Wall Street Journal compares LeBron to Bird

[buzz]

Don't join a message board if you have to get your toys and go home once you can't back up your opinions with evidence.

If you ever decide to change your attitude, here are the things that you should answer:

- If the 08 celtics were thugs and dirtier than any team in the 80s, show the play that comes close to McHale's clothesline, or just the average bad boys' defense.

- If interior defense is so much tougher now, why is the average number of blocks per game per team this season a bit over 4.5, while in 85 it was over 5.3? In 1986 the bullets led the league with 8.7 blocks per game, this season the bulls lead the league at 6.1 per game.

- I never said anything about feasting on expansion teams. I said that expansion diluted talent. So Jordan needed another all star to win it all, but he was going against teams with 3 or 4 all stars himself. Show me a team that Lebron has beaten in the playoffs that is better than the 91 lakers, the 92 blazers, the 90s knicks or the 90s pacers.

- If Lebron is so flawless, why don't you address his 29% from 10-15 feet and his 39% from 16-23 feet?


I have no problems saying that Lebron is among the top 10 players of all time. I do have a problem saying he is the best of all time, which is what saying that he is better than jordan would mean.

OK, I lied. I did read that. Basically, dude... I am in charge of how I waste my own leisure time. I read who I want to read, I respond to who I want to respond to. There's a bunch of message board warrior out there who are just tedious.

"Sure, that may be true 99% of the time, but WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 1%?"

"I demand that you respond to my irrelevant parsed distortion of a point you didn't even make! Preferably with Hollinger type hyper stats that PROVE EVERYTHING!"

It's not that I can't respond to those kinds of arguments, I just generally choose not to.

For example, your blocks per game by era argument is not valid. First of all, with games that routinely had final scores of 120-110 or so, there were simply more possessions in a game in the 80s. Why? Mostly because they didn't play defense as much! They also didn't have this obsession to foul everyone who got in the lane (further reducing the number of blocks) that coaches do now.

And again, the point is not to compare playoff resumes. My argument is that LeBron is playing at a higher level right now than I have ever seen from anyone else. I brought up Jordan's resume to make the perfectly valid point that he did not have to face elite teams during the 90s... that's not true of anyone else in this discussion, from Larry and Magic to Kobe and even LeBron. ALL of those dudes would have feasted in the 90s playing in MJ's place on the Bulls.

And again, I have already addressed LeBron's shooting percentages by pointing out that he has no HOF-caliber sidekick(s) to take the heat off of him, unlike Bird, Magic, MJ and Kobe.

Lastly, I am just going to give a shout out here to the 2008 Celtics, if that is OK. Three first-ballot HOFers who will all likely end up as Top 25 scorers all-time. Plus the best defense of the last 15 years or so, and a host of rugged role players in Rondo, KP, Posey, PJ, House and Powe.

Don't know if that team was Top 10 all-time, but they were very good and quick to fight. Let's see Jordan take them to 7 with the same cast of scrubs and misfits LeBron had. Because I *know* Michael never beat a team that good, even with a great team alongside him.

/rant

[buzz]

Knocking around the modern Lakers in no way makes you a thug. A thug in todays game perhaps. Because the NBA won't let teams be real thugs anymore.

I'm sorry but you're flat out wrong if you think the modern Celtics could push around teams from back then.

Being James Posey makes you a thug. Shoot. Anyone who sat courtside that year probably heard some version of the f-bomb at least 5,000 times a game. Why do you think we get t'd up so much?

We are/were like a bunch of angry drunken sailors on shore leave. KG Celts are a bunch of swearing, pushing, shoving, scowling, bullying SOBs.

And personally, I like it that way.

[Onslaught]

Knocking around the modern Lakers in no way makes you a thug. A thug in todays game perhaps. Because the NBA won't let teams be real thugs anymore.

I'm sorry but you're flat out wrong if you think the modern Celtics could push around teams from back then.

Being James Posey makes you a thug. Shoot. Anyone who sat courtside that year probably heard some version of the f-bomb at least 5,000 times a game. Why do you think we get t'd up so much?

