For career though, Steph is above Bird and I am highly debating whether or not he should be above Magic too.
Bird is a guy who has really sunk after my reevaluations. Tremendous player when healthy but he simply had way too many Playoff injuries and then his prime was cut off quite early so longevity is lacking.
Bird's peak being higher than magic or steph is way off tbh. He didn't create anywhere near as much as either, his defense wasn't even a clear positive by 86, and he is at best the second best scorer here
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
For career though, Steph is above Bird and I am highly debating whether or not he should be above Magic too.
Bird is a guy who has really sunk after my reevaluations. Tremendous player when healthy but he simply had way too many Playoff injuries and then his prime was cut off quite early so longevity is lacking.
Bird's peak being higher than magic or steph is way off tbh. He didn't create anywhere near as much as either, his defense wasn't even a clear positive by 86, and he is at best the second best scorer here
I've never heard someone talk about Bird like this.
He was far and away the best player on one of the three greatest teams in NBA history. Averaged 26/10/7 on 50/40/90 splits. INSANELY portable and crazy effective off-ball, but he could just as easily take over a game if necessary.
His defense was definitely a positive, watch clips from the Finals that year. Wasn't a Pippen/Kawhi level 1 on 1 shutdown defender but his help was very effective and he made life quite difficult for Hakeem.
This is a team that went 82-18 for the whole season and it began and ended with him. I don't know how to sell him more. I'm not exactly a Boston homer so there's no bias here.
He played all 100 games so there's no WOWY score but consider this:
First 34 games, the Cs were 26-8 and he averaged 24/9/6 on 53% TS.
Then his back healed up, they went 39-5 the rest of the way and he averaged 28/10/7 on 61% TS (including 46% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game which is INSANE for the 80s).
Very clearly he had an insane ceiling raising effect on that team.
I think my favorite accomplishment for him was the year before he retired. That 1991 team had no business going as far as they did in a west that was growing much stronger than Magic's peak years. New coach, new system, no Kareem. Worthy was aging and really banged up, that team would've been dead in the water without Earvin and they made the finals meeting peak Michael taking him to 6.
To me, with magic it was less about numbers like the offensive version of Russell where he was just gonna get the team far with whatever he had. Even then, his numbers were still very good especially for his time.
For career though, Steph is above Bird and I am highly debating whether or not he should be above Magic too.
Bird is a guy who has really sunk after my reevaluations. Tremendous player when healthy but he simply had way too many Playoff injuries and then his prime was cut off quite early so longevity is lacking.
Bird's peak being higher than magic or steph is way off tbh. He didn't create anywhere near as much as either, his defense wasn't even a clear positive by 86, and he is at best the second best scorer here
I've never heard someone talk about Bird like this.
Well, ultimately, it's not about the talk, it's about the tape(and there will be lots of that here)
He was far and away the best player on one of the three greatest teams in NBA history.
The Celtics being one of the "three greatest teams in nba history" seems pretty hard to defend. They did not repeat, they did not post a top 3-ever regular-season rating, nor did they post a top 3-ever playoff rating, and they obviously get rinsed by a whole bunch of teams if you break era-relativity. And that is all basically excluding the 11-ring Celtics because srs was suppressed in the 60's.
Either way, Bird was on the team the seasons before and after when they were not "atg", and the biggest addition this year was Walton coinciding with defensive improvement(they actually got worse offensively iirc). Unless you are arguing Bird's defensive impact just skyrocketed from 85, I don't see how the Celtic's team success really means anything for Bird in a comparison with two players who won more and have stronger impact profiles.
Averaged 26/10/7 on 50/40/90 splits.
Those are worse numbers than the best years Magic and Steph and 50/40/90 is pretty meaningless given key context like volume and defensive attention. Whether you think he could have scaled up or not in the modern game, the "40" is meaningless when it's just a couple attempts which most defenses are leaving wide open. Honestly not sure why you're posing splits instead of true-shooting but I digress.
