RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #12 (Larry Bird)

[DraymondGold]

What? Magic won more. Magic better impact. Magic better playoffs. Magic got handles. Magic better playmaker. Magic better longetivity.

Kobe won more. Got similar impact. Got better longevity, better playmaker, got handles, better in playoffs

How is that inconsistent

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”. That was the first thing you said in your vote for Magic, and it’s a reason you’ve been citing throughout the project to justify your votes. You don’t get to suddenly drop it as your criteria now, without that being in inconsistent

You’re the one who considers impact as important for determining goodness.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

Don’t ignore the question, explain how it’s consistent to cite “impact” for so many past votes then say Bird doesn’t belong in this discussion here.

Bird has the most impact over Kobe.

According to you. People have made arguments for kobes peak being similar and Kobe being more skilled and Kobe achieving the same results and Bird having really good help.

According to the data you yourself use!!

You’re the one who cites WOWY as reasoning for your rating Magic and Hakeem and Russell and Steph and all the others so highly.

Bird has significantly more WOWY than Kobe, 36% more WOWY in the OG Thinking Basketball Prime WOWY database. That’s not up for debate, it’s a mathematical fact. I just pasted the value. And the other data is all similarly higher on Bird — check the multi-year WOWY database or Moonbeam’s RWOWY. The only thing that isn’t higher on Bird than Kobe is WOWYR, which gives Bird a much higher uncertainty range and a note that small changes in the methodology can produce much higher results for Bird.

So yes, Bird has more WOWY than Kobe. Bird has more “impact” than Kobe.

So if i go back and look at the post you replied to. I won't find a screenshot of you taking a thing they counted, saying you counted another thing, and then saying you dont trust them?

Misrepresenting someone =/= not being swayed by their point. That's pretty obvious bruh

I just looked. They said they counted x "wide open" stuff. You said u counted 11 "more open" so you're skeptical. You contradicted them with something different and then said u didn't trust them...

I explained that a larger sample is more trustworthy, which it is.

No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about

Here’s you: “No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about”

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

… so I clearly did state that Ohayo was using a smaller sample than me. … now who’s the one misrepresenting someone?

Ohayo than posted some film that they said depicted Bird not creating much when off-ball... in a play where Bird literally generates an entirely open shot from his off ball movement.

I dont think bird "generated" that and neither did kd or their friend or cieling. Idk why thats a mistake

Bird’s teammate suddenly got wide open. How did they get wide open?

Did the defender just happen to stand in the spot you would to block a layup pass at the exact same time as Bird was cutting off-ball toward the rim to get a layup pass and make a layup, and at the exact same time their assignment was moving back?

Did the defender just happen to not notice their assignment was moving back, despite the fact that their assignment was clearly in their line of sight?

What caused this defensive positioning error? Provide an actual explanation for why Bird’s teammate suddenly got open if you disagree. The Guy who’s approved by the NBA to do film analysis on the NBA app clearly agrees with my assessment.

So explain why you disagree, explain what the defender suddenly got out of position if not to guard Bird.

And remember: if the defender hadn’t committed the error of leaving Bird’s teammate open, Bird’s off-ball movement would have made him open for a layup pass, which was in the line of sight of the ball handler…. So the counterfactual of “what if the defender kept better positioning” doesn’t work here either.

[falcolombardi]

Can you guys post the bird plays everyone is arguing about please? Sounds interesting

Would love to look at them myself

[eminence]

Voting Post

Vote #1: George Mikan
Vote #2: Larry Bird

Nominate: Dirk Nowitzki

Mikan - still my #1 here as the clear remaining dominant era force. 8 years, 7 titles, great defense, great offense, the 'weakness' is the only 8 years. But really, what was left to accomplish, no money in basketball at that point and George leaves to run for the US House (narrow loss).

Bird - Oscar might be my top pick here, but I'll go with Bird over Kobe, as those are the two really facing off here. Birds 9 year opening run gets it done, came in strong, adapted his game over the run and stayed strong. Prefer the '84/'86 peak over the non-Mikan candidates here (and that cascades down - better at season 1, season 2, ... season 9).

Dirk - He's in the running and I like him over Robinson primarily for the better longevity, both faced some notable playoff struggles.

[falcolombardi]

What? Magic won more. Magic better impact. Magic better playoffs. Magic got handles. Magic better playmaker. Magic better longetivity.

Kobe won more. Got similar impact. Got better longevity, better playmaker, got handles, better in playoffs

How is that inconsistent

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”. That was the first thing you said in your vote for Magic, and it’s a reason you’ve been citing throughout the project to justify your votes. You don’t get to suddenly drop it as your criteria now, without that being in inconsistent

You’re the one who considers impact as important for determining goodness.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

Don’t ignore the question, explain how it’s consistent to cite “impact” for so many past votes then say Bird doesn’t belong in this discussion here.

Bird has the most impact over Kobe.

According to you. People have made arguments for kobes peak being similar and Kobe being more skilled and Kobe achieving the same results and Bird having really good help.

