Can a case be made that Larry Bird was the GOAT ?

[70sFan]

...a FEW players clearly ahead of him as a passer? At the very LEAST these guys are all ahead of him:
Magic
Stockton
Robertson
Nash
Kidd
CP3
LeBron

And I'm being kind by the way. I would probably put another 5 or 6 guys in front of him but that following group is where you can begin to argue his ranking.

You mentioned 7 players in the whole history, that's not a lot. Besides, I don't agree with all the names you mentioned.

7 is more than a few. Being the 8th greatest passer in NBA history is fantastic. Hell being top 50 is fantastic. But we're talking about "goat" material so the criteria has to be pretty strict. Also I'd love to know who on that list you disagree with

I'm not a native speaker, so I won't discuss what number "a few" really means, but you won't find many passers better than Bird.

I disagree with Stockton, Kidd and Paul. LeBron and Robertson are arguable. Assist numbers don't say a lot about the quality of passes or passing vision. Bird played mostly off-ball, which is why he didn't have massive assist numbers. His vision is certainly better than Stockton's or Paul's, who are incredible on their own but miss more openings than Larry did.

[Slim Charless]

If we remove centers then Bird is my GOAT. If the game is on the line and I had to put the ball in any one player's hands to win the game it is Larry Legend.

There's this Jordan guy I heard was pretty good. Might wanna check his YouTube highlights.

I've watched the NBA since 1979. I think I remember Jordan. He was pretty good. But he wasn't Bird. That's the great thing about opinions. You can have yours and I can have mine.

This is true. I honestly think Larry would be the 2nd option on a title contending team nowadays. A previous poster got offended by my comparison to Lamar Odom (better shooting of course). I think they compare fairly and I don't think that's an insult

[70sFan]

Firstly, I like how you skipped over the other players I mentioned. Comment on Larry's chances VS Ayton/Bam/Tatum/Collins. Do you think he does well against them?

I see no reason why Collins would cause a lot of problems for Bird. I guess the main problem would be defending lobs on P&Rs, but with right gameplan it shouldn't be a massive problem.

I don't think he'd fare great against Tatum, because he wasn't quick enough to defend him and Tatum's shooting/driving combination would be too much for him.

If Bird could hold his own on switches against Hakeem Olajuwon, I'm sure he'd do well on Ayton in limited number of possessions. He wouldn't defend Ayton against the Suns for majority of the game though.

Bam is interesting, because he's skilled and athletic, but I don't think he's they guy that would destroy you if you put Bird on him. I also fail to see why Bird would have to defend Bam against Miami, he'd defend PJ Tucker in these games.

To answer your question, JJJ is quick enough to beat Larry to the hoop and is much longer than him as well as stronger.

Do you think teams didn't have athletes like JJJ back in Bird's era? Larry defended athletic freaks like Larry Nance and Orlando Woolridge who didn't beat him to the hoop consistently. I also don't think JJJ is stronger than Bird, though I don't want to start another debate.

What would actually happen is what I've constantly said would happen with Larry:

Ja switches onto him and blows right by him. Over and over. Eventually JJJ might drag him out to the 3 point line and he'll get beat on the back door pass.

So why it doesn't happen against Jokic?

Again - do you think Dirk would suck as well today for the exact reasons?

[70sFan]

I don’t understand why he’s considered an all-time great shooter either….because he won the three point competition? He shot 37% from 3 on two attempts per game, and 51% on twos in 17 attempts per game. That’s good, I guess, but not spectacular. Before anyone argues that he would’ve been a better 3 point shooter if he played in this era bc he would’ve practiced them, my counter would be do you really think Larry bird didn’t practice his shooting?

One of the best players of his generation,no question. Also no question that he is not the GOAT.

Bird played his whole college career without a three point line. For 90% of Bird's career three point line was treated like a gimmick. Yeah, I'd say Bird didn't practise three point shooting like players today do.

That said, Bird inarguably had insane shooting touch. His FT% is among the best ever, he was extremely accurate three point shooter for his era and his shot profile indicates that he had elite midrange game as well (especially since he wasn't good inside finisher).

