Larry Bird vs Lebron James - Greatest SF of all Time

[Okada]

I don't even understand what hypothetical benefit there is to post-padding to make it an issue in the first place.

[wigglestrue]

Peak bird is certainly the better offensive player, but Lebron makes this a close call just because he's a great defensive presence. But playoffs are how I judge a player and Bird would be the better scorer, rebounder, and playmaker. And people always mention less-skilled players when discussing intangibles, but IMO Bird is One of the best examples of that weve seen. His impact on the game was tremendous. I'd take Bird.

So was Bird, apparently. In a very tangible, visible, quantifiable way.
What's yet to be determined is just how great a defensive presence Bird was.
Was he a Top 50 defender? (Hard to argue now that he wasn't, given what's upthread.)
As high as Top 25? Some tier in between, like Top 35-40?

Perhaps nobody, not even Celtics homers like myself, has ever before bothered to even contemplate whether Bird was a better overall defensive presence than just "very good in only one or two auxiliary ways for a few seasons", perhaps it has never occurred to anyone to figure out if Bird was an all-time great defender? And, most improbably, it seems he was. Go figure. How long before the consensus turns to catch up with this unexpected reality?

p.s. Here's another defensive highlight reel for Bird. Most of the same plays as before, but longer, no music, uneven audio-wise, and for some reason does not feature a few big plays like on Bird's ECF-sealing steal in 1985. Now, tell me his defensive greatness is not visible here. How many other all-time defenders wouldn't be proud of this as a career montage of defensive plays? Not many. Look at who Bird picks, swats, and generally embarrasses. He may not have been assigned superstars all game, but there's apparently no shortage of video of him spectacularly thwarting players like Jordan, Erving, Magic, Hakeem, Wilkins, King, Pippen, Worthy...and on and on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3H76dsMqo3s

Wait, wait, there's an even longer montage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEAZMT5t_U

I know that Bird is a good defender. I know that a couple of his famous plays were defensive. I've watched him guard MJ and though he still got his, he had to work for his points. But for impact on team defense? That's Lebron without a doubt. And for shutting down opposing players? Bird's no all-timer like Pipp-MJ (though neither is Lebron). But Lebrons D is more important to his team. If you truly believe otherwise, Godspeed. By the way, you may want to consider replying to someone's 2-paragraph opinion with something other than "QFT" if you disagree. Actually, it's hard to take any of the "QFT" posters seriously. It's just abrasive. Thanks for the links, will check them out.

LeBron is also an all-time great defender, better as a complete defender since he can guard players one-on-one at a high level AND he's a really good help defender. I'm not saying Bird is better on defense, or even LeBron's equal. But we've all been drastically shortchanging Bird's defensive impact. Bird's defensive value is not too far behind LeBron's. Maybe not far at all?

[tsherkin]

(I'm about 10 years and 20,000 posts removed from caring aboit post-padding, lol.)

It's board policy not to post pad, wiggles. Tenure doesn't exempt you from the rules, as your colorful history here should remind you.

[wigglestrue]

I don't even understand what hypothetical benefit there is to post-padding to make it an issue in the first place.

Pointsmanship of some kind.
The sport of sporting a large number next to one's name.
Juvenile stuff, perhaps indicative of unrelated shortcomings.

[wigglestrue]

(I'm about 10 years and 20,000 posts removed from caring aboit post-padding, lol.)

It's board policy not to post pad, wiggles. Tenure doesn't exempt you from the rules, as your colorful history here should remind you.

Well, hell, I'm not doing that here...am I, lol? I hope not. Tell me if I am. Each of my comments here was a discrete, new thought in the flow of conversation. To expand-via-edit retroactively would kind of spoil the accuracy of the conversational record, no? I'll try to strike a better balance, if need be.

[tsherkin]

Well, hell, I'm not doing that here, am I?

And you'll notice you're absent a warning, formal or otherwise, aren't you?

Each of my comments here was a discrete, new thought in the flow of conversation. To expand-via-edit retroactively would kind of spoil the accuracy of the conversational record, no?

Not really. QFT doesn't really add anything, just like an And-1. Use the built-in function or wait until you've something substantial to say. It's board policy.

No Post Padding - Please construct posts and do not post pad as this derails discussion. 'Me too' or '+1' or 'Player X Easily' posts are considered post padding. If you have an opinion, take the time to support it. Things like U Mad, IBTL, NOT SURE IF SERIOUS, X easily, things not related to the thread, etc, etc. also count as Post Padding. Posts which do not have any substantive content but merely quote other posters are also considered post padding.

