LeBron vs. Bird / '14 Heat vs '86 Celtics.

[ivanvamp]

 
But this is at least in part because this kind of multiple big man lineup simply doesn't work in today's NBA. There's no great equivalent for Parish/McHale/Bird (and that still may be the best starting five I've ever seen, along with the Nash/Joe Johnson/Quentin Richardson/Marion/Amar'e Suns), but we saw time and again this year that multiple big men didn't work. Howard/Asik in Houston, Drummond/Monroe/Smith in Detroit, both massive failures. Brooklyn's season turned around when Brook Lopez (arguably the best two way center in the league) went out for the season and they started playing Pierce at PF. San Antonio benched Splitter in this past series, Roy Hibbert was rendered totally useless more often than not in the playoffs. 
 
Imagining the Bird-era Celtics in today's NBA hurts my head, I don't know how they'd do. Among other things, they were maybe the smartest team I've ever seen, the Spurs come close. I do know that a size advantage inside rarely works in today's game, though. 

 
Well we're not talking big men of the caliber of Howard/Asik or Drummond/Monroe/Smith.  I mean, Asik and Monroe, for example, can't even sniff one all star game.  We're talking about three Hall of Famers (plus a fourth coming off the bench).  Compared to those three, Drummond/Monroe/Smith are complete chumps.  I have no doubt that the 1986 Celtics' structure would work just fine in today's NBA.  The great ones would be great in any era.  

 

[jon abbey]

Duncan/Robinson and the Nowitski Mavs come to mind.

 
Duncan/Robinson played before zone defenses were legalized (to try to stop Shaq's dominance) and Chandler/Nowitzki is like playing Parish with Bird, no McHale. Shawn Marion was the third starter on that frontline. Bird with either Parish or McHale would be awesome, all three together is much less clear to me in today's game. 

 

[jon abbey]

 
 The great ones would be great in any era.  

 
It's easy to say this, but there's absolutely no way of knowing either way. 

 

[Mugthis]

Celtics would have a big size advantage, but how would they keep up with the Heat's speed, spacing, shooting, and athleticism (and more sophisticated offenses and defenses)? 

 

[wutang112878]

Celtics would have a big size advantage, but how would they keep up with the Heat's speed, spacing, shooting, and athleticism (and more sophisticated offenses and defenses)? 

 
Thats the wonderful thing about basketball.  Basketball intelligence, passing and unselfish play can make up for all of that offensively.  Defensively the Celts would have to rely on the height/length of McHale & The Chief

 

[luckiestman]

Is it really fair to talk about tha athleticism advantage teams have without discounting PED use or are we just going to pretend that isn't rampant?

 

[Kliq]

I think we are discounting how great of a defender McHale was before injuries took their toll. This was a guy who made six All-Defense teams and could guard all the frontcourt positions. He is long enough and strong enough and can move his feet fast enough to turn Lebron into a jump shooter.

 

[cardiacs]

The 1986 Celtics would come out of the locker room and into the arena where they would see a team waiting for them with athletes with the strength and speed that they never could have imagined.  Stop.  Heat by 40.
 

 
This isn't fair. You need to somehow normalize the conditioning and training of each era. Either assume the entire 1986 Celtics had all the training of the modern Heat or the Heat team experience the NBA and all athletic conditioning of the 80's. Imagine Kevin McHale was in his 20's right now and in the NBA. Do you think his physique would look like it did in the 80's?

 

[Euclis20]

I think we are discounting how great of a defender McHale was before injuries took their toll. This was a guy who made six All-Defense teams and could guard all the frontcourt positions. He is long enough and strong enough and can move his feet fast enough to turn Lebron into a jump shooter.

 
Yeah, I doubt McHale and his 3 1st team all-defense nods (for the record, LeBron has 5 1st team all-defense appearances...not to knock it, but 3 appearances on the 1st team doesn't exactly make him unique) are going to slow a player who is stronger, faster, and knows how to use his body to get to the rim.  His length would make for an interesting challenge, but the players who gave given LeBron difficulty in the past tend to be stronger, rather than lengthy types like McHale.  LeBron just capped off a regular season in which he scored over 27 points and shot better than 56% from the field...only one other wing player in history has done that (Adrian Dantley).  McHale was amazingly versatile, but just because he can guard all 3 front court positions doesn't 'mean he would be able to turn arguably the best slasher in NBA history into a jump shooter.