[trueballer7]

There's this Jordan guy I heard was pretty good. Might wanna check his YouTube highlights.

I've watched the NBA since 1979. I think I remember Jordan. He was pretty good. But he wasn't Bird. That's the great thing about opinions. You can have yours and I can have mine.

This is true. I honestly think Larry would be the 2nd option on a title contending team nowadays. A previous poster got offended by my comparison to Lamar Odom (better shooting of course). I think they compare fairly and I don't think that's an insult

Why would Larry be the 2nd option on a title contending team?

[ryguy613]

You mentioned 7 players in the whole history, that's not a lot. Besides, I don't agree with all the names you mentioned.

7 is more than a few. Being the 8th greatest passer in NBA history is fantastic. Hell being top 50 is fantastic. But we're talking about "goat" material so the criteria has to be pretty strict. Also I'd love to know who on that list you disagree with

I'm not a native speaker, so I won't discuss what number "a few" really means, but you won't find many passers better than Bird.

I disagree with Stockton, Kidd and Paul. LeBron and Robertson are arguable. Assist numbers don't say a lot about the quality of passes or passing vision. Bird played mostly off-ball, which is why he didn't have massive assist numbers. His vision is certainly better than Stockton's or Paul's, who are incredible on their own but miss more openings than Larry did.

When you start getting into the "we can't quantify it with numbers" argument you start to make things incredibly subjective to the point where theres really no reason to "argue" about anything. At that point I might as well just make the case that Jason Williams is the greatest passer of all time. I mean hes not but you cant disprove it because if you do... i disagree. lol

Besides that, being an amazing off ball player is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it really should take you out of the running for being discussed as an all time great passer in my opinion. The best passers take on the responsibility of having the offense operate through them. Operating off ball is a luxury in that regard, that the other players on my list do not have.

[70sFan]

When you start getting into the "we can't quantify it with numbers" argument you start to make things incredibly subjective to the point where theres really no reason to "argue" about anything. At that point I might as well just make the case that Jason Williams is the greatest passer of all time. I mean hes not but you cant disprove it because if you do... i disagree. lol

We can quantify it and some people do. Assist numbers are simply a poor estimate of passing ability. It tells us more about the role player play, not his ability to read defense. A quick example is Nikola Jokic, who is probably the best passer in the league, yet he's not close to the leading assist man.

Besides that, being an amazing off ball player is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it really should take you out of the running for being discussed as an all time great passer in my opinion. The best passers take on the responsibility of having the offense operate through them. Operating off ball is a luxury in that regard, that the other players on my list do not have.

Players like Paul have to play on-ball, because they wouldn't be dangerous without the ball.

We really should stop thinking that on-ball players are the only ones that matter on basketball court. It's true that Bird wouldn't be able to play LeBron's role on offense, but vice versa.

[CobraCommander]

LMAO, nobody is going to argue and debate someone who thinks that humans have evolved physically in the last 40 years, especially when it has been proven that testosterone and growth hormones produced by the body have declined for generations.

As for today's defense, maybe you don't know this but there was no such thing as a flagrant foul when Bird played. Today's players not being able to touch Bird would have made life so easy he would have spent a year playing left handed because it was so easy for him.

Ummmm ok bro.


That addressed none of what I said but thanks for the useless rambling about fouls and evolution. I never made any of those points.

I'll make it very simple for you:

What does Larry avg today? Also what are his defensive numbers (DWS, DBPM).

He'd be hunted on defense over and over.

I don't understand why people think Bird would be bad defender today. He'd play strictly as a big and he was more mobile than a lot of centers or fours. I mean, Jokic has been good defender this season and he plays defense the way Bird did back then, except that Larry had much higher motor and less physical limitations.

I will entertain some dumb comments and some other silly stuff cause this is REALGM...it’s just fun to debate. Like who better Luka or trae,..or is MJ or LBJ the goat...it’s fun with no real wrong answer - but a dude saying Bird is equivalent to Lamar Odom is beneath me...

