Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-28-2013, 08:32 PM   #106
Micku
NBA lottery pick
 
Micku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,973
Micku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
It just doesnt add up Mick. Id agree that if you took Bird and placed him on a bad team, his ppg would stay the same or even increase because hed be the teams only option on offense. But then you must eliminate the championships and MVPs. Hed become Carmello Anthony. Because he was subpar in the playoffs more often than not.

How? Kobe won MVP and championships like that. On 09, he averaged roughly 21 shots on a very talented offensive team. LeBron won MVPs by averaging 19 FGA a game with the Miami Heat in 11 and 12. We wouldn't eliminate championships or MVPs for Bird because we know that would work.

Besides, I was debating on the amount of shots Bird could take in this league. You said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
If Bird took roughly 20 shots in a league that avg about 7100 shots per team, how is he gonna get the same 20 in a league where the avg team takes about 6500?

First: I and many others just said he would shoot more. You said paced matter, and I showed you that stars like MJ and Karl Malone average the same amount of shots like they did in the 80s. Sometimes even more on a slow pace game. Why can't Bird just as much? Especially since they were K.Malone and MJ teams were championship contenders?

Second: If he were to have a good team, lets say the Lakers 09. Kobe shot roughly 21 FGA per game. Bird could do something similar if he wanted to since he would be the best player on that team. Even when the Heat 11 or 12, LeBron took roughly 19 FGA per game. If they could do it, why not Bird? In 1986 Bird shot roughly 20 FGA. And Bird would fit better because he was a better catch and shoot player than LBJ and Kobe. This would allow other players to touch the ball and may have a better flow within the offense.

Third: Bird most likely wouldn't be like a Carmelo. Bird is easier to build around because he has a better overall game. He is a better scorer, much better passer, rebounder, and better defensively too. And Bird would probably take the Nuggets outside the first round a few times where Melo failed in theory.

Bird would average the same amount of shots because he will be your number 1 option on most teams and he would average 18-21 FGA a game too because LBJ, Kobe, Durant have done that and went to the finals. But if you were talking about transferring the whole 1986 Celtics to today's league and say that they can't have the same amount of shots, then we would have a conversation. But only thing we have comparable that comes to mind are the Orlando Magic of 95 and 96 did something similar, and their starting five were better than this whole league offensively. Their top five guys took roughly the same amount of shots that the Celtics 1986 starting did and they played at a slower pace. And the 1986 Celts starting five was better than the Magic.

The 97 Lakers too were like that. The main problem with comparing the 1986 Celtics team is that they were too good. Their starting five was arguably the best starting five in the history of the NBA. There are very rare teams that had the talent offensively like they did. And their bench was pretty good too. But since the Magic and 97 Lakers did it, I don't see why the Celtics starting five could not. Their problem would be the bench play in terms of FGA.

Last edited by Micku : 06-28-2013 at 08:40 PM.
Micku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 08:38 PM   #107
kuniva_dAMiGhTy
The First School
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 10,511
kuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation herekuniva_dAMiGhTy has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

I don't know, but '86 Bird would be the best player on the planet. Easily.
kuniva_dAMiGhTy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 08:46 PM   #108
Micku
NBA lottery pick
 
Micku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,973
Micku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
On that Celtics team he aint doing it. In the right situation? Sure. Maybe even twice. Durants more of a scorer than Bird. A hybrid of BBird/Gervin. I see Durant being able to routinely be able to avg 30-32 ppg in the 80s. Something he hasnt been able to accomplish in this era.

And mind you. Your trying to take bits and.pieces from the 89s and infuse it into now. What's efficient now was not considered efficient in the 80s. The avg FG% now is roughly 44-45%. It was about 48% in Birds day.

We must take all factors into play

That's because of the 3pt shot. Since eFG take into account of the 3pt shot, today's eFG is the same/better than what it was in 1986 for example. 2013 eFG= 49.6%. 1986 eFG=49.3%.

If teams hardly shoot any 3s like they did in the 80s, then the FG% would be better. They are much better shooters now. Back then, ppl dared guys to shoot the long jumper except guys like Bird and other shooters like him. Now, since they are better shooters, they will guard them more tight.
Micku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 08:57 PM   #109
2010splash
Now a Cavs fan again
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,028
2010splash has a bad reputation2010splash has a bad reputation2010splash has a bad reputation
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
It just doesnt add up Mick. Id agree that if you took Bird and placed him on a bad team, his ppg would stay the same or even increase because hed be the teams only option on offense. But then you must eliminate the championships and MVPs. Hed become Carmello Anthony. Because he was subpar in the playoffs more often than not.
This. Bird is the most overrated player on these boards. Some people honestly believe the dude would be the best player in the league today.