Link

Further questions can be discussed via PM.

And now back to our regularly-scheduled Lebron-vs-Bird debate.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

I think most posters rank players relative to the era they played in (ie Bird is a top ten player all time because of how he dominated the '80's) but that doesn't necessarily mean they think he would dominate just the same today.

1960s ball was weak and the players from the 1960s would be far less effective in today's game. Players from the 1980s through now would have to learn to be more careful about not travelling if they were inserted into the 1960s.

1980s ball was essentially the same game as today. What has changed?

The best sagging switching defenses in the 1980s were almost zone like.
Now with the Zone defenses legal, teams still prefer sagging switching zone like man to man. I did not like watching the late 1990s 1 on 1 isolations with 4 guys on one side of the floor so that the other player can get a 1 on 1 play or illegal defense call.

The 3 point shooting on several current NBA teams has become crazy good. The improvement in the accuracy and utilization of 3 point shooting is the biggest change from the 1980s to now. Teams have more players who can and will shoot 3s. Modern defenses must extend to the 3 point line which creates more space for players between mid range and the rim.

Modern big men are more likely to slash to the hoop rather than set up down low to receive an entry pass. There are less big men today with quality back to the basket post moves.

The average 2s, 3s and 4s are about an inch taller than they were in the 1980s. The Center position has not gotten bigger since the mid 1980s but may have gotten a bit quicker. The point guard position has gotten a bit quicker.

Bird plunked down in 2014 would be 97% as dominant today as he was in the 1980s. Bird in the 2000s would still be a better rebounder and better player than Dirk Nowitzki.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

To the thread: Bird was a power forward.

This is an exaggeration like people saying that James Worthy was a power forward. Bird played the majority of his minutes @ SF. He only played PF, when either Chief/Mchale were injured or in foul trouble.

What defines a player's position?
I think the best measure of a player's position is to mentally insert him on 100 other teams and then figure out who's minutes he would take and what position those players played.

Add Bird to random 1980s or 2000s teams and figure out who's minutes Bird would take. You should be able to see that he would be taking minutes from the power forwards. Add Bird to the champion Bulls and Pippen barely loses any minutes but Grant and Rodman and Kukic would lose a lot of minutes and their backups would lose all their power forward minutes.

Next best way to define a position is by the position of who they defend. About 85% of Bird's career minutes on defense were spent defending power forwards. There was one high profile exception to bird defending the power forwards; Bird defended Rodney McCray in the NBA finals while McHale defended Ralph Sampson. Rodney McCray had been a center in college and did not have the skills to exploit Bird's slower foot speed on defense. Also when you are playing with Hakeem you want Hakeem to take the shots. Robert Reid in the same series did have the skills to exploit Bird's slower foot speed.

McHale guarded Sampson because Sampson was 7' 4". McHale neuralized Sampson's ofence.

Bird defended the power forwards because he could not defend peopele like Dr J or Dominique Wilkens. First Maxwell and ML Carr defended the small forwards. Later McHale defended the small forwards. McHale who also defended Centers defended the small forward most of the time when Bird, Parish and McHale were on the floor together.

ML Carr, Wedman, Darren Daye, Fred Roberts, Michael Smith, Jim Paxon, Ed Pickney, Ron Grandison, Reggie Lewis, Kevin Gamble, Derek Smith, and Rick Fox all spent some time defending small forwards while Bird defended power forwards.

Deciding that Bird is a small forward because of his role on offense is like deciding that Dirk Nowitzki is an off guard because of his role on offense. I am guessing that Worthy spent 75% of his defensive minutes guarding small forwards, 20% of his time guarding power forwards and 5% of his time guarding off guards.

Magic Johnson is the best counter argument against me. Since Byron Scott and Cooper played almost all the defensive point guard minutes against quick point guards, to be consistent I would have to say Magic Johnson was not a point guard.

To the thread: Bird was a power forward.

Bird played the majority of his minutes @ SF. He only played PF, when either Chief/Mchale were injured or in foul trouble.

Go back an look at film from 1985 onwards and see who McHale defends when Parish, Bird and McHale are on the floor together. MacHale will usually be defending the small forwards. Bird would defend small forwards that were slow or could not dribble and there were not many of them.