We are/were like a bunch of angry drunken sailors on shore leave. KG Celts are a bunch of swearing, pushing, shoving, scowling, bullying SOBs.

And personally, I like it that way.

Hold on, I think the problem is we have VERY different ideas of what makes someone a "thug." If yelling the F-Bomb makes you a thug then KG is a big time thug. Gangsta thugging actually.

To me body slamming people and hitting them into the stands like men makes you a thug. The way the game was played before the flagrant foul. Rondo would drive to the basket one time. After that he'd eat wood floor. And KG would be tied up in a knot around the basket after he did his head banging stuff. And PP would KNOW what a real foul was when he was put to the line. Not that weak hand slap stuff he gets today.

[BballTim]

But fair to say that Lebron is athletic enough to be elite in any era. And that Larry was not particularly athletic, particularly by the current era's standards.

  Bird didn't depend on athleticism to dominate. Look at the end of his career, after the double heel surgery. He could barely bend his back. 35 years old. Still good for 20/10/7. THe thought that a healthy Bird wouldn't be able to dominate in this era because the players are too athletic is nonsensical.

[dlpin]

OK, I lied. I did read that. Basically, dude... I am in charge of how I waste my own leisure time. I read who I want to read, I respond to who I want to respond to. There's a bunch of message board warrior out there who are just tedious.

"Sure, that may be true 99% of the time, but WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 1%?"

"I demand that you respond to my irrelevant parsed distortion of a point you didn't even make! Preferably with Hollinger type hyper stats that PROVE EVERYTHING!"

It's not that I can't respond to those kinds of arguments, I just generally choose not to.

For example, your blocks per game by era argument is not valid. First of all, with games that routinely had final scores of 120-110 or so, there were simply more possessions in a game in the 80s. Why? Mostly because they didn't play defense as much! They also didn't have this obsession to foul everyone who got in the lane (further reducing the number of blocks) that coaches do now.

And again, the point is not to compare playoff resumes. My argument is that LeBron is playing at a higher level right now than I have ever seen from anyone else. I brought up Jordan's resume to make the perfectly valid point that he did not have to face elite teams during the 90s... that's not true of anyone else in this discussion, from Larry and Magic to Kobe and even LeBron. ALL of those dudes would have feasted in the 90s playing in MJ's place on the Bulls.

And again, I have already addressed LeBron's shooting percentages by pointing out that he has no HOF-caliber sidekick(s) to take the heat off of him, unlike Bird, Magic, MJ and Kobe.

Lastly, I am just going to give a shout out here to the 2008 Celtics, if that is OK. Three first-ballot HOFers who will all likely end up as Top 25 scorers all-time. Plus the best defense of the last 15 years or so, and a host of rugged role players in Rondo, KP, Posey, PJ, House and Powe.

Don't know if that team was Top 10 all-time, but they were very good and quick to fight. Let's see Jordan take them to 7 with the same cast of scrubs and misfits LeBron had. Because I *know* Michael never beat a team that good, even with a great team alongside him.

/rant

To me, message board warrior is the guy who huffs and puffs and doesn't back up what he says.

So, again, which team that Lebron has beaten in the playoffs is better than the 1991 lakers? the ewing-oakley-starks knicks? If the Magic's defense last year took care of the Cavs, I can't imagine what that 1993 new york knicks team would do to them. The 93 knicks were better defensively in every single measure, even adjusted for pace, than last year's magic team. Oh, and regarding the blocks and pace argument, that bullets team still blocked a lot more shots than this bulls team (8.8 blocks per 100 possession vs 6.5 blocks per 100 possessions).


And finally, who cares about f-bombs? Please, show me plays that are like the McHale clothesline, or the average Laimbeer play. You can't be serious if "thug" is talking dirty but not playing dirty.

[buzz]

To me, message board warrior is the guy who huffs and puffs and doesn't back up what he says.