Better peaks than Larry Bird:

Jordan (no question)
LeBron (no question)
Shaq (no question)
Wilt (no question)
Kareem (no question)

Then you have guys like Duncan and Hakeem.
2010splash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 11:31 PM   #110
97 bulls
5-time NBA All-Star
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,788
97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Micku
How? Kobe won MVP and championships like that. On 09, he averaged roughly 21 shots on a very talented offensive team. LeBron won MVPs by averaging 19 FGA a game with the Miami Heat in 11 and 12. We wouldn't eliminate championships or MVPs for Bird because we know that would work.

Besides, I was debating on the amount of shots Bird could take in this league. You said:



First: I and many others just said he would shoot more. You said paced matter, and I showed you that stars like MJ and Karl Malone average the same amount of shots like they did in the 80s. Sometimes even more on a slow pace game. Why can't Bird just as much? Especially since they were K.Malone and MJ teams were championship contenders?
I never said anything about pace. I said tempo. The tempo of the game now is different from when Bird played. And sure you showed players who transcended eras and took roughly the same amount of shots. But you fail to acknowledge their situations were different. You refuse to acknowledge this fact.


Second: If he were to have a good team, lets say the Lakers 09. Kobe shot roughly 21 FGA per game. Bird could do something similar if he wanted to since he would be the best player on that team. Even when the Heat 11 or 12, LeBron took roughly 19 FGA per game. If they could do it, why not Bird? In 1986 Bird shot roughly 20 FGA. And Bird would fit better because he was a better catch and shoot player than LBJ and Kobe. This would allow other players to touch the ball and may have a better flow within the offense.
Again, Bird took that many shots in an era where there was more opportunities. Its simple math. You comparing him to Bryant, Durant, Ive hear Iverson, its not the same thing. Those guys would be the Jordans, Wilkins, Gervins, type. Scorers. Bird never led the league in FGAs but Im suppposed to believe hed be taking enough shots to lead the league now?


Third: Bird most likely wouldn't be like a Carmelo. Bird is easier to build around because he has a better overall game. He is a better scorer, much better passer, rebounder, and better defensively too. And Bird would probably take the Nuggets outside the first round a few times where Melo failed in theory.
Quit possibly. But my comparison of Bird and Anthony wasnt to imply theyre on the same level. But I doubt hes taking any team deep in the pkayoffs based on his track record of having 10 year of top three talent around him.


Bird would average the same amount of shots because he will be your number 1 option on most teams and he would average 18-21 FGA a game too because LBJ, Kobe, Durant have done that and went to the finals. But if you were talking about transferring the whole 1986 Celtics to today's league and say that they can't have the same amount of shots, then we would have a conversation. But only thing we have comparable that comes to mind are the Orlando Magic of 95 and 96 did something similar, and their starting five were better than this whole league offensively. Their top five guys took roughly the same amount of shots that the Celtics 1986 starting did and they played at a slower pace. And the 1986 Celts starting five was better than the Magic.

The 97 Lakers too were like that. The main problem with comparing the 1986 Celtics team is that they were too good. Their starting five was arguably the best starting five in the history of the NBA. There are very rare teams that had the talent offensively like they did. And their bench was pretty good too. But since the Magic and 97 Lakers did it, I don't see why the Celtics starting five could not. Their problem would be the bench play in terms of FGA.
You answered the question for me. The Orlando Magic had no bench. The Celtics did. That Laker team was deep, but not top heavy. They were Shaq and a bunch of very good players

Id just like to.see some consistency in you guys arguments. All you guys will enter threads vs Yao Mings Foot when he argues about team defenses of now and then. The same concept applies both ways. You cant say that Bird woukd be able to.do the exact same thing he did in the 80s now based on his stats in the 80s, then call YMF for attempting to compare teams without context.

If I were to say the 96 Bulls are the greatest team ever based soely on having the best win percentage ever youd apply context real quick.
97 bulls is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 11:34 PM   #111
97 bulls
5-time NBA All-Star
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,788
97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Micku
That's because of the 3pt shot. Since eFG take into account of the 3pt shot, today's eFG is the same/better than what it was in 1986 for example. 2013 eFG= 49.6%. 1986 eFG=49.3%.

If teams hardly shoot any 3s like they did in the 80s, then the FG% would be better. They are much better shooters now. Back then, ppl dared guys to shoot the long jumper except guys like Bird and other shooters like him. Now, since they are better shooters, they will guard them more tight.
Thats partially it. Id also attribute it to the amount of easy transition baskets the tempo of the league provided back then. And the way defense was more of an afterthought.
97 bulls is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 02:48 AM   #112
Micku
NBA lottery pick
 
Micku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,973
Micku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Id just like to.see some consistency in you guys arguments. All you guys will enter threads vs Yao Mings Foot when he argues about team defenses of now and then. The same concept applies both ways. You cant say that Bird woukd be able to.do the exact same thing he did in the 80s now based on his stats in the 80s, then call YMF for attempting to compare teams without context.

