1980 Bird vs 1988 Bird

[70sFan]

Which Bird version is the better player?

[tsherkin]

Which Bird version is the better player?

What's the pro-rookie Bird argument here?

[AEnigma]

Which Bird version is the better player?

What's the pro-rookie Bird argument here?

Theoretically might / likely would have better RAPM and RAPM rank that season, primarily from 1980 Bird being a much better defender than 1988 Bird. In that sense, I would entertain 1980 Bird as more impactful relative to his league, just because 1988 had more impressive top end talent (~peak Magic, regular season peak Jordan, prime Hakeem, prime Ewing, prime Barkley, prime Wilkins, early prime Malone, ~peak Stockton, etc.). However, if you flipped 1980 and 1988 Bird, I think the 1980 Celtics would become a more serious postseason contender and the 1988 Celtics would become a less serious one, even if maybe the loss of 1980 Bird’s defensive motor could conceivably drop the 1980 Celtics down to the conference 2-seed.

[One_and_Done]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

[Dr Positivity]

I could see the argument 88 Bird is not playing as good D anymore but offensively it's not close. I think 82/83 Bird vs 88 would be closer.

[70sFan]

Which Bird version is the better player?

What's the pro-rookie Bird argument here?

More hunger to prove himself in RS, other than that... nothing really? 1988 Bird was significantly better offensive player, like tiers ahead of rookie Bird. Younger version being better defensively just isn't enough to overcome that gap.

[AEnigma]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

Was 2005 Lebron better than 2015 Lebron? Playing through pain does not inherently offset years of experience.

And your link is about the 1988 offseason.

[Cavsfansince84]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

After the 88 season when he knew he'd be getting surgery and would miss the entire 89 season. He also considered retiring after 85 until he found a way to get his back pain under control.

[One_and_Done]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

Was 2005 Lebron better than 2015 Lebron? Playing through pain does not inherently offset years of experience.

And your link is about the 1988 offseason.

This is a simplistic way of looking at things. 2008 Shaq was 'more experienced' than rookie Shaq, but he certainly wasn't more impactful.

Obviously a guy usually peaks when everything comes together, physical and mental, but older doesn't always equal better. Bird came into the league as an MVP level player. He was craftier and wiser by 88, and if he'd been healthy he'd have undoubtedly been better, but by 1988 Bird had already considered retirement twice due to foot and back issues. He was not as good in 88 as 80 IMO.

[One_and_Done]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

After the 88 season when he knew he'd be getting surgery and would miss the entire 89 season. He also considered retiring after 85 until he found a way to get his back pain under control.

His foot problems didn't begin in the 88 offseason though. He'd had then in 88 too, it was just in the offseason they said they'd have to do major work to fix it.

[70sFan]

Or the fact that Bird said he was so injured by 88 that he considered retirement.
https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/larry-bird-said-he-would-have-retired-in-1988-if-len-bias-didnt-die
If Bird was 100% healthy in 88 then sure, he'd have been better. He wasn't.

Was 2005 Lebron better than 2015 Lebron? Playing through pain does not inherently offset years of experience.

And your link is about the 1988 offseason.

This is a simplistic way of looking at things. 2008 Shaq was 'more experienced' than rookie Shaq, but he certainly wasn't more impactful.

To make this analogy work, you'd have to assume that 1988 Bird was on similar stage of his career to 2008 Shaq. Is that your opinion on that matter?

[trelos6]

OPIPM

'80 +2.2
'88 +5.1

DPIPM

'80 +1.6
'88 +0.5


PIPM

'80 +3.7
'88 +5.6


Wins Added

'80 13.5
'88 18.7


pp75, rTS%

'80 20.7, +0.7
'88 28.2, +7.0


creation, passer rating

'80 5.4, 5.4
'88 10.9, 6.9

[Cavsfansince84]

His foot problems didn't begin in the 88 offseason though. He'd had then in 88 too, it was just in the offseason they said they'd have to do major work to fix it.

Yes(I think we all know this) but the retirement idea is related to the fact of what the surgery entailed and the fact he'd be out for a full season. There's no doubt that mobility, motor and defense wise Bird was a lot better in 1980. It's just hard to argue that it outweighs what he had gained in experience, shooting and more importantly 3 pt shooting by 88. The main thing you can use against Bird in 88 is just the ecf he had though he was great in the first two rounds but he wasn't that good in the 80 ecf either.