I am not saying that McHale was not a power forward. Bird and McHale were the 2 best power forwards in the 1980s but they had to play together. Maxwell was also one of the best power forwards of the 1980s. What do you do when in 1984 when your best four players are are three power forwards and a center. Most teams would probably trade one of them for a guard but the Celtics did not do that. The Celtics made one of their power forwards defend small forwards.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Here I quibble over the details. Just talking about Bird's rookie year prior to the arrival of Parish and McHale, Birds team was not was not all that talented. The Celtics won 29 games the year before Bird arrived and won 61 games in Bird's rookie year. What changed?

Tiny Archibald playing 11 more games and 10 more minutes per game didn't hurt. Bird's presence was obviously huge, of course. But yes, Maxwell was easily better than anyone with whom Lebron played in Cleveland.

1980 Nate was a 14/8, 115 ORTG player and was at least as good as Mo Williams ever was.

It may not be true that "Bird had more help as a rookie than Lebron ever did in Cleveland"

I think it's pretty clear that it is. Lebron never had a second option as strong as Maxwell at any point in his Cleveland career, let alone a 2-3 punch to his #1 like Nate the Skate and Maxwell together.

Then in 81, his second season, they won three rounds to win the NBA title. By that point, they'd added the ~ 19/10 Parish and rookie McHale, at which point it would be entirely false to claim that any Cleveland team with Lebron ever fielded that much talent, since Maxwell and Nate were still there. It only improved from there for Bird as they eventually acquired Ainge and DJ. He played with WAY more talent than Lebron's Cavs days, so it's hardly a surprise that there is a radical difference in team success.

Again though, even as a rookie, Bird had more to work with than even 09 and 10 Lebron, and the depth on offense makes that pretty clear. In Lebron's best years in Cleveland, he was working with Mo Williams, Big Z (65 games) and Delonte West (64 G). That doesn't at all compare. Anderson Varejao was useful as well, but more on D than on O. The year after, they added injured Shaq and waste-of-skin Jamison, as well as Anthony Parker. The team was riddled with injuries and Antawn Jamison crapped himself from 3 all year long, but especially in the playoffs. Shaq wasn't able to find any serious traction in the league post-Phoenix and while the Cavs were titans in the EC regular season, they ran into Boston and everything fell apart. Williams was weak sauce, Shaq couldn't play more than 25 minutes or so, Parker wasn't a legit second option (and by that point was fairly old), etc, etc.

Boston was definitely much more balanced. You can draw at least some sort of argument that, when healthy, the 2010 Cavs squad compared to the 1980 Boston team in terms of theoretical depth, but in practice, the results were very different... especially taking a more polished player in 23 year-old Bird versus 19 year-old Lebron and seeing who had greater impact.

The point I was making, though, is that using team success doesn't make sense. It is blindingly apparent after their rookie years, of course, irrefutably the case that Bird had more to work with, but even in that rookie season (and factoring out the age difference), it really doesn't make a lot of sense to compare team success directly during those stretches.

Say what you will ultimately about who ranks higher or is better, etc, etc, but team success is intimately related to roster and Lebron's Cavs rosters were strong defensively and mostly unimpressive offensively and in terms of actual talent.

Mo Williams was a one-time All-Star who made it in as an injury replacement. Big Z was a two-time All-Star... 2003 and 2005. By those later years, he was a low-minutes guy who couldn't be a big-time impact player. Shaq was a year away from retirement. Jamison had fallen completely apart. Parker had played a full career in Europe, then three years with Toronto before hitting Cleveland at 34 and overlapping with Lebron for a year (just like Shaq and Jamison... the latter of whom played 25 RS games and then the playoffs, and sucked).

And Mike Brown wasn't really a stellar offensive coach, though he worked the defensive system well enough.

Cleveland management didn't do a particularly good job, while Boston was able to exploit Nate's return to health and the quality of Cedric Maxwell right away. Would I say rookie Bird was better than rookie Lebron?

For sure, though given the nearly half-decade difference in age and the college difference, I can't say that is terribly surprising or meaningful.

This is the stuff I'm talking about, a direct comparison in terms of team success really falls apart along several seams.

After looking I see that Lebron never had a really good team in Cleveland. It is as much that about mismatched pieces as it is about lack of talent. Wait, I just saw 2008-2009 and that was a good group of players.

Back to 2003-2004
The team that could have been:

I had a lot of respect for Big Z. Big Z is not Maxwell's equal in talent but because the center position is so important big Z is almost Maxwell's equal.