 

[ivanvamp]

LeBron would have been a beast to guard for the 86 Celtics - or anybody else in history, for that matter.  He's just that great.  But the C's would be well-equipped to deal with everything else the Heat have.  DJ would have been just about a perfect matchup for Wade.  Bosh maybe just stands by the 3-point line and hits jumpers, but if that's so, Bird could stay out there with him for that.  
 
Like I've said:  I think the Celtics would have no trouble scoring a ton of points on this Heat team, I think the Celtics could pretty easily deal with everything the Heat throw at them, except LeBron.  But that would mean LeBron would have to score 45+ points a game.  Which is possible - he's that great - but I think McHale could do enough to at least keep him below that.
 
Anyway, obviously none of us will never know.  But it's fun to talk about.

 

[wutang112878]

LeBron would have been a beast to guard for the 86 Celtics - or anybody else in history, for that matter.  He's just that great.  But the C's would be well-equipped to deal with everything else the Heat have.  DJ would have been just about a perfect matchup for Wade.  Bosh maybe just stands by the 3-point line and hits jumpers, but if that's so, Bird could stay out there with him for that.  
 
Like I've said:  I think the Celtics would have no trouble scoring a ton of points on this Heat team, I think the Celtics could pretty easily deal with everything the Heat throw at them, except LeBron.  But that would mean LeBron would have to score 45+ points a game.  Which is possible - he's that great - but I think McHale could do enough to at least keep him below that.

 
Its entirely possible they would let Lebron go MJ style like what happened in the first round that year.  The guy averaged 47 points, 47 freaking points a game but they basically him go bonkers and asked him teammates to beat them against a normal defense, not a 'stop MJ at all costs' defense.  That would be interesting to watch because as far as I can tell in the Lebron Heat playoff history opponents have done that to Lebron yet.

 

[Zomp]

 
This isn't fair. You need to somehow normalize the conditioning and training of each era. Either assume the entire 1986 Celtics had all the training of the modern Heat or the Heat team experience the NBA and all athletic conditioning of the 80's. Imagine Kevin McHale was in his 20's right now and in the NBA. Do you think his physique would look like it did in the 80's?

 
Okay but then wouldn't you also need to alter the playing style of the players today without their athleticism?  Certainly their playing style would change, and its impossible to predict how.  These exercises are fun, but ultimately I think you can only compare players accomplishment's vs the competition in their own era and leave it at that.

 

[The Social Chair]

 
All of these are silly hypotheticals but I believe If you switched Lebron and Bird, the Celtics play (with Lebron) against the Heat (w/ 86 Bird), the margin of victory would be a lot larger than vice versa.

 

[Bernie Carbohydrate]

 
Its entirely possible they would let Lebron go MJ style like what happened in the first round that year.  The guy averaged 47 points, 47 freaking points a game but they basically him go bonkers and asked him teammates to beat them against a normal defense, not a 'stop MJ at all costs' defense.  That would be interesting to watch because as far as I can tell in the Lebron Heat playoff history opponents have done that to Lebron yet.

 
That's exactly where my thoughts went--the Celts defended Michael Jordan brilliantly...by living with the fact that he could not be stopped.  But that Jordan was playing on a mediocre Bulls team -- no Pippen, no Horace Grant, just a (very young) Charles Oakley and replacement level Dave Corzine at center. It was okay if Jordan scored 50, because there was no way the immortal Gene Banks was going to make them pay.
 
Having said that, I think LeBron has had a better career than Bird and exceeds Bird prime-for-prime.  Like Bird, LeBron is a potential triple-double every night.  Like Bird, LeBron can take over a game on offense.  But LeBron is a much better defender than Bird. Larry was great at getting steals, was smart, and would play tough in the post, but he was slow (even when he was healthy slashers like Nique could blow past him). I think today a coach would be tempted to have Bird defend the opposing PF so he would not have to chase athletic small forwards on the perimeter.
 
Meanwhile you can leave LeBron one-on-one with anyone--anyone from an opposing big man to a scoring guard-- and he can handle it.
 
I so much enjoyed Bird's career, but the race is over.