Completely absent in that slashline is Bird's limited ball-handling was a crippling issue which means if you go and actually count how many defenders he takes out of plays, it's alot less than the number steph takes out as well as the number magic takes out. Bird also does not exert the downhill pressure Magic can which means he is not able to draw defenders away from his teammates the same way. And because defenses were not trying to stop his 3's, he isn't making that back up with shooting gravity. In short, the assists grossly oversell what he offered as a creator:
Spoiler:
Being a more skilled passer is all fine and good but ultimately what matters is what you create. Or, put another way, your ability to take out or minimize variables that make it harder for teammates to score. And when we look at that...
Timing, accuracy. His touch passing, when he only has the ball for a fraction of a second and one-hands it to someone. No-lookers, the whole range of things which might impress someone with his positional awareness and technical passing acumen. Watch more Bird and pay specific attention to his passing. I don't want to be rude, your question is fair, especially for someone who never saw him live. But there are plenty of highlights which illustrate why the fanfare exists.
In this highlight reel, none of his first four passes create wide open looks. There are still defenders the recipients have to deal with up until pass #5. You have to wait till pass #8 to see another uncontested look. Pass #10 for the 3rd.
Magic's first 7 passes here create wide open looks. 9 of his first 12. You might also notice that alot of these passes come with Magic handling the ball in traffic, allowing Johnson to filter out defenders, before he makes the pass. In some of these Magic is also leveraging rim-pressure as defenders take themselves out of the play in anticipation of what he's going to at the basket.
;start=25[/url] Kobe creates 5 wide-open looks in his first 10 possessions(for clarity, i am not[b] counting something like the Walton pass). As you might expect he is not anticipating or making reads as early as the other two are but he is able to leverage both his pressure at the rim and penetration to compensate for his disadvantage in raw-skill. Bryant is also, like Magic, taking defenders out of the play pre-pass
Here is the result:
Whatever you think of their raw-passing, Magic creates [b]more and creates more efficiently, while leading better offenses.
So does Lebron:
And if you think this is a matter of off-ball creation being undervalued...so does Steph:
So does Jordan:
You know who Bird looks comparable to? This guy: The reverse can be applied to Bird but with passing. His scoring volume goes down and nor his assists or effeciency go up. I'm not even saying this makes him = KD but you and Ben are not even acknowledging this as a factor and it's a principle that applies to both. It's easier to replace "creation" that is tied to good-decision making, good 1 v 1 finishers, good secondary passers, lesser coverage, and good ball-handlers. That's why it's not just about who passes the best. Westbrook forces defenders to get in his way when he's running at you. He's not just waiting for an opening or making a defender shuffle here or there. That's why he can garuntee his teammates buckets when they suck at shooting. Adam and Westbrook wasn't league topping pnr because Adam is kevin mchale.
Similarly, playing with two bigger and better rebounders and paint-protectors, the vast majority of his rebounds were uncontested(low-value), and pretty much all his blocks were weakside plays. The box-score does not capture negative stuff like blow-bys. Add it all up, and he was giving up about as much if not more than he was stopping, even with extremely unique roster-construction/personell letting him roam as an SF defensively while playing as a PF offensively(elaborated on at the bottom of the spoiler):
Spoiler:
For those who are curious, a half into the final round of 86, Bird is having a fantastic scoring game(16 points with 7 possessions, 1 technical)
He is offering creative value but it's limited(2 Great OC, 12:40, 28:50)but he seems limited here(and thus far not much of anything seems to be happening off-ball):
His defense(1 Decent DP, 46:30, 5 Minor Breakdowns, 53:20, 41:55, 26:55, 26:40, 12:30, 2 Moderate Breakdowns, 20:10, 20:35) isn't great
Here's the game for those who want to vet/comment:
For those who are curious on the justification for a certain classification, there are notes attached to all of these. Ask(with a time-stamp), and I can pull it up.
For posterity here were some examples of things that were not counted:
-> 44:15 ("empty-ish assist") -> 48:10 ("i hope that didn't get an assist")
WestGOAT wrote:I have shared some of the proto-tracking but I guess I may as well provide what was done with game 1(87 ecf) from the same series. Was vetted by different people though(and a love of Caps Lock )...
