Who's higher on your all time list? Larry Bird, Shaq O'Neal or Hakeem

[toodles23]

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

[SNPA]

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

Bird below Kobe. Next time please put that at the top. I’d like those seconds of my life back.

[MrBigShot]

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

Bird 1981 championship playoff stats: 22/14/6 on 47/38/90
Bird 1984 championship playoff stats: 28/11/6 on 52/41/88
Bird 1986 championship playoff stats: 26/9/8 no 52/41/93

Did he have some years where he wasn't as efficient, sure. But at or near 50/40/90 for 3 playoff runs resulting in championships does not paint the picture of a playoff dropper.

[toodles23]

Bird below Kobe. Next time please put that at the top. I’d like those seconds of my life back.

Compelling argument from you, as per usual.

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

Bird 1981 championship playoff stats: 22/14/6 on 47/38/90
Bird 1984 championship playoff stats: 28/11/6 on 52/41/88
Bird 1986 championship playoff stats: 26/9/8 no 52/41/93

Did he have some years where he wasn't as efficient, sure. But at or near 50/40/90 for 3 playoff runs resulting in championships does not paint the picture of a playoff dropper.

Not sure why you would cherry pick three years to say that he isn't a playoff dropper, especially since I noted in my post that it isn't at all a coincidence that two of the three times his scoring held up in the playoffs it resulted in championships.

Regular season per 100 averages, 1980-1988:

30.9 / 12.7 / 7.6, 3.9 57.0 TS%, 24.2 PER

Playoff per 100 averages:

28.4 / 12.4 / 7.4, 55.5 TS%, 21.5 PER

He is definitely a fairly significant playoff dropper. For more granular detail here's a post from years ago who's author I can't find anymore

----

1980 - Averaged a .511 TS% in the postseason. In game 5 vs. the Sixers, he shot poorly, 5-19 with just 12 points, as the Celtics lost the game. His man (Dr. J) averaged 25 PPG in this series. His team loses in 5 games despite having HCA and winning 61 games. Had a 18.3 PER in the postseason

1981 - Has a .532 TS% in the postseason. He had a bad finals where he averaged just 15 PPG on .419 shooting and .460 TS%.

1982 - PPG average dropped from 22.9 PPG to 17.8 PPG. He has an embarrassing .474 TS% in the playoffs. He averaged a pedestrian 18.3 PPG against the Sixers. Averages 17 PPG in the final 2 games of the series. The Celtics lose again with HCA. The Celtics won 63 games and had the #1 SRS in the league. Has a 17.9 PER in the postseason.

1983 - The Celtics get swept by the Bucks. The Celtics win 56 games and had the #2 SRS in the league and lose again with HCA. Bird plays awful again. .478 TS%. His PPG average drops 2 PPG in the playoffs. Bird missed a game in the series but that game happened to be the closest one (Celtics lose by 4). In the 3 other games, the Celtics lose by 14.3 PPG with Bird on the court.

1984 - Great playoffs. Averaged 27-14-4 in the Finals and had a .607 TS% in the playoffs. First great playoff of his career. Celtics win the title over the Lakers.

1985 - Celtics make the finals, but Bird's numbers drop in the playoffs. His PPG drops by 2.8 PPG, Reb by 1.2 Reb, and AST by 0.7 AST. Had an average .536 TS% in the postseason. Bird plays even worse in the finals. His PPG dropped 4.9 PPG, his Reb 1.7 Reb, and AST by 1.6 AST in the finals compared to his regular season average. His Finals TS% is just .527. Not only that, but Celtics finish with 63 wins and lose once again with HCA a constant theme in Bird's career. This is the first time in Celtics history they lost in the finals with HCA.

1986 - Great year. His best year ever. Wins the title. .615 TS% in the postseason and amazing finals.