It is an Interesting group of guys that were with Lebron his rookie year. http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2004.html They were too young. Many were people with character flaws that would keep them from ever reaching their potential. There were mid season trades and trades after the season. No Stability. That team needed a special coach.

Lebron's rookie team had Carlos Boozer but let him go to Utah without getting anything in return. Boozer would reach Maxwell's level of talent.

Ricky Davis was an interesting talent. He could have been a good 2nd option on offense if he could play team basketball. The Cavaliers traded Davis for Tony Battie and others. Then at the end of the season traded Battie for Drew Gooden, Steven Hunter and Anderson Varejao.

I think Verejao and Gooden may have fit better with young Lebron than Boozer did because they could run with young Lebron. But Boozer should have been traded for a guard. The Cavaliers cut Hunter who then had a good season with the Suns and played 20 minutes per game in the Western Conference finals Lebron's second year. Hunter was a center who could run and block shots. Cavaliers also had young Diop who could block shots. By Lebron's 3rd year Diop would be playing 16 minutes a game for the Mavericks in the NBA finals.

I liked Drew Gooden and Verejao. A nice tandem at power forward. Gooden could play some small forward and Verejao could play some Center. By Lebron's 3rd year Big Z, Diop, Hunter, Verajao and Gooden with Lebron should have been a strong front court.

The Cavaliers left rookie Jason Kapono exposed to the expansion draft after Lebrons first year. Kapono was a fine designated shooter. If we really believe Lebron could defend off guards and power forwards then Kapono could play small forward at the 3 point line and create space for Lebron to work.

With Lebron on a rookie contract how were the Cavaliers unable to resign restricted free agent Boozer due to the Salary cap?

Sasha and Snow seem like sensible acquisitions for Lebron's 2nd year. I can't fault the Cavaliers for Wagner who might have been a great side kick for Lebron if he wasn't injured. Boozer should have been signed and traded with, Luke Jackson pick, McInnis and Newbie for a starting point guard and starting off guard. Maybe Baron Davis and someone. Davis was dumped early in 2014.

Larry Hughes was a good athlete, a good passer, could be a lock down defender when he wanted to be one, couldn't shoot and could be selfish enough to take shots he couldn't hit.

Cavs got some good minutes from Donyell Marshal.

Damon Jones could shoot but he was too slow. I don't like point guards who have to back their way up the court.

I like Gibson better than Damon Jones. Gibson may not have point guard skills but like Toney Douglas with the Heat now, if you are quick enough to defend point guards and you can shoot then you can play point guard with Lebron because Lebron is the guy who has the ball all the time and is the real point guard.

Shannon Brown is a good back up off guard.

Wally, Joe Smith, Devin Brown Ben Wallace. Past their prime.
Mo Williams, Delonte, good but not great.

FOUND IT! Or at least almost found it, Lebron's supporting cast in 2008-2009 is as good as the supporting cast that Bird had his rookie year. Well, on 2nd thought maybe they are not as good but they are close. Which explains why they won 66 games. It is not that they have any one player as good as Cedric Maxwell but players 4 through 10 are superior to the 1980 Celtics 4 through 10. Players 2 and 3, Big Z and Mo Williams are inferior to the 2nd coming of Nate Archibald and Cedric Maxwell but they are not so inferior that that the Cavs better depth does not make the teams almost equal.

Mo Williams, Delonte, Wally, Gibson and Sasha, vs old but good Nate Archibald, Chris ford, rookie Gerald Hederson, ML Carr and Jeff Judkins? Which group is better?

Big Z, Verejao, Joe Smith and old Ben Wallace vs Old Cowens, Cedric Maxwell, and Rick Robey? Which group is better?

Next year Old Shaq and Old Jamison and Anthony Parker, Moon and Hickson are added but Big Z gets hurt, and Smith, Wallace, Wally, and Sasha are gone.

There was too much player turnover. The Cavs kept trying to rent old players.

Regarding Nate's and Mo Williams assists: Nate had great point guard skills and I loved watching him slice and weave his way through packed in big men to either finish with a spin off the backboard or a perfect pass to open teammate that he should not have even been able to see. Nate was a fast dribbler with the ball and looked a bit like Iverson the way he went around people. But Nate was not as fast as he looked. He had lost years to injuries and was slowed down. Nates true speed was easier to see on defense.

No longer young Mo Williams was probably faster than Nate. Mo Williams was never a basketball artists on Nate's level. Bird's ability to run an offense through him barely altered how much time Nate had the ball.

