How good would Larry Bird be in today's game?

Originally Posted by MonStar1

Originally Posted by psk2310

Originally Posted by MonStar1


I don't want to disrespect a legend but I think alot of ya'll are giving him the easy pass with a quick "yeah".

1. He would have to play defense.  I'm sorry the way SF handle the ball in 2012> 1980's.  I can see him struggling alot of nights.

2. His jumper and IQ would still be tops in the league but he wouldn't be able to get to the basket or finish at the same rate as the 80's.

3. LeBron is better. And I hate LeBron stans.  LeBron isn't clutch, isn't a great shooter, and has limited post moves.  BUT he impacts the game much greater than Larry which hurts me to say


Listen here young buck (lol), Bird was regularly guarded by guys like Dennis Rodman, Rick Mahorn, Xavier McDaniels back then & defenders were allowed to be much more physical than they are no & Bird had no problems getting to the hole & knocking down a J right in thier grills. Aside from all his personal antics, Rodman is one of the best front court defenders to ever play the game & Bird handled him no problem. There isn't a front court player out there now that can play defense remotely close to Rodman.

That young buck thing is joke BTW. Don't take any of this seriously. This amounts to a barber shop sports dicussion. Got it? 
tongue.gif

  
Ok geezer.  Anyways I agree with him scoring on offense especially the way rules are today. BUT on the defensive end. Also I have seen ALOT of basketball and I'm not that young lol 

  
I think I like Old Man better than Geezer...Geezer implies someone in thier 70s or something...I will also disagree about defense nowadays. I don't think many of the players today have the footwork & desire needed to play D. I see it all the time in these young cats. You gotta have heart to play good D which most of these guys don't have.

  
 
Bird was a good team defender.

Name me some great individual defensive players who played on bad or mediocre defensive teams. Good team defense trumps everything.

If you threw Bird on most NBA teams today, he wouldn't look so hot on defense. Who would though? There's only a few teams each season who play good team defense. Those Celtics teams he was on played good team defense and he held his own. That's all you can really judge him on. Lebron and KD average 30 for an entire season --- who is really stopping them? Not gonna be Bird. Nique used to give Bird the biz. Nothing you can ever do versus the best.

Again, the great scorers find a way to score. Bird knew how to get open and his quick release along with where he released it made him lethal. A hand in the face wouldn't do #@@#.
 
Originally Posted by Bean Pie Slanga


Defense was better back in his day. All that crap you listed doesn't exactly translate to good defense in today's game. I rarely see it and I will watch an NBA solely for that.

Bird had a quick release and shot it from behind his head, high IQ, and all the quirky moves. He would be insanely good in today's game and you can lock this one up!
 
Originally Posted by MonStar1


3. LeBron is better. And I hate LeBron stans.  LeBron isn't clutch, isn't a great shooter, and has limited post moves.  BUT he impacts the game much greater than Larry which hurts me to say


INCORRECT.
 
Originally Posted by MonStar1

Originally Posted by DownyBoy

Originally Posted by MonStar1

1. He would have to play defense.  I'm sorry the way SF handle the ball in 2012> 1980's.  I can see him struggling alot of nights.

 
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
Do you watch the NBA? Half the guys out there don't play defense at all.

You can't be serious. Maybe you don't watch the NBA and just say what you hear like "they don't play defense" or "all the players skills suck". 
grin.gif


Maybe the Bobcats and Wizards don't play defense. But defense does exist in the NBA please believe that.
  
The fact of the matter is, there are plenty of "stars" in the league that don't play a lick of defense right now. Being able to play defense is not much of a pre-requisite for the NBA these days.
 
I actually forgot how many scraps he got into...Also forgot he & Dr. J used to go at it too. Those Sixer teams back then with Mo, Doc, Bobby Jones, Moses Malone, & Toney..Reggie Johnson too. Man, that's a wrap, Bird would definately house these dudes today...No question.
 
As good...no even better today than he was then. Don't let these athletes of today fool you, because fundamentals >>>>>>> athleticism.

MJ had crazy athletic ability but he was also one of the most sound fundamental players to ever play basketball. From his shooting, to his passing, the guy made the game of basketball look like art.

Larry Bird would shoot lights out today, and he would shoot over 50% from the floor. You dudes gotta be crazy to think Larry Bird wouldn't get it done in today's leage.
 
Craftiness, high bball IQ, and a quick release jumper goes a long way. I mean look what Jordan did with the Wizards. There's no doubt in my mind Larry Legend would dominate today's game.
 
I rarely comment on topics like this but Bird wouldnt be top 25. Has anyone actually watches 80's basketball? That man had ugly form no lift in his shot and didn't see zone d. Maybe he would of adjusted but of he played exactly how he did back then he'd be an average player
as far as SFs go, somewhere behind Durant, Lebron and probably Melo too.
r8uj46.gif
 
Ok I'm gonna go with my decision.

He's still be top 10. And right under LeBron he'd be the 2nd best SF in the league. 
 
He would not rank higher than LeBron if he were playing right now. LeBron does way too much compared to Bird. Bird would get torched so much on the defensive end that he wouldn't even have the faith of any coach to play him 30 MPG.

He is called Larry the Legend because he killed in the 80s.

I think some of you are discrediting the significance of the athleticism of today's athletes. Every night he is going up against a Michael Cooper X 3. I don't realistically seeing him doing what he did back then.

He would be relegated to a spot up shooting type of role honestly.

And this has nothing to do with age. The mentality of today's game and coach is based on athleticism. He just can't compete with these horses man. He can be as smart as he wants to be.
 
He would do a lot more in today's game, fundamentally sound players in all areas always fare better than those who play extremely well in one area and not others (which is what the league is full of today).