The original methodology:
If we move to game 5, literally dubbed the steal game, we can see some of his limitations on tape:
Note that while he coughs up a layup, we decided to only count this as a minor breakdown as it wasn't his man and "most players" may not prevent this.
But Bird, by reputation, is not "most players" with many assuming his all-time cerebral offense translates to draymond/kg/lebron/cp3 level defensive court-mapping on the other end. I'd say Larry was more good than great in this regard, frequently being baited into questionable gambles, sometimes getting caught ball-watching, and mostly reacting to what was in his direct line of vision rather than the sort of anticipatory play-reading you'd expect from the best of the best.
Consequently here, in the very first possession of a massive playoff-game, we see that Bird isn't really tracking the weak-side, isn't aware of what's Laimbeer is up to, and ultimately fails to make a high-value help read that the KG's and the Draymond's are making in their sleep.
Rather, Bird mostly reacted to what was happening in front of him, sticking to assignments and making mostly good/reasonable decisions even when the execution didn't come off...
22:32
This was graded as a moderate breakdown for a number of reasons and I think encapsulates Bird's limitations defensively.
For one, fronting a player of your same position instead of guarding straight up is already somewhat of a small loss for the Defense. This is not a guard trying to save a mismatch on a wing, and while it's not a bad decision(especially against Dantley), it's important to understand that Bird's relatively weak man-defense was largely covered for by an excellent supporting cast(more on that later)
Two, we see this here a few seconds later when, after Bird botches the execution leaving Dantley in the clear, Mchale comes in and delays Dantley giving Bird an opportunity to recover and help.
Three, unfortunately, be it due to athleticism, awareness, or motor, Bird gives up on the play early and Dantley converts.
To be fair there were also positives...
40:15
This was classified as a good defensive play and shows some of Bird's strengths. He does a good job fronting his man away from the ball, makes a timely rotation to get in front of Isiah and his size allows him to swallow Thomas's drive well before he gets to the hoop.
It was not classified as great because the shot was block occurred further from the basket with multiple bigs behind him(thus not as high percentage of a look) and Bird's teammates do a fair bit of lifting pressuring Isiah into an ill-advised shot attempt.
This play is also only really possible because Bird is being utilized as an SF defensively rather than being asked to fight for position under the hoop.
And this gets us back to that cast. It is a luxury that Bird was allowed to play like a PF on offense while being hidden at SF on the other end. Strong rim-deterrents who were also switchable and could also could handle, pass, and score in isolation were not an easy find in the 80's. Put him on a conventional roster and his various weaknesses probably become more apparent.
You might notice the rather paltry creation that shows up in the various trackings(virtually none of it coming off-ball) which gets us to...
INSANELY portable and crazy effective off-ball
No. He needed versatile man defenders who could also protect the paint and could also handle the rock and drive(that's a rare combination even today), and provided less off-ball impact than even someone like Lebron, never mind a Steph. Bird is far less portable than Steph is on either end and frankly, you can even make a case for Magic(besides him literally being the #1 in rs and playoff win %) translating better because he's much more straightforward to build around defensively(a result of offering some of the inside-threat/slashing-game/rim-gravity offensively you would want from a bigger defender).
Bird is the least valuable of the three statistically, far less successful in terms of team-success, and needs more unique personell on both sides of the floor. The fact the Celtics had a one-off atg year on the bulk of a one-off defensive improvement despite Bird quite clearly declining on that end does not really offer solid evidence Bird was more portable than either.
but he could just as easily take over a game if necessary.
[/quote][/quote] But he couldn't, or at least, not nearly to the players you're placing above. That's why he was the biggest playoff-dropper of the 3 both in terms of team performance and individual numbers/effeciency(volume and effeciency dropped), and ultimately didn't come close in terms of team success despite one of the shallower iterations of that team nearly making the conference finals without him in 1992. The Celtics single-year turn around with Bird was great, but they ultimately were not all that in that same postseason and they/bird has failed to replicate that signal at any other point.