So, again, which team that Lebron has beaten in the playoffs is better than the 1991 lakers? the ewing-oakley-starks knicks? If the Magic's defense last year took care of the Cavs, I can't imagine what that 1993 new york knicks team would do to them. The 93 knicks were better defensively in every single measure, even adjusted for pace, than last year's magic team. Oh, and regarding the blocks and pace argument, that bullets team still blocked a lot more shots than this bulls team (8.8 blocks per 100 possession vs 6.5 blocks per 100 possessions).


And finally, who cares about f-bombs? Please, show me plays that are like the McHale clothesline, or the average Laimbeer play. You can't be serious if "thug" is talking dirty but not playing dirty.

You have a serious reading comprehension issue, man. I have replied to some of these points like 2 or 3 times already, lol.

As to tough, let's define it. McHale's clothesline wasn't tough. Laimbeer chucking Larry to the floor isn't tough. Tough is a guy like Ben Wallace or Kendrick Perkins. Big, mean beasts who will get physical on opponents and intimidate them. Bad Boy Pistons and Riley Knicks had some of that, but the the 2008 Celtics measure up there, believe that.

And certainly more than the kind of basketball that was typically played in the 80s. A couple of hard fouls in the playoffs doesn't make up for an entire era of people being allowed to drive the lane with impunity.

Speaking of which, I don't recall MJ getting put on his ass when he was dropping 63 on us, do you?

[buzz]

Hold on, I think the problem is we have VERY different ideas of what makes someone a "thug." If yelling the F-Bomb makes you a thug then KG is a big time thug. Gangsta thugging actually.

To me body slamming people and hitting them into the stands like men makes you a thug. The way the game was played before the flagrant foul. Rondo would drive to the basket one time. After that he'd eat wood floor. And KG would be tied up in a knot around the basket after he did his head banging stuff. And PP would KNOW what a real foul was when he was put to the line. Not that weak hand slap stuff he gets today.

No, I think the problem is that history doesn't match some of your recollections of it.

Watch some old tape. The game used to be decidedly less physical. Outside of like 2-3 teams in the late 80s/90s, you have skinnier players running uptempo and barely even touching each other on defense.

Everyone seems to agree that players are bigger and stronger now, and perhaps even that there is a much higher premium on playing what are more complicated defensive schemes, but somehow this doesn't translate into more physical play on average?

I literally must be watching a different sport than some of you, lol.

Food for thought... the '86 Celts scored 114 points a game and gave up 104.7. The '08 Celts scored 100.5 and gave up 90.5.

Do people really think that is because you used to be able to bodyslam people back in the day and you aren't even allowed to touch offensive players in the modern era?

[dlpin]

You have a serious reading comprehension issue, man. I have replied to some of these points like 2 or 3 times already, lol.

As to tough, let's define it. McHale's clothesline wasn't tough. Laimbeer chucking Larry to the floor isn't tough. Tough is a guy like Ben Wallace or Kendrick Perkins. Big, mean beasts who will get physical on opponents and intimidate them. Bad Boy Pistons and Riley Knicks had some of that, but the the 2008 Celtics measure up there, believe that.

And certainly more than the kind of basketball that was typically played in the 80s. A couple of hard fouls in the playoffs doesn't make up for an entire era of people being allowed to drive the lane with impunity.

Speaking of which, I don't recall MJ getting put on his ass when he was dropping 63 on us, do you?

Again, short and to the point since you seem to like to attack but ignore the point:

- Teams that Lebron has beaten that are better than the 91 lakers, 93 knicks, 92 Blazers, 98 pacers and jazz?

- So the 80's are the era when people could drive to the lane with impunity? I guess you never heard of the Jordan rules. And whether Perkins is tough or not is irrelevant: he can't put two hands on anyone like people used to be able to, and the charge area is much larger. I've pointed this out with blocks per 100 possessions, ft/fg, etc, etc. but as usual you just ignore it.

[dlpin]

No, I think the problem is that history doesn't match some of your recollections of it.

Watch some old tape. The game used to be decidedly less physical. Outside of like 2-3 teams in the late 80s/90s, you have skinnier players running uptempo and barely even touching each other on defense.