 

[86spike]

Is it really fair to talk about tha athleticism advantage teams have without discounting PED use or are we just going to pretend that isn't rampant?

 
agreed.
 
Lebron with access to the same 80s PED options as Bird would not be the same Lebron we see today.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

I'm playing devil's advocate more than anything, but I think the issues would more be on the other end. We saw Atlanta play five three point shooters against Indiana in the playoffs and almost knock them out, I think that Celtics team would be very exposed on defense against today's teams. Then again, I really have no idea. Like I said, it hurts my head to think about so I should just stop. 

My favorite team of all time in any sport are the 80's Celtics

That being said, they would be too slow to guard today's elite players which in the car of Miami you have James and Wade. I loved DJ bit could he guard Wade? I'm not so sure. I think the Lakers of that era would be more equipped as when the C's were even a bit closing in on 30 for the big three they struggled with a lack of speed and quickness vs the Lakers

 

[Mugthis]

 
Thats the wonderful thing about basketball.  Basketball intelligence, passing and unselfish play can make up for all of that offensively.  Defensively the Celts would have to rely on the height/length of McHale & The Chief

 
The Heat and LeBron in particular have plenty of basketball intelligence, passing, and unselfish play to go along with their speed and athleticism. 

 

[The Social Chair]

 
The Heat and LeBron in particular have plenty of basketball intelligence, passing, and unselfish play to go along with their speed and athleticism. 

 
This is what i was going to say. The Italian men's team beat the 2004 US team, and that Italian team had less athleticism than the 80's Celtics. Athleticism can be beat by smart basketball and ace shooting.  The thing is that the Heat are athletic AND they pass the ball beautifully. Best of both worlds.
 

 

[lexrageorge]

 
This is what i was going to say. The Italian men's team beat the 2004 US team, and that Italian team had less athleticism than the 80's Celtics. Athleticism can be beat by smart basketball and ace shooting.  The thing is that the Heat are athletic AND they pass the ball beautifully. Best of both worlds.
 

The 2004 US Olympic team just wasn't that good.  Overhyped, yes.  But good, no.  Also, the quirks of the FIBA game did have some impact that helped negate the athletic advantage of the 2004 team.  
 
Having said that, that team would have been much better with the 2014 LeBron than the 2004 LeBron they had.  
 
Back on point:  LeBron has surpassed Bird.  I cannot conceive an argument to the contrary. 

 

[wutang112878]

 
The Heat and LeBron in particular have plenty of basketball intelligence, passing, and unselfish play to go along with their speed and athleticism. 

 
The 86 Celtics might have been the best half court passing team ever, literally ever.  They assisted on 64% of their FGs that year, and that doesnt even do them justice because most franchises dont have enough passing highlights in their entire history to compete with the 86 Celtics passing highlights.  Lebron and Wade arent selfish in that they are demanding the ball just to put up stats but saying they are as unselfish as that 86 team was is just wrong.  We can debate intelligence, but in passing and unselfish play those two teams are not in the same stratosphere.

 

[Blacken]

Those goalposts are mighty fuckin' heavy, aren't they?

 

[wutang112878]

Considering it was certainly one of the top 5 teams ever, yeah they are high.

 

[Mugthis]

I didn't say they were as unselfish/good at passing as the '86 Celtics. I just said they were plenty unselfish and good at passing themselves, to go along with their historic athleticism. It's not like they are a Kobe-led team. 
 
I will say when it comes to selflessness, there's probably huge diminishing returns to its value. I highly doubt the 86 Celtics were more unselfish in any significant way. In fact, at a certain point, being unselfish has negative value.
 
Passing? Maybe the Celtics are more than marginally better than the Heat. But LeBron is a fucking brilliant passer (better than anyone in this matchup) and the Heat whip the ball around the court extremely well. 
 
All that said...
 
1. The '86 Celtics dominated their league much more than any Heat team, and thus should go down as higher on the "greatest teams ever" list.
 
2. The 2012, 13, or 14 Heat would probably beat the '86 Celtics if they were to face each other. But the 2014 Bobcats would beat the '66 Celtics, so I'm not sure how meaningful this is. Of course athletes and coaches get more athletic and sophisticated over time. The best practices of fitness, nutrition, tactics, and strategy get passed down and refined over time. And of course as the talent pool expands, the distribution of talent becomes more tightly bound at the top of the talent pool. The rate at which these things happen is up for dispute, but that they happen shouldn't be. 