According to the data you yourself use!!

You’re the one who cites WOWY as reasoning for your rating Magic and Hakeem and Russell and Steph and all the others so highly.

Bird has significantly more WOWY than Kobe, 36% more WOWY in the OG Thinking Basketball Prime WOWY database. That’s not up for debate, it’s a mathematical fact. I just pasted the value. And the other data is all similarly higher on Bird — check the multi-year WOWY database or Moonbeam’s RWOWY. The only thing that isn’t higher on Bird than Kobe is WOWYR, which gives Bird a much higher uncertainty range and a note that small changes in the methodology can produce much higher results for Bird.

So yes, Bird has more WOWY than Kobe. Bird has more “impact” than Kobe.

Misrepresenting someone =/= not being swayed by their point. That's pretty obvious bruh

I just looked. They said they counted x "wide open" stuff. You said u counted 11 "more open" so you're skeptical. You contradicted them with something different and then said u didn't trust them...

I explained that a larger sample is more trustworthy, which it is.

No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about

Here’s you: “No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about”

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

… so I clearly did state that Ohayo was using a smaller sample than me. … now who’s the one misrepresenting someone?

Ohayo than posted some film that they said depicted Bird not creating much when off-ball... in a play where Bird literally generates an entirely open shot from his off ball movement.

I dont think bird "generated" that and neither did kd or their friend or cieling. Idk why thats a mistake

Bird’s teammate suddenly got wide open. How did they get wide open?

Did the defender just happen to stand in the spot you would to block a layup pass at the exact same time as Bird was cutting off-ball toward the rim to get a layup pass and make a layup, and at the exact same time their assignment was moving back?

Did the defender just happen to not notice their assignment was moving back, despite the fact that their assignment was clearly in their line of sight?

What caused this defensive positioning error? Provide an actual explanation for why Bird’s teammate suddenly got open if you disagree. The Guy who’s approved by the NBA to do film analysis on the NBA app clearly agrees with my assessment.

So explain why you disagree, explain what the defender suddenly got out of position if not to guard Bird.

And remember: if the defender hadn’t committed the error of leaving Bird’s teammate open, Bird’s off-ball movement would have made him open for a layup pass, which was in the line of sight of the ball handler…. So the counterfactual of “what if the defender kept better positioning” doesn’t work here either.

What plays are you guys discussing about?

[One_and_Done]

Since Dirk has just edged past D.Rob for the nominee, I want to say a few words about D.Rob's impact. I can see if people think he didn't have enough longevity. Personally I'd take KD over him if Durant had enough support, and I can see the Dirk/K.Malone/Dr J arguments too. However in terms of peak D.Rob, he's better than any of those guys.

D.Rob was one of the GOAT defensive players, combining incredible instincts and timing with pogo stick, quick twitch athleticism. The guy ran the floor like a deer. When Tony Parker came to the Spurs, D.Rob was old and slow. Parker assumed he had always been that way. One day after practise someone showed Parker a video of a young Robinson running the floor. He couldn't believe how fast he was. They told him about the time David Robinson claimed he could walk on his hands the length of the practise court, being gymnast in college. The coach, incredulous, told him if he could do it everyone would get practise off. D.Rob proceeded to walk the length of the court on his hands, and the team took the day off. His dexterity at over 7 feet tall was basically unheard of.

Robinson's impact was clear from the day he joined the league. He came into a 21 win team, and turned them into a 56 win team. The team had a 11 point SRS turnaround. The Spurs were a contender for the first 7 years of D.Rob's career, during which time they averaged 55 a wins a year. Then at age 31 D.Rob had an injury and was never wholly the same again, and gradually degraded in impact. But that first 7 year impact is right up there with the top peaks. If D.Rob was merely a GOAT defensive player, he would be worthy of discussion here even if he was just an average offensive player. Unfortunately he was superb offensive player, who even though he had his shortcomings still did more than enough to warrant inclusion here. I set out his stats on page 1.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Vote: George Mikan

Again, because he's the most dominant player relative to era left. Seven titles in eight years. At or near the top of the league in scoring(with good efficiency) and rebounding in most of those seasons.

Secondary Vote: Larry Bird

This is the one that's going to actually matter in this thread, and I'm going with Bird as my strategic vote.

There's been a debate about their defense in this thread, and what I will say is that that multiple defensive metrics look pretty poor for Kobe.

Kobe never broke a +1 D-RAPM in his career, and posted a negative D-RAPM twelve times(even if you don't count his last three post-achilles years, that's still nine negative D-RAPMs). His career-high D-RAPM is +0.9 in 2000-01.

We obviously don't have that data for Bird, but I mean, Kobe's D-RAPM numbers are not that much better than someone like Steve Nash.