[ryguy613]

When you start getting into the "we can't quantify it with numbers" argument you start to make things incredibly subjective to the point where theres really no reason to "argue" about anything. At that point I might as well just make the case that Jason Williams is the greatest passer of all time. I mean hes not but you cant disprove it because if you do... i disagree. lol

We can quantify it and some people do. Assist numbers are simply a poor estimate of passing ability. It tells us more about the role player play, not his ability to read defense. A quick example is Nikola Jokic, who is probably the best passer in the league, yet he's not close to the leading assist man.

Besides that, being an amazing off ball player is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it really should take you out of the running for being discussed as an all time great passer in my opinion. The best passers take on the responsibility of having the offense operate through them. Operating off ball is a luxury in that regard, that the other players on my list do not have.

Players like Paul have to play on-ball, because they wouldn't be dangerous without the ball.

We really should stop thinking that on-ball players are the only ones that matter on basketball court. It's true that Bird wouldn't be able to play LeBron's role on offense, but vice versa.

You're right that assists don't tell the whole story. If it did I wouldnt even be talking about Larry Bird as a top 10 or 15 all time passer, because he is currently ranked 44th all time in assists. So obviously I agree with you that his passing exceeds his actual assist numbers, but at some point it HAS to cap your rankings as an all time passer. I mean you brought up Jokic being the best passer in the nba. Well I'm not sure I agree with that but his assist numbers are still indicative of his elite passing. He's basically a top 6 assist leader every year. Bird was lucky if he finished in the top 13 or 14 every year. That is a sizable difference. Anyways, I dont think theres anything wrong with saying that Bird's passing was elite, because it was, but to say he was a better passer than John Stockton or Chris Paul is just odd to me. I agree with you that those guys can't operate efficiently off ball the way bird could, but that doesnt take away from my point. Playing off ball affords one the luxury to not have to be an elite passer every minute of every game in order to operate the offense. If that is the real bread and butter of your career it speaks much more highly to your overall ranking in that category.

[70sFan]

When you start getting into the "we can't quantify it with numbers" argument you start to make things incredibly subjective to the point where theres really no reason to "argue" about anything. At that point I might as well just make the case that Jason Williams is the greatest passer of all time. I mean hes not but you cant disprove it because if you do... i disagree. lol

We can quantify it and some people do. Assist numbers are simply a poor estimate of passing ability. It tells us more about the role player play, not his ability to read defense. A quick example is Nikola Jokic, who is probably the best passer in the league, yet he's not close to the leading assist man.

Besides that, being an amazing off ball player is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it really should take you out of the running for being discussed as an all time great passer in my opinion. The best passers take on the responsibility of having the offense operate through them. Operating off ball is a luxury in that regard, that the other players on my list do not have.

Players like Paul have to play on-ball, because they wouldn't be dangerous without the ball.

We really should stop thinking that on-ball players are the only ones that matter on basketball court. It's true that Bird wouldn't be able to play LeBron's role on offense, but vice versa.

You're right that assists don't tell the whole story. If it did I wouldnt even be talking about Larry Bird as a top 10 or 15 all time passer, because he is currently ranked 44th all time in assists. So obviously I agree with you that his passing exceeds his actual assist numbers, but at some point it HAS to cap your rankings as an all time passer. I mean you brought up Jokic being the best passer in the nba. Well I'm not sure I agree with that but his assist numbers are still indicative of his elite passing. He's basically a top 6 assist leader every year. Bird was lucky if he finished in the top 13 or 14 every year. That is a sizable difference. Anyways, I dont think theres anything wrong with saying that Bird's passing was elite, because it was, but to say he was a better passer than John Stockton or Chris Paul is just odd to me. I agree with you that those guys can't operate efficiently off ball the way bird could, but that doesnt take away from my point. Playing off ball affords one the luxury to not have to be an elite passer every minute of every game in order to operate the offense. If that is the real bread and butter of your career it speaks much more highly to your overall ranking in that category.

Some people like Ben Taylor made film study of how often players missed openings, as well as how often they made high quality reads. Stockton isn't close to Bird in that category. Of course, John had the ball a lot in his hands, so he had more potential reads to miss, but still - Bird definitely had higher vision than Stockton.

