Topic: NBA 2013-2014 <FINALS>

[the_w0rks]

Ok pasensya ka na.  Feeling ko lang naman yun.  Wala na kasi rivalry kaya eagerly yearning for one.  And despite mga dugo pinaguusapan, I'm relaxed na thanks to you hahaha.  Nagbago na ako.  Di na ako war freak .  Tumatanda na ako eh...

haha. yeah, wala talagang rivalry right now. Although I would love to see OKC and Heat shape up to form a rivalry. That's if they meet several times in the finals. Pwede din naman siguro Pacers vs Heat rivalry coz they battle each other more often. And I think Paul George is engaged to make it a rivalry. So that's really nice.

[mattia]

Watching GSW vs HOU now and I'm happy for Steve Blake!!

Heck, he'll be going to the playoffs and his old Laker team is not  

[rexFi]

McHale was not in Boston yet during Bird's rookie year.  It was really basically Bird and out of their prime players to serviceable teammates.  No Parish, No McHale yet.  Bird had great teammates.... great during their primes.  But those players were on the downward paths when Bird first came in.

Yeh then FO got them mchale, CHI FO got MJ Pippen and so on and so forth. Nobody wins alone as per Bill Russell (Team game?)

who did CLE get for LBJ? Byron Scott?

Watching GSW vs HOU now and I'm happy for Steve Blake!!

Heck, he'll be going to the playoffs and his old Laker team is not  

He'll suck though in the playoffs.

[DVD_Freak]

Yeh then FO got them mchale, CHI FO got MJ Pippen and so on and so forth. Nobody wins alone as per Bill Russell (Team game?)

who did CLE get for LBJ? Byron Scott?

You are talking about succeeding years.  I am talking about Bird's greatness day 1 pa lang.  Bird was all NBA first team kagad in his rookie year.  He took a 29-53 team and turned it around what was then the biggest win-loss turn around in NBA history.  Imagine a 29-53 team and basically single handedly carried a mediocre team to the East finals.  So the argument that Bird had great players around him since day1 to lift his team..... is false.  So Bird transformed a losing team into a winner.....in his rookie year! 

Bird was that great!  . That year...no McHale, no Parish, no Ainge, No DJ, no Walton. McHale wasn't even a big difference maker when they got him.  Rookie pa lang siya nun.  But in only his second year, Bird won the team a ring. 

[rexFi]

You are talking about succeeding years.  I am talking about Bird's greatness day 1 pa lang.  Bird was all NBA first team kagad in his rookie year.  He took a 29-53 team and turned it around what was then the biggest win-loss turn around in NBA history.  Imagine a 29-53 team and basically single handedly carried a mediocre team to the East finals.  So the argument that Bird had great players around him since day1 to lift his team..... is false.  So Bird transformed a losing team into a winner.....in his rookie year! 

Bird was that great!  . That year...no McHale, no Parish, no Ainge, No DJ, no Walton. McHale wasn't even a big difference maker when they got him.  Rookie pa lang siya nun.  But in only his second year, Bird won the team a ring. 

LBJ (and some other 2003 draftees) did too I guess regarding the italized.

By that logic, Bird is greater than Magic then, He had Kareem from the start, helped reached the Finals etc. Although he got injured, the stat is already 3-2.

[DVD_Freak]

LBJ (and some other 2003 draftees) did too I guess regarding the italized.

By that logic, Bird is greater than Magic then, He had Kareem from the start, helped reached the Finals etc. Although he got injured, the stat is already 3-2.

I think the Cavs still had a losing record in his rookie year.  There was win improvement...but not a winning record.  I don't know of any 2003 draftees whose teams had a winning record from having a losing record.  Remember, a win improvement is not the same as having a winning record.  Boston was practically a last place team in the east.  From last they went all the way to first in Bird's rookie year.  Transforming a team into winner meaning winning record.  And not just winning record.  It was the biggest win loss turn around in NBA history nga.