In D-PIPM, where we can compare Kobe and Bird directly, Bird crushes him(at least up until his injuries start slowing him down):

Bird:
80 +1.58
81 +1.69
82 +1.72
83 +1.60
84 +1.74
85 +1.20
86 +1.57
87 +1.05
88 +0.51
89 +0.24
90 +0.80
91 +1.11
92 +0.45

Kobe:
97 -0.73
98 -2.23
99 -0.29
00 -0.10
01 +0.57
02 -2.01
03 -0.35
04 -0.06
05 -1.38
06 -2.28
07 -0.74
08 +0.03
09 -0.15
10 +0.32
11 -1.35
12 -1.35
13 -2.00
14 -0.16
15 -2.71
16 -3.39

Now, in D-RAPTOR, where we can also compare them head-to-head, they're much closer(and in fact Kobe is better in the playoffs), but D-RAPTOR also had Jokic as the the fifth best defender in the league this past season, so I'm skeptical of it(Jokic may have been the best player in the league in 2022-23, but it wasn't because of his defense).

Bird RS D-RAPTOR career average: 4.14(4.41 if you omit 89 season where he played six games)
Kobe RS D-RAPTOR career average: 3.54(but 4.36 if you omit the last three post-achilles seasons)
Bird PO D-RAPTOR career average: 3.45
Kobe PO D-RAPTOR career average: 3.94

At any rate, RAPTOR gives a more positive outlook on Kobe's defense, but none of these metrics suggests a clear or big advantage for Kobe.

Looking at offensive efficiency

Bird's career average rTS is 2.2;
3.1 if only up to 1988(when he had his foot injury).
Kobe's career average rTS is 1.2;
2.4 if only up to 2013 when he had his achilles injury.

So Bird has a modest advantage overall.

But Bird had a higher peak - he had a four-year stretch from 84-85 to 87-88 where he posted +4.2, +3.9, +7.4, and +7.0 rTS's. The +3.9 matches Kobe's career high(set in 2006-07), with the other three besting any rTS Kobe ever had. Bird had back-to-back 50-40-90 seasons in 87 and 88, one of only two players to ever do it multiple times(the other is Nash).

In the playoffs, I looked at every series Bird played from 1980 to 1988 and every series Kobe played from 2000 to 2010 and for each series compared their TS to what their opponent had allowed in the RS.

By this measure, Kobe averages a +3.1 rTS per series 2000-2010, and Bird averages a +2.65 rTS per series 1980-1988. So a modest advantage for Kobe, but again, Bird peaks higher. If I take Kobe's best five-year stretch based on rTS vs playoff opponents - 2006-2010 - he averages a +4.21 rTS; if I take Bird's best five-year stretch - 1984-1988 - he averages a +4.41 rTS(and that would be +5.07 were it not for poor -7.6 rTS shooting series he had against the Bad Boys in the 1988 finals). Those best-five-year stretches are very close, with Bird having a small advantage.

Because part of my argument is based on Bird's peak play, I narrowed it down one more year. Bird's best four-year stretch from 1984-1987 yields a +5.45 rTS per series average. There is no four-year stretch for Kobe that gets particularly close to that - 2006-09 yields a +4.43 rTS per series average, while 2007-2010 yields a +4.07 rTS per series average. I will put all the series-by-series rTS I calculated in a spoiler:

Spoiler:

Bird:

80
+1.2
-2.4

81
+3.9
+4.9
-7.5

82
+0.4
-8.0

83
-1.5
-5.0

84
+1.4
+10.6
+9.1
+6.4

85
+10.1
-2.6
-4.3
+0.0

86
+8.2
+6.6
+14.5
+3.6

87
+12.6
+4.8
+4.9
+1.3

88
+4.7
+3.9
-7.6

Kobe:

00
+2.2
+2.1
+5.0
-9.8

01
+5.2
+9.0
+8.8
+0.2

02
-4.4
-0.9
-1.3
+12.3

03
+1.6
+3.7

04
+1.2
+5.4
+2.9
-2.8

06
+6.0

07
+2.8

08
+5.9
+8.6
+6.8
-0.3

09
+1.8
+1.9
+9.1
+1.7

10
-2.1
+6.9
+10.4
-0.6

Career vs career, their efficiencies are comparable, but I would characterize Kobe as being perhaps more consistent(Bird had some underwhelming TS numbers in his earlier years) with Bird peaking higher.

Rebounds/Playmaking

Bird averaged 12.5 boards per 100 in the RS and 12.1 per 100 in the PO for his career.
Bird averaged 14.5 TRB% in the RS and 13.9 TRB% in the PO.
Kobe averaged 7.5 boards per 100 in the RS and 6.9 per 100 in the PO for his career.
Kobe averaged 8.1 TRB% in the RS and 7.4 TRB% in the PO.

This is a clear and sizeable advantage for Bird.

Bird averaged 7.9 assists to 3.9 turnovers per 100 in the RS for his career.
Bird averaged 7.6 assists to 3.6 turnovers per 100 in the PO for his career.
Kobe averaged 6.7 assists to 4.3 turnovers per 100 in the RS for his career.
Kobe averaged 6.4 assists to 4.0 turnovers per 100 in the RS for his career.