Looking at Mo Williams assists per 36 minutes it looks like playing with Lebron reduced Williams assists by one or two assists per 36 minutes.

[Okada]

The Cavs teams with LeBron were better than most people give them credit for now, they just had horrendous name value. But you're not winning 66 games with '09 LeBron vs. all, there were some things that worked there. Those teams played outstanding defense and hit a ton of threes, and that wasn't all because of LeBron.

[tsherkin]

The Cavs teams with LeBron were better than most people give them credit for now, they just had horrendous name value. But you're not winning 66 games with '09 LeBron vs. all, there were some things that worked there. Those teams played outstanding defense and hit a ton of threes, and that wasn't all because of LeBron.

No one's saying they were bums, Okada. He had spot-up shooters and defenders, but we're talking about title aspirations and they were never good enough to facilitate that kind of contention against the competition he faced from 03-04 through 09-10.

[RSCD3_]

The Cavs teams with LeBron were better than most people give them credit for now, they just had horrendous name value. But you're not winning 66 games with '09 LeBron vs. all, there were some things that worked there. Those teams played outstanding defense and hit a ton of threes, and that wasn't all because of LeBron.

In a lot of ways, the 09 cavaliers remind me of the chicago bulls of 2011. A team with a strong defense, and some players with useful offensively but no true 2nd option. This really limited both teams in the ECF. The heat stopped rose because they realized that although no one else could score effectively, rose plus their defense could stop the heat. The magic kind of used the exact approach let lebron score ( well not "give him an open path" but dont send a lot of help ) This allowed him to torch the magic but wheb lever lebron wasnt shooting the other shooters had trouble with defense ( lengthy forwards ) and he wasnt enough to take then down.

I see the situation as very close with 09 james being a lot better than rose and the cavs defense not being as good as thibs'. The bulls were/are referred to as a one man army with great defense and they got 60+ wins and lost in the PS. I see that cavs team as a precursor albeit with more one man offense and less suffocating defense. I mean nobody calls the 2011 bulls stacked at all but they had a good collection of players with no second option.

People always say that defense dials up in the playoffs and thats why these one man armies even with great defense tend to make it to conference finals at farthest and usually this only happens in the east.

Oh and before someone retorts about the 2011 mavs the difference was that they had players that were first or second options before ( kidd,marion,terry; all guys who had been in many playoff battles ) and this collective experience helped overcome the lack of a second option because they knew how to play team ball. The 2009 cavs/ 2011 bulls were pretty upstart and didnt have any former offensive anchors or chemistry to make up for their 2nd option or lack thereof.

Just my two cents

P.s. I guess the counterpoint to a lack of a second option is to have a more experienced playoff team with good chemistry amongst themselves.

Sent from my SCH-I800 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[therealbig3]

In the last couple of years, I think LeBron has progressed as an offensive player that he can be mentioned on the same level as Bird on that end of the ball. LeBron's ALWAYS been a fantastic passer with great court vision, and he progressed as a scorer due to an improved jumper and a reliable post game...while also still being the best slasher and finisher in the game, which has always been his defining attribute as a scorer. I don't think he'll ever match Bird's feel for the game, or Bird's passing ability, but he more than makes up for it with his other advantages.

I certainly think there's a bigger gap defensively than there is offensively. I'm not sure if there is a gap offensively, while I know for sure that LeBron is a significantly better defender than Bird.

LeBron's longevity is already comparable to Bird's, and you have to consider durability when comparing them as well. Bird was frequently hampered by injury, LeBron really hasn't been. That's a pretty big deal.

I'd take LeBron over Bird all time at this point.

[Grandpa Waiters]

In the last couple of years, I think LeBron has progressed as an offensive player that he can be mentioned on the same level as Bird on that end of the ball. LeBron's ALWAYS been a fantastic passer with great court vision, and he progressed as a scorer due to an improved jumper and a reliable post game...while also still being the best slasher and finisher in the game, which has always been his defining attribute as a scorer. I don't think he'll ever match Bird's feel for the game, or Bird's passing ability, but he more than makes up for it with his other advantages.

I certainly think there's a bigger gap defensively than there is offensively. I'm not sure if there is a gap offensively, while I know for sure that LeBron is a significantly better defender than Bird.

LeBron's longevity is already comparable to Bird's, and you have to consider durability when comparing them as well. Bird was frequently hampered by injury, LeBron really hasn't been. That's a pretty big deal.