Yes by that logic Bird was definitely better than Magic in that year.  Kaya nga Bird was rookie of the year...Magic was not.  Bird was an all NBA first team.  Magic was not.  Bird did more with practically a lottery team the year before than Magic since Kareem was already there.

Magic had Kareem.  Bird had Dave Cowens though still solid, was nowhere near his prime.  In fact Cowens retired after Bird's rookie year.

[rexFi]

Then lets all compare that to what players Lebron had from the start.

The outcome is still the same. Bird, Magic, MJ etc had better team mates, better coaches, better FO than lebron had at first then to succeeding years..

Until he went to Miami, there can we compare teammates with all the past greats. Nobody can say to win championships etc a player would have to do it Alone.

btw Cavs FO/Mike Brown still sucks to this day.

[steelcrazy]

Danny Granger traded to sixers for Evan Turner and Lavoy Allen. Kawawa naman si Granger.

Pacers just deny Granger a chance to win a Ring but that's life.
Pacers just got deeper with Turner, he's the spark which Indiana needs.
With Turner, they can speed up their game and Turner gives them the creativity of a guard which Hill obviously can't give.

[DVD_Freak]

Then lets all compare that to what players Lebron had from the start.

The outcome is still the same. Bird, Magic etc had better team mates, better coaches, better FO than lebron had at first then to succeeding years..

Until he went to Miami, there can we compare teammates with all the past greats. Nobody can say to win championships etc a player would have to do it Alone.

btw Cavs FO/Mike Brown still sucks to this day.

That's not really the point.  Bird inherited a terribly underwhelming team.  You can even consider it a lottery team.  But he transformed a practically last place team in the whole league.... to the best record in the NBA in his rookie season!  And with a mediocre team at that?  Forget about having great teammates for Bird's rookie season.  There was none.  Just once great players who were about to retire.  So the notion you need great teammates to transform a team....Bird debunked it.  Sure it's not the norm.  But Bird proved it can be done.  Teammates don't define a great player.  Great players make their teammates better.  You don't become a great player by what players surround you.  And that what makes a great player.  Why he is still considered a top 3 all time and the best forward ever.

I am not even comparing Miami teammates.  Maybe we can compare Bird's teammates during his rookie year to Lebron's teammates during his rookie year.   

[2fast2furious]

Watching the new rivalry OKC-MIA Parang LA-Bos nung araw.  Crispa Toyota.

Miami having a great game so far, leading by 18 with 8 mins left.  I think Mia will take this game. 2-0 na ba sila this season?

nope. 1-1 lang. Miami lost on their first meeting. they are just returning the favor.

[rexFi]

That's not really the point.  Bird inherited a terribly underwhelming team.  You can even consider it a lottery team.  But he transformed a practically last place team in the whole league.... to the best record in the NBA in his rookie season!  And with a mediocre team at that?  Forget about having great teammates for Bird's rookie season.  There was none.  Just once great players who were about to retire.  So the notion you need great teammates to transform a team....Bird debunked it.  Sure it's not the norm.  But Bird proved it can be done.  Teammates don't define a great player.  Great players make their teammates better.  You don't become a great player by what players surround you.  And that what makes a great player.  Why he is still considered a top 3 all time and the best forward ever.

I am not even comparing Miami teammates.  Maybe we can compare Bird's teammates during his rookie year to Lebron's teammates during his rookie year.   

Once great players are still great players yeh, the comparison to experience vets given life by a rookie is still better with a rookie with sucky team mates etc.

So no I do not think anything is debunked, Bird still needed his team mates to be great once again regardless if they sucked the last season without him.

Them winning is more of evidence that Lebrons team suck in his rookie year and more mediocre than Bird's team.

[DVD_Freak]

Once great players are still great players yeh, the comparison to experience vets given life by a rookie is still better with a rookie with sucky team mates etc.