Bird has the superior a:to ratio; this is certainly just one way to look at playmaking and doesn't tell the whole story, to be sure, but it is something worth noting.

Box Impact numbers

For Bird's career, he has 6.9BPM and .203 WS/48 in the RS.
For Kobe's career, he has 4.6BPM and .170 WS/48 in the RS.
For Bird's career, he has 6.9BPM and .173 WS/48 in the PO.
For Kobe's career, has has 5.4BPM and .157 WS/48 in the PO.

In the regular season, Bird posted a 7+ BPM 6 times, 8+ 4 times, and 9+ 1 time; Kobe posted a 7+ BPM 1 time, and that was his career high.

In the playoffs, Bird posted a 6+ BPM 7 times, 7+ 4 times, and 9+ 2 times; Kobe posted a 6+ BPM 5 times, a 7+ 3 times, and a +8 one time.

Advanced Impact Numbers

For Bird's career, he has a 4.11 average PIPM score; Kobe has a 1.62 average.
For Bird's career, he has a 5.93 average RS RAPTOR; Kobe has a 4.41 average.
For Bird's career, he has a 5.28 average PO RAPTOR; Kobe has a 3.85 average.
(Though, again, I am skeptical of RAPTOR...)

I think that's enough for now. It's late.

Nomination: David Robinson
Nomination #2: Charles Barkley

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Since Dirk has just edged past D.Rob for the nominee, I want to say a few words about D.Rob's impact. I can see if people think he didn't have enough longevity. Personally I'd take KD over him if Durant had enough support, and I can see the Dirk/K.Malone/Dr J arguments too. However in terms of peak D.Rob, he's better than any of those guys.

D.Rob was one of the GOAT defensive players, combining incredible instincts and timing with pogo stick, quick twitch athleticism. The guy ran the floor like a deer. When Tony Parker came to the Spurs, D.Rob was old and slow. Parker assumed he had always been that way. One day after practise someone showed Parker a video of a young Robinson running the floor. He couldn't believe how fast he was. They told him about the time David Robinson claimed he could walk on his hands the length of the practise court, being gymnast in college. The coach, incredulous, told him if he could do it everyone would get practise off. D.Rob proceeded to walk the length of the court on his hands, and the team took the day off. His dexterity at over 7 feet tall was basically unheard of.

Robinson's impact was clear from the day he joined the league. He came into a 21 win team, and turned them into a 56 win team. The team had a 11 point SRS turnaround. The Spurs were a contender for the first 7 years of D.Rob's career, during which time they averaged 55 a wins a year. Then at age 31 D.Rob had an injury and was never wholly the same again, and gradually degraded in impact. But that first 7 year impact is right up there with the top peaks. If D.Rob was merely a GOAT defensive player, he would be worthy of discussion here even if he was just an average offensive player. Unfortunately he was superb offensive player, who even though he had his shortcomings still did more than enough to warrant inclusion here. I set out his stats on page 1.

I'm with you on D-Rob. I just gave him another nomination vote.

FWIW, I think 99 D-Rob is under-appreciated. There is a perception among some that he was just along for the ride in 99 like he was in 03, but in 99, a lot of his impact numbers are actually better than Duncan's:

(DRob on the left, Duncan on the right)

7.0 v 5.2 RAPM
6.25 v 3.29 PIPM
7.64 RS RAPTOR vs 3.35 RS RAPTOR
8.22 PO RAPTOR vs 5.40 PO RAPTOR
6.7 BPM RS vs 4.5 BPM RS
7.1 BPM PO vs 6.6 BPM PO
.261 WS/48 RS vs .213 WS/48 RS
.243 WS/48 PO vs .243 WS/48 PO

[One_and_Done]

For anyone curious it's Bird 6, Kobe 6, Mikan 3, West 2, Oscar 2. However Bird actually leads by 4 when you include preferences.

Nominations are D.Rob 6, Dirk 6, Moses 2, Dr J 2, K.Malone 1 and Jokic 1.

[ShaqAttac]

What? Magic won more. Magic better impact. Magic better playoffs. Magic got handles. Magic better playmaker. Magic better longetivity.

Kobe won more. Got similar impact. Got better longevity, better playmaker, got handles, better in playoffs

How is that inconsistent

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”.

And I also said Magic won more. You dont get to call me inconsistent coz u cherrypick what you read. Idc what I said "first", voting magic over bird and voting kobe over bird isnt inconsistent.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

or maybe i dont only use careeer wowy to look at impact? idk why you thought i did. when ppl make good arguments that bid had a good help and great fit and then point out besides one year the team was actually alright without him then his impact proba aint that high if he's only winning 3 and he aint creating much or defending good

"you only using wowy" is just u assuming im as one-note as you when evaluating players. my first vote had me bring up mikans wins and how everyone thought he was way better than everyone else coz we didnt have wowy or anything. i voted hakeem over kg coz hakeem won 2 rings as bitw despite also having a bad situation. You just read what you want to read. Idk what to say

Misrepresenting someone =/= not being swayed by their point. That's pretty obvious bruh

I just looked. They said they counted x "wide open" stuff. You said u counted 11 "more open" so you're skeptical. You contradicted them with something different and then said u didn't trust them...