Everyone seems to agree that players are bigger and stronger now, and perhaps even that there is a much higher premium on playing what are more complicated defensive schemes, but somehow this doesn't translate into more physical play on average?

I literally must be watching a different sport than some of you, lol.

Food for thought... the '86 Celts scored 114 points a game and gave up 104.7. The '08 Celts scored 100.5 and gave up 90.5.

Do people really think that is because you used to be able to bodyslam people back in the day and you aren't even allowed to touch offensive players in the modern era?

Food for thought: you dismissed the blocks number because of pace and then you throw out points per game and ignore pace.
86 celtics points scored per 100 possessions: 111.8
86 celtics points allowed per 100 possessions: 102.6
08 celtics points scored per 100 possessions: 110.2
08 celtics points allower per 100 possessions: 98.9

Really close, isn't it?

Oh, and here is another interesting number:
Lebron FTA per FGA this year: 0.508
Jordan's career FTA per FGA: 0.357
Jordan's career high FTA per FGA: 0.441

[buzz]

Food for thought: you dismissed the blocks number because of pace and then you throw out points per game and ignore pace.
86 celtics points scored per 100 possessions: 111.8
86 celtics points allowed per 100 possessions: 102.6
08 celtics points scored per 100 possessions: 110.2
08 celtics points allower per 100 possessions: 98.9

Really close, isn't it?

Oh, and here is another interesting number:
Lebron FTA per FGA this year: 0.508
Jordan's career FTA per FGA: 0.357
Jordan's career high FTA per FGA: 0.441

Oh no... one of these Hollinger types.

Those stats aren't disproving anything, dude... first, they do in fact demonstrate that the 08 Celts were better defensively. Second, they prove that people are putting their hands all over Lebron.

What they are NOT showing is that in a slower-paced, lower-scoring game, the same statistical margin of victory is actually a much bigger butt-whupping. Further, you don't GET 100 possessions against the 08 Celts. Might as well link me Big Baby's per 48 minute stats if you are going to get way abstract here.

And finally, they don't speak to the kinds of fouls, or the severity of them. Jordan got touch fouls up the ying-yang. If he ever got thrown to the floor, like Pierce has been half a dozen times or more in just about every game he has ever played, a national emergency would probably have been declared by the President.

And as an addendum to the public record, I heretofore state that many good points have been raised in this thread, but that none of them were from you, sir!

You keep on thinking that Bobbie Gibson carried LeBron to the Finals. I'll be back on Planet Earth.

Good day.

[Witch-King]

all I have to say is this: If LeBron James eliminates the Celtics from the playoffs and then loses to the Lakers in the finals (basically just giving the Lakers another ring) why would Boston of all cities want to trade for LeBron (seeing as he would probably be leaving the Cavs anyway in that scenario)?

We wouldn't want to send one of the Big 3 to the city of Cleveland nor would we consider a potential contract with him more important than a shot at Banner 18 or any case that prevents the Lakers from overtaking us as far as overall championships are concerned.

Do you think that there would be any chance that the Celtics could forgive LeBron and trade for him if something like that were to occur, because I surely don't...

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61H5WN20100218

[GreenFaith1819]

Well, I have only read the 1st page of this thread, so I apologize ahead of time if I am repeating what someone else may have posted, but:

I love Lebron as a player, but any well-thought out article cannot place Lebron James in the same category as Larry Bird...because Lebron hasn't won any Champ'ships, while Larry has won 3 Champ'ships.

Yes - stat-wise he is awfully close to Larry, but.......that's it.

I spelled "Championship" that way because of a good shipmate and friend of mine from my early Navy days that used to joke on me about the Celtics back in the 90's..he would deliberately pronounce it that way to mock Boston back then.

[dlpin]

Oh no... one of these Hollinger types.

Those stats aren't disproving anything, dude... first, they do in fact demonstrate that the 08 Celts were better defensively. Second, they prove that people are putting their hands all over Lebron.

What they are NOT showing is that in a slower-paced, lower-scoring game, the same statistical margin of victory is actually a much bigger butt-whupping. Further, you don't GET 100 possessions against the 08 Celts. Might as well link me Big Baby's per 48 minute stats if you are going to get way abstract here.

