Bird vs. LeBron, Part Deux

[Moranis]

What might the first half of Lebron's career have looked like if he had a stable coach and a couple of good veterans to learn from? There's no way to know for sure but we can safely say that Bird had it a little easier coming into the league from that perspective. As far as I'm concerned, the level of success that those Cleveland teams did enjoy in spite of the roster around James is as great a testament to his talent as you can make.

People always say this, but I don't get it.

His 2009-10 team was pretty darn stacked for that point in time, remembering that this was before the whole "superfriend" era began, and few teams at the time (outside of Boston and LA) had more than one legit star player.

People forget that:

* Antawn Jamison was an 20/9 player for much of his career (he was basically on par with Chris Bosh, if not better)

* Mo Williams was an 18 PPG player just one year prior

* The four-man rotation of Shaq, Ilgauskas, Varejao and Hickson was quite possible the deepest front-court in the entire NBA

* Delonte West and Daniel Gibson were both very solid backup guards

I mean sure his roster may not have been as top heavy as a Ray/Pierce/KG/Rondo or Kobe/Gasol/Bynym but he still had quite a bit of help.

Jamison came over with just 25 games left.  Shaq played just 53 games the whole year and was a shell of his former self (just 22 minutes a game in the playoffs).  Ilgauskas was basically done that year.  He was under 21 minutes a game in the regular season and played in just 7 of the 11 post season games at under 10 minutes a game.  Varejao has always been a glorified role player.  JJ Hickson was in his second year and played under 8 minutes a game in the playoffs (and for good reason). 

Perhaps it is you that is misremembering things.  And just for the record, James was a 29/9/8 player on 53% from two, 40% from three that post season.  Maybe just maybe James' teammates weren't as good as you think they were. 

[BballTim]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

[Moranis]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

except you can't really say that.  Their AST% aren't close (James is basically a full 10% better in his career and Bird's two highest seasons only were better than James' rookie year) and that is with Larry having much better teammates for the majority of his career.  And it isn't like either one played with a dominant passing PG, as both often led their teams in assists. 

Bird was a better rebounder (both in totals and rates), but that is about it (Bird was a better outside and foul shooter as well, but given the volume of shots difference, James actually has a higher TS% and PPS making him overall the more efficient scorer in addition to just scoring more in general).  I get we are Celtics fans and Bird is (and should be) king here, but the real SF king is in fact Lebron James. 

[slamtheking]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

except you can't really say that.  Their AST% aren't close (James is basically a full 10% better in his career and Bird's two highest seasons only were better than James' rookie year) and that is with Larry having much better teammates for the majority of his career.  And it isn't like either one played with a dominant passing PG, as both often led their teams in assists. 

Bird was a better rebounder (both in totals and rates), but that is about it (Bird was a better outside and foul shooter as well, but given the volume of shots difference, James actually has a higher TS% and PPS making him overall the more efficient scorer in addition to just scoring more in general).  I get we are Celtics fans and Bird is (and should be) king here, but the real SF king is in fact Lebron James still Larry Bird. 

fixed that for you

[BballTim]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

except you can't really say that.  Their AST% aren't close (James is basically a full 10% better in his career and Bird's two highest seasons only were better than James' rookie year) and that is with Larry having much better teammates for the majority of his career.  And it isn't like either one played with a dominant passing PG, as both often led their teams in assists.

  You can really say that if you watched them both play. Bird's arguably the best passer in league history. James is one of the better passers in the league today. There's not much of a comparison. 

Bird was a better rebounder (both in totals and rates), but that is about it (Bird was a better outside and foul shooter as well, but given the volume of shots difference, James actually has a higher TS% and PPS making him overall the more efficient scorer in addition to just scoring more in general).  I get we are Celtics fans and Bird is (and should be) king here, but the real SF king is in fact Lebron James.

  In addition to being among the best passers in the game, Bird's one of the best rebounding SFs in the history of the league, and arguably the best shooter ever. James is a mediocre shooter who gets to the rim a lot and gets a lot of free throws and isn't overly effective when he isn't dominating the ball. Those shots at the rim and free throws count, but that (and defense) are the only things he has on Bird.

[GC003332]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gx_kqvy9nZA

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cL1xl0FR6xM

Stats aside, there was a slight difference in the mentality of these players.

[D.o.s.]

No way Bird's the best passer in league history by any measure beyond anecdote and personal approximation (i.e. nostalgia).

[BballTim]

No way Bird's the best passer in league history by any measure beyond anecdote and personal approximation (i.e. nostalgia).

