After 40 years of watching, participating in, and teaching, I firmly believe that Larry Bird is the greatest all-around player of all time. If he so desired, he could easily average 35–36 points per game.One explanation is the general deficiency in team defense. He would be free to travel and not have a human hand scrutinizing him (euro step). According to the laws of today, he could also carry the ball! After more than fifteen years, he would eat alive this soft, streetball-loving, no-rules NBA aspirant. I believe he could average about 36 points, 15 rebounds, and 15 assists if he were playing now. He would be in his element.
Was Larry Bird an overvalued talent who, in the modern NBA, would likely never see action off the bench? Was this question submitted by Dennis Rodman? Let’s get this straight: you want to know if the guy who won the first three three-point games, one while still wearing his warm-up jacket, was the best small-forward passer in history, and once shot with only his left hand for the majority of a game to trick the opposition, would be able to play off the bench in the modern NBA?
at least 25 points per game, or around what Luka Doncic scores. Although Luka and he don’t play the same position, their physical characteristics and skill levels make them a fair comparison. Like Bird, Doncic lacks exceptional quickness and athleticism, but like Bird, he also possesses excellent handling, a high basketball IQ, and the ability to score from beyond the arc or near the rim. Doncic and Bird are both excellent passers, clutch players, and rebounders. Even in terms of rebounding, shooting accuracy, and strength in the post, Bird is superior. Doncic is, in my opinion, very similar to Bird, and if Bird were still active in the NBA today, his stats might be identical to Bird’s.