Too much credit going to athleticism, guys like Tim Duncan and Kevin Love never were the most athletically gifted yet have looked pretty damn good in today's game (and they stand out). This league is watered down today, Bird was a lethal shooter and passed like a point guard, he would dominate today's game.
 
Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

He would not rank higher than LeBron if he were playing right now. LeBron does way too much compared to Bird. Bird would get torched so much on the defensive end that he wouldn't even have the faith of any coach to play him 30 MPG.

He is called Larry the Legend because he killed in the 80s.

I think some of you are discrediting the significance of the athleticism of today's athletes. Every night he is going up against a Michael Cooper X 3. I don't realistically seeing him doing what he did back then.

He would be relegated to a spot up shooting type of role honestly.

And this has nothing to do with age. The mentality of today's game and coach is based on athleticism. He just can't compete with these horses man. He can be as smart as he wants to be.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo
 
Originally Posted by Mez 0ne

He would do a lot more in today's game, fundamentally sound players in all areas always fare better than those who play extremely well in one area and not others (which is what the league is full of today). 
How so? The top players in the league are athletes. Not fundamental dudes. Other than TD, when was the last time the best player in the league was a fundamental dude? Not even that, when was the last time that the majority of the top 10/20 players in the league weren't athletes? Nah man, I have to disagree with that.
Originally Posted by Bean Pie Slanga

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

He would not rank higher than LeBron if he were playing right now. LeBron does way too much compared to Bird. Bird would get torched so much on the defensive end that he wouldn't even have the faith of any coach to play him 30 MPG. 

He is called Larry the Legend because he killed in the 80s. 

I think some of you are discrediting the significance of the athleticism of today's athletes. Every night he is going up against a Michael Cooper X 3. I don't realistically seeing him doing what he did back then.

He would be relegated to a spot up shooting type of role honestly.

And this has nothing to do with age. The mentality of today's game and coach is based on athleticism. He just can't compete with these horses man. He can be as smart as he wants to be.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo
In terms of athletic ability/length. Not in terms of someone that is going to shut him down. Meaning he would not be able to score the way he scored back then. Again I ask, name me a spot up shooter (which he would be in today's game) that KILLED in recent history? Killed to the tune of 25+ PPG.
 
Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by Mez 0ne

He would do a lot more in today's game, fundamentally sound players in all areas always fare better than those who play extremely well in one area and not others (which is what the league is full of today). 
How so? The top players in the league are athletes. Not fundamental dudes. Other than TD, when was the last time the best player in the league was a fundamental dude? Not even that, when was the last time that the majority of the top 10/20 players in the league weren't athletes? Nah man, I have to disagree with that.

Bird could shoot with his back to the basket, drain 3's in your face, had a good mid range jump shot, had unbelievable court vision and was an excellent passer. Also a very deceptive player with the pump fakes, and the way the refs blow their whistles today he would  live at the free throw line. You don't have to be a top athlete to dominate the NBA.
 
Originally Posted by Mez 0ne


Bird could shoot with his back to the basket, drain 3's in your face, had a good mid range jump shot, had unbelievable court vision and was an excellent passer. Also a very deceptive player with the pump fakes, and the way the refs blow their whistles today he would  live at the free throw line. You don't have to be a top athlete to dominate the NBA.

I hear all of that about what he could do in his day and I agree. But again, this is a new day. This is a new game. I honestly believe for someone to be able to be as successful across eras they have to have some sort of athletic ability or at the very least crazy length. Bird had neither one of those.
To be DOMINANT (key word) in today's NBA, I feel you have to be a top notch athlete. Again, I ask. Over the last 15 years, name me one person (not Duncan) that dominated the NBA that wasn't a top athlete. Don't say Dirk, I wouldn't label his as dominating.

Players over the last 15 years that I would use the word DOMINANT.

Iverson

Shaq

Kobe

LeBron

Duncan

There are other players that were great PLAYERS, but dominant, those are the ones I nominate. 4 athletes. 1 fundamental dude.

Again, the best players are NOT fundamental based dudes. They are athletically based players.
 
Originally Posted by Mez 0ne

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by Mez 0ne

He would do a lot more in today's game, fundamentally sound players in all areas always fare better than those who play extremely well in one area and not others (which is what the league is full of today). 
How so? The top players in the league are athletes. Not fundamental dudes. Other than TD, when was the last time the best player in the league was a fundamental dude? Not even that, when was the last time that the majority of the top 10/20 players in the league weren't athletes? Nah man, I have to disagree with that.

Bird could shoot with his back to the basket, drain 3's in your face, had a good mid range jump shot, had unbelievable court vision and was an excellent passer. Also a very deceptive player with the pump fakes, and the way the refs blow their whistles today he would  live at the free throw line. You don't have to be a top athlete to dominate the NBA.
Everything but that last part.  In his era he was a GOD. In this era he would be very very good!

  
 
Originally Posted by MonStar1

Everything but that last part.  In his era he was a GOD. In this era he would be very very good!

  
I don't think he would be on the court long enough to reach a very very good status. How many sport up shooters (again I feel this is what his role would be) that are defensive liabilities (don't give me that he is a team defender cop out) play 30+ minutes per game. He isn't driving around anyone, he isn't going to be creating his own offense. He isn't going to be seeing superstar type minutes today.
6th man role at best? His lack of foot speed is what I am holding against him. Intangibles can only take you but so far.
 
Bird would be in constant foul trouble with this talk of "defense was better back then". Let him play that defense in today's game he'd have 5 fouls by the 3rd nightly
laugh.gif


He'd still be a great shooter, gritty as far scoring in the paint and taking hits, but with the athleticism of guys today I can't say he'd be a top 5 player.
 
Back
Top Bottom