Bird better than Jordan?

[BillVol]

Yes, says this guy. I've thought so for years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svHk8Zntc5g

http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/index.htm

[Jnathletics]

I would take Kareem, Magic, Bird, Bill Russell, Wilt, Dr.J, and Moses over MJ any day.
His not the greatest in my book and never will be.

He recieved too many benefits as a player that outweigh his talent. Tell the NBA a foul is a foul no matter who commits it and traveling rules should be the same for all players, not 2 steps for $1million, 3 steps for $3 million+, and 4 steps for $6 million+ salaried players.

[Conor Dary]

Such jealous people, ho, ho, ho....

[Marlow]

You can cherry pick video clips and stats all day long, but it was not the corporations that made MJ, it was the peoples! Was he the GOAT? That is indeed debatable. As noted above I'd take Kareem Abdul Jabbar before anyone else on my Dream Team. Russell, Wilt, Bird, Magic, MJ? Yeah, they're all up there too.

[bijanc]

Kareem was better than Jordan. His h.s. team lost one game. His college team lost one game. He turned the Bucks from 27-55 to 56-26, then 66-16 w/ a 4-0 finals sweep of Unseld, Monroe, Marin, Gus Johnson, Loughery. Won as many NBA rings as Jordan, won them two decades apart, all-time scoring king, and won three straight NCAA crowns in routs.

Chamberlain > Jordan.

[jhc68]

I concur that Kareem was better than Jordan and add that Chamberlain was better than Kareem.
Forget about the wild exaggerations that Wilt loved to tell about his exploits, there is no arguing with averaging 50 pts. for a whole NBA season.

Bird and Magic and Jerry West were better team players. MJ and Kobe and Dr. J and even Elgin Baylor were more spectacular scorers. Big O and Maravich were maybe the most skilled players. But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

[bambam]

But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

Hardly - 50 ppg is meaningless. Only one number matters - 11

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

[dj]

But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

Hardly - 50 ppg is meaningless. Only one number matters - 11

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

Bunk. With that argument you've just anointed Sam Jones and K.C. Jones as the two greatest guards in history and Tom Heinsohn and Satch Sanders as the two greatest forwards!

[scottmitchell74]

Exactly! The ring argument makes Steve Kerr infinitely better than Steve Nash and Robert Horry a god compared to Karl Malone and Charles Barkley.

Bird better than Jordan? Bird passed and rebounded better, and could score when he wanted. Man, that's a tough one. I preferred Bird's game, but 10 scoring titles is something hard to argue with. Hmm...

I think part of what makes Jordan so attractive to his die-hards was his artistry. For instance, from age 21-28 (Jordan didn't play before 21, and Lebron isn't older than 28 yet) Lebron James and Jordan's stats (especially player efficiency rating) are eerily similar. However, Jordan looked graceful while Lebron is like a bull, so people seem unwilling to put James on even ground with Jordan. I believe that particular comparison will come into focus better 7-10 years from now.

[Master Po]

None of these pieces of data (e.g., championships, individual stats -- both season and career) stands alone. One of the problems with such debates is that we toss different data sets at each other without really trying to explain why we value one over the other. Maybe it's the case that numbers don't lie, but they sure don't tell the truth either.

The other challenge for me in thinking about greatest NBA player is that the big men seem to need a different category than the others. I really don't know how to compare Jabaar, et al. with Jordan, et al. It would be like trying to compare the greatness of whomever one thinks is the greatest quarterback with the greatest offensive tackle. How do you compare?

As for Jordan and Bird, I truly prefer Bird's game, but I think Jordan was capable of playing more different kinds of games. The team he was on created a context for the game he played, but a different (great) team might have required a different game, and I'm pretty sure he could have done it. I feel the same way about James. Of course I can't prove any of that or persuade anyone of it.

As for the big men, it seems idiotic to say this, but I think I have always underrated Jabaar. Of course when I look at all the data sets, he seems to be the greatest big man. On the other hand, were I building a team, and if I could pick any big man to build it around, it is hard for me to go past Russell. I can't say exactly why.