These same players were the same ones who had the losing record.  In fact the team Bird inherited even got worse.  Bob McAdoo the team's top scorer from the previous year was gone.   Also no more Billy Knight and Jojo White.  Those that remained were practically about to retire.     A team that sucked even with once great players would still suck.  And after losing those great players...the team sucked even more.  But what did Bird do?  Just made the Celtics the best team in Basketball and in the NBA record wise.

So no I do not think anything is debunked, Bird still needed his team mates to be great once again regardless if they sucked the last season without him.

It is debunked.  From last to best in the NBA...it's debunked.  There was no contention that Bird needed his teammates.  The contention was .....

Bird(them) having good/great teammates already.

No...Bird did not have great teammates his rookie year.  These were the players from a losing team.

Them winning is more of evidence that Lebrons team suck in his rookie year and more mediocre than Bird's team.

No.  It's evidence that Bird was a great player from Day 1.... and only a tenth of Lebron's athletic ability.  Bird's accomplishments are a reflection of his greatness.  Not a reflection of Lebron's flaws.

Now this is not to be construed as a knock on Lebron.  What I am pointing out is the greatness of Larry Legend.

[rexFi]

A team that sucked even with once great players would still suck. 

Lebron's team never were great, once great players are still considered to be great players still in the end.

Do you know Larry Hughes? <<-- unahan na kita, nope he never was great, maybe overrated.

It is debunked.  From last to best in the NBA...it's debunked.  There was no contention that Bird needed his teammates.  The contention was .....

Bird(them) having good/great teammates already.

No...Bird did not have great teammates his rookie year.  These were the players from a losing team.

They are great, experienced etc sorry to disagree with you on that one.

No.  It's evidence that Bird was a great player from Day 1.... and only a tenth of Lebron's athletic ability.  Bird's accomplishments are a reflection of his greatness.  Not a reflection of Lebron's flaws.

Now this is not to be construed as a knock on Lebron.  What I am pointing out is the greatness of Larry Legend.

What I would like to knock is Lebron's team mates in Cle from the start and till now and is the reason why he left for Miami.

^ and that should not be a knock on lebron's legacy or say to be great he must have stayed a necessity for LBJ.

[DVD_Freak]

Lebron's team never were great, once great players are still considered to be great players still in the end.

Do you know Larry Hughes? <<-- unahan na kita, nope he never was great, maybe overrated.

Again I'm not knocking Lebron.  The contention was Bird won because he already had great teammates.

They are great, experienced etc sorry to disagree with you on that one.

I think you are confusing great careers with great players for that particular season.  The stats those once great players produced are nowhere near the stats they produced during their primes....hence the losing record the year before Bird arrived.

What I would like to knock is Lebron's team mates in Cle from the start and till now and is the reason why he left for Miami.

^ and that should not be a knock on lebron's legacy or say to be great he must have stayed a necessity for LBJ.

That is not what I was actually contesting...it's Bird having already great teammates to win.   

[XanderCage]

Lol.

[rexFi]

Again I'm not knocking Lebron.  The contention was Bird won because he already had great teammates.

But he does have better team mates than lebron from the start, Lebron "needed" those kinds of players. That counts as great.

I think you are confusing great careers with great players for that particular season.  The stats those once great players produced are nowhere near the stats they produced during their primes....hence the losing record the year before Bird arrived.

Still having those experiences makes them great and they can pull something out from themselves with a leader like Bird filling in the roles they can't do anymore, but still call it great if they can fill their roles.

LBJs teams never could fill what's needed of them. Hence they suck and LBJ need to go somewhere else.

That is not what I was actually contesting...it's Bird having already great teammates to win.   

see above ^ it could be implied. Hence Bird is better than Magic at all time for me na if I am going to use a logic like Magic had a great team from the start vs. Bird. Kung Rings si Horry na?(Joke lang)

..and its not a knock on Bird to if we still call his team great(or potentially) when he arrived. Its also a compliment for their team too.

