Najee

Larry Bird averaged 24.3 points per game while shooting a much higher percentage than Elgin Baylor (career average: 27.3, FG%: .431, compared to Bird's .496). Not only was Bird a better shooter than Baylor (not based on their field goal percentages, but actual skill), but Bird needed fewer shots to score comparably.

Like Pioneer said, Baylor played during a period where teams shot a lot more and made fewer shots (hence, low shooting percentages and high rebounding totals). Baylor's .428 field goal percentage in 1962-63 was actually close to the league average that season; Baylor's clip was like someone shooting 50 percent from the field. That season, Baylor averaged 33 shots per game to get his 38.3 points per game.

In Bird's best scoring seasons where he averaged 28.1 (1986-87), 28.7 (1984-85) and 29.9 points per game (1987-88), he never averaged more than 22 shots per game in a season. In all three seasons, he shot better than 52 percent from the field.

No one is diminishing what Baylor did, just being asked to choose between him and Bird. Factor in the team accomplishments, Bird would rate out ahead of Baylor, IMO.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

Deke

Elgin still scored more. the fg% aint drastic enough to favor bird.
then you count how good they are defensively.

More points scored-Baylor
Better Defender-Baylor
Better Rebounder-Baylor

more effecient-bird
better passer-bird

both are damn good players but ill take the guy who gets the boards, scores more(fg% is an overrated stat. lebron has a higher fg% then kobe. is he better offensively?) and plays good man D.

buduan

Rick Barry.

And he won the title.

buduan

What leads you to believe that Baylor was a better defender?

Deke

admittedly i havent seen much of baylor. but from the games i did see vs boston he played pretty good man D whereas bird was pretty much a liability vs scott-worthy.

Undefeated82

Larry Bird FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

__________________

seifer0406

If Lebron finishes his career without major injuries, he will be the best if not a top 3 sf in history. Physically he has to be the most athletic SF to ever play the game. If he stays healthy he will also have better career numbers because of playing more years.

Najee

For his career, Elgin Baylor averaged 3 points per game more than Larry Bird despite years where Baylor was averaging more than 30 shots per game in effectively a dead-ball era.

I doubt that I would call Baylor the better rebounder, either. Baylor played in a dead-ball era, where teams took considerably more shots than any team since then. Factoring those rather inflated numbers, I would say Baylor's career averages are comparable to Bird's (24 points, 10 rebounds per game).

When the league's shooting became more accurate at the end of his career (and started resembling the modern era), Baylor's numbers started deflating to where they were like Bird's (24 points, 10 rebounds, .486 shooting in 1969-70).

Because Baylor (shot-heavy, low accuracy) and Bird (higher percentage, more skilled) played in entirely different eras, you need some sort of statistical computation to adjust one's era for the other. It's similar to an economic deflator, which is used to compare a good like gasoline prices in the late '70s to today.

I didn't see Baylor play live, and more likely than neither did you. I can say I've never heard people (including people I know who did see him play) speaking about Baylor's defense in effusive terms. Bird was a good team defender who did receive three all-Defensive Team second-team honors.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

BadBaronRudigor

I still find those All-D awards for Bird pretty shocking. It would be like Nash getting one today. I saw the guy play defense, he was a slow SF most of the time who could be beat off the dribble by most good SFs. He wasn't even that good a post defender despite his size. He could hang in the passing lanes and his outstanding court awareness would get him steals but he was not in any sense an above average defensive forward. That said, neither was Baylor by all accounts, being undersized with a scorer's mentality . . . not Charles Barkley bad but not a good defender either.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Deke

excuses by era are dumb. the way i see it you score 30 ppg, you score 30 ppg. it doesnt mean kobes 35 ppg is better then MJs 38 ppg. and it doesnt mean birds 24 ppg is better then baylors 27 ppg. plus bird retired in his prime...

kflo