And as for building a team, and whom I might start with regarding the "non-big" man, I suppose Jordan, James, Bird would be on the short list, and maybe I should choose one of them, but it's hard for me to go past Magic Johnson. He seems to me to bring more different kinds of assets to a team, perhaps, than any other non-big man. I can't say exactly why.

The numbers don't seem to tell me everything of value about any of these players.

[Marlow]

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

If this were H-O-R-S-E, then yes, one player deserves all the credit. It's not.

[Conor Dary]

But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

Hardly - 50 ppg is meaningless. Only one number matters - 11

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

Bunk. With that argument you've just anointed Sam Jones and K.C. Jones as the two greatest guards in history and Tom Heinsohn and Satch Sanders as the two greatest forwards!

Agreed. By this argument Will Perdue, who was on 4! NBA title teams is one of the best ever!

Whoever was the best is something to argue about. But the most fun and entertaining was Jordan. The guy would do anything to win a game, any game. That 72 win season was something with Jordan and his Jordanaires...

[bambam]

But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

Hardly - 50 ppg is meaningless. Only one number matters - 11

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

Bunk. With that argument you've just anointed Sam Jones and K.C. Jones as the two greatest guards in history and Tom Heinsohn and Satch Sanders as the two greatest forwards!

Little different - everyone on that team would agree the reason they won was Russell - who changed the game of basketball with his defensive prowess. Cousy even said they played great team defense because they could overplay everybody because if they missed, the big guy was backing them up. Besides none of the other guys on those teams won 11 championships. Russell did.

[bambam]

But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

Hardly - 50 ppg is meaningless. Only one number matters - 11

Bill Russell - 11 championships - end of argument

Bunk. With that argument you've just anointed Sam Jones and K.C. Jones as the two greatest guards in history and Tom Heinsohn and Satch Sanders as the two greatest forwards!

Agreed. By this argument Will Perdue, who was on 4! NBA title teams is one of the best ever!

Whoever was the best is something to argue about. But the most fun and entertaining was Jordan. The guy would do anything to win a game, any game. That 72 win season was something with Jordan and his Jordanaires...

I'll still take Russell as my all-time center and we'll win, because he always did

[bambam]

And if its individual statistics you want to use as the defining factor, then its Oscar Robertson. Everyone has heard the story that in one year (1961-62) he averaged a triple-double for the entire season. What is less well known is that he actually averaged a triple-double for the entire first 5 years of his career, although he never did it again in any other single year. Here are his stats for those years.

1960-61 30.5 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 9.7 apg
1961-62 30.8 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 11.4 apg
1962-63 28.3 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 9.5 apg
1963-64 31.4 ppg, 9.9 rpg, 11.0 apg
1964-65 31.3 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 11.5 apg
Totals 30.3 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 10.6 apg

In 1965-66 his rebounds dropped off a little bit, giving him a career rebound average of "only" 9.95 thru 6 seasons, which technically would round to 10.0.

Not a bad 5 seasons.

[18.99s]

Russell won his titles in an era without the salary cap, making it much easier for richer teams to acquire and keep superstars together and win year after year. So comparing his 11 titles with that of players in the salary cap era is absolutely meaningless.

[kevinsdad]

Agreed. By this argument Will Perdue, who was on 4! NBA title teams is one of the best ever!

The funniest thing I ever read about Jordan was that he called Perdue "Will Vanderbilt," because he said Perdue wasn't tough enough to be named after a Big Ten school.

[Conor Dary]

Agreed. By this argument Will Perdue, who was on 4! NBA title teams is one of the best ever!

The funniest thing I ever read about Jordan was that he called Perdue "Will Vanderbilt," because he said Perdue wasn't tough enough to be named after a Big Ten school.

Yea, Jordan didn't think much of WP.

[odelltrclan]

Agreed. By this argument Will Perdue, who was on 4! NBA title teams is one of the best ever!

The funniest thing I ever read about Jordan was that he called Perdue "Will Vanderbilt," because he said Perdue wasn't tough enough to be named after a Big Ten school.

