Am I the only one who thinks Bird is a lock top 10 player ATM?

[wutevahung]

are you just making up fake arguments now? who has said they are knocking on Bird because he is not a high flyer?

It doesn't matter if he is a better shooter, better rebounder and a better passer. The real question is "Is he a better player?"

Dominque was listed as 6'8 240 lbs, and Bird was 6'9 230 lbs but somehow Bird is a strong power PF and Wilkins is SF?

Assuming the NBA heights and weights are accurate (which is a very iffy proposition sometimes), I think they are talking mainly mainly defensive ability and maybe a bit of rebound rate. Bird was relatively slow afoot for an NBA wing; Nique was quicker, though his defensive effort was rarely impressive when I saw him.

I think both players would be PF in today's game, and correct me if I was wrong, my knowledge of those Celtics teams were mostly from reading books/posts, but Larry was often the one guarding the post and McKale being the one guarding SF right?

Position, as it has became obviously lately, is not black and white. I was simply pointing out the inconsistencies in his logic I have great respect for Larry's game.

[tsherkin]

Position, as it has became obviously lately, is not black and white. I was simply pointing out the inconsistencies in his logic I have great respect for Larry's game.

I think it has more to do with the fact that Nique was an athletic slasher and Bird was an off-ball and post guy who was a little taller. Nique had the classic bump-and-fade from the mid block, but he was definitely a more prototypical SF, and Bird was not. Yeah, you can play the position-less card, but both played more toward a positional archetype, and not the same one.

[Proxy]

Nah, Steph kicked him out of mine personally, not seeing why he has to be one

[SNPA]

I used to think he was untouchable in that spot as well, but it's not the case.

If you take a career value approach, he just doesn't stack up to the other guys in the top 10.

I think his '86 peak was top 5 all time and surrounding it he has a wonderful 5 year prime from '84-'88, but even within that, he was injured in the '85 and '88 postseasons. Before that, he was still an great player but has numerous Playoff failures on the offensive side of the ball, which is where he made most of his impact. After that, he was clearly worse. Still an All-Star but no longer an all-timer.

He just wasn't good enough for long enough. The '89 injury is what really hurts him.

I have him at 11, behind Hakeem and ahead of Dirk. I may re-evaluate Dirk and move him ahead as well, because his two biggest strengths (Playoff resilience and longevity) are Bird's two biggest weaknesses tbh.

The highest I could see him is 8 if you REALLY value peak, but I see no argument over LeBron, Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Shaq and Duncan.

The argument is peak Bird is the best all around player. He is a better shooter, rebounder and passer than James. The argument applies to Jordan to with shooting more debatable. The Centers obviously are a totally different thing, it’s all around that’s key.

The usual arguments against him are minor IMO. He wasn’t a high flyer…ok so? Outside of having to be more clever around the hoop it didn’t hurt him much and Bird was a much better athlete than generally given credit for. The other criticism is on defense he was slow laterally. Bird is big and strong PF, so yeah he played out of position at SF and had a hard time with guys like Niqe on the perimeter, what big PF wouldn’t? Not many.

are you just making up fake arguments now? who has said they are knocking on Bird because he is not a high flyer?

It doesn't matter if he is a better shooter, better rebounder and a better passer. The real question is "Is he a better player?"

Dominque was listed as 6'8 240 lbs, and Bird was 6'9 230 lbs but somehow Bird is a strong power PF and Wilkins is SF?

Seems you and others missed the word usual.

If you think Dominque was as big as Bird there’s nothing I can tell you.

Also, being a better rebounder, shooter and passer is generally a good argument for being a better player (exceptions apply obviously).

[wutevahung]

The argument is peak Bird is the best all around player. He is a better shooter, rebounder and passer than James. The argument applies to Jordan to with shooting more debatable. The Centers obviously are a totally different thing, it’s all around that’s key.

The usual arguments against him are minor IMO. He wasn’t a high flyer…ok so? Outside of having to be more clever around the hoop it didn’t hurt him much and Bird was a much better athlete than generally given credit for. The other criticism is on defense he was slow laterally. Bird is big and strong PF, so yeah he played out of position at SF and had a hard time with guys like Niqe on the perimeter, what big PF wouldn’t? Not many.

are you just making up fake arguments now? who has said they are knocking on Bird because he is not a high flyer?

It doesn't matter if he is a better shooter, better rebounder and a better passer. The real question is "Is he a better player?"