1987 - I think this is his most admirable playoffs up until the finals. The Celtics were quite banged up this year. Averaged 27-10-7 in the postseason with .577 TS%. Though his numbers in the finals dropped off once again. His PPG was 3.9 PPG down from the regular season, AST down by 2.1 AST and his TS% was just .534. In game 6, Bird scored just 16 points on 6-16 (.375) shooting. In the final 3 games of this series, Bird averaged just 20 PPG on .377 shooting and .492 TS% with 3.7 TOV. This is the first time Bird has played without HCA in the playoffs and his team loses.

1988 - Bird's PPG drops by 5.4 PPG, Reb by 0.5 Reb. Bird shoots an awful 40-114 (.351) against the Pistons. Has a mediocre .538 TS% and 20.2 PER in the playoffs. The Celtics had HCA and the #1 SRS in the league and you probably guessed what happened next, Larry Bird loses with HCA once again.

1989 - Injured doesn't play in the postseason.

1990 - Bird shoots .539 TS% and has 3.6 TOV as the Celtics once again you guessed it, lose with HCA.

1991 - In the first round, his team needs to go 5 vs. the 41 win Pacers. His PPG drop by 2.3 PPG and his Rebounds and Assists also drop quite a bit. Has a .490 TS% 15.8 PER in the playoffs. Against the Pistons Bird averages 13.4 PPG on .446 TS%. His 56 win team played with you guessed it HCA and loses with it.

1992 - Doesn't play in the first round as the Celtics sweep the Pacers. In round 2, his team goes 7 against the Cavs, but Bird plays in 4 games and his team was 1-3 in those games. Averages a pathetic 11.3 PPG and 4.5 Reb which are 8.4 PPG and 5.2 Reb down from his regular season average. He has a .514 TS% and 16.4 PER in the postseason.

So out of 12 years, you get 9 years under .540 TS%, 5 under .520 TS%, and 3 under .500 TS%. From 80-83, he had a 19.9 playoff PER. In that span, Johnny Moore, Franklin Edwards, Gus Williams, and Bob Lanier all had better playoff PER and WS/48. Teammates Parish, McHale, Tiny Archibald, and Cedric Maxwell had better TS% in that span. From 88-92, he had a 18.8 PER which is 25th among players with 10 playoff games played. Players who had better playoff PER's in that span include Fat Lever, Terry Cummings, Roy Tarpley, Cedric Ceballos, and Sarunas Marciulionis. His teammates Reggie Lewis and Kevin McHale had better playoff PER's in that span.

With Bird you get a nice 4 year run that had 4 straight finals appearances but outside of that you get a 4 year span of .505 TS% (80-83) and a .525 TS% span (88-92). In 12 years, you get 7 losses with HCA. Basically out of Bird's 13 year career, you have 1 injury season and 3 non-descript postseasons at the end of his plus some playoff disappointments early in his career.

[SNPA]

Bird below Kobe. Next time please put that at the top. I’d like those seconds of my life back.

Compelling argument from you, as per usual.

Sorry, it’s not personal. I just have a rule. I don’t talk ball with people who put Kobe above Bird, James or Jordan. Good luck though.

[dhsilv2]

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

Bird 1981 championship playoff stats: 22/14/6 on 47/38/90
Bird 1984 championship playoff stats: 28/11/6 on 52/41/88
Bird 1986 championship playoff stats: 26/9/8 no 52/41/93

Did he have some years where he wasn't as efficient, sure. But at or near 50/40/90 for 3 playoff runs resulting in championships does not paint the picture of a playoff dropper.

Bird career first round 25.4/8.9/8 on 48.1/28.1/89.4
Second Round 23.5/9.2/6.1 49.2/27.6/90.2
ECF 23.4/11.6/6.2 45.2/34.9/88.4
Finals 23.1/11.6/6 45.8/42.2/87.2

Now that 3 point shooting is wild but the guy took 45 3's in his finals career so I'm not putting much value on that one. The rest paints a pretty good story that Bird's shooting declined in the bigger tougher rounds. So if you pull a full run it doesn't look as great. Lets take 1981

Vs Bulls 23.5/13/7.3 50/50/95.5
vs Philly 26.7/13.4/4.6 48.6/33/89
Finals 15.3/15.3/7 41.9/33/81.3

Those first two rounds are awesome...the finals not so much.