 

[Cesar Crespo]

It's funny people envision Lebron being the same freak he is in 1986 but can't envision Bird being in better shape in 2014.

 

[wutang112878]

I didn't say they were as unselfish/good at passing as the '86 Celtics. I just said they were plenty unselfish and good at passing themselves, to go along with their historic athleticism. It's not like they are a Kobe-led team. 
 
I will say when it comes to selflessness, there's probably huge diminishing returns to its value. I highly doubt the 86 Celtics were more unselfish in any significant way. In fact, at a certain point, being unselfish has negative value.
 
Passing? Maybe the Celtics are more than marginally better than the Heat. But LeBron is a fucking brilliant passer (better than anyone in this matchup) and the Heat whip the ball around the court extremely well. 
 
All that said...
 
1. The '86 Celtics dominated their league much more than any Heat team, and thus should go down as higher on the "greatest teams ever" list.
 
2. The 2012, 13, or 14 Heat would probably beat the '86 Celtics if they were to face each other. But the 2014 Bobcats would beat the '66 Celtics, so I'm not sure how meaningful this is. Of course athletes and coaches get more athletic and sophisticated over time. The best practices of fitness, nutrition, tactics, and strategy get passed down and refined over time. And of course as the talent pool expands, the distribution of talent becomes more tightly bound at the top of the talent pool. The rate at which these things happen is up for dispute, but that they happen shouldn't be. 

 
Isnt the bolded conflicting?
 
And on the underlined, we will just have to agree to disagree that possibly the best passing team of all time is only marginally better than the Heat.  Most importantly, are you really saying that Lebron is a better passer than Bird?  Throughout this thread I dont think there has been one person who said that and many people who conceded that Bird was most certainly the better passer.  If you really, truly think that highly of the Heats passing game we are worlds apart on comparing these 2 teams.
 
Now on the athleticism piece, we had some great points above:
 
 

Exactly. Just look at San Antonio. They don't have an abundance of athleticism at all but they school more athletic teams with great passing and shooting.

 
 

 
This is what i was going to say. The Italian men's team beat the 2004 US team, and that Italian team had less athleticism than the 80's Celtics. Athleticism can be beat by smart basketball and ace shooting.  The thing is that the Heat are athletic AND they pass the ball beautifully. Best of both worlds.
 

 
Here are some great examples where basketball intelligence and passing beat superior athleticism, just like Rocky's eye of the tiger beat Ivan Drago.  Your assertion that any team today could beat the Celts of the 60s seems to be very excessive.

 

[Mugthis]

How is it conflicting? Let's use some imaginary numbers just to show my logic:
 
'86 Celtics:
Passing: 10/10
Intelligence: 10/10
Seflessness: 10/10
Size: 8/10
Athleticism: 3/10 (relative to today)
Shooting: 8/10
 
'14 Heat:
Passing: 9/10
Intelligence: 9/10
Selflessness: 9/10
Size: 6/10
Athleticism: 9/10
Shooting: 10/10
 
I'm half-assing those already imaginary ratings, but I would pick a team with the bottom ratings to beat the top team.
 
And of course the Bobcats would destroy the '66 Celtics. The '66 Celtics haven't even been trained to shoot a 3-pointer.
 
And no, let's please not go down the rabbit hole and then start imagining: "well, what if the '66 Celtics roster were born 48 years later!" Yeah, maybe Bill Russell becomes a WR in the NFL. At the very least, it would be literally impossible for the '66 Celtics roster to exist in today's game, considering the differences in league rules and CBAs.
 
How the '66 Celtics would do if they grew up today is a completely unknowable question and rather pointless to speculate. It's too many levels of abstraction. 

 

[Kliq]

I know you said you were half-assing those numbers, but how on earth do the Celtics get a 8/10 for size? They had three HoF frontcourt players starting AND Walton off the bench.

 

[wutang112878]

How is it conflicting? Let's use some imaginary numbers just to show my logic:
 
'86 Celtics:
Passing: 10/10
Intelligence: 10/10
Seflessness: 10/10
Size: 8/10
Athleticism: 3/10 (relative to today)
Shooting: 8/10
 
'14 Heat:
Passing: 9/10
Intelligence: 9/10
Selflessness: 9/10
Size: 6/10
Athleticism: 9/10
Shooting: 10/10
 
I'm half-assing those already imaginary ratings, but I would pick a team with the bottom ratings to beat the top team.
 