A compliment for the NBA/Basketball because its a Team Sport.

[bumblebee]

If great players are always great, how come Malone and Payton didn't win in LA?

[DVD_Freak]

But he does have better team mates than lebron from the start, Lebron "needed" those kinds of players. That counts as great.

How are they better teammates?  These are old geezers that's way past their primes compared to young studs like Boozer and Ilgauskas.  In terms of production.  Lebron even had 3 teammates produce at east 15ppg compared to Bird's 1.  Athletic ability certainly goes to Lebron's team.  Bird had old geezers with the exception of Maxwell who certainly was not one of the greats of the game.

Still having those experiences makes them great and they can pull something out from themselves with a leader like Bird filling in the roles they can't do anymore, but still call it great if they can fill their roles.

There's a reason why the Celtics were 32-50 and 29-53 two years prior to Bird's arrival.  They weren't great anymore.  Those experiences and their greatness are no longer making them pull out anything.

LBJs teams never could fill what's needed of them. Hence they suck and LBJ need to go somewhere else.

Now this is where you contradict yourself.  If the teams around LBJ could never fill what's needed of them, Why didn't Lebron (like what you mentioned of Bird) with him being a leader fill in the roles they can't

see above ^ it could be implied. Hence Bird is better than Magic at all time for me na if I am going to use a logic like Magic had a great team from the start vs. Bird. Kung Rings si Horry na?(Joke lang)

..and its not a knock on Bird to if we still call his team great(or potentially) when he arrived. Its also a compliment for their team too.

A compliment for the NBA/Basketball because its a Team Sport.

Again the contention was....  Bird already had great teammates for him to win.  Pampagulo na lang yun iba.   

[rexFi]

If great players are always great, how come Malone and Payton didn't win in LA?

Injuries, Kobe() and Detroit. <-- now those were great players/team too.

Great example in driving the point that Basketball is a Team Game and the better/greater Team that season won. Although injured ata madalas si Malone noon.

[dpogs]

dalawa lang criteria ko sa isang great basketball player...

1. admit the he/shee needs a team to win a championship
2. hindi rapist ( ).


on and off the court he/she should be role model.... (applies sa lahat ng athletes)

[rexFi]

How are they better teammates?  These are old geezers that's way past their primes compared to young studs like Boozer and Ilgauskas.  In terms of production.  Lebron even had 3 teammates produce at east 15ppg compared to Bird's 1.  Athletic ability certainly goes to Lebron's team.  Bird had old geezers with the exception of Maxwell who certainly was not one of the greats of the game.

Boozer, end of story/reply.

Veteran experience trumps athletic ability.

Boozer(again) is a bonehead.

There's a reason why the Celtics were 32-50 and 29-53 two years prior to Bird's arrival.  They weren't great anymore.  Those experiences and their greatness are no longer making them pull out anything.

Addition of a Player that fills a role they can't anymore is just whats needed so The Team pulled out something.

Now this is where you contradict yourself.  If the teams around LBJ could never fill what's needed of them, Why didn't Lebron (like what you mentioned of Bird) with him being a leader fill in the roles they can't

Again the contention was....  Bird already had great teammates for him to win.  Pampagulo na lang yun iba.   

Because they shouldn't have to. You are simply making this about Individuals while I am making this about TEAM.

The fact that Bird filled what the past team lacks doesn't make it a requirement for Lebron to fill in what his team mates lack. Proof too that Bird had the better team at the start compared to LBJ.

and

Boozer  . I rest my case, sorry if you think Boozer amounts to anything.

[DVD_Freak]

Boozer, end of story/reply.

Veteran experience trumps athletic ability.

Boozer(again) is a bonehead.

Compared to Cowens who was about to retire?  Hahaha!  I don't think so.  Boozer was averaging like 15ppg and 11rpg.

Addition of a Player that fills a role they can't anymore is just whats needed so The Team pulled out something.

Same can be said of Lebron and the Cavs.