Bird is flatly a worse floor-raiser, cieling-raiser and anything in-between the two and I do not think the tape, or Hakeem holding him to a competitive series with much weaker injury/coke hindered help(they were -3.5 without Hakeem that year) really suggests Bird just became significantly better at basketball in 86 as opposed to 85.
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
migya wrote:Alt the can be well compared because their teams were built well around them. Bird does more than just scoring and passing than the other two. His defense and rebounding, as well as intangibles, are better.
Bird > Magic > Curry
Don't know for peaks only but career: Bird #9, Magic #10, Curry not top 20 yet, almost there, just hasn't had a long enough prime. He'd be top 15 with same level for another three years.
You know Curry has a longer prime than Bird.
Curry has 9 "Superstar" seasons from 2014-2023, not including 2020 obviously.
Bird has 9 "Superstar" seasons from 1980-1988. I'm a bit lower on a Birds first 2 seasons but I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt.
I'd have 2013 and 2024 Curry ahead of any 1990-1992 season.
Think Curry want a real star unto 2014 but definitely 2015. Bur had star effect until 1991 though that can be debated.
migya wrote:Alt the can be well compared because their teams were built well around them. Bird does more than just scoring and passing than the other two. His defense and rebounding, as well as intangibles, are better.
Bird > Magic > Curry
Don't know for peaks only but career: Bird #9, Magic #10, Curry not top 20 yet, almost there, just hasn't had a long enough prime. He'd be top 15 with same level for another three years.
Curry 2700+ career TS add, Bird 1000+ TS add...where is the prime advantage?
OhayoKD wrote:Bird's peak being higher than magic or steph is way off tbh. He didn't create anywhere near as much as either, his defense wasn't even a clear positive by 86, and he is at best the second best scorer here
I've never heard someone talk about Bird like this.
Well, ultimately, it's not about the talk, it's about the tape(and there will be lots of that here)
He was far and away the best player on one of the three greatest teams in NBA history.
The Celtics being one of the "three greatest teams in nba history" seems pretty hard to defend. They did not repeat, they did not post a top 3-ever regular-season rating, nor did they post a top 3-ever playoff rating, and they obviously get rinsed by a whole bunch of teams if you break era-relativity. And that is all basically excluding the 11-ring Celtics because srs was suppressed in the 60's.
Either way, Bird was on the team the seasons before and after when they were not "atg", and the biggest addition this year was Walton coinciding with defensive improvement(they actually got worse offensively iirc). Unless you are arguing Bird's defensive impact just skyrocketed from 85, I don't see how the Celtic's team success really means anything for Bird in a comparison with two players who won more and have stronger impact profiles.
Averaged 26/10/7 on 50/40/90 splits.
Those are worse numbers than the best years Magic and Steph and 50/40/90 is pretty meaningless given key context like volume and defensive attention. Whether you think he could have scaled up or not in the modern game, the "40" is meaningless when it's just a couple attempts which most defenses are leaving wide open. Honestly not sure why you're posing splits instead of true-shooting but I digress.
Completely absent in that slashline is Bird's limited ball-handling was a crippling issue which means if you go and actually count how many defenders he takes out of plays, it's alot less than the number steph takes out as well as the number magic takes out. Bird also does not exert the downhill pressure Magic can which means he is not able to draw defenders away from his teammates the same way. And because defenses were not trying to stop his 3's, he isn't making that back up with shooting gravity. In short, the assists grossly oversell what he offered as a creator:
Spoiler:
Being a more skilled passer is all fine and good but ultimately what matters is what you create. Or, put another way, your ability to take out or minimize variables that make it harder for teammates to score. And when we look at that...
Timing, accuracy. His touch passing, when he only has the ball for a fraction of a second and one-hands it to someone. No-lookers, the whole range of things which might impress someone with his positional awareness and technical passing acumen. Watch more Bird and pay specific attention to his passing. I don't want to be rude, your question is fair, especially for someone who never saw him live. But there are plenty of highlights which illustrate why the fanfare exists.
