Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Lebron smokin weed and talkin shit
Comments
-
That's FS logic by even your standards ... LBJ would be greater if he wanted to ... he just doesn't want to.RoadDawg55 said:
Quit with the stats bullshit. LeBron could average 30 easily right now if he wanted to. I'm sure he could grab more rebounds if chased them down too.Tequilla said:
I think that there's definitely something to be said for the era differences ... Bird exhausted his college eligibility versus LBJ coming into the league immediately after HS is a huge difference. Absolute totals are obviously going to be different ... probably more appropriate to evaluate at age specific seasons then. And you've hit the nail on the head with the differences between the physical and advancements in health and in particular sports medicine and training. Another that isn't talked about enough in the eras is that in the 80s for the most part teams still traveled commercially versus privately and the schedules could definitely be a little more painful for the players. How do we evaluate the players from years past playing every single game regardless versus in today's era where stars will sit out games? Playing 82 used to be a badge of honor ... now not so much.FreeChavez said:
Does the entire argument come down to longevity in the game at some point? Bird had to go to college, as well as broke down based on injury. So is the argument prime, career, era?Tequilla said:
A lot of people make the argument that the difference between Bird and LBJ is so vast that any discussion of comparing the two is foolish and FS. Likewise, the idea that LBJ isn't a Top 3 or Top 5 player of all time to some is just unthinkable.RoadDawg55 said:
And?Tequilla said:
Stats are way more similar than you thinkRaceBannon said:Bird
Yeah right
LBJ is a great player ... there's no question about it. But anybody that goes into the Top 10-15 of all time is an all-time great player. There's a lot of a splitting hairs once people get to this level of player where the intangibles start becoming way more valuable. It's why for myself personally I drop Wilt lower on my list than others.
I believe bron is top 5 for his ability to be at the top for so long without injury, but there is certainly an argument to be made that this era of player hasn't dealt with physical nature of NBA and had plenty of health conscious programs to improve careers.
LBJ's career stat line is 27-7-7 with a shooting line of .499/.742/.340 ... steals/blocks per game are 1.7 and 0.8.
Bird's career stat line is 24-10-6 with a shooting line of .496/.886/.376 ... steals/blocks per game are 1.7 and 0.8.
If you look at career accolades at this point they are virtually the same. Up until last year's Finals I would have put Bird ahead of LBJ by just a bit. Now I would probably flip the two. But we also know that the way the game was played 30 years ago is vastly different than it is today. The stupidest argument I hear sometimes is people saying that Bird wouldn't have been able to play today ... that's comical.
The resumes are insanely comparable ... I would love to see arguments that LBJ has a better resume than Jordan, Russell, Kareem, and Magic.
Bird would be great right now. LeBron would be dominant in any era. You're pressing. It's really not that close.
BTW, from a usage standpoint, Bird was used 26.5% of the time during his career ... LBJ 31.6% of the time.
And before you use the logic that LBJ is by far the superior defender to Bird, did you know that Bird led the league in defensive win shares 4 different times in his career? LBJ hasn't done it once.
-
For Boston the 5 years prior to Bird:RoadDawg55 said:
With the best team and organization. I didn't like "The Decision" but Bird and Magic both played on great teams from day one.PurpleThrobber said:
Bird had to get through Detroit, Atlanta, Chicago, New York, Cleveland and Philadelphia.RaceBannon said:Bird had a better team around him. Never went to 6 Finals in a row.
74-75: 60-22 (1st of 9 in the East, lost in East Finals in 6)
75-76: 54-28 (1st of 9 in the East, won NBA Title)
76-77: 44-38 (4th of 11 in the East, lost in the East Semi's in 7)
77-78: 32-50 (8th of 11 in the East)
78-79: 29-53 (10th of 11 in the East)
For the Lakers the 5 years prior to Magic:
74-75: 30-52 (9th of 9 in the West, missed playoffs)
75-76: 40-42 (6th of 9 in the West, missed playoffs)
76-77: 53-29 (1st of 11 in the West, lost in West Finals in 4)
77-78: 45-37 (5th of 11 in the West, lost in West 1st Round in 3)
78-79: 47-35 (5th of 11 in the West, lost in West Semi's in 5)
And then the 79-80 season with Bird/Magic on the rosters:
Boston: 61-21 (1st in the East, lost in East Finals in 5)
Lakers: 60-20 (1st in the West, won NBA Title in 6)
But Bird/Magic had nothing to do with the transformation of those teams right?