I'd take LeBron over Bird all time at this point.

One series, one game, two clutch free throws, one shot for all the marbles? BIRD

[therealbig3]

In the last couple of years, I think LeBron has progressed as an offensive player that he can be mentioned on the same level as Bird on that end of the ball. LeBron's ALWAYS been a fantastic passer with great court vision, and he progressed as a scorer due to an improved jumper and a reliable post game...while also still being the best slasher and finisher in the game, which has always been his defining attribute as a scorer. I don't think he'll ever match Bird's feel for the game, or Bird's passing ability, but he more than makes up for it with his other advantages.

I certainly think there's a bigger gap defensively than there is offensively. I'm not sure if there is a gap offensively, while I know for sure that LeBron is a significantly better defender than Bird.

LeBron's longevity is already comparable to Bird's, and you have to consider durability when comparing them as well. Bird was frequently hampered by injury, LeBron really hasn't been. That's a pretty big deal.

I'd take LeBron over Bird all time at this point.

One series, one game, two clutch free throws, one shot for all the marbles? BIRD

If only championships were won based on one series, one game, two clutch FTs, or one shot...over the course of an ENTIRE playoff run...I'd take LeBron.

[JordansBulls]

Don't think anyone answered it, but who would you consider better in the finals? Bird was there in 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986 and Lebron in 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013

[wigglestrue]

Don't think anyone answered it, but who would you consider better in the finals? Bird was there in 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986 and Lebron in 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013

Well, unadjusted for pace, Bird by a decent margin.
But none of us has yet to adjust it for pace.
Not sure how that will affect things.
How do we do that, where is it?

[wigglestrue]

Does anyone not get the sense of watching equals here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3NAWRKNBEQ

[wigglestrue]

So...I noticed Bird catch up to and pull ahead of James in the poll results the last few days. Am I actually swaying people? Or is it just, like, one night where a half dozen people just randomly voted one way versus the other?

[wigglestrue]

Okay, sooo...

Bird: Is he a Top 25 Defender of All Time? Top 50? Only in the Top 100?

I'm going with Top 25 still, just barely, based on:

- The three All-Defensive selections (probably deserved two or three more)
- The only defensive metrics there are on bkref, Defensive Win Shares (led the league four times -- which has been done by only Russell, Olajuwon, Duncan, Wallace, Howard -- and is ranked 26th all-time in NBA history) and Defensive Rating (finished top-ten six times -- 2nd, 4th, 6th, 6th, 9th, 10th -- and is ranked 61st in NBA history)
- The game footage, which shows him to be an extraordinary free safety, with defensive skills and instincts just as jaw-dropping as any other aspect of his game.

Ladies and gentlemen, Larry Bird seems to be one of the most complete basketball players ever. A two-way force. If you look at the metrics on bkref, his value in Statville is actually more about his defense than his offense. (WTF, right?) Look at his Offensive Rating and Offensive Win Shares. Look at where he finished each season per those two metrics, versus their defensive counterparts. Is it not exactly the reverse of what the popular wisdom on Bird would suggest? Whatever is going on there, here, is a huge thing. Bird's standing as an all-timer is at stake. If he's as great defensively as it appears to me, then he's never falling out of the elite 6 or 7 or whatever "magic number" the GOAT roll call is in any given future year. If he was as valuable on defense as it seems, then he's legitimately in the running for the #1 spot again, a la the tentative consensus that was budding circa 1986. He will ultimately always lose, in my book, to Jordan, Russell, and Wilt. IMO, recognizing his unexpected defensive greatness forces us to move him ahead of Magic, 5 to 3 title advantage be damned. (It's one random twist of an ankle or an inch's difference in trajectory away from being a 4 to 4 tie, mind you.) Bird can now sniff Kareem. Well, maybe not, lol. Kareem was really, really great. But, so, even if the Top Four is (IMO, again) cemented as Jordan, Russell, Wilt, Kareem...instead of Bird being tied to Magic, usually to Magic's rear, now Bird can lay claim to a Top 5 spot. Not only that, but he separates himself from Magic. There wouldn't be a Top Four and then a Twosome of Bird/Magic. It'd be a Top Five of Jordan, Russell, Wilt, Kareem, and Bird...and then Magic...oh, and LeBron. LeBron has a little ways to go still to catch up to Bird, after all. To me, anyway.

EDIT: "He will ultimately always lose, in my book, to Jordan, Russell, and Wilt." Actually...never say never!