You can be excellent passer with low assist numbers. Rick Barry had 360 degree vision, yet he never averaged more than 6 apg.

Jokic has higher assist numbers because he's more ball-dominant than Bird. Again, it doesn't mean that Bird is worse passer. I think that our definition of great passer is so different that we have to agree to disagree at this point.

[Fencer reregistered]

7 is more than a few. Being the 8th greatest passer in NBA history is fantastic. Hell being top 50 is fantastic. But we're talking about "goat" material so the criteria has to be pretty strict. Also I'd love to know who on that list you disagree with

I'm not a native speaker, so I won't discuss what number "a few" really means, but you won't find many passers better than Bird.

I disagree with Stockton, Kidd and Paul. LeBron and Robertson are arguable. Assist numbers don't say a lot about the quality of passes or passing vision. Bird played mostly off-ball, which is why he didn't have massive assist numbers. His vision is certainly better than Stockton's or Paul's, who are incredible on their own but miss more openings than Larry did.

When you start getting into the "we can't quantify it with numbers" argument you start to make things incredibly subjective to the point where theres really no reason to "argue" about anything. At that point I might as well just make the case that Jason Williams is the greatest passer of all time. I mean hes not but you cant disprove it because if you do... i disagree. lol

Besides that, being an amazing off ball player is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it really should take you out of the running for being discussed as an all time great passer in my opinion. The best passers take on the responsibility of having the offense operate through them. Operating off ball is a luxury in that regard, that the other players on my list do not have.

I think this on-ball/off-ball argument has gotten a bit misleading. Bird brought the ball upcourt more rarely than guards did. In fact, he commonly was the guy who threw the inbounds pass, where is where some of those full-court baseball pass inbounds plays come from. Similarly, after grabbing a rebound, he'd look to throw the outlet pass rather than dribbling the ball upcourt himself.

But if the offense started from a half court set, he was fairly often the QB.

Recall that DJ wasn't a career PG either.

[Fencer reregistered]

So, do you think Bird was the best ever at making his teammates better? Best ever shooter? Best ever passer? I would rank him very highly in all of these categories, but would have a tough time calling him best ever. Perhaps that's the point...the fact that he would rank highly in all of these categories is what makes his case for GOAT.

I don't think he has a case for best shooter ever with Curry arrival. Passing is arguable, but I think I'd find a few players clearly ahead of him.

What is underestimated here is his off-ball game. This is where he has the strongest case for the GOAT.

...a FEW players clearly ahead of him as a passer? At the very LEAST these guys are all ahead of him:
Magic
Stockton
Robertson
Nash
Kidd
CP3
LeBron

And I'm being kind by the way. I would probably put another 5 or 6 guys in front of him but that following group is where you can begin to argue his ranking.

Almost all the guys on your list are clearly BEHIND Bird as a passer. Magic was probably better. One can say Nash was better if one places high value on his ability to move around a congested half court with a live dribble before passing.

That's about it, although I'll concede that the case for Bird over LeBron as a passer, while correct, isn't totally obvious. (It depends on the observation that interior passing in an era with tight spacing is harder than skip passing in an era where play is more spread.)

[Fencer reregistered]

He has only 2 finals losses. Some would use that narrative to put him as the 2nd greatest of all time, since others in the top 10 have either 2 or more finals losses, which apparantly is the metric to place you in the GOAT conversation as we all know.

Some said he was equal to Lamar O-damn...never mind

2 things:

-Yes Nique was there and he used to cook the Celts, so I'm not sure what your point was. Now, Bird also would also drop numbers on ATL as well but that leads me to me other point....

-I'm talking about defense. Mikal, Ben Simmons, Marcus Smart and OG would be nightmares for Larry. The length and speed/strength those guys for example have would be a nightmare.

You need to think of this in terms of switching. Teams didn't do that back in the 80s....

