April 17, 201115 yr I do. Bird would make the whole team better. He would work make Tyson Chandler an all star, Stevenson. A dead eye long range sniper, Kidd 5 years younger and Barea the 6th Man of the Year. And they still wouldn't be better than the Lakers.
April 17, 201115 yr Kind of an amusing thread. Let's begin with the premise of the thread. Let's remember that Bird played on some great teams in his prime. Put him in a similar situation now, then yes he is easily a hall of famer. Put him on the Timberwolves, probably a different story. Now moving on, The Dirk comparison would be valid, if Dirk had a couple of rings. Guess that goes back to you can only be as good historically as the teams you play with.
April 17, 201115 yr Kind of an amusing thread. Let's begin with the premise of the thread. Let's remember that Bird played on some great teams in his prime. Put him in a similar situation now, then yes he is easily a hall of famer. Put him on the Timberwolves, probably a different story. Now moving on, The Dirk comparison would be valid, if Dirk had a couple of rings. Guess that goes back to you can only be as good historically as the teams you play with. Rings has nothing to do with it, IMO. Two completely different styles of play.
April 17, 201115 yr And they still wouldn't be better than the Lakers. I don't know. Bird elevates everyone's game. Who knows exactly how good they could be with Bird minus Dirk.
April 17, 201115 yr Rings has nothing to do with it, IMO. Two completely different styles of play. I don't really like making comparisons. You may be right. However I seem to be reading a lot of opinion on here that disagrees about the styles of play. I also disagree with rings having a lot to do with the perception of greatness in the NBA. Take a look at the "Top 50 Greatest in History" Lot of rings with that crowd. http://www.nba.com/history/players/50greatest.html
April 17, 201115 yr I don't know. Bird elevates everyone's game. Who knows exactly how good they could be with Bird minus Dirk. They'd still have Jason Kidd who's almost ready to go to into a retirement home, Shawn Marion who hasn't been revelant since 2005, Tyson Chandler who plays when he wants to get paid, Barea who is literally my size, Roddy Beaubois who is a poor man's Jason Terry, and Jason Terry who is a poor man's Nick Van Exel. Not to mention Brendan Haywood who was the Tyson Chandler of last season. That team doesn't look like one that beats LA to me. And I didn't even mention Peja in that.
April 17, 201115 yr They'd still have Jason Kidd who's almost ready to go to into a retirement home, Shawn Marion who hasn't been revelant since 2005, Tyson Chandler who plays when he wants to get paid, Barea who is literally my size, Roddy Beaubois who is a poor man's Jason Terry, and Jason Terry who is a poor man's Nick Van Exel. Not to mention Brendan Haywood who was the Tyson Chandler of last season. That team doesn't look like one that beats LA to me. And I didn't even mention Peja in that. Chris Paul just beat the Lakers and you are trying to tell me that Bird can't?
April 17, 201115 yr Chris Paul just beat the Lakers and you are trying to tell me that Bird can't? Let me know when the Hornets win the series. I do feel better about my OKC pick though.
April 17, 201115 yr Let me know when the Hornets win the series. I do feel better about my OKC pick though. OKC needs to beat the Nuggets first.
April 18, 201115 yr Is there a former star you guys don't think would be good today? Why would a player who was a former star not be good today? Is it because you think there are better athletes today? I don't think so. I think there is better training. But I think any player that was a star in his era would train like the athletes of this era and be just as good if not better. It is all relative to the standards of each era.
April 18, 201115 yr Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Charles Barkley...all would star today. No question about it.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.