[One_and_Done]

Was 2005 Lebron better than 2015 Lebron? Playing through pain does not inherently offset years of experience.

And your link is about the 1988 offseason.

This is a simplistic way of looking at things. 2008 Shaq was 'more experienced' than rookie Shaq, but he certainly wasn't more impactful.

To make this analogy work, you'd have to assume that 1988 Bird was on similar stage of his career to 2008 Shaq. Is that your opinion on that matter?

No, but that's irrelevant because it's an analogy not a comparison. The 2 things compared don't need to be the same, no more than when I say 'it's a tough nut to crack'. I am not suggesting the thing is the same difficulty to crack as a nut, no more than I am suggesting exact equivalence when I say 'life is like a box of chocolates'.

[OhayoKD]

I could see the argument 88 Bird is not playing as good D anymore but offensively it's not close. I think 82/83 Bird vs 88 would be closer.

Bird stopped playing good d post his 85 injury and was a negative by 86. If Bird's defensive rep from his rookie year is accurate, the defense shouldnt be close either. It may of course, not be accurate.

[OhayoKD]

His foot problems didn't begin in the 88 offseason though. He'd had then in 88 too, it was just in the offseason they said they'd have to do major work to fix it.

Yes(I think we all know this) but the retirement idea is related to the fact of what the surgery entailed and the fact he'd be out for a full season. There's no doubt that mobility, motor and defense wise Bird was a lot better in 1980. It's just hard to argue that it outweighs what he had gained in experience, shooting and more importantly 3 pt shooting by 88.

1.3 mostly uncontested three makes are important why exactly

[Cavsfansince84]

1.3 mostly uncontested three makes are important why exactly

It prob isn't that relevant especially compared to 1980 but I think its an extension of the type of shooter he became in the 86-88 period when his ts+ also becomes elite level.

[OhayoKD]

1.3 mostly uncontested three makes are important why exactly

It prob isn't that relevant especially compared to 1980 but I think its an extension of the type of shooter he became in the 86-88 period when his ts+ also becomes elite level.

sure

[70sFan]

This is a simplistic way of looking at things. 2008 Shaq was 'more experienced' than rookie Shaq, but he certainly wasn't more impactful.

To make this analogy work, you'd have to assume that 1988 Bird was on similar stage of his career to 2008 Shaq. Is that your opinion on that matter?

No, but that's irrelevant because it's an analogy not a comparison. The 2 things compared don't need to be the same, no more than when I say 'it's a tough nut to crack'. I am not suggesting the thing is the same difficulty to crack as a nut, no more than I am suggesting exact equivalence when I say 'life is like a box of chocolates'.

Scholastic philosophers are turning in their graves seeing your ramblings about analogies...

If that's what analogic reasoning is to you, then I can reject any of your takes by arbitrary comparisons.


Coming back to basketball, if you agree that 2008 Shaq is a not good comparison to 1988 Bird, then maybe you stop using "analogies" and explain exactly what makes rookie Bird better than 1988 Bird. Injuries don't make you automatically a worse player, 2004 Shaq was dealing with injuries but was still significantly better than rookie (that's way better comparison than your). Bird peaked as an offensive player during that time and you don't have any evidences to prove me wrong on that matter. Any 1980s Celtics fan would agree with me

[tsherkin]

Which Bird version is the better player?

What's the pro-rookie Bird argument here?

Theoretically might / likely would have better RAPM and RAPM rank that season, primarily from 1980 Bird being a much better defender than 1988 Bird. In that sense, I would entertain 1980 Bird as more impactful relative to his league, just because 1988 had more impressive top end talent (~peak Magic, regular season peak Jordan, prime Hakeem, prime Ewing, prime Barkley, prime Wilkins, early prime Malone, ~peak Stockton, etc.). However, if you flipped 1980 and 1988 Bird, I think the 1980 Celtics would become a more serious postseason contender and the 1988 Celtics would become a less serious one, even if maybe the loss of 1980 Bird’s defensive motor could conceivably drop the 1980 Celtics down to the conference 2-seed.

Hmm. I can't say I put much stock in RAPM. It produces some opinions which make very little sense to me, though I will admit that it at least makes me pause and wade through the thought, which is worthwhile.

Rookie Bird vs. peak Bird, though. Can't really see a sane argument that 1980 Bird was better. The offensive difference was considerable. The defensive difference, particularly since it was largely about post defense... less so. It's just difficult to wrap my head around the idea that a rookie version would be better than the peak version of a player without gross statistical support.