Larry Bird was a better shooter. I think that is the end of the list unless you want to include trash talking.
I wouldn't go that far, but Bird didn't have the same advantages in training, nutrition and chemical enhancement.
Larry Bird was a great player, and the second best SF of all time, but Lebron is the best SF of all time. You don't just need "longevity" to make that case, even if you ignore longevity (which I would say you shouldn't, at least not altogether) his peak was at least as good as, and I would say better than, Bird's, in addition to being a lot longer. He was Bird's equal or better offensively and at his peak a better defensive player And unlike Bird he didn't have the luxury of getting drafted into the best organization in the league and playing his entire career next to multiple other HOF players,
Neither did any of the guys he played against.
True
Kobe missed more clutch shots than any player in NBA history. His FG % in close and late situations is one of the worst in NBA history.
Lebron was a better offensive player than Bird pretty much his whole career. Consider that defense was much worse in Bird's day, and pace was higher, and assists were easier to come by because there were way fewer 3 point shots, and that despite all that, Larry Bird had one season in his career -- 1986 -- when he surpassed Lebron's CAREER 7.4 assists per game.
How does that work? Lebron averaged more points per game and more assists per game for his career. He also had more point per game and way more assists per game in his best season than Bird had in his best.
1. These discussions are always ludicrous because they don't compare apples to apples. NBA players are WAY better than they were in MJ's days. In particular, the abilities of the median player are considerably higher than they were. In MJ's day, it was common for NBA teams to give substantial minutes to big immobile oafs. I'm not sure Patrick Ewing would make it in the NBA today, and I'm sure as hell confident that the Greg Ostertags and Joe Kleines of the world would not. Teams can play way more sophisticated defenses now. Playing defense is much more taxing than it was. On the other hand, there are more passing targets these days to get assists (though Bird never had that problem).
He’s not.
I would think it's a guy that had been in the league for forever and made a lot of playoff runs. Maybe Chucky Brown or Joe Smith?
Lebron elevated the players around him just like Bird did. But unlike Bird Lebron was dropped into a dysfunctional franchise at 19 and spent the first several years with very little talent around him. Bird never had to worry about that. Bird, in contrast, went as a 23-year-old to the best and most celebrated franchise in the NBA with arguably the best personnel guy in history (Auerbach) - at least the best personnel guy through the 1980s NBA - in charge. His rookie year the Celtics had two other established all stars who were also all stars that season (Cowens and Archibald), plus Cedric Maxwell. The next year Auerbach ripped off the Warriors for Parish and McHale. and Bird would play with those HOFers for the rest of his career. Was playing with Bird beneficial for those guys? Absolutely. But it doesn't change the fact that Bird never really had to play in anything other than perfect circumstances. We never got to see if he could, say, drag a supporting cast featuring Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Larry Hughes to the NBA Finals as a 20-year-old, because Bird never had to do anything like that.
Bird was pretty awesome but LeBron is better career wise and probably at their peaks too.
Ahh, the NBA plumbers argument to elevate LeBron. That’s laughable!! NBA players today may be better athletes, but I feel their basketball IQ is worse. Also the physicality is far less than Jordan’s day. As for defense, LeBron has never been nor ever will be a better defender than Jordan. All defensive team and DPOY trophies puts that argument to rest immediately. Also, man to man defense is less taxing??