In this highlight reel, none of his first four passes create wide open looks. There are still defenders the recipients have to deal with up until pass #5. You have to wait till pass #8 to see another uncontested look. Pass #10 for the 3rd.
Magic's first 7 passes here create wide open looks. 9 of his first 12. You might also notice that alot of these passes come with Magic handling the ball in traffic, allowing Johnson to filter out defenders, before he makes the pass. In some of these Magic is also leveraging rim-pressure as defenders take themselves out of the play in anticipation of what he's going to at the basket.
;start=25[/url] Kobe creates 5 wide-open looks in his first 10 possessions(for clarity, i am not[b] counting something like the Walton pass). As you might expect he is not anticipating or making reads as early as the other two are but he is able to leverage both his pressure at the rim and penetration to compensate for his disadvantage in raw-skill. Bryant is also, like Magic, taking defenders out of the play pre-pass
Here is the result:
Whatever you think of their raw-passing, Magic creates [b]more and creates more efficiently, while leading better offenses.
So does Lebron:
And if you think this is a matter of off-ball creation being undervalued...so does Steph:
So does Jordan:
You know who Bird looks comparable to? This guy: The reverse can be applied to Bird but with passing. His scoring volume goes down and nor his assists or effeciency go up. I'm not even saying this makes him = KD but you and Ben are not even acknowledging this as a factor and it's a principle that applies to both. It's easier to replace "creation" that is tied to good-decision making, good 1 v 1 finishers, good secondary passers, lesser coverage, and good ball-handlers. That's why it's not just about who passes the best. Westbrook forces defenders to get in his way when he's running at you. He's not just waiting for an opening or making a defender shuffle here or there. That's why he can garuntee his teammates buckets when they suck at shooting. Adam and Westbrook wasn't league topping pnr because Adam is kevin mchale.
Similarly, playing with two bigger and better rebounders and paint-protectors, the vast majority of his rebounds were uncontested(low-value), and pretty much all his blocks were weakside plays. The box-score does not capture negative stuff like blow-bys. Add it all up, and he was giving up about as much if not more than he was stopping, even with extremely unique roster-construction/personell letting him roam as an SF defensively while playing as a PF offensively(elaborated on at the bottom of the spoiler):
Spoiler:
For those who are curious, a half into the final round of 86, Bird is having a fantastic scoring game(16 points with 7 possessions, 1 technical)
He is offering creative value but it's limited(2 Great OC, 12:40, 28:50)but he seems limited here(and thus far not much of anything seems to be happening off-ball):
His defense(1 Decent DP, 46:30, 5 Minor Breakdowns, 53:20, 41:55, 26:55, 26:40, 12:30, 2 Moderate Breakdowns, 20:10, 20:35) isn't great
Here's the game for those who want to vet/comment:
For those who are curious on the justification for a certain classification, there are notes attached to all of these. Ask(with a time-stamp), and I can pull it up.
For posterity here were some examples of things that were not counted:
-> 44:15 ("empty-ish assist") -> 48:10 ("i hope that didn't get an assist")
WestGOAT wrote:I have shared some of the proto-tracking but I guess I may as well provide what was done with game 1(87 ecf) from the same series. Was vetted by different people though(and a love of Caps Lock )...
The original methodology:
If we move to game 5, literally dubbed the steal game, we can see some of his limitations on tape:
Note that while he coughs up a layup, we decided to only count this as a minor breakdown as it wasn't his man and "most players" may not prevent this.
But Bird, by reputation, is not "most players" with many assuming his all-time cerebral offense translates to draymond/kg/lebron/cp3 level defensive court-mapping on the other end. I'd say Larry was more good than great in this regard, frequently being baited into questionable gambles, sometimes getting caught ball-watching, and mostly reacting to what was in his direct line of vision rather than the sort of anticipatory play-reading you'd expect from the best of the best.