For example if Boston played the Suns, Mikal would have chief priority for Bird, but the Celts would switch and hunt for Booker maybe. PHX would counter by trying to get Ayton out on him. Do you think Bird is taking Ayton off the dribble? I'm not sure and I'm also not sure that he can just shoot over him as 7 footers that can leap out and take wings/guards didn't happen back in 84.

It's not his faut as a lot of guys would have trouble handling the speed and pace of today's game. You can't hide slow players in the playoffs. Look what happened to Rudy Gobert...3 time DPOTY and the Clips cooked him last summer. You think Bird is gonna handle the likes of PG13/Kawhi or Trae/Dame (on switches) easily? Not likely.

You really believe this.

I’m out.

Gotcha so:



You guys are welcome to debate this and attack the points that I'm making. Sorry, I just don't see him handling the switch heavy defenses that are in the league nowadays. Him being smart is nice, but that won't cut it against the likes of Ben Simmons, OG etc, etc etc. He's also gonna be hunted by the opposing team's best perimeter guy.

You're talking about a superb midrange shot maker, who also had post scoring skills that were merely good for his era but would be elite now. Marcus Smart doesn't defend Jokic for more than a few plays per game at the most, and he wouldn't be a major problem for Bird either.

As for today's good defensive SFs being more of a problem for Bird than Michael Cooper or Scottie Pippen were -- why?

[dickfox]

He's the BIRD, not the GOAT.

[Slim Charless]

Some said he was equal to Lamar O-damn...never mind

You really believe this.

I’m out.

Gotcha so:



You guys are welcome to debate this and attack the points that I'm making. Sorry, I just don't see him handling the switch heavy defenses that are in the league nowadays. Him being smart is nice, but that won't cut it against the likes of Ben Simmons, OG etc, etc etc. He's also gonna be hunted by the opposing team's best perimeter guy.

You're talking about a superb midrange shot maker, who also had post scoring skills that were merely good for his era but would be elite now. Marcus Smart doesn't defend Jokic for more than a few plays per game at the most, and he wouldn't be a major problem for Bird either.

As for today's good defensive SFs being more of a problem for Bird than Michael Cooper or Scottie Pippen were -- why?

Cooper held him 4 points below his career average (25-->21.4 ppg) throughout the 20 games they matched up so that doesn't exactly help your case.

Pippen didn't really hit full steam defensively till 91, which was Larry's final year so we never got to see them go at each other at their peaks. I think that Pippen was a better defender than Cooper and would have done a better job on Larry-probably to the tune of >20ppg I imagine.

Neither one had access to the kinds of things today's players have and again, makes my point that Bird would have a difficult time playing today.

[ryguy613]

I don't think he has a case for best shooter ever with Curry arrival. Passing is arguable, but I think I'd find a few players clearly ahead of him.

What is underestimated here is his off-ball game. This is where he has the strongest case for the GOAT.

...a FEW players clearly ahead of him as a passer? At the very LEAST these guys are all ahead of him:
Magic
Stockton
Robertson
Nash
Kidd
CP3
LeBron

And I'm being kind by the way. I would probably put another 5 or 6 guys in front of him but that following group is where you can begin to argue his ranking.

Almost all the guys on your list are clearly BEHIND Bird as a passer. Magic was probably better. One can say Nash was better if one places high value on his ability to move around a congested half court with a live dribble before passing.

That's about it, although I'll concede that the case for Bird over LeBron as a passer, while correct, isn't totally obvious. (It depends on the observation that interior passing in an era with tight spacing is harder than skip passing in an era where play is more spread.)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude but you know that you are looking at Bird's passing ability with rose colored glasses when you feel the need to qualify magic's passing ability as "probably better". Come on guys...

[Fencer reregistered]

Gotcha so:



You guys are welcome to debate this and attack the points that I'm making. Sorry, I just don't see him handling the switch heavy defenses that are in the league nowadays. Him being smart is nice, but that won't cut it against the likes of Ben Simmons, OG etc, etc etc. He's also gonna be hunted by the opposing team's best perimeter guy.