From the 79-80 season to the 87-88 season, the win totals for each organization by year:
Boston: 61, 62, 63, 56, 62, 63, 67, 59, 57
Lakers: 60, 54, 57, 58, 54, 62, 62, 65, 62
Must have been all those supporting players and nothing about the two players who are on the short list of players in the history of the game that made the players around them significantly better. -
Lots of those teams were great with a lot of great players ... Chicago and Cleveland showed on the scene at the tail end of Bird's career and that era of the Celtics run.PurpleThrobber said:
Bird had to get through Detroit, Atlanta, Chicago, New York, Cleveland and Philadelphia.RaceBannon said:Bird had a better team around him. Never went to 6 Finals in a row.
I don't think enough people give credit to Philadelphia and what a great team they were. In any era where their path wasn't blocked by Boston and the Lakers, they would have won multiple titles (in the 3 preceding years lost to Portland in the NBA Finals and to Washington in the East Finals the year they won the NBA Title) ...
79-80: Beat Boston in East Finals, lost to Lakers in the Finals in 6
80-81: Lost to Boston in East Finals holding a 3-1 lead - Boston won the Finals
81-82: Beat Boston in East finals, lost to Lakers in the Finals in 6
82-83: Won the NBA Title over the Lakers - one of the greatest teams of all time
83-84: Lost in the First Round to New Jersey in 5
84-85: Lost in East Finals in 5 to Boston
85-86: Lost in East Semi's to Milwaukee in 7
A literal who's who of great players in NBA history: Dr. J, Maurice Cheeks, Andrew Toney, Darryl Dawkins, Moses Malone and in the last 2 years of that run Charles Barkley. Dr J has taken his lumps over time accordingly (as he should) ... but that 82-83 team was so fucking good ... Moses Malone was such a beast.
The team that nobody really remembers from the early to mid 80s is Milwaukee because they were almost always blocked by Boston and Philly but probably the 4th best team in the NBA. Sidney Moncrief, Marques Johnson, Bob Lanier, Junior Bridgeman (scoring machine), Quinn Buckner, Terry Cummings, Paul Pressey, and Ricky Pierce.
As an aside, perhaps my favorite game from that era was the 1988 East Semi's Game 7 between Boston and Atlanta. If you watch the game, you realize how well Atlanta played ... yet still lost and honestly never got close to even sniffing a championship. That's how difficult it was to win in that era. Just tough to get to the top at that time. -
Cleveland and Miami sucked before LBJ. It doesn't take a fucking novel.
Cleveland 07 or whatever is the worst team to ever make the Finals. -
Orr still too lowPurpleJ said:1. Wayne Gretzky
2. Gordie Howe
3. Bobby Orr
4. Mario Lemieux
5. Patrick Roy/Dominik Hasek -
Probably the smartest thing you've said on this board.backthepack said:
Orr still too lowPurpleJ said:1. Wayne Gretzky
2. Gordie Howe
3. Bobby Orr
4. Mario Lemieux
5. Patrick Roy/Dominik Hasek -
Two blatant omissions:backthepack said:
Orr still too lowPurpleJ said:1. Wayne Gretzky
2. Gordie Howe
3. Bobby Orr
4. Mario Lemieux
5. Patrick Roy/Dominik Hasek
-
Tom Chambers would have done as good in Boston on those teams as Bird
#FirstTake
#HotTake
#Controversey
#SlowSportsDay -
I'd be willing to listen if you talked about Tom Chambers swapping places with James Worthy ... and I love James Worthy ...
But Bird? You sound like Isaiah Thomas. -
Worthy made Chambers his bitch
-
If it's LeBron or the Field, I'm taking the Field every time
-
Safest bet in sports.MelloDawg said:If it's LeBron or the Field, I'm taking the Field every time
-
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
-
PurpleThrobber said:
And also the ugliest motherfucker in the history of the NBA.
also considered adam morrison but i think he's been stricken from any nba history. -
Morrison chose to be horrible looking (no homo).rodmansrage said:PurpleThrobber said:And also the ugliest motherfucker in the history of the NBA.
also considered adam morrison but i think he's been stricken from any nba history.
Cassell is a decent choice. Bird is right up there. Greg Oden.