It seems funny, but for most ordinary folks we would be saying what an A hole the guy was. Jordan got away with a lot that helped make him great. How many 3 and 4 step approaches was he given so that we could see his athleticism. He is definitely one of the GOAT, but the best? Who knows.

[odelltrclan]

I concur that Kareem was better than Jordan and add that Chamberlain was better than Kareem.
Forget about the wild exaggerations that Wilt loved to tell about his exploits, there is no arguing with averaging 50 pts. for a whole NBA season.

Bird and Magic and Jerry West were better team players. MJ and Kobe and Dr. J and even Elgin Baylor were more spectacular scorers. Big O and Maravich were maybe the most skilled players. But Chamberlain dominated like no other.

But there is. Wilt played in an age where his height gave him a huge advantage. When the league itself was much smaller, giving him a much bigger advantage. If he played today he would be nowhere near that type of average. Jordan likely would still would put of the same stats today.

Wilt also played in the Russell era, and Russell quite often got the better end of those matchups.

[bambam]

Wilt also played in the Russell era, and Russell quite often got the better end of those matchups.

Really, why didn't I say that? Somebody else said all his championships were meaningless.

[4:24-miler]

None of these pieces of data (e.g., championships, individual stats -- both season and career) stands alone. One of the problems with such debates is that we toss different data sets at each other without really trying to explain why we value one over the other. Maybe it's the case that numbers don't lie, but they sure don't tell the truth either.

The other challenge for me in thinking about greatest NBA player is that the big men seem to need a different category than the others. I really don't know how to compare Jabaar, et al. with Jordan, et al. It would be like trying to compare the greatness of whomever one thinks is the greatest quarterback with the greatest offensive tackle. How do you compare?

As for Jordan and Bird, I truly prefer Bird's game, but I think Jordan was capable of playing more different kinds of games. The team he was on created a context for the game he played, but a different (great) team might have required a different game, and I'm pretty sure he could have done it. I feel the same way about James. Of course I can't prove any of that or persuade anyone of it.

As for the big men, it seems idiotic to say this, but I think I have always underrated Jabaar. Of course when I look at all the data sets, he seems to be the greatest big man. On the other hand, were I building a team, and if I could pick any big man to build it around, it is hard for me to go past Russell. I can't say exactly why.

And as for building a team, and whom I might start with regarding the "non-big" man, I suppose Jordan, James, Bird would be on the short list, and maybe I should choose one of them, but it's hard for me to go past Magic Johnson. He seems to me to bring more different kinds of assets to a team, perhaps, than any other non-big man. I can't say exactly why.

The numbers don't seem to tell me everything of value about any of these players.

Great point Master Po. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that MJ runs circles over Bird in terms of defense. MJ was a 9x NBA All-Defensive First Team and was the NBA Defensive Player of the Year in 1988. Bird was never NBA All-Defensive First Team. Having watched both players in hteir prime MJ was the far superior one-on-one defensive player. He could shut down his opponent. Bird didn't really have that "shut-down" skill. The more agile Kevin McHale was the guy who was usually assigned to stop the stronger power forwards.

[4:24-miler]

I remember this article where Larry Bird is called the "perfect player".

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

[no one]

I don't think there is any such athlete, as greatest of all time, in any sport. Mostly arbitrary groups of 'A', 'B', or "C' - or however many levels one chooses to designate peeps.

[bambam]

I don't think there is any such athlete, as greatest of all time, in any sport. Mostly arbitrary groups of 'A', 'B', or "C' - or however many levels one chooses to designate peeps.

Eddy Merckx in cycling - by acclamation. Every cycling expert agrees on this one.

[Pego]

I don't think there is any such athlete, as greatest of all time, in any sport. Mostly arbitrary groups of 'A', 'B', or "C' - or however many levels one chooses to designate peeps.

Eddy Merckx in cycling - by acclamation. Every cycling expert agrees on this one.

As a young man, I was blown away by Jacques Anquetil.