Consequently here, in the very first possession of a massive playoff-game, we see that Bird isn't really tracking the weak-side, isn't aware of what's Laimbeer is up to, and ultimately fails to make a high-value help read that the KG's and the Draymond's are making in their sleep.
Rather, Bird mostly reacted to what was happening in front of him, sticking to assignments and making mostly good/reasonable decisions even when the execution didn't come off...
22:32
This was graded as a moderate breakdown for a number of reasons and I think encapsulates Bird's limitations defensively.
For one, fronting a player of your same position instead of guarding straight up is already somewhat of a small loss for the Defense. This is not a guard trying to save a mismatch on a wing, and while it's not a bad decision(especially against Dantley), it's important to understand that Bird's relatively weak man-defense was largely covered for by an excellent supporting cast(more on that later)
Two, we see this here a few seconds later when, after Bird botches the execution leaving Dantley in the clear, Mchale comes in and delays Dantley giving Bird an opportunity to recover and help.
Three, unfortunately, be it due to athleticism, awareness, or motor, Bird gives up on the play early and Dantley converts.
To be fair there were also positives...
40:15
This was classified as a good defensive play and shows some of Bird's strengths. He does a good job fronting his man away from the ball, makes a timely rotation to get in front of Isiah and his size allows him to swallow Thomas's drive well before he gets to the hoop.
It was not classified as great because the shot was block occurred further from the basket with multiple bigs behind him(thus not as high percentage of a look) and Bird's teammates do a fair bit of lifting pressuring Isiah into an ill-advised shot attempt.
This play is also only really possible because Bird is being utilized as an SF defensively rather than being asked to fight for position under the hoop.
And this gets us back to that cast. It is a luxury that Bird was allowed to play like a PF on offense while being hidden at SF on the other end. Strong rim-deterrents who were also switchable and could also could handle, pass, and score in isolation were not an easy find in the 80's. Put him on a conventional roster and his various weaknesses probably become more apparent.
You might notice the rather paltry creation that shows up in the various trackings(virtually none of it coming off-ball) which gets us to...
INSANELY portable and crazy effective off-ball
No. He needed versatile man defenders who could also protect the paint and could also handle the rock and drive(that's a rare combination even today), and provided less off-ball impact than even someone like Lebron, never mind a Steph. Bird is far less portable than Steph is on either end and frankly, you can even make a case for Magic(besides him literally being the #1 in rs and playoff win %) translating better because he's much more straightforward to build around defensively(a result of offering some of the inside-threat/slashing-game/rim-gravity offensively you would want from a bigger defender).
Bird is the least valuable of the three statistically, far less successful in terms of team-success, and needs more unique personell on both sides of the floor. The fact the Celtics had a one-off atg year on the bulk of a one-off defensive improvement despite Bird quite clearly declining on that end does not really offer solid evidence Bird was more portable than either.
but he could just as easily take over a game if necessary.
Overwhelming volume of words and wrong. Honestly don’t know how to tackle it.
Bird is the best all around player ever and you argue he isn’t portable.
Colbinii wrote: Yeah but what are you basing this off of?
Curry in 2013 was having Top 10 Impact and voted 4th best player here on RealGM.
2013-2023, minus 2020 is actually 10 seasons, not 9.
Birds last Top 5 finish was 1988, giving him 9 seasons.
The top players were much higher canker than in those earlier years for Curry. I'm not going to debate that, but I see it as clear.
Sounds good Migya, just keep seeing the world through your own lense and close your mind to the ideas of everyone else.
You keep pulling and try to bait, it looks very childish, don't care for what real life reasons that is. I won't try to sway your thinking because that's none of my business. We come here to talk and express our views.
The top players were much higher canker than in those earlier years for Curry. I'm not going to debate that, but I see it as clear.
Sounds good Migya, just keep seeing the world through your own lense and close your mind to the ideas of everyone else.
You keep pulling and try to bait, it looks very childish, don't care for what real life reasons that is. I won't try to sway your thinking because that's none of my business. We come here to talk and express our views.
Right...and when someone presents evidence contrary to your view, do you simply bury your head in the sand and ignore it or do you re-think what your own belief is since it is possible you are incorrect and you could learn?
