Amazing Larry Bird stat note

[Fatal9]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

[Fatal9]

You better take a closer look at Bird in his five NBA Finals. A case could be made that he was only the best player on the court in those five Finals, in ONE...and that was in 83-84 when LA should have SWEPT Boston in the first four games.

'81 (easily the best player on the court for anyone who has seen the series)
'84 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)
'86 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)

[unknown101]

Jordan is only in 2 of them...

Does that mean Robinson, Ewing, Hakeem, Garnett, etc. who are all in top 25 3 or 4 times are all better than Jordan?

Larry Bird, just like Michael Jordan, isnt gonna be on all of the top 25's because that's really only possible for big men like the ones listed above. try to find a sg or sf thats in 3 of those categories, I dont think there is any.

[Wukillabeez78]

If you'd ever seen Larry Bird play you wouldn't be questioning his greatness. All-time stat rankings like those you are talking about have more to do with a players longevity in the league than greatness. For instance, Mark Jackson has more total assists in his career than Magic Johnson and Isiah Thomas even though the latter two were WAAAYYYYY better passers and players than he was. They played at a higher level than Mark Jackson but have inferior all-time assist totals because he played much longer than they did.

You have to be able to discern what numbers are really important when comparing players (especially if you never saw them play with your own eyes). Generally, people who only compare players by their stats do so by comparing a certain amount of time (their best 5 years for example).

I prefer looking at per game averages if I am going to solely compare players by stats. This gives you a better idea of what the player actually did as opposed to cumulative stats. There are plenty of journeyman type players who simply played a long time and have great all-time totals because of their longevity and not necessarily because they were great.

Larry was GREAT though and is definitely a top ten player all time. 24.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg and 6.3 apg??? How many small forwards have better numbers all time? He was a small forward by the way and got those numbers (esp. the rebounds) playing with a great center (Parish) and great power forward (McHale). Just for the sake of comparison, Dirk (who is a power forward several inches taller than Bird) has career averages of 22.9 ppg, 8.5 rpg and 2.7 apg. Dirk will probably play much longer than Bird and might eventually have better career totals than Bird (especially total points) but his career averages will never be better. You tell me who's the better player....

[DoubleTech]

Is is the awards/championships that make everyone believe he is so great? Let's face it, he is a great player. But is he a dominant player?

Have you ever watched the guy play? Do you have any idea how many clutch baskets he hit during his career? Do you know how tough and competitive he was? He makes today's players look like puss!es.

courtesy of Kblaze:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULvo7__wwBU

pay close attention to what Magic says at the beginning of the video.

[AirGauge23]

If you wanna see dominance, check his 60 point game against the hawks.

He did it because he felt like it.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

+10

Was gonna say the same thing. These people are crazy. Bird is probably the most well-rounded (and arguably the most effective) offensive player in history. It's better to look at career averages in cases like Bird's -- or, better yet, his 3-5 year peak averages. Bird was ridiculously good.

[bballer]

You can't go off stats with this one.

[juju151111]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.

LOL Larry>KB Wth are you talking about you stat whore. Lets see their playoffs stats then.

[jlauber]

'81 (easily the best player on the court for anyone who has seen the series)
'84 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)
'86 (one of the greatest finals performances ever)

First of all, Kareem AND Magic were better in '85, and Magic was CLEARLY better in '87.

Now, on to '81. Bird averaged 15.3 ppg, 15.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, and shot .419 from the field. He didn't deserve, NOR did he win the Finals MVP. He was outplayed by his own teammate, Cornbread Maxwell, who averaged 17.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, and shot .568 from the floor. Meanwhile Moses Malone put up a 22.2 ppg, 16.3 rpg series, with arguably a bad .403 FG%. In any case, if Bird were the best in that series, he was not very good.