I explained that a larger sample is more trustworthy, which it is.

sample of what. what film. I just see u tryna hype an offball curl as playmaking

you said you were skeptical because you tracked something different and there was more of that. idk what you're tryna hide here for.

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

a larger sample of what. you literally just said what ben thought. and apparently you and ben think a guy looking at a curl is special. defender was given cowens space from the start and then he fired a shot they were fine with. You had a larger sample of a completely different thing and then said u were skeptical because of it. it also wasnt missed at all. they literally noticed it at the start...

[ShaqAttac]

What? Magic won more. Magic better impact. Magic better playoffs. Magic got handles. Magic better playmaker. Magic better longetivity.

Kobe won more. Got similar impact. Got better longevity, better playmaker, got handles, better in playoffs

How is that inconsistent

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”. That was the first thing you said in your vote for Magic, and it’s a reason you’ve been citing throughout the project to justify your votes. You don’t get to suddenly drop it as your criteria now, without that being in inconsistent

You’re the one who considers impact as important for determining goodness.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

Don’t ignore the question, explain how it’s consistent to cite “impact” for so many past votes then say Bird doesn’t belong in this discussion here.

According to you. People have made arguments for kobes peak being similar and Kobe being more skilled and Kobe achieving the same results and Bird having really good help.

According to the data you yourself use!!

You’re the one who cites WOWY as reasoning for your rating Magic and Hakeem and Russell and Steph and all the others so highly.

Bird has significantly more WOWY than Kobe, 36% more WOWY in the OG Thinking Basketball Prime WOWY database. That’s not up for debate, it’s a mathematical fact. I just pasted the value. And the other data is all similarly higher on Bird — check the multi-year WOWY database or Moonbeam’s RWOWY. The only thing that isn’t higher on Bird than Kobe is WOWYR, which gives Bird a much higher uncertainty range and a note that small changes in the methodology can produce much higher results for Bird.

So yes, Bird has more WOWY than Kobe. Bird has more “impact” than Kobe.

I just looked. They said they counted x "wide open" stuff. You said u counted 11 "more open" so you're skeptical. You contradicted them with something different and then said u didn't trust them...

No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about

Here’s you: “No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about”

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

… so I clearly did state that Ohayo was using a smaller sample than me. … now who’s the one misrepresenting someone?

I dont think bird "generated" that and neither did kd or their friend or cieling. Idk why thats a mistake

Bird’s teammate suddenly got wide open. How did they get wide open?

Did the defender just happen to stand in the spot you would to block a layup pass at the exact same time as Bird was cutting off-ball toward the rim to get a layup pass and make a layup, and at the exact same time their assignment was moving back?

Did the defender just happen to not notice their assignment was moving back, despite the fact that their assignment was clearly in their line of sight?

What caused this defensive positioning error? Provide an actual explanation for why Bird’s teammate suddenly got open if you disagree. The Guy who’s approved by the NBA to do film analysis on the NBA app clearly agrees with my assessment.

So explain why you disagree, explain what the defender suddenly got out of position if not to guard Bird.

And remember: if the defender hadn’t committed the error of leaving Bird’s teammate open, Bird’s off-ball movement would have made him open for a layup pass, which was in the line of sight of the ball handler…. So the counterfactual of “what if the defender kept better positioning” doesn’t work here either.

What plays are you guys discussing about?

Watch on YouTube

this one.

[DraymondGold]

What? Magic won more. Magic better impact. Magic better playoffs. Magic got handles. Magic better playmaker. Magic better longetivity.

Kobe won more. Got similar impact. Got better longevity, better playmaker, got handles, better in playoffs

How is that inconsistent

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”.

And I also said Magic won more. You dont get to call me inconsistent coz u cherrypick what you read. Idc what I said "first", voting magic over bird and voting kobe over bird isnt inconsistent.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

or maybe i dont only use careeer wowy to look at impact? idk why you thought i did. when ppl make good arguments that bid had a good help and great fit and then point out besides one year the team was actually alright without him then his impact proba aint that high if he's only winning 3 and he aint creating much or defending good

"you only using wowy" is just u assuming im as one-note as you when evaluating players. my first vote had me bring up mikans wins and how everyone thought he was way better than everyone else coz we didnt have wowy or anything. i voted hakeem over kg coz hakeem won 2 rings as bitw despite also having a bad situation. You just read what you want to read. Idk what to say

I see you’re adept at avoiding the question, so let’s try again:

How do you justify saying Bird doesn’t belong in this conversation, when Bird has significantly more impact than Kobe using the metrics you prefer for impact?