1984 he was great and really his finals weren't bad but still

27.4/14/3.6 48.4/66.7/84.2

Now 48% is great, he took 6 3's so who cares, but what's with his free throw shooting dropping in the finals?

1986 isn't any different. Over 50% for 3 rounds and then he shot 48.2 in the finals. Thankfully this time he was locked in on the line, 31/33 which is just impressive!

Now I'm not knocking Bird's 84 or 86 finals, he was great. But you do see a clear decline and some questionable looking games. 1981, he wasn't great in the finals minus his rebounding which was great.

[Warspite]

Hakeem
Shaq


Bird

Hakeem and Shaq are simply in a different tier than Bird. Bird was a huge playoff dropper for most of his career who couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency and wasn't a notably positive defender after his first few years, and the relevant portion of his career was a lot shorter than Hakeem and Shaq's primes.

There's a reason the arguments in this thread for Bird are purely based on vibes and cliches. Bird's reputation for being super clutch and a "killer" or whatever is incredibly undeserved - as I said earlier, he was a huge playoff dropper, which is why he lost with homecourt SEVEN TIMES in the playoffs (I believe this is the most ever, at least among star players) and he never won a series without homecourt. He also never even made a game winning shot in the playoffs. If a more modern, less mythologized player had these set of facts he would be relentlessly, unendingly mocked as a massive choker (not to say that would be deserved - I think Bird's physical limitations made him easier to gameplan for in the playoffs compared to the regular season, not that he had some sort of mental deficiency).

As noted, he couldn't maintain decent scoring efficiency in most of his playoff runs - he was under 54 TS% in 9 of his 12 playoff appearances, and it's not a coincidence that two of the three times he actually scored well in the playoffs resulted in a championship. Given how stacked his teams were for his entire career (perhaps the luckiest star ever with regards to consistently great supporting casts), I would say only getting 3 rings out of that is a pretty noteable underachievement. Hakeem only won one fewer despite never once playing with a cast as good as what Bird had in nearly every season of his prime.

Personally, I have Hakeem and Shaq both in the top 7 while Bird is more in the 12-15 range with Curry, Oscar and Dirk, closely but clearly behind Kobe who had a longer career and was a more consistent and generally superior playoff performer.

Bird 1981 championship playoff stats: 22/14/6 on 47/38/90
Bird 1984 championship playoff stats: 28/11/6 on 52/41/88
Bird 1986 championship playoff stats: 26/9/8 no 52/41/93

Did he have some years where he wasn't as efficient, sure. But at or near 50/40/90 for 3 playoff runs resulting in championships does not paint the picture of a playoff dropper.

Bird career first round 25.4/8.9/8 on 48.1/28.1/89.4
Second Round 23.5/9.2/6.1 49.2/27.6/90.2
ECF 23.4/11.6/6.2 45.2/34.9/88.4
Finals 23.1/11.6/6 45.8/42.2/87.2

Now that 3 point shooting is wild but the guy took 45 3's in his finals career so I'm not putting much value on that one. The rest paints a pretty good story that Bird's shooting declined in the bigger tougher rounds. So if you pull a full run it doesn't look as great. Lets take 1981

Vs Bulls 23.5/13/7.3 50/50/95.5
vs Philly 26.7/13.4/4.6 48.6/33/89
Finals 15.3/15.3/7 41.9/33/81.3

Those first two rounds are awesome...the finals not so much.

1984 he was great and really his finals weren't bad but still

27.4/14/3.6 48.4/66.7/84.2

Now 48% is great, he took 6 3's so who cares, but what's with his free throw shooting dropping in the finals?

1986 isn't any different. Over 50% for 3 rounds and then he shot 48.2 in the finals. Thankfully this time he was locked in on the line, 31/33 which is just impressive!

Now I'm not knocking Bird's 84 or 86 finals, he was great. But you do see a clear decline and some questionable looking games. 1981, he wasn't great in the finals minus his rebounding which was great.

Kind of glass is half full/half empty argument.