Because they shouldn't have to. You are simply making this about Individuals while I am making this about TEAM.

With Bird filling in those what his teammates lacked points to what Bird individually did.

The fact that Bird filled what the past team lacks doesn't make it a requirement for Lebron to fill in what his team mates lack. Proof too that Bird had the better team at the start.

And that is why Bird is a top 3 all time.  It may not be a requirement but Bird did it.

and

Boozer  . I rest my case, sorry if you think Boozer amounts to anything.

Stat sheets don't lie though.


Maybe we can compare this.....no commentary para objectively speaking.   

Boston:  Without Rookie Bird, Celtics = Losing record.
Cleveland:  Without Rookie Lebron, Cavs = Losing record

Boston:  With Rookie Bird, Celtics = Best record in the NBA
Cleveland:  With Rookie Lebron, Cavs = still losing record

Boston:  Without Rookie Bird, Celtics = 29-53 record
Miami:  Without Lebron, Heat  =  47-35 record

Boston:  With Rookie Bird, Celtics = 61-21 record (32 win improvement)
Miami:  With Lebron, Heat  =  58-24 record (11 win improvement)

[rexFi]

Compared to Cowens who was about to retire?  Hahaha!  I don't think so.  Boozer was averaging like 15ppg and 11rpg.

Boozer 

Same can be said of Lebron and the Cavs.

Nope it can't as Bird has the better players.

With Bird filling in those what his teammates lacked points to what Bird individually did.

But his Team still did what is needed required of them.

And that is why Bird is a top 3 all time.  It may not be a requirement but Bird did it.

And his Team did what is required of them while Lebron's did not hence he left after waiting...

Stat sheets don't lie though.

Interpretation is another matter though.

Maybe we can compare this.....no commentary para objectively speaking.   

Boston:  Without Rookie Bird, Celtics = Losing record.
Cleveland:  Without Rookie Lebron, Cavs = Losing record

Boston:  With Rookie Bird, Celtics = Best record in the NBA
Cleveland:  With Rookie Lebron, Cavs = still losing record

Boston:  Without Rookie Bird, Celtics = 29-53 record
Miami:  Without Lebron, Heat  =  47-35 record

Boston:  With Rookie Bird, Celtics = 61-21 record (32 win improvement)
Miami:  With Lebron, Heat  =  58-24 record (11 win improvement)

Kelangan may commentary, di parin objective yan kasi kelangan andon yung reason like what we are discussing above. Saka offcourse the keyword: Chemistry, ng team. Kaya we are discussing filling in what and what should a teammate has done.

Tawag diyan False Dichotomy sorry.

[Moks007]

Ask ko lang, why hate Lebron James? I don't like Kobe Bryant but I don't hate him. Bagay, entitled naman lahat sa opinion nila. Don't take it literally, the guy is just aggressive and has a mind set to be great. its not something bad. its just like saying, "I'm gonna win a championship this year". Lets admit, Lebron is the greatest player now in the NBA.

Well I just plain hate Lebron (or maybe instigated lang lol). The problem is he talks so much crap. Pls. Lebron, just do it on the court. I think this Lebron thing is blown out of proportion by the internet and the sports commentators. When I grew up watching basketball in the 70's onwards, I think the best commentators/media people were, Dick Stockton, Tom Heinsohn, Bill Russell, Bill Cunningham, and some others I can't remember. Right now I have to freaking tolerate, Reggie Miller, Shaq, Steve Smith, Barkley, Webber etc. Every time Lebron makes a shot, plays a great game scoring 30, 40 plus points, make a game winner etc. They will say the following:

1. The greatest player in the world. Seriously now, How many times do I have to hear this?
2. the Mt rushmore of nba issue
3. Watch out league when he plays like that.
4. They keep comparing him with the past great players.
5. A superhuman body that plays all position.