You're talking about a superb midrange shot maker, who also had post scoring skills that were merely good for his era but would be elite now. Marcus Smart doesn't defend Jokic for more than a few plays per game at the most, and he wouldn't be a major problem for Bird either.

As for today's good defensive SFs being more of a problem for Bird than Michael Cooper or Scottie Pippen were -- why?

Cooper held him 4 points below his career average (25-->21.4 ppg) throughout the 20 games they matched up so that doesn't exactly help your case.

Pippen didn't really hit full steam defensively till 91, which was Larry's final year so we never got to see them go at each other at their peaks. I think that Pippen was a better defender than Cooper and would have done a better job on Larry-probably to the tune of >20ppg I imagine.

Neither one had access to the kinds of things today's players have and again, makes my point that Bird would have a difficult time playing today.

So you're saying that Bird scored less when guarded by one of the few perimeter DPOY's ever than when guarded by other guys? Oh, the horror!!!

Off the top of my head, Cooper -- who actually came off the bench -- was a great defender. Kareem, despite age, was still good. I presume Rambis was good, for why else did they play somebody so blah offensively. Magic was a dubious defender, but of course had size. The non-Cooper SGs didn't seem like much special. Embarrassingly, I don't recall either way about Worthy, one great steal excepted.

So perhaps the Celtics rightly attacked other matchups than Cooper?

[Fencer reregistered]

...a FEW players clearly ahead of him as a passer? At the very LEAST these guys are all ahead of him:
Magic
Stockton
Robertson
Nash
Kidd
CP3
LeBron

And I'm being kind by the way. I would probably put another 5 or 6 guys in front of him but that following group is where you can begin to argue his ranking.

Almost all the guys on your list are clearly BEHIND Bird as a passer. Magic was probably better. One can say Nash was better if one places high value on his ability to move around a congested half court with a live dribble before passing.

That's about it, although I'll concede that the case for Bird over LeBron as a passer, while correct, isn't totally obvious. (It depends on the observation that interior passing in an era with tight spacing is harder than skip passing in an era where play is more spread.)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude but you know that you are looking at Bird's passing ability with rose colored glasses when you feel the need to qualify magic's passing ability as "probably better". Come on guys...

It's a question of how one weights different skills. Magic was even better than Bird on the fast break. Bird was better than Magic in standstill interior passing. I don't recall how close to Bird Magic was in outlet passing, but Bird did it more. Magic was even better than Bird in entry passes. Etc.

[hardenASG13]

I don’t understand why he’s considered an all-time great shooter either….because he won the three point competition? He shot 37% from 3 on two attempts per game, and 51% on twos in 17 attempts per game. That’s good, I guess, but not spectacular. Before anyone argues that he would’ve been a better 3 point shooter if he played in this era bc he would’ve practiced them, my counter would be do you really think Larry bird didn’t practice his shooting?

One of the best players of his generation,no question. Also no question that he is not the GOAT.

Bird played his whole college career without a three point line. For 90% of Bird's career three point line was treated like a gimmick. Yeah, I'd say Bird didn't practise three point shooting like players today do.

That said, Bird inarguably had insane shooting touch. His FT% is among the best ever, he was extremely accurate three point shooter for his era and his shot profile indicates that he had elite midrange game as well (especially since he wasn't good inside finisher).

Thats all true, but 37% is 37 %. The thread is asking if Bird could be considered the goat. He wasnt.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

his career ended at basically the same moment than his greatest rival injuries/aids.

so.

lets see.

his greatest rival

BEat him in the ncaa

beat him 5 rings to 3 with similar rosters, maybe celtics depth was even better.

beat him 2-1 in direct nba finals.

so

No

0 chance at Goat .


You can argue for his biggest rival being the goat tough ( he is for me).

Michigan state vs Indiana state. This is an example of what exactly?

And the Lakers roster crushed the Celtics roster. Magic literally played his ENTIRE career with another GOAT level player. Bird had fricking Kevin mchale. A solid all star that nobody even remembers if he doesnt play with bird. Before Bird hurt his back Magic Johnson was Tragic Johnson. That's with Kareem beside him. Let's not forget that.

So really....come on man