And of course the Bobcats would destroy the '66 Celtics. The '66 Celtics haven't even been trained to shoot a 3-pointer.
 
And no, let's please not go down the rabbit hole and then start imagining: "well, what if the '66 Celtics roster were born 48 years later!" Yeah, maybe Bill Russell becomes a WR in the NFL. At the very least, it would be literally impossible for the '66 Celtics roster to exist in today's game, considering the differences in league rules and CBAs.
 
How the '66 Celtics would do if they grew up today is a completely unknowable question and rather pointless to speculate. It's too many levels of abstraction. 

 
The rankings help me understand where you are coming from and I see where our difference is.  I put the 86 Celtics up as one of the top 5 teams of all time.  I look at this Heat team and see this team as a very good championship team, but I can find 10 title teams I would rather have over them.
 
I'll ask again why is it impossible for basketball intelligence and passing to beat athleticism?  There are the Spurs over the last decade.  The Italy example cited above.  The 2004 Olympics where the US a team full of athletes lost to Spain and Argentina.  Spain and Argentina.  That team was a collection of the most gifted athletic stars in the NBA at the time but they couldnt play as a team and the whole was less than the sum of the parts.  This really isnt a debate of one era vs another, just focus on the athleticism part.  Do you think a less talented and less athletic team can beat a superior team if they play unselfish team basketball?

 

[wutang112878]

Great example.  And now that he's ours and after the stories that have been written on him, we can see how much intelligence he pushes to the players and ends up on the court.  When he has strategies like this:
 

 
Stevens kept his players in situations—offensively and defensively—where they had a high probability of success. Shelvin Mack, a thick 6'3" guard, was seldom asked to guard an explosive dribbler (a duty that usually fell to Ronald Nored or Shawn Vanzant); Matt Howard, a 6'8" forward on both Final Four teams with a propensity for overplaying and fouling, was usually assigned to an opponent's weakest forward (while Hayward or Willie Veasley would guard more athletic players). Hahn, strong and slow, sometimes guarded players who were six inches taller but not highly skilled.
 

 
 
You can see that opponents athleticism and your athletic weakness can be overcome with basketball intelligence.

 

[lars10]

Celtics would have a big size advantage, but how would they keep up with the Heat's speed, spacing, shooting, and athleticism (and more sophisticated offenses and defenses)? 

The 86 Celtics were always looking to run...they could also play half court, but they'd look to run a fast break on almost every possession..with McHale and Parrish and at times Bird on the boards they were always looking for a quick outlet pass.
 
The Heat are a decent shooting team, but it's not like the C's were bad shooters or didn't know how to space out the floor.

 

[Mugthis]

Kliq, on 03 Jun 2014 - 8:41 PM, said:
I know you said you were half-assing those numbers, but how on earth do the Celtics get a 8/10 for size? They had three HoF frontcourt players starting AND Walton off the bench.

 
I dunno, I was looking at the rosters and the Celtics seemed to have very good size, but not 10/10. I imagine a Twin Towers type deal, i.e. Sampson/Hakeem or Robinson/Duncan getting a 10/10.
 
If you look at the roster heights (I'll limit it to top 10 MP):
 
'86 Celtics | '14 Heat:
 
C: Parish, 7-0 (230lb) | C: Bosh, 6-10 (228) [+.2", +2lb]
PF: McHale, 6-11 (210lb) | PF: Lewis, 6-10 (215) [+.1, -5]
SF: Bird, 6-9 (220lb) | SF: James, 6-8 (240) [+.1, -20]
SG: Ainge, 6-4 (175lb) | SG: Wade, 6-4 (212) [0, -37]
PG: DJ, 6-4 (185lb) | PG: Chalmers, 6-1 (190) [+.3, -5]
Mean: 6-8 (204lb) | 6-6 (217lb) [+.2", -13lb]
 
C: Kite, 6-11 (250) | C, Chris Anderson, 6-10 (230) [+.1, +20)
C: Walton, 6-11 (210) | PF: Beasley, 6-9 (235) [+.2, -25]
SF: Wedman, 6-7 (210) |  SF: Shane Battier, 6-8 (220) [-.1, -10]
SG: Carlisle 6-5 (210) | SG: Ray Allen, 6-5 (205) [0, +5]
PG: Sichting, 6-1 (168) | PG: Norris Cole, 6-2 (170) [-.1, -2]
Mean: 6-7 (210lb) | 6-7 (212lb)
 
So...
 