It’s great that Kobe has more rings and longevity. If that pushes you to vote for Kobe, I can’t stop you. But you didn’t prefer Jordan over LeBron, or Shaq over Hakeem, or Kobe or Steph, so clearly rings aren’t everything. And you’ve been voting Mikan for the last few rounds, so clearly longevity isn’t everything. And you’re not just saying you side with Kobe, you’re saying Bird is so much worse he doesn’t even belong here.

Kobe’s longevity advantage isn’t as great if we look eta-relative. And there’s an argument Bird’s impact advantage is greater than Kobe’s longevity advantage.

So again: how do you justify saying Bird doesn’t belong in this conversation, given that you incorporated impact as one of your major criteria on the past, and given Bird’s impact advantage in the stats you prefer to use?

I just looked. They said they counted x "wide open" stuff. You said u counted 11 "more open" so you're skeptical. You contradicted them with something different and then said u didn't trust them...

sample of what. what film. I just see u tryna hype an offball curl as playmaking

you said you were skeptical because you tracked something different and there was more of that. idk what you're tryna hide here for.

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

a larger sample of what. you literally just said what ben thought.

I see you’ve gotten lost in your own argument, so let me offer a refresher of what happened.

You said I just misrepresent Ohayo.

I said that’s not true, I was just unconvinced by Ohayo because their criteria for measuring creation was too specific (ignoring important forms of creation), because they had a small sample, and because they showed they made mistakes in their film analysis.

You said I didn’t say anything about small sample sizes.

I provided quotes proving you’re wrong and that I did, and explaining why the sample size for me was bigger (massively more minutes of film.

Now you’re confused with what sample we’ve been talking about (“sample of what”) and what film we’ve been talking about (“What film”).

What sample? To repeat what I already said in my last post, Ohayo looked at far fewer minutes of film than me and Ben combined. Over 1000% less minutes, at least, depending on just how many games Ben watched.

What film? The film analysis that’s in Ohayo and my post, and the one we’ve been discussing this entire time.

Bird looks like an all-time off ball creator (and overall offensive player) when we look at a large sample of film.

and apparently you and ben think a guy looking at a curl is special. defender was given cowens space from the start and then he fired a shot they were fine with. You had a larger sample of a completely different thing and then said u were skeptical because of it. it also wasnt missed at all. they literally noticed it at the start...

You say “defender was given cowens space from the start”. That’s a clear misrepresentation.

At t=2s, at the start of the possession, the defender is ~5 feet away. We can tell based on the size of the circle, which has a radius of 5.9 feet, and the defender is less than the radius of the circle.

At t=6s when the defender takes the shot, the defender is ~12 feet away. We know again based on the size of the circle, which has a diameter of 11.81 feet.

So the defender goes from 5 feet to 12 feet in separation, a full 7 more feet away. That’s a massive difference, that’s a difference of being able to recover in 1 step and recovering in 3 steps, which is how many they take to try to get to the shot.

So again, how did the defender get that much space? At t=4s, we see the defender take a step toward the paint when Bird fakes a cut. That’s the first source of separation. Then Bird cuts again, and the guy stays in position to guard Bird.

You even admit the defender was distracted, with your comment the “a guy looking at” Bird…. Which proves my point! Bird’s off ball movement forced the defense to choose between an open layup by him and an open midrange by a teammate. It generated the open shot.

If you disagree, provide an actual explanation for why the defender was out of position, why the defense gave up an open shot, if not for Bird.

You say Ohayo already notes this. They didn’t. They noticed that the other defender, #9, got distracted — they didn’t notice that it led to an open shot. They said “what is Bird actually creating?” And the answer is an open shot. Which is the metric they actually preferred to use to put down Bird in the first place.

[ceiling raiser]

You don’t get to constantly change your criteria. You said “Magic got better impact”. That was the first thing you said in your vote for Magic, and it’s a reason you’ve been citing throughout the project to justify your votes. You don’t get to suddenly drop it as your criteria now, without that being in inconsistent

You’re the one who considers impact as important for determining goodness.

So either impact is important, in which case you’re misrepresenting Bird by saying he
“really wasn't good enough to be talked about here”,
Or impact isn’t important to you, in which case that would conflict with your reasoning in past votes.

Don’t ignore the question, explain how it’s consistent to cite “impact” for so many past votes then say Bird doesn’t belong in this discussion here.

According to the data you yourself use!!

You’re the one who cites WOWY as reasoning for your rating Magic and Hakeem and Russell and Steph and all the others so highly.

Bird has significantly more WOWY than Kobe, 36% more WOWY in the OG Thinking Basketball Prime WOWY database. That’s not up for debate, it’s a mathematical fact. I just pasted the value. And the other data is all similarly higher on Bird — check the multi-year WOWY database or Moonbeam’s RWOWY. The only thing that isn’t higher on Bird than Kobe is WOWYR, which gives Bird a much higher uncertainty range and a note that small changes in the methodology can produce much higher results for Bird.

So yes, Bird has more WOWY than Kobe. Bird has more “impact” than Kobe.