I strive to learn and grow and change throughout my life.
From a career standpoint, Bird is definitely 3rd here. Longevity is not really part of my criteria because it's so situational but durability is part of being a basketball player. Bird's problem isn't that he had a short career but that his body prevented him from having a longer one and that isn't really unlucky or situational. That's just his body limitation so he IMO should be penalized for it. But Magic, despite having a shorter career and prime than Curry actually has a durability edge. Curry had more playoff injuries than Magic. Magic also achieved more so he takes it in a career comparison.
Career wise, Magic > Curry > Bird and there isn't much wiggle room there for me.
Now when it comes to primes it's interesting. It's a much much closer discussion. I have Magic and Curry on the same tier and it's tough to say one is clearly better than the other. They both check all the boxes in terms of box score, impact stats, team success etc. With Bird depending on how you grade his defense, you can either have him above or below both of the others.
migya wrote:Alt the can be well compared because their teams were built well around them. Bird does more than just scoring and passing than the other two. His defense and rebounding, as well as intangibles, are better.
Bird > Magic > Curry
Don't know for peaks only but career: Bird #9, Magic #10, Curry not top 20 yet, almost there, just hasn't had a long enough prime. He'd be top 15 with same level for another three years.
Curry 2700+ career TS add, Bird 1000+ TS add...where is the prime advantage?
Basketball is much more than TS.
sure but its an important data for measuring scorers. Curry is just the much better offensive player as a whole, and although Bird has the defensive edge, its not good enough.
cpower wrote:sure but its an important data for measuring scorers. Curry is just the much better offensive player as a whole, and although Bird has the defensive edge, its not good enough.
So you can certainly say that Curry was a more efficient scorer than Bird. Volume 3pt shooting will do that for you, and it's even more pronounced in the playoffs. But what about playmaking? What about offensive rebounding? What about occupation of different spots and sets on the floor beyond just the off-ball? Steph does a little more POA stuff with a live dribble, for sure, but Bird was also quite capable in the post. There's stylistic difference in how they approach, and obviously Bird has some postseason concerns with his scoring, but is it that clear that Steph is really a "much better offensive player as a whole?" Or are we looking at positional differences and over-crediting the little dude who handles more?
Lamelo Anthony wrote:Magic easily the best. Primary ball handler and led better offenses with different casts and in different systems. Bird is last. Not as good as a shooter or off-ball player as Steph, overrated defender, biggest playoff dropper.
Bird was a bigger playoff dropper
Yet somehow just a few posts above I gave Bird and Curry’s finals stats, which favor Bird.
Here it is again:
Found this interesting. Bird and Curry have played one minute difference in finals basketball. A single minute.
cpower wrote:sure but its an important data for measuring scorers. Curry is just the much better offensive player as a whole, and although Bird has the defensive edge, its not good enough.
So you can certainly say that Curry was a more efficient scorer than Bird. Volume 3pt shooting will do that for you, and it's even more pronounced in the playoffs. But what about playmaking?
Bird is a better raw passer, but Steph creates more thanks to the live dribble, being defended alot more on 3-pointers, and being the first volume off-ball creator in nba history.
its my last message in this thread, but I just admit, that all the people, casual and analytical minds, more or less have consencus who has the weight of a rubberized duck. And its not JaivLLLL
OhayoKD wrote:Bird is a better raw passer, but Steph creates more thanks to the live dribble, being defended alot more on 3-pointers, and being the first volume off-ball creator in nba history.
Not sure I agree with that, given Bird's touch passing and his own defensive draw as a shooter. Certainly not at the same range as Steph, but it's a little bit odd to treat Steph as if he's the only guy who drew a lot of coverage away from the ball and used his movement to leverage that for team offense. It's also worth remembering that Boston authored the second-best team offense of the 80s in 88 with Bird leading the way. He had help, of course, but he was a huge part of how that team functioned. I think you're also depreciating post and outlet passing.
)...
You should pull up.