The Heat starting lineup gives up 2 inches and their bench essentially gives up no height. However, the Heat have an advantage in weight, especially it's starting lineup. 
 
Not sure the Celtics have much of a size advantage. Certain a much smaller advantage there compared to the Heat's athleticism, and possibly shooting.  

 

[Mugthis]

 
 
You can see that opponents athleticism and your athletic weakness can be overcome with basketball intelligence.

 
Are you going to post every occasion a superior athletic team won a basketball game?

 

[Mugthis]

 
I'll ask again why is it impossible for basketball intelligence and passing to beat athleticism?  There are the Spurs over the last decade.  

 
I'm not sure why you're asking this since no one has ever argued that smarter teams never beat more athletic teams.
 
Also...funny you mention the Spurs, since they most recently just lost the NBA title to the more athletic Heat. They've also failed to win the title 11 times in the past 15 years, presumably to dumber teams. So, again, I'm not sure what you're proving here.

 

[Mugthis]

Imagine the Celtics trying to keep up with this lineup:
 
C: Parish, 7-0 (230lb) | C: Bosh, 6-10 (228) [+.2", +2lb]
PF: McHale, 6-11 (210lb) | PF: Lewis, 6-10 (215) [+.1, -5]
SF: Bird, 6-9 (220lb) | SF: James, 6-8 (240) [+.1, -20]
SG: Ainge, 6-4 (175lb) | Ray Allen, 6-5 (205) [-.1, -30]
PG: DJ, 6-4 (185lb) | SG: Wade, 6-4 (212) [0, -27]
 
Mean: 6-8 (204lb) | 6-7 (220lb) [+.2", -16lb]
 
How could they keep up with the athleticism of James and Wade? The shooting of Allen, Bosh, Lewis, and James? Imagine trying to chase Allen around on the screens (which they've never seen anything like before), while staying in front of cutting James and Wade, while avoiding leaving Bosh and Lewis open for easy corner threes? All while giving up quite a bit of weight. You think an inch in height and some vague notion of basketball IQ is going to swamp that?
 
They would have no chance over a big enough sample. The '86 Celtics will have to settle for "just" one of the 3 most dominating teams of all-time. But they wouldn't beat today's Heat. 

 

[Kliq]

 

Kliq, on 03 Jun 2014 - 8:41 PM, said:
I know you said you were half-assing those numbers, but how on earth do the Celtics get a 8/10 for size? They had three HoF frontcourt players starting AND Walton off the bench.

 
I dunno, I was looking at the rosters and the Celtics seemed to have very good size, but not 10/10. I imagine a Twin Towers type deal, i.e. Sampson/Hakeem or Robinson/Duncan getting a 10/10.
 
If you look at the roster heights (I'll limit it to top 10 MP):
 
'86 Celtics | '14 Heat:
 
C: Parish, 7-0 (230lb) | C: Bosh, 6-10 (228) [+.2", +2lb]
PF: McHale, 6-11 (210lb) | PF: Lewis, 6-10 (215) [+.1, -5]
SF: Bird, 6-9 (220lb) | SF: James, 6-8 (240) [+.1, -20]
SG: Ainge, 6-4 (175lb) | SG: Wade, 6-4 (212) [0, -37]
PG: DJ, 6-4 (185lb) | PG: Chalmers, 6-1 (190) [+.3, -5]
Mean: 6-8 (204lb) | 6-6 (217lb) [+.2", -13lb]
 
C: Kite, 6-11 (250) | C, Chris Anderson, 6-10 (230) [+.1, +20)
C: Walton, 6-11 (210) | PF: Beasley, 6-9 (235) [+.2, -25]
SF: Wedman, 6-7 (210) |  SF: Shane Battier, 6-8 (220) [-.1, -10]
SG: Carlisle 6-5 (210) | SG: Ray Allen, 6-5 (205) [0, +5]
PG: Sichting, 6-1 (168) | PG: Norris Cole, 6-2 (170) [-.1, -2]
Mean: 6-7 (210lb) | 6-7 (212lb)
 
So...
 