If I were to say the 96 Bulls are the greatest team ever based soely on having the best win percentage ever youd apply context real quick.

I don't get what you mean. Are you saying that Bird's game cannot translate to 18-22 shots per game because he wouldn't have opportunities to do so? Even tho he had more ways to score and more efficently than a guy like Wilkins? And he doesn't have to lead the league in FGA. But he could get those 18-22 shot attempts. If ppl like Kevin Love, Carmelo, Kobe could do it, why not Bird?

And tempo and pace are basically the same. Tempo could mean the rate or pace of the game. And it could also mean the motion or constant speed, and that's what we call pace.

I don't see why it is hard to acknowledge that Bird could average those amont of shots in any era because the way he shot and move w/o the ball and post up would be valuable in any era. If you are talking about a team from the 80s, then
that would be a different story. But we are talking about possibly the best SF ever tho LeBron will probably considered to better than him as time goes on.

Last edited by Micku : 06-29-2013 at 03:09 AM.
Micku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 02:55 AM   #113
LeBird
Good High School Starter
 
LeBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 933
LeBird has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fpliii
Unlike Bird who was arguably the best in the league from when he came in (HM: Kareem + Doc, and Moses maybe for a while), Magic has a clearly-defined prime, during which I'm sure he would contend for the best in the league. Before then though, while he'd be top 5 (or I guess top 4), I think he's below the big 3 (LeBron, Bird, KD).

Just my $0.02 though.

Yes, that's what the revisionists seem to forget, Magic's prime was very defined and comes later. It wasn't until his 4th season he was voted as all-first team PG. And from the debut of both Magic and Bird until 1988, Magic only finished above Bird one time in MVP voting. Larry was the real deal from the get-go.
LeBird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 03:06 AM   #114
LeBird
Good High School Starter
 
LeBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 933
LeBird has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

97 Bulls has made the kind of argument/mistake someone who relies on statistics and doesn't have a good grasp about the fundamentals of the game makes.

18-22 FGA is possible for Bird in any era. Pace does not affect superstar players because whether it slows down or not, a player like Bird is the #1 option and they'll get him the ball regardless if that means other players get it less. If, as Micku argues, many of today's stars are averaging those kinds of shot-taking numbers, why in the hell wouldn't Bird be able to? That is the question that is being dodged. There is no reason why he wouldn't be able to.
LeBird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 03:07 AM   #115
Micku
NBA lottery pick
 
Micku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,973
Micku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterMicku is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Thats partially it. Id also attribute it to the amount of easy transition baskets the tempo of the league provided back then. And the way defense was more of an afterthought.

I agree with this in a way. I think it's more credit to the Pistons because I believe they slowed down the pace and played more defense. They weren't the first team to do that, but probably the first team to win the championship without the epic talent that the Lakers and Celts had. And they sagged off a lot except for known shooters and they take the first good shot available.

You also have to give credit to the offense. They knew how to pass and start the break. And they ran up the court to start their offense far quicker.

Last edited by Micku : 06-29-2013 at 03:14 AM.
Micku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 03:16 AM   #116
97 bulls
5-time NBA All-Star
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,788
97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Micku
I don't get what you mean. Are you saying that Bird's game cannot translate to 18-22 shots per game because he wouldn't have opportunities to do so? Even tho he had more ways to score and more efficently than a guy like Wilkins? And he doesn't have to lead the league in FGA. But he could get those 18-22 shot attempts.

And tempo and pace are basically the same. Tempo could mean the rate or pace of the game. And it could also mean the motion or constant speed, and that's what we call pace.

I don't see why it is hard to acknowledge that Bird could average those amont of shots in any era because the way he shot and move w/o the ball and post up would be valuable in any era. If you are talking about a team from the 80s, then
that would be a different story. But we are talking about possibly the best SF ever tho LeBron will probably considered to better than him as time goes on.
Its hard to acknowledge because he coukdnt or never did it when he played. In an era where he had ample opportunity. Comparing guys like Durant and Bryant isnt feasible because they did take shots at a league leading rate.

Heres another example. Bill Russell routinely shot in the mid 40s percent throughout his career. Thats terrible for a center now, but thats was the norm back then. And if you were to ask me what his percentage woukd be today id say low 50s. The leavue is different.
97 bulls is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 03:29 AM   #117
LeBird
Good High School Starter
 
LeBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 933
LeBird has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Its hard to acknowledge because he coukdnt or never did it when he played. In an era where he had ample opportunity. Comparing guys like Durant and Bryant isnt feasible because they did take shots at a league leading rate.

