MJ/LBJ/KAJ vs Bird. Basic Basketball Skills.

[HeartBreakKid]

I’d don’t have Bird as GOAT. But the player I do have as GOAT is also a basketball savant.

I don’t believe you can have great finger dexterity and a desire and eventually be a better guitar player than Hendrix. You can get good, you can get great with endless practice and study but you can’t get past the person willing to do the same but with more natural talent.

Bird is a natural basketball player. He was always great, even before he picked up a basketball for the first time. It’s was in there, just waiting to come out. That’s a different level from someone who might be a top of line world class athlete, who plays basketball.

I respect the hell out of what James has done transforming his game, dedicating himself to learning and building skills. It’s awesome. His late career skill level is beautiful. He deserves all the credit. But, he isn’t a basketball savant. He learned it, it isn’t innate. And that limits him, you can’t just overwhelm innate skill and ability with athleticism at the highest of levels. Basketball is fundamentally a game of skill, athleticism is supplemental.

This is all tough for the quantitative crowd to engage. I respect that approach but it’s not wholistic and doesn’t do well recognizing its weaknesses. Genius is a thing. You can’t put a number to it and it matters in basketball.

That's great, but you're clearly just picking and choosing who is a savant and who is not. You probably think James is not savant because he didn't shoot long 2s coming out of HS, when he is pretty clearly a savant at basketball. Not only was he a freakish athlete which is perfectly relevant to athletics (duh) he was always praised for his vision and handles.

You do not get compared to Magic Johnson without being a savant, unless you are going to say Magic is not a savant either. And no, I am not saying James is a better passer, but you're making it seem like he's just some guy who runs and jumped high coming out of HS.


How are you going to say basketball is a game of skill primarily. Think about it for one second and think about how tall everyone in the NBA is. Obviously your physical attributes are by far the primary aspect in how far you can go into the NBA.

Basketball is nowhere near the most skill oriented sport - you are probably just lazily comparing it to American Football and not nearly every other sport that exist.

Yeah, Larry Bird wouldn't make the league if he had been unathletic 5'9 with his skillset. I'm pretty sure there are people who could read the game better than Bird who didn't make the league because they couldn't make it work on the basketball court.

He also said the GOAT is a savant (I'm assuming he means Jordan) seemingly not realizing Jordan was not a fast learner at all, and only made varsity at 16 which is a-typical. Before Jordan was 16 he was only 5'10 and after that he was 6'3...hm.....

[AEnigma]

That's great, but you're clearly just picking and choosing who is a savant and who is not. You probably think James is not savant because he didn't shoot long 2s coming out of HS, when he is pretty clearly a savant at basketball. Not only was he a freakish athlete which is perfectly relevant to athletics (duh) he was always praised for his vision and handles.

You do not get compared to Magic Johnson without being a savant, unless you are going to say Magic is not a savant either. And no, I am not saying James is a better passer, but you're making it seem like he's just some guy who runs and jumped high coming out of HS.

How are you going to say basketball is a game of skill primarily. Think about it for one second and think about how tall everyone in the NBA is. Obviously your physical attributes are by far the primary aspect in how far you can go into the NBA.

Basketball is nowhere near the most skill oriented sport - you are probably just lazily comparing it to American Football and not nearly every other sport that exist.

Yeah, Larry Bird wouldn't make the league if he had been unathletic 5'9 with his skillset. I'm pretty sure there are people who could read the game better than Bird who didn't make the league because they couldn't make it work on the basketball court.

He also said the GOAT is a savant (I'm assuming he means Jordan) seemingly not realizing Jordan was not a fast learner at all, and only made varsity at 16 which is a-typical. Before Jordan was 16 he was only 5'10 and after that he was 6'3...hm.....

It would be weird to give Jordan that label not only because he obviously was not one but also because he is part of this comparison where SNPA sees Bird favourably.

Russell might make sense I suppose. But this is all pretty arbitrary and aesthetic. I do not think Bird (or Magic as another oft-cited “savant”) has any more overall natural aptitude for the sport than Lebron does outside of aesthetic play preferences. If that is the standard, sure, Bird is at the top of that particular facet of “basketball intelligence”, but that is only one of many.

