Larry or Lebron?

[GuyClinch]

The same Tiny-Cowens-Maxwell combo that lead them to a 29-53 record the previous year. Enter Bird: 61 wins.

I love Bird but that's an oversimplification of what happened. There was a coaching change and other roster changes in between there. Rowe was gone - and although that's touch before my time its my understanding he was a legendary bad apple. The kind of guy that would make us pine for J.R. Rider..

Pete

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

The same Tiny-Cowens-Maxwell combo that lead them to a 29-53 record the previous year. Enter Bird: 61 wins.

I love Bird but that's an oversimplification of what happened. There was a coaching change and other roster changes in between there. Rowe was gone - and although that's touch before my time its my understanding he was a legendary bad apple. The kind of guy that would make us pine for J.R. Rider..

Pete

Yup. Cowens was the player-coach the year before. That didn't work out so well.

However, Larry >>> Lebron. When Larry won games, you wouldn't find him on the sideline doing the **** Riverdance like some sort of WNBA player.

[Cyclical]

The same Tiny-Cowens-Maxwell combo that lead them to a 29-53 record the previous year. Enter Bird: 61 wins.

I love Bird but that's an oversimplification of what happened. There was a coaching change and other roster changes in between there. Rowe was gone - and although that's touch before my time its my understanding he was a legendary bad apple. The kind of guy that would make us pine for J.R. Rider..

Pete

Sure it's an oversimplification but how many 3 paragraph posts can I post on this subject... Is Garnett alone responsible for the biggest turnaround in NBA history? Of course not -- Pierce missed a ton of games the previous year; TA had the horrible injury after averaging 20+ for a stretch and Al, Gomes and others went in and out of injuries all season. It was a frustrating season. But hey, guess what - it's all about KG. No KG, no title. No KG, no 60+ wins. Now to Bird - Take that and multiply by your favorite number, since Tiny was on the downside of his career, Cowens was a sad shell of his former self and Max was good but no Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Bird made that team what it was. Rowe or no Rowe; new coach or not. No one doubts that.

[Captain_Caveman]

Pete, that's cool, but I did notice that you gave Paul Pierce to Larry as a teammate.

People are making LeBron fight this battle with one hand tied behind his back.

I say that if you give him a HOF frontline with other guys like DJ, Walton, Wedman and Ainge, we aren't even having this conversation.

[tombattor]

Pete, that's cool, but I did notice that you gave Paul Pierce to Larry as a teammate.

People are making LeBron fight this battle with one hand tied behind his back.

I say that if you give him a HOF frontline with other guys like DJ, Walton, Wedman and Ainge, we aren't even having this conversation.

Yeah, that's the unfortunate part. Larry retired when, like 35 or something? If Lebron were to retire when Larry did, he still has 11 more years to match Larry's accomplishments. Lebron definitely has to keep doing what he's been doing plus win some titles to do that, but I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be able to do all that.

[GuyClinch]

This is interesting. Part of me wants to say Lebron - as of course Lebron is a much better athlete. But I think if this could really play out we are looking at more of a "better then Dirk" kind of player vs. a Lebron.

I have seen some failing in Lebron's game of late.. He doesn't seem to have the basketball savvy that Bird and Magic had. Nor does he have the incredible competitive a-hole type of personality that so many successful NBA guys have MJ (Pierce is reported to have a lessor version of this)..

Skill wise his outside shooting still isn't really where it should be - nor do I think he has the amazing mid-range game of guys like Pierce and Kobe.. He is more athlete then ballplayer at this point. That's not such a great insult because he is actually the best athlete I have ever seen. Jordan got more out of his athleticism but he wasn't nearly as strong as Lebron..

But size and speed CAN be offset with savvy and skills. Steve Nash is a good modern example of this. But Bird had more then Nash. He had Nash's brain for the game and was 6'9. Again its not all brains you need a baseline level of athleticism to compete. I think Bird would have that - just like Nash does.

Pete

[Bruiser]

It all depends on the way you like the game.
You like showmanship, LeBron is your guy.
You hate showmanship, you go with Larry.

[MyInsatiableOne]

Wow, a no brainer...Larry. LeBron has never made his teammates better and is not a complete player...an athletic freak, yes, but a **** defender and a horrid shooter still...

Larry FTW

[tombattor]

Wow, a no brainer...Larry. LeBron has never made his teammates better and is not a complete player...an athletic freak, yes, but a **** defender and a horrid shooter still...

Larry FTW

That's not true. You want to believe that because you hate Lebron and you love Bird, but Lebron does make his teammates better. Mo Williams and Z have no business in allstar games and he put them there. Same goes for the rest of the clowns that make up the Cavs.