  Because now that we have statistics, people are basically slaves to them, and whatever they measure must be valid, or people wouldn't keep track of the data.

  I don't think that "best passer" discussions are at all worthwhile, because people always get pretty far along in them before they figure out that different people have different definitions of what it means to be the best passer. If you rely on statistics then you're basically going to cling to a certain definition of best passer, if you judge players based on actually watching them play you're left with anecdote and nostalgia.

[D.o.s.]

Worth noting: I'm not clinging to statistics here, (I think Jason Williams was the best passer of all time, as I've said before I believe), just pointing out that the "well if you actually watched them play statement" can lead to a whole bunch of inarguable disagreements.

[Donoghus]

Best passing SF in history?  Sure.

Best passer in history? I wouldn't go that far.

[fairweatherfan]

No way Bird's the best passer in league history by any measure beyond anecdote and personal approximation (i.e. nostalgia).

Don't forget YouTube videos! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwo4vtaZmsY


...I'm not making a serious argument but this is well worth watching in any event. 

[D.o.s.]

Awww yis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeEuaxo3dXo

This video actually has comparatively little passing. But it does have the elbow pass, and that pass is awesome.

[Donoghus]

But he is physically capable of taking multiple bong rips.

[ahonui06]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

except you can't really say that.  Their AST% aren't close (James is basically a full 10% better in his career and Bird's two highest seasons only were better than James' rookie year) and that is with Larry having much better teammates for the majority of his career.  And it isn't like either one played with a dominant passing PG, as both often led their teams in assists. 

Bird was a better rebounder (both in totals and rates), but that is about it (Bird was a better outside and foul shooter as well, but given the volume of shots difference, James actually has a higher TS% and PPS making him overall the more efficient scorer in addition to just scoring more in general).  I get we are Celtics fans and Bird is (and should be) king here, but the real SF king is in fact Lebron James.

The higher AST% is also loosely correlated to LeBron's higher USG% and overall ball dominance. He will have the opportunity to create more chances for assists.

[Moranis]

There are really only two categories I can see in which Lebron has beaten Bird for his career and they are PPG (+12%) and Free Throw Rate (+100%). 

Bird on the other hand has beat Lebron in rebounding (+40%), three point percentage (+3.5%) and FT% (+14%). 

So since Bird has won three categories to Lebron's one, I would give Bird the winner of the "tangibles / stats" category.

As far as intangibles go, there is no competition.  Bird was tougher, had higher basketball IQ (IMO), was more clutch, was a better leader, and was an absolute master of the mental game (i.e. taking opponents mind out of their game and letting them beat themselves).

There are going to be valid arguments to be made in both directions, but here is the thing that seals the deal to me - Bird did EVERYTHING well.  He had no weakness in his game.  He could score from anywhere on the court, he could rebound at an elite level, he could pass at an elite level, he could defend at an elite level (and did, consistently), he had leadership, he had toughness, and he is one of the greatest pure shooters to ever live

Lebron is great scorer but isn't as skilled a scorer - he's merely above average (rather than great) as a shooter and rebounder, he lacks toughness and leadership, and his defensive effort is too inconsistent.

If I'm building a team today with the choice of 30 year old bird or 30 year old Lebron (assuming both healthy) I'll take bird without a moment hesitation.

What about assists?  What about TS%  what about PER?  When you just pick and choose categories you can get whatever result you want.

  LeBron gets a few more assists since he's much more ball dominant than Bird was but Larry was a significantly better passer than James and had much better court vision.

except you can't really say that.  Their AST% aren't close (James is basically a full 10% better in his career and Bird's two highest seasons only were better than James' rookie year) and that is with Larry having much better teammates for the majority of his career.  And it isn't like either one played with a dominant passing PG, as both often led their teams in assists. 

Bird was a better rebounder (both in totals and rates), but that is about it (Bird was a better outside and foul shooter as well, but given the volume of shots difference, James actually has a higher TS% and PPS making him overall the more efficient scorer in addition to just scoring more in general).  I get we are Celtics fans and Bird is (and should be) king here, but the real SF king is in fact Lebron James.

The higher AST% is also loosely correlated to LeBron's higher USG% and overall ball dominance. He will have the opportunity to create more chances for assists.

Kobe's career USG% is right around James' but his AST% is right around Bird's.  Melo's career USG% is right around James, but his AST% is about half of James' and 10% lower than Bird's.  Steve Nash's USG% is lower than Bird's, but his AST% nearly doubles Bird.  USG% and AST% aren't really correlated at all.  They quite simply measure different things.  I mean John Stockton had a career AST% of 50.2, but his USG% was just 18.9.