'84. IF LA had not GIVEN games two and four, Bird wouldn't have won that Finals MVP. I do agree that he was the best player in that series...ALTHOUGH it was close. Bird averaged 27.4 ppg, with 14.0 rpg, 3.6 apg, and shot .484. Meanwhile Magic had a very good series (although his FT shooting down the stretch killed LA in game four.) He averaged 18.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 13.6 apg, and shot .560 from the field.

In '86 Bird's numbers were good, but debateable. 24.0 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg on .482 shooting. His fellow teammate, Kevin McHale averaged 25.8 ppg, 8.5 rpg, and shot .573 from the floor. Houston's Olajuwon 24.7 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.1 bpg, and shot .479 from the field.

In '85, Bird averaged 23.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 9.5 apg, and shot .450. His teammate McHale, went for 26.0 ppg, 10.7 rpg, and shot .598. Meanwhile, Kareem, after a horrible game one, dominated the rest of the series. He finished with 25.7 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 5.2 apg, and shot .604 from the field. And Magic put up 18.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 14.0 apg, and shot .494 from the floor.

In '87, Bird put up 24.2 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 5.5 apg, and shot .445 from the floor. Magic went for 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, and shot .541 from the field.

Sorry, but these are the FACTS. Was Bird a great player, sure for a period of about five years. I have him at #10 on MY all-time list. And, yes, he is well below Magic (#2), and is even below Kobe (#8.) In terms of career, he is where he should be.

[juju151111]

Bird didn't even play 900 games in his career, entered the NBA at 23 and his body broke down at 31. These type of cumulative stats reward longevity (at least 1000+ played games), it doesn't make him a better or worse player. Why are there so many idiots who can't realize simple things like this? He is the greatest all-around player ever, and him being or not being in the "top 25" means sh*t. You can question his longevity and durability, but not his dominance.

lol @ "was he really that dominant". For five straight years he averaged, 24/10/7, 29/11/7, 26/10/7, 28/9/8 and 30/9/6, all while being near the top on steal leaders and posting crazy shooting percentages. If Lebron posted seasons like that while on teams that won a couple of rings, you'd be creaming yourself. This while rebounding on a front line that included McHale and Parish, sharing the ball with his team and not getting nearly as many touches as star players would get from 90s onward.

It's funny how jabuar is a historian and doesn't know Bird Greatest.

[jlauber]

LOL Larry>KB Wth are you talking about you stat whore. Lets see their playoffs stats then.

In terms of scoring...not even close. Bird's BEST post-season scoring average was 27.5 in '83-84. If you count this post-season, Kobe has had SEVEN post-seasons above that, including FOUR over 30! You can argue that Bird may have had better all-around numbers, but in terms of CAREER, Kobe has been a force for more seasons, AND, he is not close to being done.

[Soothsayer]

You better take a closer look at Bird in his five NBA Finals. A case could be made that he was only the best player on the court in those five Finals, in ONE...and that was in 83-84 when LA should have SWEPT Boston in the first four games.

And a case could be made that out of Kobe's 6 finals appearances, he was only the best player on the court in ONE as well, last year, when he beat the Magic.

[Showtime]

In terms of scoring...not even close. Bird's BEST post-season scoring average was 27.5 in '83-84. If you count this post-season, Kobe has had SEVEN post-seasons above that, including FOUR over 30! You can argue that Bird may have had better all-around numbers, but in terms of CAREER, Kobe has been a force for more seasons, AND, he is not close to being done.

Why do the kids think everything has to do with PPG?

[Cyclone112]

Even more amazing are his career playoff stats, including PER (for those that value it.) He cracks the top-25 in ppg, at #24 (23.76), but that is about it.

Once again, and carrying my argument from another thread...Kobe is a better player, in terms of career, than Bird was.

Seriously? Fatal already shut this thread down but you trying to bring Kobe into this based on career totals? Seriously career totals? Fine have a look at the all time rankings below.

[CODE]
PTS AST TRB STL BLKS TOV MINS GAMES
Bird 25 33 44 26 119 23 59 182
Bryant 12 55 175 28 177 17 38 84
[/CODE]