Here’s you: “No, you just said Ben thinks Bird is an offensive goat coz blah blah and blah. Idk what sample ur talking about”

Here’s me in the posts we’re talking about: “you haven't tracked the whole game,” “Thinking Basketball, who's tracked Bird in great detail across far more than just one game…”, “Furthermore, the sample you looked at was significantly smaller. You tracked *less than* 3 quarters of a game -- less than 36 minutes. I tracked 58 minutes (61% more than you did) and cited film analysis that tracked 100s upon 100s more minutes. And these larger samples were clearly more positive for Bird than your smaller sample was.”

… so I clearly did state that Ohayo was using a smaller sample than me. … now who’s the one misrepresenting someone?

Bird’s teammate suddenly got wide open. How did they get wide open?

Did the defender just happen to stand in the spot you would to block a layup pass at the exact same time as Bird was cutting off-ball toward the rim to get a layup pass and make a layup, and at the exact same time their assignment was moving back?

Did the defender just happen to not notice their assignment was moving back, despite the fact that their assignment was clearly in their line of sight?

What caused this defensive positioning error? Provide an actual explanation for why Bird’s teammate suddenly got open if you disagree. The Guy who’s approved by the NBA to do film analysis on the NBA app clearly agrees with my assessment.

So explain why you disagree, explain what the defender suddenly got out of position if not to guard Bird.

And remember: if the defender hadn’t committed the error of leaving Bird’s teammate open, Bird’s off-ball movement would have made him open for a layup pass, which was in the line of sight of the ball handler…. So the counterfactual of “what if the defender kept better positioning” doesn’t work here either.

What plays are you guys discussing about?

Watch on YouTube

this one.

Hmmm.

So Bird’s flailing like a fish out of water and distracting a defender. Not much value there, it’s more gamesmanship than shot creation. Nothing really exclusive to Bird, either.

Call it secondary creation if you want, a la Ohayo. But this is a big reach from Ben, especially given it’s not typical of Bird (and was more of a defensive collapse).

Highlighting this as demonstrating next-level creation abilities probably isn’t making the intended point.

[ShaqAttac]

What plays are you guys discussing about?

Watch on YouTube

this one.

Hmmm.

So Bird’s flailing like a fish out of water and distracting a defender. Not much value there, it’s more gamesmanship than shot creation. Nothing really exclusive to Bird, either.

Call it secondary creation if you want, a la Ohayo. But this is a big reach from Ben, especially given it’s not typical of Bird (and was more of a defensive collapse).

Highlighting this as demonstrating next-level creation abilities probably isn’t making the intended point.

iirc he also did it with steph:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2268193

tbh if someone is just gonna say his opinions are proof i would probably trust them less

[ceiling raiser]

Unfortunately, have to go with Kobe Bryant here.

Bryant vs Bird: Not convinced of Bird’s next-level playmaking ability here. I think Moonbeam’s new data is fascinating, but need to see different looks over more windows. Regardless, Bird has a ton of questions in terms of his ability to play on-ball in today’s era (and without that, he is less respected as a threat off-ball)

Bryant vs Mikan: As I’ve noted in previous threads, I think this is a slam dunk from a modernism POV. Nothing has been shown from the Mikan side, so unfortunately he’s likely just to occupy a spot until the ballot opens up with multiple new nominations.

Bryant vs Robertson: I actually like Oscar a lot here. He has Nash-like offensive metrics, and was part of some of the GOAT Bucks teams. Bryant has a more robust offensive skillset, however, and improved in the postseason.

Bryant vs West: As many questions as I have about Kobe on the defensive end, West is a bigger question mark. He seems to be a ballhawk of note, but I don’t think his defense translates into the modern era. Very much open to hearing more about this.

Alternate vote: Oscar Robertson. With Moonbeam’s new data Wilt looks like the clear #2 from the era, but Oscar seems strong at the end of his career. I think he had a tremendous mind for the game and would be valuable in any era.

Nomination: David Robinson. Let’s get him on the ballot! I think he compared favorably to everybody else here, and would make for fascinating debates.

[eminence]

Bryant vs Mikan: As I’ve noted in previous threads, I think this is a slam dunk from a modernism POV. Nothing has been shown from the Mikan side, so unfortunately he’s likely just to occupy a spot until the ballot opens up with multiple new nominations.

What could possibly convince from a 'modernist' point of view?

[ceiling raiser]

Bryant vs Mikan: As I’ve noted in previous threads, I think this is a slam dunk from a modernism POV. Nothing has been shown from the Mikan side, so unfortunately he’s likely just to occupy a spot until the ballot opens up with multiple new nominations.

What could possibly convince from a 'modernist' point of view?

Playmaking realistically. I don’t know if adequate footage exists, but that’s the best path.

[ceiling raiser]

Watch on YouTube

this one.

Hmmm.

So Bird’s flailing like a fish out of water and distracting a defender. Not much value there, it’s more gamesmanship than shot creation. Nothing really exclusive to Bird, either.