I think Chris Kaman wins the prize though. -
Gheorghe Muresan says fuck off
-
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close. -
Yeah you're crazy.ThomasFremont said:
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close.
He's top 7 at absolute worst. I have him at 5. -
Tommy is right
-
Better than Kobe? Duncan? Shaq? How do you decide who is best? They are all franchise players.dnc said:
Yeah you're crazy.ThomasFremont said:
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close.
He's top 7 at absolute worst. I have him at 5.
There is very little to no difference from the guy ranked #5 to the guy ranked 15-20. -
So you're saying that Isaiah Thomas and Dennis Rodman were right?ThomasFremont said:
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close. -
That could be a very chinteresting discussion for anybody wanting to nerd out during the offseason.RoadDawg55 said:
Better than Kobe? Duncan? Shaq? How do you decide who is best? They are all franchise players.dnc said:
Yeah you're crazy.ThomasFremont said:
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close.
He's top 7 at absolute worst. I have him at 5.
There is very little to no difference from the guy ranked #5 to the guy ranked 15-20.
I don't disagree with you that largely when you get to the elite of the elite, the differences between players become very slim. -
The only one of those three I think you can argue was better than Bird is Duncan, and I'd take Kobe's consensual six.RoadDawg55 said:
Better than Kobe? Duncan? Shaq? How do you decide who is best? They are all franchise players.dnc said:
Yeah you're crazy.ThomasFremont said:
Call me crazy, but Larry Bird is the most overrated bball player in history.Tequilla said:
Bird >>>>>>>>>>>>> Worthy ... not even closeRaceBannon said:Worthy made Chambers his bitch
We get it, he's good for a white guy.
But he doesn't belong in the elite conversation...not even close.
He's top 7 at absolute worst. I have him at 5.
There is very little to no difference from the guy ranked #5 to the guy ranked 15-20. -
Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
-
ROFLTequilla said:Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Shaq is WAY better. -
When Shaq tried he was way better.ThomasFremont said:
ROFLTequilla said:Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Shaq is WAY better.
Malone and Akeem were relentless every single possession.
Shaq could have had Wilt/Kareem like numbers. -
For a guy that didn't try, he still ended up #7 in scoring and won a shit ton of rings.PurpleThrobber said:
When Shaq tried he was way better.ThomasFremont said:
ROFLTequilla said:Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Shaq is WAY better.
Malone and Akeem were relentless every single possession.
Shaq could have had Wilt/Kareem like numbers.
Not to mention he was more physically imposing than any player in league history. -
That's what he's saying though. If he would have tried he could have been top 3 all time.ThomasFremont said:
For a guy that didn't try, he still ended up #7 in scoring and won a shit ton of rings.PurpleThrobber said:
When Shaq tried he was way better.ThomasFremont said:
ROFLTequilla said:Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Shaq is WAY better.
Malone and Akeem were relentless every single possession.
Shaq could have had Wilt/Kareem like numbers.
Not to mention he was more physically imposing than any player in league history.
Shaq was lazy as hell. There's a reason Kobe hated him. Kobe might be a selfish asshole but he's a competitive asshole.
Is four rings a shit ton? -
He's no Robert Horry, but yeah, 4 seems pretty good.dnc said:
That's what he's saying though. If he would have tried he could have been top 3 all time.ThomasFremont said:
For a guy that didn't try, he still ended up #7 in scoring and won a shit ton of rings.PurpleThrobber said:
When Shaq tried he was way better.ThomasFremont said:
ROFLTequilla said:Shaq to me is one of the all-time what ifs ... if he really cared about being the best he'd have kept himself in much better shape and won a few more titles. His dominance was as unparalleled as Wilt's in his era. But because he didn't, I think you can make a really good argument for not only Wilt being ahead of him (only area where Shaq has him is in rings) but also Moses Malone and Hakeem Olajuwon.
Shaq is WAY better.
Malone and Akeem were relentless every single possession.
Shaq could have had Wilt/Kareem like numbers.
Not to mention he was more physically imposing than any player in league history.
Shaq was lazy as hell. There's a reason Kobe hated him. Kobe might be a selfish asshole but he's a competitive asshole.
Is four rings a shit ton?
Jordan ONLY has 6...and Shaq wasn't even trying. -
Shaq never won without a top 5 all time shooting guard.