And to the extent I would say Russell stands a level above, that is to a great deal era-related. Smartest basketball player of his time. Not sure that automatically translates had he been born in 1990 or 2000.

[70sFan]

That's great, but you're clearly just picking and choosing who is a savant and who is not. You probably think James is not savant because he didn't shoot long 2s coming out of HS, when he is pretty clearly a savant at basketball. Not only was he a freakish athlete which is perfectly relevant to athletics (duh) he was always praised for his vision and handles.

You do not get compared to Magic Johnson without being a savant, unless you are going to say Magic is not a savant either. And no, I am not saying James is a better passer, but you're making it seem like he's just some guy who runs and jumped high coming out of HS.


How are you going to say basketball is a game of skill primarily. Think about it for one second and think about how tall everyone in the NBA is. Obviously your physical attributes are by far the primary aspect in how far you can go into the NBA.

Basketball is nowhere near the most skill oriented sport - you are probably just lazily comparing it to American Football and not nearly every other sport that exist.

Yeah, Larry Bird wouldn't make the league if he had been unathletic 5'9 with his skillset. I'm pretty sure there are people who could read the game better than Bird who didn't make the league because they couldn't make it work on the basketball court.

He also said the GOAT is a savant (I'm assuming he means Jordan) seemingly not realizing Jordan was not a fast learner at all, and only made varsity at 16 which is a-typical. Before Jordan was 16 he was only 5'10 and after that he was 6'3...hm.....

I think his GOAT is Russell, not MJ.

[HeartBreakKid]

Yeah, Larry Bird wouldn't make the league if he had been unathletic 5'9 with his skillset. I'm pretty sure there are people who could read the game better than Bird who didn't make the league because they couldn't make it work on the basketball court.

He also said the GOAT is a savant (I'm assuming he means Jordan) seemingly not realizing Jordan was not a fast learner at all, and only made varsity at 16 which is a-typical. Before Jordan was 16 he was only 5'10 and after that he was 6'3...hm.....

I think his GOAT is Russell, not MJ.

Then how is Bill Russell a savant? Many, many things in basketball did not come natural to him.

He re-invented the way basketball was played through innovation and being unorthodox. He was also the best athlete in the NBA for years (by a large margin )

I have no idea who SNPA is talking about.


If it's just basketball IQ then pretty much every all time great is a savant.

[70sFan]

He also said the GOAT is a savant (I'm assuming he means Jordan) seemingly not realizing Jordan was not a fast learner at all, and only made varsity at 16 which is a-typical. Before Jordan was 16 he was only 5'10 and after that he was 6'3...hm.....

I think his GOAT is Russell, not MJ.

Then how is Bill Russell a savant? Many, many things in basketball did not come natural to him.

He re-invented the way basketball was played through innovation. He was also the best athlete in the NBA for years (by a large margin )

I have no idea who SNPA is talking about.

I think Russell could be called a savant with his very innovative way to look at the sport, but it doesn't change the fact that Russell relied very heavily on his physical atributes... like pretty much all great players in the history of the league. Even Steve Nash would be nobody without his quickness and shooting ability.

[capfan33]

I think his GOAT is Russell, not MJ.

Then how is Bill Russell a savant? Many, many things in basketball did not come natural to him.

He re-invented the way basketball was played through innovation. He was also the best athlete in the NBA for years (by a large margin )

I have no idea who SNPA is talking about.

I think Russell could be called a savant with his very innovative way to look at the sport, but it doesn't change the fact that Russell relied very heavily on his physical atributes... like pretty much all great players in the history of the league. Even Steve Nash would be nobody without his quickness and shooting ability.

Russell's definitely a savant in my opinion, I don't think it would translate as well to later eras but like, he basically invented shot-blocking. I also think his mental approach to the game was on another level compared to most players, period. Specifically when it came to matching up against Wilt.

[70sFan]

Then how is Bill Russell a savant? Many, many things in basketball did not come natural to him.