Heres another example. Bill Russell routinely shot in the mid 40s percent throughout his career. Thats terrible for a center now, but thats was the norm back then. And if you were to ask me what his percentage woukd be today id say low 50s. The leavue is different.

That's an irrelevant example. Shooting percentage is a reflection of a skillset mainly. Shot-taking is largely pre-determined by how a team wants to play and how much of the ball they want their main scorer to have as a proportion of those plays. Bird could've taken Jordan-esque shot-attempt numbers if he wanted to - he is skilled offensively, on par with anyone - he just wasn't mentally inclined to do that. He was a pass first player. It has nothing to do with being able to create shots because Bird clearly could do that. That assumption is your mistake.
LeBird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 07:20 AM   #118
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,759
LAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputationLAZERUSS has a terrific reputation
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

ISHers severely under-rating Magic's offense here.

Do fans here really believe that Magic could "only" average 20 ppg? Here was a player who could hang 42 in a clinching Finals game in his rookie season. A player who was averaging 18 ppg on .561 and .565 FG%'s, and then had playoff runs of 22 ppg on .537 and .539 shooting. And seasons of 24 ppg and playoffs of 25 ppg. All while handing out 12+ apg in the regular season, and as high as 15 apg in the playoffs. He even had a Finals of 26 ppg, on .541 shooting, with 13 apg (as well as Finals' of 21 ppg on .573 shooting, and 22 ppg on .550 shooting.)

Psileas' research turned up a stretch in which Magic had 11 straight games of 30+ points. THAT is what Magic was capable of, had he been so inclined. My god, a 36 year old HIV Magic, four years removed from playing, and overweight, averaged 15 ppg on .466 shooting, with 6.9 apg...all while playing less than 30 minutes a game. Included were stretchs in which he averaged 20 ppg, including a high of 28 (on 9-12 shooting from the floor.)

Ask Magic to score first, and pass second, and he likely could have approached 30 ppg.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 09:33 AM   #119
Psileas
NBA lottery pick
 
Psileas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Great!
Posts: 5,444
Psileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
ISHers severely under-rating Magic's offense here.

Do fans here really believe that Magic could "only" average 20 ppg? Here was a player who could hang 42 in a clinching Finals game in his rookie season. A player who was averaging 18 ppg on .561 and .565 FG%'s, and then had playoff runs of 22 ppg on .537 and .539 shooting. And seasons of 24 ppg and playoffs of 25 ppg. All while handing out 12+ apg in the regular season, and as high as 15 apg in the playoffs. He even had a Finals of 26 ppg, on .541 shooting, with 13 apg (as well as Finals' of 21 ppg on .573 shooting, and 22 ppg on .550 shooting.)

Psileas' research turned up a stretch in which Magic had 11 straight games of 30+ points. THAT is what Magic was capable of, had he been so inclined. My god, a 36 year old HIV Magic, four years removed from playing, and overweight, averaged 15 ppg on .466 shooting, with 6.9 apg...all while playing less than 30 minutes a game. Included were stretchs in which he averaged 20 ppg, including a high of 28 (on 9-12 shooting from the floor.)

Ask Magic to score first, and pass second, and he likely could have approached 30 ppg.

Well, I don't recall this specific number, maybe you meant something else. However, you can see that in the 1987 season, there's a 34 game stretch when Magic averages 27.0 ppg (on 52.2% FG) in no more than 38.3 mpg, to go with his usual 11.8 apg and 6.1 rpg. Magic never cared to dominate the ball or shoot that much. But, whenever he wanted to turn it on, he had no problem putting up LeBron-like scoring numbers. But that wasn't what made his teammates better and himself happy.
Psileas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 10:27 AM   #120
97 bulls
5-time NBA All-Star
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,788
97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: What would Larry Bird and Magic average in this Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBird
That's an irrelevant example. Shooting percentage is a reflection of a skillset mainly. Shot-taking is largely pre-determined by how a team wants to play and how much of the ball they want their main scorer to have as a proportion of those plays. Bird could've taken Jordan-esque shot-attempt numbers if he wanted to - he is skilled offensively, on par with anyone - he just wasn't mentally inclined to do that. He was a pass first player. It has nothing to do with being able to create shots because Bird clearly could do that. That assumption is your mistake.
I agree. Thats why I prefaced my statement by saying or better yet never did it. He was more than capable. Obviously, if he set out to score like that he could. But still the fact remains he never did it. So now were supposed to believe that a guy that hovered around 25-26 ppg for his prime, would avg 30 ppg? In an era where the available shot attempts are cut by roughly 20-25%? Better yet 30/14/8? GTFO
97 bulls is online now   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:14 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy