Larry Legend or King James

[Legend_Killer]

I am not comparing players who were out of the rotation. I am stating the effect of the absence of Bird and Jordan. Apparently, the Cs need Bird more than the Bulls need Jordan. You must be confusing the East of today to the East of the 90s. The East was at par with the West in the 1990s. In the 80s, the West was way weaker than the East.

 

That depends on the system of the team not the player himself, just because the Celtics needed Bird more than the Bulls needed MJ doesn't make him any better, it's the fault of the coaches and the system if they can't adjust to that absence

[will robie]

You can't say someone is better just by saying they lost in the playoffs everytime, look at both their careers in hindsight and see which one was better, ok sana kung sabay silang in their prime like Magic and Bird but it's unfair to compare their matchups

Then by what metrics can you say someone is better than someone? I am stating cold, hard facts.

 

Jordan never won a playoff game against Bird apart from losing the all-time head to head match-up in the regular season.

 

Moreover, it has been proven in the seasons that both were not in the roster that the Cs need Bird more than the Bulls need Jordan.

[Legend_Killer]

I give Jordan credit for those but he never won a playoff game against Bird. Bird also dominated the all-time regular season match up. Moreover, Jordan won most of those championships when Bird was already a shell of his old self and Magic was already retired. Based on facts, my take is Jordan would not win 6 championships if both he and Larry went out of college in the same year.

 

That's the big word "IF"

 

But in this reality this happened, you can't say if they both went at it at the same time then this would have happened, yes he dominated a young MJ but not the prime MJ which was unstoppable

[will robie]

That depends on the system of the team not the player himself, just because the Celtics needed Bird more than the Bulls needed MJ doesn't make him any better, it's the fault of the coaches and the system if they can't adjust to that absence

Yes, it makes Bird better because it proves that the Bulls can win without MJ and almost advanced to the ECF and, most probably, the NBA Finals in that 7-game war with the Knicks. The Cs never had a chance without Bird.

[Legend_Killer]

Then by what metrics can you say someone is better than someone? I am stating cold, hard facts.

 

Jordan never won a playoff game against Bird apart from losing the all-time head to head match-up in the regular season.

 

Moreover, it has been proven in the seasons that both were not in the roster that the Cs need Bird more than the Bulls need Jordan.

Sinabi ko nga di ba look at both their careers in hindsight nagbabasa ka ba?

 

It's like you're comparing Lillard and Doncic today, one is in his prime while on is just starting his career

Yes, it makes Bird better because it proves that the Bulls can win without MJ and almost advanced to the ECF and, most probably, the NBA Finals in that 7-game war with the Knicks. The Cs never had a chance without Bird.

 

It's a credit to the coach and the system

[will robie]

That's the big word "IF"

 

But in this reality this happened, you can't say if they both went at it at the same time then this would have happened, yes he dominated a young MJ but not the prime MJ which was unstoppable

It's an "if" based on cold, hard facts. Prime Bird is better than prime MJ. When Jordan retired, he was at his prime but the Bulls still gave the Knicks a competitive series which could have gone either way. Again, the Cs couldn't win a game in the playoffs without Bird in 1988-89. Prime Bird owns prime MJ.

Edited May 14, 2019 by will robie

[will robie]

Sinabi ko nga di ba look at both their careers in hindsight nagbabasa ka ba?

 

It's like you're comparing Lillard and Doncic today, one is in his prime while on is just starting his career

 

It's a credit to the coach and the system

Yes, in their careers, Bird owned Jordan and Jordan won most of those championships when Bird wasn't around.

 

Larry won with Bill Fitch and Larry also won with KC Jones so Larry thrived in two systems. Jordan never won anything without Phil Jackson.

Edited May 14, 2019 by will robie

[Legend_Killer]

Yes, in their careers, Bird owned Jordan and Jordan won most of those championships when Bird wasn't around.

 

Larry won with Bill Fitch and Larry also won with KC Jones so Larry thrived in two systems. Jordan never won anything without Phil Jackson.

 

It's an "if" based on cold, hard facts. Prime Bird is better than prime MJ. When Jordan retired, he was at his prime but the Bulls still gave the Knicks a competitive series which could have gone either way. Again, the Cs couldn't win a game in the playoffs without Bird in 1988-89. Prime Bird owns prime MJ.

 

Again basketball is a team sport, so what if MJ didn't win anything without Phil, so does Kobe, those 2 coaches were also HOFer, So what if the Celtics couldn't win without Bird, that speaks largely to the management and coaches, yes the Bulls almost made the Finals without MJ but does that discredit MJ, hell no

 

You can't say that a player is great just by judging what happened during their absence

[Legend_Killer]

I give Jordan credit for those but he never won a playoff game against Bird. Bird also dominated the all-time regular season match up. Moreover, Jordan won most of those championships when Bird was already a shell of his old self and Magic was already retired. Based on facts, my take is Jordan would not win 6 championships if both he and Larry went out of college in the same year.

 

LMAO you still put Bird over MJ despite those achievements just because he never won in the playoffs, and no it's not based on facts, that's based on pure speculation, I can say the same that Kobe would not have 5 rings if MJ was playing during his time

[will robie]

 

Again basketball is a team sport, so what if MJ didn't win anything without Phil, so does Kobe, those 2 coaches were also HOFer, So what if the Celtics couldn't win without Bird, that speaks largely to the management and coaches, yes the Bulls almost made the Finals without MJ but does that discredit MJ, hell no

 

You can't say that a player is great just by judging what happened during their absence

You just said credit to the coach and the system. It means that MJ can only win in a Phil Jackson system. Bird won in 2 systems. Hence, Bird is more adaptable to a coach than Jordan. Great players adapt to different coaching styles. Did you understand what I am getting at when I said that the Bulls were competitive without Jordan while the Celtics had no chance without Bird? It means that Larry is more important to Boston than MJ is to Chicago. These are incontrovertible facts.

 

Yes, one of the reasons you can say a player is great is the impact of his absence and it's been proven by Jordan's and Bird's absence. For the nth time, the Celtics need Larry more than the Bulls need MJ.

Edited May 15, 2019 by will robie

[will robie]

LMAO you still put Bird over MJ despite those achievements just because he never won in the playoffs, and no it's not based on facts, that's based on pure speculation, I can say the same that Kobe would not have 5 rings if MJ was playing during his time

Yes, I still put Bird above MJ. What did I base on pure speculation? The last time I checked, Kobe has a winning record when going head to head against MJ, 5-3. Ok, if that's your opinion, you are entitled to it. I am basing my argument on facts.

Edited May 15, 2019 by will robie

[will robie]

Do you want more?

 

Larry Bird was the only addition to the 1979-80 Celtics. In 1978-79, the Cs had an atrocious 29-53 record. The next season, 1979-80, the Cs had the best record in the NBA, a 31-game turnaround from the year before, behind a super rookie who took them all the way to the ECF.

 

On the other hand, MJ led his team to the playoffs on a losing record in his rookie season and got eliminated by the Bucks in the first round. In fact, MJ never made it past the first round of the playoffs in his first three seasons winning a total of one game and losing nine games. He only got out of the first round when Scottie Pippen came along. Bird didn't need a Mchale or Parish to lead the Cs to the ECF in his rookie season.

 

If you believe MJ, is the GOAT, these are the cold, hard facts about the GOAT. Never making it out of the first round in his first three seasons in the NBA.

Edited May 15, 2019 by will robie

[will robie]

Pat Riley said this:

 

"If I had to choose a player to take a shot to save a game, I'd choose Michael Jordan. If I had to choose a player to take a shot to save my life, I'd take Larry Bird."

[Legend_Killer]

Do you want more?

 

Larry Bird was the only addition to the 1979-80 Celtics. In 1978-79, the Cs had an atrocious 29-53 record. The next season, 1979-80, the Cs had the best record in the NBA, a 31-game turnaround from the year before, behind a super rookie who took them all the way to the ECF.

 

On the other hand, MJ led his team to the playoffs on a losing record in his rookie season and got eliminated by the Bucks in the first round. In fact, MJ never made it past the first round of the playoffs in his first three seasons winning a total of one game and losing nine games. He only got out of the first round when Scottie Pippen came along. Bird didn't need a Mchale or Parish to lead the Cs to the ECF in his rookie season.

 

If you believe MJ, is the GOAT, these are the cold, hard facts about the GOAT. Never making it out of the first round in his first three seasons in the NBA.

 

I don't want to comment on an era na di ko naabutan ayokong magmarunong, it's easy to base on analytics and stats because there are no variables involved kaya I don't like the what ifs.

 

You keep saying that MJ lost the playoffs during his early year, sino ba mga notable teammates nya?, Bird lost on his first year also and he had Pete Maravich and Cedric Maxwell.

 

Just because MJ was not a winner during the early years of his career doesn't make him better than Bird, he single-handedly turned around a loser franchise to a playoff contender with an unknown coach, this man scored 63 points on Bird's head at the Garden on his 2nd year, during his first run all he had was a developing Pippen and he had a 3-peat, did Bird had a 3-peat with McHale, Johnson, Ainge, Maxwell and Parish?

[will robie]

I don't want to comment on an era na di ko naabutan ayokong magmarunong, it's easy to base on analytics and stats because there are no variables involved kaya I don't like the what ifs.

I am basing my conclusions on facts.

[will robie]

You keep saying that MJ lost the playoffs during his early year, sino ba mga notable teammates nya?, Bird lost on his first year also and he had Pete Maravich and Cedric Maxwell.

Bird led the Cs to the best record in the NBA in his rookie season and all the way to the ECF. Pistol Pete was way past his prime when he went to the Cs. Cornbread was a part of the 29-53 Celtic team a year before Bird came aboard. Again, Larry was the only addition to that miserable 29-53 Celtic squad from a year before. The Bulls were 27-55 before MJ came on board. When he came on board, he couldn't even take the Bulls to a winning record. When MJ came in, he helped improve the Bulls by 11 games. When Larry came in, he helped improve the Celtics by 31 games. It's not the teammates. Its the record of the team we are talking about because even if you name Maravich or Maxwell, that Celtic team sucked.

[will robie]

Just because MJ was not a winner during the early years of his career doesn't make him better than Bird, he single-handedly turned around a loser franchise to a playoff contender with an unknown coach, this man scored 63 points on Bird's head at the Garden on his 2nd year, during his first run all he had was a developing Pippen and he had a 3-peat, did Bird had a 3-peat with McHale, Johnson, Ainge, Maxwell and Parish?

MJ not winning in his early years is already a dent in his legacy. Larry was already one of the best players in the league when he entered the NBA. The Bulls weren't a contender when MJ came on board. They were a playoff lightweight. MJ and the Bulls did not have a winning record until his 4th year when Pippen came along. Ok, I will give MJ a pass in 1985-86 because he was injured most of the year.

 

MJ scored 63 points but they lost and, worse, got swept. Pippen was already an all-star when the Bulls won their first championship so he wasn't a developing player.

 

Bird never had a 3-peat because the NBA in this era had ridiculously strong teams. The Lakers had two alpha players in Johnson and Jabbar; the Sixers had the original MJ in Dr. J; the Rockets had Moses Malone who would later team up with the Doctor to lead the Sixers to the 1983 championship; the Bucks had a great coach in Don Nelson who made his players overachieve. The Bucks didn't exactly have a franchise player but they had Sidney Moncrief, not an alpha-level player but an all-star nonetheless. The West was the weaker conference in the 80s so the Lakers were the consensus favorites year after year to come out of that conference since they were a super team with two alpha-level players and a great complimentary star in Worthy. MJ never had that kind of competition when he won those championships. The NBA was more physical and there was hand-checking during the 80s.

Edited May 16, 2019 by will robie

[Legend_Killer]

No matter what your argument is, if Bird helped the Celtics to a winning record, to the Celtics being helpless without him, to MJ not beating him, he didn't make that big of a legacy compared to MJ.

 

MJ changed the way the game is supposed to play, he changed the way the defensive sets are prepared hell, he even changed the way the game is viewed.

 

The 80's popularized the game but MJ made it mainstream and household, when great players enter their prime who are they being compared to?, who was the last great player that was compared to Bird, Dirk?

 

MJ is the measuring stick of greatness in the game, the same way Gretzky is to hockey and Brady is to football, you can throw any statistics or situational analysis my way but if you think that Bird made that big of an impact shouldn't he be the one with the signature shoes? or at least being synonymous with the acronym GOAT

[will robie]

No matter what your argument is, if Bird helped the Celtics to a winning record, to the Celtics being helpless without him, to MJ not beating him, he didn't make that big of a legacy compared to MJ.

MJ is the greatest player of the 1990s. I won't dispute that. He destroyed every superstar in that era in the playoffs. In the 80s, he was the one getting destroyed year after year. You can't call someone the GOAT when he and his team get destroyed for 7 years. He was lucky that Larry had a bad back. Otherwise, he won't get in the NBA Finals in the 90s. He won 6 titles in an era with no Bird or Jabbar/Magic. Like I said, for me, he is the greatest player in the 1990s. That is indisputable. But him being the greatest of all time? That's quite a stretch.

MJ changed the way the game is supposed to play, he changed the way the defensive sets are prepared hell, he even changed the way the game is viewed.

If he, indeed, changed the game, why was his team always beaten in the first seven years by the Cs or the Bad Boys?

[will robie]

The 80's popularized the game but MJ made it mainstream and household, when great players enter their prime who are they being compared to?, who was the last great player that was compared to Bird, Dirk?