I'm sorry but kinda sick and tired of it. I think Lebron is talaga a great player, but you cannot really say who the greatest player of all time is. Yun top 10 nga mahirap na to say who are they. Everybody will have different opinions. They play in different eras, with different team players, with game rule changes, weaker conference etc.

For me it's a disrespect to the other players saying you will  be in the top 4 greatest players of all time, greatest of all time, etc etc. You can say naman "I wanna be one of the greatest players to ever play the game." PERIOD!!! Parang nga yun isang article ni sir Ojofool posted (which is a great analysis, commentary btw). WALANG CLASS, GRACIOUSNESS ETC.

I dunno maybe its just me, but if this is his way to boost his confidence, personal goal or whatever (which I think is unnecessary) then so be it. He is happy and his fans are happy.

Para I won't be accused of being too much of a Lebron hater. The reason I hate the players  nowadays is their motto "If you can't beat them, join them"..Nba has really changed over time imo. That's why I really like Red Auerbach, Jerry Buss and Jerry West. Really basketball smarts. They make the moves to make a great team, not players talking to each other and conspiring  to play together. Wala na fun eh

[Moks007]

that guy probably lost a lot of money by placing Lakers and under..

Go Rockets!!!

[rusty]

Clippers in the lead to sign Glen Davis, per report

[anya618]

5. A superhuman body that plays all position.

like this guy? 

[Moks007]

Lol.

Lol.. so we have to put Willis Reed and Steve Nash in front of Lebron as the greatest players of all time. Eh paano yan top 4 daw siya for sure.

[Moks007]

like this guy? 

haha..I love this movie. Got it in blu-ray. Tingin ko matalo din ni Lebron yan, sa lockeroom scene.. hihihi...

[DVD_Freak]

Boozer 

So a much younger and up & coming player versus the retiring old geezer in Cowens?  No one would draft an old broken down 1980 version of Cowens over A second year player in Boozer who was averaging a double double.  But I guess you would.   

Nope it can't as Bird has the better players.

Bird had better players?  Cavs had 3 players averaging at least 15ppg compared to Bird's 1.  The 77-78 Celtics were 32-50.  Take out their 3 best players, the 78-79 Celtics were a worst team even at 29-53. 

Again...your contention was Bird won because he always had great teammates.  Who were the great teammates of that squad?  The reason they were 29-53 because they weren't great.   

But his Team still did what is needed required of them.

The teammates were actually worse statistics wise in general.  So what was needed from Bird's teammates was to play even worse?

And his Team did what is required of them while Lebron's did not hence he left after waiting...

And did Bird's teammates do which was required of them when this is basically the same players who had the worst record the year before.  These players are old geezers...no more improvement in play for them.  As a matter of fact, you can expect worse play.

Sounds to me both Bird's and Lebron's teammates both did not do what was required of them.  Only difference is your admission that Bird filled in what his teammates were lacking and Lebron was not required to do so.  Hence the huge difference in team records.

Interpretation is another matter though.

Stats is stats.  It's not subjective.  It's a matter of fact.

Kelangan may commentary, di parin objective yan kasi kelangan andon yung reason like what we are discussing above. Saka offcourse the keyword: Chemistry, ng team. Kaya we are discussing filling in what and what should a teammate has done.

Tawag diyan False Dichotomy sorry.

Nope... tawag dyan Alibi.    



Kaya nga nandun na for comparison yun team records para makapili ka na ng squad na gusto mo either Heat or Cavs.  You say Bird had the better players in his rookie year.  Fine.  Nandun yun Heat.  Siguro naman mas magaling na yun Heat squad sa team ni Bird nung 1979.  Pero look at the records.  Upon arriving with the Celtics, led by Bird the team improved by 32 wins.  When Lebron arrived to join the Heat, with Lebron Miami improved by 11 wins.  Ang laki pa rin ng difference in impact.  Oh ayan kinocompare ko na nga yun rookie Bird versus Lebron in his seventh(?) season na nga.  Bird still made the greater impact.