And finally, they don't speak to the kinds of fouls, or the severity of them. Jordan got touch fouls up the ying-yang. If he ever got thrown to the floor, like Pierce has been half a dozen times or more in just about every game he has ever played, a national emergency would probably have been declared by the President.

And as an addendum to the public record, I heretofore state that many good points have been raised in this thread, but that none of them were from you, sir!

You keep on thinking that Bobbie Gibson carried LeBron to the Finals. I'll be back on Planet Earth.

Good day.

- You are the one who brought pace into the conversation. When I mentioned the number of blocks you yelled "pace" but now you don't want to hear it?

- Again, teams that Lebron has beaten that are better than the teams Jordan or Bird had to beat. List them, please.

- Yes, Jordan got a bunch of touch foul calls. But even then he didn't get as many as Lebron gets. And only someone who did not watch a single minute of basketball in the 80s can say that things are more physical now.

[buzz]

- You are the one who brought pace into the conversation. When I mentioned the number of blocks you yelled "pace" but now you don't want to hear it?

- Again, teams that Lebron has beaten that are better than the teams Jordan or Bird had to beat. List them, please.

- Yes, Jordan got a bunch of touch foul calls. But even then he didn't get as many as Lebron gets. And only someone who did not watch a single minute of basketball in the 80s can say that things are more physical now.

How many different ways do you want me to answer the same questions?

The point is not that Lebron has a better playoff resume than MJ. It would be hard for him to given his age and those busters he has for teammates. Jordan's playoff resume was brought up to illustrate that, despite the mythology, MJ is not without some question marks of his own. Rather selfish player who played on fairly stacked teams and who NEVER BEAT an elite team in the playoffs (FWIW, like Magic, he generally lacked 3-point range too, not that holding people to the same standard matters or anything).

I have stated this explicitly in plain English like three or four times now, LOL.

Anyhow... the 2008 Celts, for instance, were better than any team the Bulls ever beat. And LeBron took them to 7 games... two years ago... which incidentally... is two years prior to the 2010 version of LeBron that this entire conversation is being based on.

Lebron wasn't better than Larry or MJ then.

He is now.

Be the last to know if you want. Don't confront me none.

[dlpin]

How many different ways do you want me to answer the same questions?

The point is not that Lebron has a better playoff resume than MJ. It would be hard for him to given his age and those busters he has for teammates. Jordan's playoff resume was brought up to illustrate that, despite the mythology, MJ is not without some question marks of his own. Rather selfish player who played on fairly stacked teams and who NEVER BEAT an elite team in the playoffs (FWIW, like Magic, he generally lacked 3-point range too, not that holding people to the same standard matters or anything).

I have stated this explicitly in plain English like three or four times now, LOL.

Anyhow... the 2008 Celts, for instance, were better than any team the Bulls ever beat. And LeBron took them to 7 games... two years ago... which incidentally... is two years prior to the 2010 version of LeBron that this entire conversation is being based on.

Lebron wasn't better than Larry or MJ then.

He is now.

Be the last to know if you want. Don't confront me none.

The problem is that you didn't answer any of the questions. You simply moved the goal posts.

You said that the 08 celtics were thugs and much more physical than anything that existed in the 80s. Other than talk about f bombs you didn't back it up with anything.

You said Jordan had more advantageous rules and that it was a lot easier to penetrate defenses in the 80s. I provided you with blocked shots, free throws per field goal attempt, and you got nothing.


Then you said that MJ only dominated because it was a weak era with no rivals, and yet completely ignore it when people point out that Lebron plays in an even weaker era.

I mean, let's get serious here: you are actually arguing that hand check rules, defensive 3 second rules and a much, much larger no-charge area HURT wing players. You are actually arguing that Lebron, who shoots 20% more free throws per shot attempt than Jordan EVER attempted, actually gets less calls than Jordan. I mean, really?

Is everyone else wrong?

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/david_aldridge/04/22/aldridge.defenses/