Dominque was listed as 6'8 240 lbs, and Bird was 6'9 230 lbs but somehow Bird is a strong power PF and Wilkins is SF?

Seems you and others missed the word usual.

If you think Dominque was as big as Bird there’s nothing I can tell you.

Also, being a better rebounder, shooter and passer is generally a good argument for being a better player (exceptions apply obviously).

And why does “usual” matter in the context when you are applying to two specific players?

Tell me, which poster in this thread knocked bird because he wasn’t a high flyer?

You are literally making up fake arguments. I m done with you.

[ty 4191]

I deviate a bit from the average PC board opinion on this to be honest. Longevity is important but I've never liked the "counting seasons" approach. Bird's 1984 and 1986 seasons with MVPs and Finals MVPs, playing as the best player in the league all year is something I value a lot. Someone like Karl Malone could've played 30 seasons and I still wouldn't take him over the barely a decade of Bird because he never came close to reaching the same heights. KG and Oscar are great examples of guys who could've been ahead of Bird but as it stands did they really show enough in the post-season to say for sure they could've replicated the success Bird had in his best years?

What it comes down to for me is longevity should only come into play when comparing players of a similar level. At least when not talking about extreme cases like T-Mac having a huge outlier peak or Walton being unable to produce even one full season at his peak. Roughly 5 prime years is generally enough for me to enter players into the conversation. Probably why I'm a bit quicker to champion current players like Kawhi, Giannis and Jokic than most as well.

This, exactly. Perfectly stated!

This is what I meant earlier in this Thread by “peak greatly superseding longevity.”

[ty 4191]

I constantly switch Larry bird back and forth with Magic Johnson for 11th or 12th on my all time list. it seems like you’re valuing accolades and rings which I don’t care about when evaluating players (these things don’t make you better at basketball or even give you much of a ball park for good you were they just say you’re good maybe) Bird has a fringe top 10 peak imo with 10+ HQ seasons but bad durability. The guys I have over him are

LeBron James
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar/Michael Jordan
Tim Duncan
Shaquille O’Neal
Kobe Bryant
Hakeem Olajuwon
Kevin Garnett
Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain

What’s the crux of the argument for Kobe over Bird?

[ceoofkobefans]

Much superior Longevity with better durability and PO resilience with a similar quality of peak

[SNPA]

are you just making up fake arguments now? who has said they are knocking on Bird because he is not a high flyer?

It doesn't matter if he is a better shooter, better rebounder and a better passer. The real question is "Is he a better player?"

Dominque was listed as 6'8 240 lbs, and Bird was 6'9 230 lbs but somehow Bird is a strong power PF and Wilkins is SF?

Seems you and others missed the word usual.

If you think Dominque was as big as Bird there’s nothing I can tell you.

Also, being a better rebounder, shooter and passer is generally a good argument for being a better player (exceptions apply obviously).

And why does “usual” matter in the context when you are applying to two specific players?

Tell me, which poster in this thread knocked bird because he wasn’t a high flyer?

You are literally making up fake arguments. I m done with you.

Lol. Usual. It has a definition.

I didn’t claim a poster in this thread specifically said it.

Words and their meanings…

[tsherkin]

What’s the crux of the argument for Kobe over Bird?

Rings. Volume scoring. Longevity. Resilience of playoff scoring. Playing on multiple repeat title teams.

YMMV on whether you accept them, of course, but he does have a platform to stand in vs Bird.

[KobesScarf]

I have him top 7

[Johnny Tomala]

MJ, KAJ, Russell, LBJ, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq is my Top 10.

There is no way Kobe was better than Bird. Kobe's death unwarrantly made him Top 10 player in many people eyes, while he shouldn't be ranked that high. I have KG as 11th best of all time, Oscar Robertson at 12th position, Kobe 13th, Karl Malone 14th and Dirk Nowitzki 15th.

[tsherkin]

MJ, KAJ, Russell, LBJ, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq is my Top 10.

There is no way Kobe was better than Bird. Kobe's death unwarrantly made him Top 10 player in many people eyes, while he shouldn't be ranked that high. I have KG as 11th best of all time, Oscar Robertson at 12th position, Kobe 13th, Karl Malone 14th and Dirk Nowitzki 15th.

People were discussing him as a top 10 player while he was still active, man. His death didnt make that happen. Whether or not you agree is another thing, for sure, but the narrative that his death caused that is BS.