No, its not debatable. No one actually debates this. Its your bias as a Celtics fan. Im not a Lebron fan, nor am I a Cavs fan, so Im looking at this objectively. And theres not a debate for Bird being better than Lebron. So you can disagree, which is fine. But you'd just be wrong.
Have you ever seen Larry Bird play in his prime?
Stats say otherwise. Lebron is clutch.
I said LeBron is not nearly as clutch as Bird, not that he wasn't clutch. Larry Bird gained a reputation as an assassin. LeBron is not the dude you want taking the final shot, mainly because he has an inconsistent outside jumper.
He took that 2007 Cavs team to the finals. With LARRY HUGHES as his second option against a great spurs team. In his 4th year.
Larry Hughes was a good 2 guard at that time. He also played with Zydrunas Ilgauskas (a top 5 center at the time).
But in the grand scheme of this debate, that doesn't matter.
Bird was apart of a super team as well, in a different era, with different rules and defenses.
OK but Bird was clearly the best player on the Celtics and, as stated in the OP, when he didn't play/missed time/missed the season, the Celtics weren't nearly as good. They went from #1 to #8 when Bird missed the 88-89 season, despite having all the other all-star players.
And you act like super teams didn't exist in Bird's era (see the Lakers, Rockets, Pistons, etc.).
Bron jumped ship TWICE to join super teams.
Lebron has 2 rings. Hes not done. I dont hold the 2007 shyt over his head. Because I mean, lets be real
You wouldn't bet money that Bron wins another ring in his career as the primary player of his team. His window's been closing.