The Heat starting lineup gives up 2 inches and their bench essentially gives up no height. However, the Heat have an advantage in weight, especially it's starting lineup. 
 
Not sure the Celtics have much of a size advantage. Certain a much smaller advantage there compared to the Heat's athleticism, and possibly shooting.  
 

 
I'm sorry, this is total horsecrap to me. First of all, Walton was listed at 6'11", but everybody agrees that he was closer to 7'2". Also, it's great that Rashard Lewis is only two inches shorter than McHale, but Lewis couldn't guard McHale if his life depended on it. Bosh is tall, but again, he couldn't bang with the likes of Parish and McHale, or even Bird for that matter. Chief would destroy Bosh on the boards. You can't just look up the heights and weights of each player and say "Well, the Celtics didn't have that big of a size advantage." Not only were the Celtics bigger, but their big players were MUCH better than the Heat's big men.

 

[lars10]

 
Imagine the Celtics trying to keep up with this lineup:
 
C: Parish, 7-0 (230lb) | C: Bosh, 6-10 (228) [+.2", +2lb]
PF: McHale, 6-11 (210lb) | PF: Lewis, 6-10 (215) [+.1, -5]
SF: Bird, 6-9 (220lb) | SF: James, 6-8 (240) [+.1, -20]
SG: Ainge, 6-4 (175lb) | Ray Allen, 6-5 (205) [-.1, -30]
PG: DJ, 6-4 (185lb) | SG: Wade, 6-4 (212) [0, -27]
 
Mean: 6-8 (204lb) | 6-7 (220lb) [+.2", -16lb]
 
How could they keep up with the athleticism of James and Wade? The shooting of Allen, Bosh, Lewis, and James? Imagine trying to chase Allen around on the screens (which they've never seen anything like before), while staying in front of cutting James and Wade, while avoiding leaving Bosh and Lewis open for easy corner threes? All while giving up quite a bit of weight. You think an inch in height and some vague notion of basketball IQ is going to swamp that?
 
They would have no chance over a big enough sample. The '86 Celtics will have to settle for "just" one of the 3 most dominating teams of all-time. But they wouldn't beat today's Heat. 
 

So now we're saying that the 86 Celts never saw screens?  Or multiple screens?
 
It's like they didn't even play basketball back then... did any of you guys actually see the 86 C's play?
 
An important question...are fouls, travels and such called the same way they were in 86?  Or are these games called with the 'rules' that are now in place?
 
edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFrRnWEt3Z4
 
this video shows just how often the C's looked to beat the other team down the court...around the 1:00 mark for instance.

 

[Mugthis]

 
I'm sorry, this is total horsecrap to me. First of all, Walton was listed at 6'11", but everybody agrees that he was closer to 7'2". Also, it's great that Rashard Lewis is only two inches shorter than McHale, but Lewis couldn't guard McHale if his life depended on it. Bosh is tall, but again, he couldn't bang with the likes of Parish and McHale, or even Bird for that matter. Chief would destroy Bosh on the boards. You can't just look up the heights and weights of each player and say "Well, the Celtics didn't have that big of a size advantage." Not only were the Celtics bigger, but their big players were MUCH better than the Heat's big men.

 
Celtics must be truly magical that they can be much "bigger" while physically being a slightly taller and skinnier. Maybe it's because even though they weighed less, they were proportionally more muscular. This would make sense, since the mid-1980's NBA was known for their superior diets and strength training programs......oh wait. They were famous for the opposite.

 

[Mugthis]

So now we're saying that the 86 Celts never saw screens?  Or multiple screens?
 
It's like they didn't even play basketball back then... did any of you guys actually see the 86 C's play?
 
An important question...are fouls, travels and such called the same way they were in 86?  Or are these games called with the 'rules' that are now in place?

 
That was overstated on my part. My bad. 
 
I will say Ray Allen and his 3PT shooting and screenplay is qualitatively different than anything that existed in that era. Likewise with Bosh and Lewis stretching the floor (thus neutralizing much of the Celtics' height advantage of defense).
 