[Conor Dary]

I don't think there is any such athlete, as greatest of all time, in any sport. Mostly arbitrary groups of 'A', 'B', or "C' - or however many levels one chooses to designate peeps.

Eddy Merckx in cycling - by acclamation. Every cycling expert agrees on this one.

That was the one great moment in the filming of American Flyer in Boulder. Merckx shows up at the start of the Mogul-Bismark and the extras, all cyclists, go 'Eddy, Eddy....

Yes, the great one. The guy who did it all.

[EZSum]

Don Bradman in cricket. No one else has ever got remotely near his Test or first-class batting averages; they are utterly surreal.

[Conor Dary]

Don Bradman in cricket. No one else has ever got remotely near his Test or first-class batting averages; they are utterly surreal.

Yes, I forgot about the Don. Definitely the best batsman ever, by far. With perhaps Gary Sobers the best all arounder. Test average of 99.94 where second was about 60. Also the infamous Bodyline controversy of 1932-3 was set up just to try to stop Bradman.

Even now he is the one always compared to.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/21768355

[bambam]

Don Bradman in cricket. No one else has ever got remotely near his Test or first-class batting averages; they are utterly surreal.

Yes, also by acclamation the greatest ever

[bambam]

I don't think there is any such athlete, as greatest of all time, in any sport. Mostly arbitrary groups of 'A', 'B', or "C' - or however many levels one chooses to designate peeps.

Eddy Merckx in cycling - by acclamation. Every cycling expert agrees on this one.

As a young man, I was blown away by Jacques Anquetil.

It was said of Anquetil, "He could drop no one, but he could never be dropped."

[jazzcyclist]

Great point Master Po. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that MJ runs circles over Bird in terms of defense. MJ was a 9x NBA All-Defensive First Team and was the NBA Defensive Player of the Year in 1988. Bird was never NBA All-Defensive First Team. Having watched both players in hteir prime MJ was the far superior one-on-one defensive player. He could shut down his opponent. Bird didn't really have that "shut-down" skill. The more agile Kevin McHale was the guy who was usually assigned to stop the stronger power forwards.

Bingo! I'm willing to entertain arguments that Jordan isn't the GOAT, but Bird's defense certainly disqualifies him IMO. On the other hand, I have to take some points away from Jordan due to his pathetic Hall of Fame inductance speech.

As for other GOATs, isn't the consensus for Gretsky just as strong for him as it is for Merckx and Bradman?

[Pego]

As for other GOATs, isn't the consensus for Gretsky just as strong for him as it is for Merckx and Bradman?

That probably is a majority opinion, but a sizeable minority would suggest Mario or Bobby Orr, a shrinking small minority of old-timers might still stick with "The Rocket."

[Conor Dary]

As for other GOATs, isn't the consensus for Gretsky just as strong for him as it is for Merckx and Bradman?

That probably is a majority opinion, but a sizeable minority would suggest Mario or Bobby Orr, a shrinking small minority of old-timers might still stick with "The Rocket."

Yes, I think it is a bit of a problem to compare the players from the time when there were only 6 teams, all Canadian players, and depth was phenomenal with the period after 1969 when the league greatly expanded and the talent pool was diminished.

I remember the Original 6 era fairly well. The Blackhawks were by far the hottest team in the city by far. And there were just so many great players.

And Bradman was able to dominate a game like no one is able to do in other sports. When you are scoring 200 or 300 runs in consecutive Tests like he did in the 1930 Ashes series you are going to be dominant.

It was on Australia's 1930 tour of England that Bradman's true brilliance was witnessed. In England he scored 2,960 runs at an average of 98.66. In the Ashes he struck 131, 254 and 334 in consecutive Tests, with 309 of the 334 runs he scored at Headingley being gathered on the first day of the match. In the final Test at The Oval he struck 232 to help Australia win the Ashes. The result was greeted with joy in Australia, a country hit hard by the Great Depression.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cric ... 09527.html

[no one]

Merckx and Bradman - okay (proves I'm not the expert I claimed) (cricket - a sport I am totally unfamiliar with. - should not have painted with such a broad brush.)