He re-invented the way basketball was played through innovation. He was also the best athlete in the NBA for years (by a large margin )

I have no idea who SNPA is talking about.

I think Russell could be called a savant with his very innovative way to look at the sport, but it doesn't change the fact that Russell relied very heavily on his physical atributes... like pretty much all great players in the history of the league. Even Steve Nash would be nobody without his quickness and shooting ability.

Russell's definitely a savant in my opinion, I don't think it would translate as well to later eras but like, he basically invented shot-blocking. I also think his mental approach to the game was on another level compared to most players, period. Specifically when it came to matching up against Wilt.

Maybe it wouldn't translate as well, but at the same time I'd definitely call Draymond Green a savant - is there any reason to doubt that Russell wouldn't at least match him today?

[SNPA]

I don't equate Basketball Savant to GOAT though--and many others don't either. For some reason, that is a difficult concept for you to understand.

I’d don’t have Bird as GOAT. But the player I do have as GOAT is also a basketball savant.

I don’t believe you can have great finger dexterity and a desire and eventually be a better guitar player than Hendrix. You can get good, you can get great with endless practice and study but you can’t get past the person willing to do the same but with more natural talent.

Bird is a natural basketball player. He was always great, even before he picked up a basketball for the first time. It’s was in there, just waiting to come out. That’s a different level from someone who might be a top of line world class athlete, who plays basketball.

I respect the hell out of what James has done transforming his game, dedicating himself to learning and building skills. It’s awesome. His late career skill level is beautiful. He deserves all the credit. But, he isn’t a basketball savant. He learned it, it isn’t innate. And that limits him, you can’t just overwhelm innate skill and ability with athleticism at the highest of levels. Basketball is fundamentally a game of skill, athleticism is supplemental.

This is all tough for the quantitative crowd to engage. I respect that approach but it’s not wholistic and doesn’t do well recognizing its weaknesses. Genius is a thing. You can’t put a number to it and it matters in basketball.

That's great, but you're clearly just picking and choosing who is a savant and who is not. You probably think James is not savant because he didn't shoot long 2s coming out of HS, when he is pretty clearly a savant at basketball. Not only was he a freakish athlete which is perfectly relevant to athletics (duh) he was always praised for his vision and handles.

You do not get compared to Magic Johnson without being a savant, unless you are going to say Magic is not a savant either. And no, I am not saying James is a better passer, but you're making it seem like he's just some guy who runs and jumped high coming out of HS.


How are you going to say basketball is a game of skill primarily. Think about it for one second and think about how tall everyone in the NBA is. Obviously your physical attributes are by far the primary aspect in how far you can go into the NBA.

Basketball is nowhere near the most skill oriented sport - you are probably just lazily comparing it to American Football and not nearly every other sport that exist.

I also think it is funny you think James had to "learn" basketball when Michael Jordan famously didn't make varsity because he was too raw. If Jordan was a savant why would he have to work on his skills so much, that isn't what savants do. He became a great HS player when he grew over 6 feet tall - go figure.

I didn’t say anything about Jordan.

Russell is my GOAT and is absolutely a basketball savant that changed the sport in revolutionary ways.

As for athleticism, of course there is a baseline need. A paraplegic with the greatest court vision ever…blah blah. You get the point. The draft is full of guys every year that can jump out the gym but you’ll notice recent MVP’s include guys like Joker and Nash.

James learned basketball. You can see it across his game. His shot is mechanical and clearly learned. His passing, while good early in driving and the open court, has grown tremendously as he learned to expand. And good for him, he put in the work. He deserves the credit. James, like Wilt, had massive physical advantages and over time grew their skill level. Credit to them.

Look, I’m not trying to make it a pure dichotomous situation. Obviously there is a ton of interplay. But there are players to whom an understanding and feel for the game comes more naturally than others, I don’t see how that’s arguable. The highest end of the guys are basketball savants. That’s a huge advantage, every bit as important as excessive athletic ability over the mean IMO. It’s underrated to in the quantitive era.

[70sFan]

I’d don’t have Bird as GOAT. But the player I do have as GOAT is also a basketball savant.