Why couldnt Hakeem play better in the easier regular season? Maybe his team would have made the playoffs? Maybe get home court 1 year?

What makes Bird so scary and so dangerous is that you can get physical with him and force him into a taking lower % shots. Of course he is so great he just make them and beat you or your strategy will work and you will and you can hold him 18ppg but you most likely are still going to lose because he will find other ways to beat you. Maybe its helping Parish/McHale or DJ or maybe you can out play him and the whole Celtics and beat them for 47 mins and then Bird steals the inbounds and beats you.

[dhsilv2]

Bird 1981 championship playoff stats: 22/14/6 on 47/38/90
Bird 1984 championship playoff stats: 28/11/6 on 52/41/88
Bird 1986 championship playoff stats: 26/9/8 no 52/41/93

Did he have some years where he wasn't as efficient, sure. But at or near 50/40/90 for 3 playoff runs resulting in championships does not paint the picture of a playoff dropper.

Bird career first round 25.4/8.9/8 on 48.1/28.1/89.4
Second Round 23.5/9.2/6.1 49.2/27.6/90.2
ECF 23.4/11.6/6.2 45.2/34.9/88.4
Finals 23.1/11.6/6 45.8/42.2/87.2

Now that 3 point shooting is wild but the guy took 45 3's in his finals career so I'm not putting much value on that one. The rest paints a pretty good story that Bird's shooting declined in the bigger tougher rounds. So if you pull a full run it doesn't look as great. Lets take 1981

Vs Bulls 23.5/13/7.3 50/50/95.5
vs Philly 26.7/13.4/4.6 48.6/33/89
Finals 15.3/15.3/7 41.9/33/81.3

Those first two rounds are awesome...the finals not so much.

1984 he was great and really his finals weren't bad but still

27.4/14/3.6 48.4/66.7/84.2

Now 48% is great, he took 6 3's so who cares, but what's with his free throw shooting dropping in the finals?

1986 isn't any different. Over 50% for 3 rounds and then he shot 48.2 in the finals. Thankfully this time he was locked in on the line, 31/33 which is just impressive!

Now I'm not knocking Bird's 84 or 86 finals, he was great. But you do see a clear decline and some questionable looking games. 1981, he wasn't great in the finals minus his rebounding which was great.

Kind of glass is half full/half empty argument.

Why couldnt Hakeem play better in the easier regular season? Maybe his team would have made the playoffs? Maybe get home court 1 year?

What makes Bird so scary and so dangerous is that you can get physical with him and force him into a taking lower % shots. Of course he is so great he just make them and beat you or your strategy will work and you will and you can hold him 18ppg but you most likely are still going to lose because he will find other ways to beat you. Maybe its helping Parish/McHale or DJ or maybe you can out play him and the whole Celtics and beat them for 47 mins and then Bird steals the inbounds and beats you.

So I agree with the first point that if Hakeem were better in the regular season, he'd have had more playoff success.

But this second point really hammers home why Bird gets treated differently from others. So many players get killed on these forums for having these bad game. Meanwhile a Bird and even my favorite guy, Manu...they'll get credit for "finding other ways to win". It's a hell of a lot easier to find other ways to win with allstar/allnba/MVP teammates around you. The problem is we shouldn't criticize Bird for that, but we should understand and elevate guys like Hakeem and Harden who didn't have the support.

[Warspite]

Bird career first round 25.4/8.9/8 on 48.1/28.1/89.4
Second Round 23.5/9.2/6.1 49.2/27.6/90.2
ECF 23.4/11.6/6.2 45.2/34.9/88.4
Finals 23.1/11.6/6 45.8/42.2/87.2

Now that 3 point shooting is wild but the guy took 45 3's in his finals career so I'm not putting much value on that one. The rest paints a pretty good story that Bird's shooting declined in the bigger tougher rounds. So if you pull a full run it doesn't look as great. Lets take 1981

Vs Bulls 23.5/13/7.3 50/50/95.5
vs Philly 26.7/13.4/4.6 48.6/33/89
Finals 15.3/15.3/7 41.9/33/81.3

Those first two rounds are awesome...the finals not so much.