 

Dirk's game is similar to Bird but in terms of basketball IQ, leadership and competitive ferocity, Dirk does not hold a candle to Larry. Magic and Larry were the reasons the NBA had its renaissance in the 80s. The torch was just passed on to Jordan.

Edited May 17, 2019 by will robie

[will robie]

MJ is the measuring stick of greatness in the game, the same way Gretzky is to hockey and Brady is to football, you can throw any statistics or situational analysis my way but if you think that Bird made that big of an impact shouldn't he be the one with the signature shoes? or at least being synonymous with the acronym GOAT

I really would like to believe Brady is the GOAT in American Football. The Patriots are my team in the NFL. However, I could not consider him the GOAT because he did not beat the NY Giants of Eli Manning in two Super Bowl tries. For me, a GOAT is someone who destroys every superstar in his path. MJ never even won a playoff game against Bird.

Edited May 17, 2019 by will robie

[Legend_Killer]

I really would like to believe Brady is the GOAT in American Football. The Patriots are my team in the NFL. However, I could not consider him the GOAT because he did not beat the NY Giants of Eli Manning in two Super Bowl tries. For me, a GOAT is someone who destroys every superstar in his path. MJ never even won a playoff game against Bird.

 

Then your definition of GOAT is wrong, there's no player in modern team sports who absolutely dominated everybody, yes it is synonymous to winning but you can't make the excuse of "no he lost out on those years that's why he's not the GOAT", part of their greatness is overcoming struggles, if MJ came right out of the gate winning left and right less people would have appreciated his greatness, just like Westbrook's statline, part of being GOAT is being able to overcome obstacles, MJ was not a winner in his first few years so he strived and stuck to his team waited for them to develop, that's why LeBron will never be as great like MJ

[will robie]

Then your definition of GOAT is wrong, there's no player in modern team sports who absolutely dominated everybody, yes it is synonymous to winning but you can't make the excuse of "no he lost out on those years that's why he's not the GOAT", part of their greatness is overcoming struggles, if MJ came right out of the gate winning left and right less people would have appreciated his greatness, just like Westbrook's statline, part of being GOAT is being able to overcome obstacles, MJ was not a winner in his first few years so he strived and stuck to his team waited for them to develop, that's why LeBron will never be as great like MJ

And yours is right? You say that MJ is the greatest of all time with emphasis of "all time" which includes the 1980s. The last thing I remember about Jordan in the 1980s is his Bulls incessantly got destroyed by the Bucks, Pistons and the Cs. So no, he isn't the greatest of all time. I will concede him being the greatest player of the 1990s but of all time? That's quite a stretch. No matter how you rationalize, the facts that I presented can't be controverted.

Edited May 18, 2019 by will robie

[Legend_Killer]

And yours is right? You say that MJ is the greatest of all time with emphasis of "all time" which includes the 1980s. The last thing I remember about Jordan in the 1980s is his Bulls incessantly got destroyed by the Bucks, Pistons and the Cs. So no, he isn't the greatest of all time. I will concede him being the greatest player of the 1990s but of all time? That's quite a stretch. No matter how you rationalize, the facts that I presented can't be controverted.

 

LMAO, if you're talking about all time it includes until today, who is still being talked until today as the GOAT?, if you watch Open Court and they have hosts who are FORMER NBA players not like us who are spectators and they are asked for their Top Ten players of all time Bird doesn't even show up in their list, Shaq was even ahead of him, all of them unanimously placed MJ as number 1, so you can throw all the "stats and facts" all you want even include the 80s in which Bird was in his prime but in the end it's still MJ as GOAT until today

[will robie]

LMAO, if you're talking about all time it includes until today, who is still being talked until today as the GOAT?, if you watch Open Court and they have hosts who are FORMER NBA players not like us who are spectators and they are asked for their Top Ten players of all time Bird doesn't even show up in their list, Shaq was even ahead of him, all of them unanimously placed MJ as number 1, so you can throw all the "stats and facts" all you want even include the 80s in which Bird was in his prime but in the end it's still MJ as GOAT until today

I am not talking about who is being talked about today as the GOAT. I am talking about Jordan being destroyed time and again in the 1980s. That is their opinion but if you want, I can show you opinions of other players. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts. I am not gonna say that Bird is the GOAT but he is ahead of Jordan when it comes to that status. Jordan never beat Bird in the playoffs and that's one fact that Jordan fans tend to overlook. Moreover, he couldn't get past the Pistons or Bucks in the 80s.

Edited May 18, 2019 by will robie