I don’t believe you can have great finger dexterity and a desire and eventually be a better guitar player than Hendrix. You can get good, you can get great with endless practice and study but you can’t get past the person willing to do the same but with more natural talent.

Bird is a natural basketball player. He was always great, even before he picked up a basketball for the first time. It’s was in there, just waiting to come out. That’s a different level from someone who might be a top of line world class athlete, who plays basketball.

I respect the hell out of what James has done transforming his game, dedicating himself to learning and building skills. It’s awesome. His late career skill level is beautiful. He deserves all the credit. But, he isn’t a basketball savant. He learned it, it isn’t innate. And that limits him, you can’t just overwhelm innate skill and ability with athleticism at the highest of levels. Basketball is fundamentally a game of skill, athleticism is supplemental.

This is all tough for the quantitative crowd to engage. I respect that approach but it’s not wholistic and doesn’t do well recognizing its weaknesses. Genius is a thing. You can’t put a number to it and it matters in basketball.

That's great, but you're clearly just picking and choosing who is a savant and who is not. You probably think James is not savant because he didn't shoot long 2s coming out of HS, when he is pretty clearly a savant at basketball. Not only was he a freakish athlete which is perfectly relevant to athletics (duh) he was always praised for his vision and handles.

You do not get compared to Magic Johnson without being a savant, unless you are going to say Magic is not a savant either. And no, I am not saying James is a better passer, but you're making it seem like he's just some guy who runs and jumped high coming out of HS.


How are you going to say basketball is a game of skill primarily. Think about it for one second and think about how tall everyone in the NBA is. Obviously your physical attributes are by far the primary aspect in how far you can go into the NBA.

Basketball is nowhere near the most skill oriented sport - you are probably just lazily comparing it to American Football and not nearly every other sport that exist.

I also think it is funny you think James had to "learn" basketball when Michael Jordan famously didn't make varsity because he was too raw. If Jordan was a savant why would he have to work on his skills so much, that isn't what savants do. He became a great HS player when he grew over 6 feet tall - go figure.

I didn’t say anything about Jordan.

Russell is my GOAT and is absolutely a basketball savant that changed the sport in revolutionary ways.

As for athleticism, of course there is a baseline need. A paraplegic with the greatest court vision ever…blah blah. You get the point. The draft is full of guys every year that can jump out the gym but you’ll notice recent MVP’s include guys like Joker and Nash.

James learned basketball. You can see it across his game. His shot is mechanical and clearly learned. His passing, while good early in driving and the open court, has grown tremendously as he learned to expand. And good for him, he put in the work. He deserves the credit. James, like Wilt, had massive physical advantages and over time grew their skill level. Credit to them.

Look, I’m not trying to make it a pure dichotomous situation. Obviously there a ton of interplay. But there are players to whom an understanding and feel for the game comes more naturally than others, I don’t see how that’s arguably. The highest end of the guys are basketball savants. That’s a huge advantage, every bit as important as excessive athletic ability over the mean IMO. It’s underrated to in the quantitive era.

LeBron was a passing savant as a teenager though...

[poopdamoop]

I don't think anyone in here is actually using the word savant correctly - LeBron is probably more of a "savant" than Bird is.

[penbeast0]

SAVANT "a person of learning. especially : one with detailed knowledge in some specialized field (as of science or literature) : a person affected with a developmental disorder (such as autism or intellectual disability) who exhibits exceptional skill or brilliance in some limited field (such as mathematics or music)"

Should we consider basketball players developmentally disordered because their focus generally is far from education?

[poopdamoop]

SAVANT "a person of learning. especially : one with detailed knowledge in some specialized field (as of science or literature) : a person affected with a developmental disorder (such as autism or intellectual disability) who exhibits exceptional skill or brilliance in some limited field (such as mathematics or music)"

Should we consider basketball players developmentally disordered because their focus generally is far from education?

Maybe Bird being a slow white guy was a type of developmental disorder

[penbeast0]

I was thinking more LeBron since at least Bird went on to college though I don't know how much they required of him academically. Some schools basically ignore academics for sports stars, some treat them as student athletes.