And Lebron is not a bad defender. He was, at the beginning of his career, but he's not any more. No, he doesn't always cover the other team's best offensive players, but that's not because he can't. It's because he's so valuable on offense that they don't want to wear him out on D. Besides, Larry Bird was one of the worst defenders and he played in the 80s when no one played D.

There are 2 problems I have with this thread. One is that people refuse to believe that Lebron so far has been, at least individually, as good as Larry was because they love Larry Bird. Another is that people are trying to compare Larry Bird's entire career with Lebron's incomplete one. Lebron is same age as Larry in his 2nd year. I think Lebron's last 3 years compare quite well with Larry's first 2~3 years in the league.

[MyInsatiableOne]

^I still disagree LeBron makes his teammates better...how fantastic have Mo and Z been this year? They **** suck now...last year was an aberration, especially for Mo...

[Captain_Caveman]

LeBron was 2nd in DPOY voting last year and is currently 6th in the NBA in assists (not far behind Rondo, despite not having anywhere near the same quality of teammates).

I mean, just look at the stats... 29 PPG on 51% shooting, 37% from 3 and 78% from the line, 7 RPG and 8 APG.

That's just filthy. Consider for a moment that Larry shot 37.6% from 3 in his career, and LeBron is already catching him there.

[tombattor]

IMO, the bottom line is this. Lebron is at the very worst, the 2nd best player in the league right now. And soon, if not already, he'll be the best player in the league. And at 24, he still has years of continued dominance ahead of him. LB was one of the top 2 players in the league in his days. And Lebron is exactly that right now. And I see a lot of similarities between Larry and Lebron's games. Only difference is that Larry was the better outside shooter and Lebron is the better athlete. I don't think that's a bad guy to build any franchise around.

The only problem with this argument on this board is that people consider LB to be a deity, so all logic, reason and common sense go right out the window. I knew that would be the case, even before I started posting on this thread, so it was my mistake to even bother trying to reason...

[slamvangundy]

Knicks fan here.

I would go with Lebron, but its a damn tough decision. Lebron has played with some truly piss poor teammates, so to compare him unfavorably to Kobe on the basis of championships is absurd. People used the same championship argument against KG, and in my mind he was one of the top three players of his decade (along with Duncan and Shaq). The similarities between Lebron and Larry's games are actually pretty uncanny. Both had/have the passing skills of top point guards, and both had/have the rebounding abilities of elite power-forwards. Larry was probably the better shooter, but Lebron's athleticism and ability to guard almost any type of player is the tie breaker for me.

I will add that Larry Bird has become severely underrated by my ESPN/Videogame/ADD generation. He's right up there in the pantheon for me and he is obviously one of the top-10 basketball players of all time. But if you talk to people 25 years old or younger, many would wrongly deny him his place in the elite of basketball's elite.

[Hilltop]

There are 2 problems I have with this thread. One is that people refuse to believe that Lebron so far has been, at least individually, as good as Larry was because they love Larry Bird. Another is that people are trying to compare Larry Bird's entire career with Lebron's incomplete one. Lebron is same age as Larry in his 2nd year. I think Lebron's last 3 years compare quite well with Larry's first 2~3 years in the league.

Well said

[infinite11285]

Cavs fan here, I'm not going to jump into the fray but I will say that the obvious bias toward Larry Legend will discredit any argument made for LeBron. Thus this discussion/argument/thread is not credible.

[villatrynity154]

i was in the mavs forum and came across a thread involving the same thing but a matchup b/w larry and dirk....now i consider myself more of a mavs fan than a celtics fan...that is not to say i am a mavs fan, but this is what i had to say on the subject...

bird was something else...he was handpicked...a guy no one believed had the physical body to be anything positive in the game....won 3 championship with the celtics and defined the era...bird is untouchable and lets just leave it at that...

[Harison]

We had this thread in Comparison board: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=968155

My post:
Lebron has clear athletic advantage, also has an edge in the defense, but I'm hard pressed to find anything else. Bird is more dangerous scorer (good defense can limit Lebron, you would have harder time to do that to elite jumpshooter like Bird, what to speak about clutch situations where Bird is up there with Jordan and Russell), better range, better passer (in big part because he is smarter than Lebron), better rebounder, tougher mentality, more efficient. You can stick Bird to any team and he would fit perfectly fine, but you have to build team around Lebron to make the best use of him.

Basing on what we know now, I really see no reason why would anyone pick Lebron over Bird (outside fans, of course), regardless of their accolades. But most GMs probably would pick Lebron in draft, I probably would make the same minor mistake if I wouldnt know the future

Was just watching some Birds moments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULvo7__wwBU