1984 he was great and really his finals weren't bad but still

27.4/14/3.6 48.4/66.7/84.2

Now 48% is great, he took 6 3's so who cares, but what's with his free throw shooting dropping in the finals?

1986 isn't any different. Over 50% for 3 rounds and then he shot 48.2 in the finals. Thankfully this time he was locked in on the line, 31/33 which is just impressive!

Now I'm not knocking Bird's 84 or 86 finals, he was great. But you do see a clear decline and some questionable looking games. 1981, he wasn't great in the finals minus his rebounding which was great.

Kind of glass is half full/half empty argument.

Why couldnt Hakeem play better in the easier regular season? Maybe his team would have made the playoffs? Maybe get home court 1 year?

What makes Bird so scary and so dangerous is that you can get physical with him and force him into a taking lower % shots. Of course he is so great he just make them and beat you or your strategy will work and you will and you can hold him 18ppg but you most likely are still going to lose because he will find other ways to beat you. Maybe its helping Parish/McHale or DJ or maybe you can out play him and the whole Celtics and beat them for 47 mins and then Bird steals the inbounds and beats you.

So I agree with the first point that if Hakeem were better in the regular season, he'd have had more playoff success.

But this second point really hammers home why Bird gets treated differently from others. So many players get killed on these forums for having these bad game. Meanwhile a Bird and even my favorite guy, Manu...they'll get credit for "finding other ways to win". It's a hell of a lot easier to find other ways to win with allstar/allnba/MVP teammates around you. The problem is we shouldn't criticize Bird for that, but we should understand and elevate guys like Hakeem and Harden who didn't have the support.

Ot maybe you can appreciate how Bird took a journeyman C, a young PF that can only play 26mpg and a combo guard that is considered old, washed up and cant shoot outside 15ft into the Hall of Fame.

[dhsilv2]

Kind of glass is half full/half empty argument.

Why couldnt Hakeem play better in the easier regular season? Maybe his team would have made the playoffs? Maybe get home court 1 year?

What makes Bird so scary and so dangerous is that you can get physical with him and force him into a taking lower % shots. Of course he is so great he just make them and beat you or your strategy will work and you will and you can hold him 18ppg but you most likely are still going to lose because he will find other ways to beat you. Maybe its helping Parish/McHale or DJ or maybe you can out play him and the whole Celtics and beat them for 47 mins and then Bird steals the inbounds and beats you.

So I agree with the first point that if Hakeem were better in the regular season, he'd have had more playoff success.

But this second point really hammers home why Bird gets treated differently from others. So many players get killed on these forums for having these bad game. Meanwhile a Bird and even my favorite guy, Manu...they'll get credit for "finding other ways to win". It's a hell of a lot easier to find other ways to win with allstar/allnba/MVP teammates around you. The problem is we shouldn't criticize Bird for that, but we should understand and elevate guys like Hakeem and Harden who didn't have the support.

Ot maybe you can appreciate how Bird took a journeyman C, a young PF that can only play 26mpg and a combo guard that is considered old, washed up and cant shoot outside 15ft into the Hall of Fame.

Parish was 27 and had been on one team before joining Bird. Are you talking about DJ as old? He was 29 when he joined and an NBA champion and finals MVP already and first team all defense the prior year. Or Tiny who'd win 3 more allstar bids (not sure he deserved them) with Bird after having 3 prior? Or are we talking about Bill Walton coming over still struggling but a brilliant player, passer, and defender who came off the bench?

I'm sorry but all those guys had proven their value before they ever met Larry. McHale sure as hell didn't become a great player because of Bird. I'm sure he helped like any good teammate but McHale become an all time great because he was 6'10, had better mobility than Bird, had a standing reach that rivaled any big man, and had the most fundamentally complete post game perhaps ever.

And I haven't even gotten to how 6 guys from those Celtic teams went on to become head coaches.

Bird had an amazing organization and people around him. Doesn't make him less of a great player. But it did give him far more opportunity to under preform and still win. Or as you put it, find other ways to contribute and win.