Call it secondary creation if you want, a la Ohayo. But this is a big reach from Ben, especially given it’s not typical of Bird (and was more of a defensive collapse).

Highlighting this as demonstrating next-level creation abilities probably isn’t making the intended point.

iirc he also did it with steph:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2268193

tbh if someone is just gonna say his opinions are proof i would probably trust them less

Taking a step back, assume you do count these as elite creation. Let’s give that to Bird.

Take those possessions, and all similar other idiosyncratic moments as elite creation. Collectively, they still don’t happen frequently enough to compensate for his limited on-ball game. The handles just aren’t there.

[ShaqAttac]

Hmmm.

So Bird’s flailing like a fish out of water and distracting a defender. Not much value there, it’s more gamesmanship than shot creation. Nothing really exclusive to Bird, either.

Call it secondary creation if you want, a la Ohayo. But this is a big reach from Ben, especially given it’s not typical of Bird (and was more of a defensive collapse).

Highlighting this as demonstrating next-level creation abilities probably isn’t making the intended point.

iirc he also did it with steph:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2268193

tbh if someone is just gonna say his opinions are proof i would probably trust them less

Taking a step back, assume you do count these as elite creation. Let’s give that to Bird.

Take those possessions, and all similar other idiosyncratic moments as elite creation. Collectively, they still don’t happen frequently enough to compensate for his limited on-ball game. The handles just aren’t there.

honestly, its still wild when he does it with steph but at least steph got handles and can create off the dribble and ****

i think some voters been saying he was as good as anyone ever offensively and i got no clue how.

[homecourtloss]

Vote:Kobe Bryant
Alternate: George Mikan

I have been seriously considering Mikan as nobody stood above his peers as much as Mikan did. We have the usual caveats about the time he played but at some point, I have to close the philosophical disconnect.

As far as Kobe and Bird are concerned, Kobe’s longevity (an 8 year gap between 2001 and 2009 monster performances is impressive) and greater post season resiliency. 2009 Kobe has become highly underrated and the 2009 Lakers have always been an underrated team. 2009 Kobe saw a player play half court basketball at its hardest but exceptionally well: 90th percentile in spot-up shooting, 90th percentile in coming off screens, 80th percentile or higher in literally every other category, e.g., ISO, post-up, with a low turnover %, good playmaking and strong ISO defense. The offense was +14.9 with Kobe On compared to off with a decent sized off sample, i.e., ~1,000 minutes.

As for whether Ray Allen and Pierce win with Shaq? Yes, but they wouldn’t create that 2001 post season team. Kobe was creating offense out of nothing with Shaq off the court to the tune of 45 per 100. One of the two best post season teams had on/offs favoring Kobe by a large degree. In general, Kobe’s playoff ON/OFFs were quite eye popping.

Then you had him at age 34 in season 16 having a Renaissance year with even more diminished athleticism but still incredibly effective. It’s a shame that he got hurt.

[trex_8063]

.

iirc he also did it with steph:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2268193

tbh if someone is just gonna say his opinions are proof i would probably trust them less

Taking a step back, assume you do count these as elite creation. Let’s give that to Bird.

Take those possessions, and all similar other idiosyncratic moments as elite creation. Collectively, they still don’t happen frequently enough to compensate for his limited on-ball game. The handles just aren’t there.

I've followed part of this debate, so just going to chip in my 2c.....

Calling this "meaningless flailing" [someone suggested something to that effect] is not accurate. One can say his off-ball movement doesn't pass some bar of "high-level off-ball movement", and perhaps that's true. That said, his initial back-cut is absolutely what creates the open look for Cowens: Cowens' man drops all the way down to the block for the explicit purpose of preventing the backdoor pass to Bird.

Is a 19-footer by Dave Cowens---even a wide-open one---a high-% look? I would say probably not; but jsia: it's only there because of Bird's cut.
And what's more, that back-cut was only there in the first place because Bird's man is playing perimeter ball-denial: the opponent is apparently so concerned about Bird even obtaining the ball in isolation on the perimeter he's overplaying that aspect, which enables the viable backdoor cut.

And then, around the middle of the clip, Cowens is open again at the top of the key [though he doesn't get the ball] because his man is hedging toward doubling Bird off-ball on the post (because his man is fronting him: again playing ball-denial, this time in the post).


I don't know if any of this is "elite creation"; I don't really have a horse in that race. And I cannot say for certain how often such plays are occurring (though imo it would be reasonable to assume it's happening often enough if the opponent is playing aggressive ball-denial).
But his gravity off-ball [both on the perimeter and in the post] is obvious in this clip; and his movement is not without effect.

And fwiw, I saw a clip where Ben credits Steph Curry with a creation simply for drawing a defender's eye on the perimeter for literally one second as Steph drifted close(ish) to him off-ball......and Steph's teammate [who was being guarded by that defender] chose that moment to cut backdoor (and ends up scoring).

If that counts......


EDIT: I write this as someone who voted for Kobe, fwiw.