I do love how everyone is waving away the athleticism of the Heat, the presence of LeBron and Wade, the spacing/shooting of the Heat, and the fact that LeBron is probably the perfect player to shut down Bird (as much as it's possible to shut down someone like Bird, of course). All because the Celtics would allegedly overpower the shorter but heavier and stronger Heat. That and unsubstantiated claims of their superior intelligence and passing. A strong case.

 

[lars10]

 
Celtics must be truly magical that they can be much "bigger" while physically being a slightly taller and skinnier. Maybe it's because even though they weighed less, they were proportionally more muscular. This would make sense, since the mid-1980's NBA was known for their superior diets and strength training programs......oh wait. They were famous for the opposite.

So to be clear... the only criteria for comparing Bosh and Parrish, McHale and Lewis is their height and weight?
 
I agree that LeBron v Bird and DJ v Wade are tough match ups, but seems odd that you think the two above are all that close.  Neither Bosh or Lewis could bang in the post with those two...that's not their game.
 
And I think Ainge could follow Allen all over the court...would Allen get back on D to try and keep Danny from sneaking out on the fast break?
 
I really wish we could see this matchup.
 
Edit:  I don't mean to oversimplify your argument...just not that impressed with Bosh or Lewis personally.

 

[Mugthis]

So to be clear... the only criteria for comparing Bosh and Parrish, McHale and Lewis is their height and weight?
 
 

Nope. Nice try.
 
The claim I'm responding to is the idea that the Celtics had some significant "size" advantage over the Heat. Luckily "size" is a well-understood term. "a thing's overall dimensions or magnitude; how big something is."

Luckily we have (imperfect) measurements of height and weight! Surely we can agree that those are two big components of "size." Surely a team with a significant advantage in "size" should show a significant advantage in height and/or weight, right? And yet no such thing exists. But weight is imperfect, since 200lbs of fat and 200lbs of muscle mean very different things when we think of "size" in the NBA. Unfortunately, this entirely favors the modern Heat. They Heat may be shorter, but they are heavier and stronger. I see no reason why they would get destroyed in the paint due to size. McHale, of course, has historically great post moves, so he'd do well there. But no one is disputing that.
 
I accept that the Celtics are taller, have superior post players, and emphasize controlling the post. This is where they have the best chance at gaining an advantage over the Heat. I agree. However, the Heat, due to their physical size, could much more easily adapt to this mismatch than the Celtics could adapt to the Heats athleticism, spacing, and shooting. 

 

[lars10]

 
I accept that the Celtics are taller, have superior post players, and emphasize controlling the post. This is where they have the best chance at gaining an advantage over the Heat. I agree. However, the Heat, due to their physical size, could much more easily adapt to this mismatch than the Celtics could adapt to the Heats athleticism, spacing, and shooting. 

 
OK..yeah sorry..I see your point.
 
I do think that the Heat's spacing and shooting are overrated in your argument... The athleticism would definitely be a problem.
 
I wish the Heat's competition had been more than basically the Celtics over their run...they've really had no dominant team to play against to truly gauge how good they are.
 
How would the Heat fair in the Western conference?  Or the Eastern Conference of the 80s?  

 

[wutang112878]

 
I'm not sure why you're asking this since no one has ever argued that smarter teams never beat more athletic teams.
 
Also...funny you mention the Spurs, since they most recently just lost the NBA title to the more athletic Heat. They've also failed to win the title 11 times in the past 15 years, presumably to dumber teams. So, again, I'm not sure what you're proving here.

 
Its because of your assertion, that seems serious, that the Bobcats could beat the 66 Celtics.  And you completely dismiss the 86 Celts ability to compete with the Heat.  I think that vastly overates athleticism and underates basketball intelligence's importance in basketball.  We see it in all sports too, look at the 01 Pats a group of slow, not terribly talented defenders who beat the greatest show on turf.

 

[wutang112878]

 
Imagine the Celtics trying to keep up with this lineup:
 
C: Parish, 7-0 (230lb) | C: Bosh, 6-10 (228) [+.2", +2lb]
PF: McHale, 6-11 (210lb) | PF: Lewis, 6-10 (215) [+.1, -5]
SF: Bird, 6-9 (220lb) | SF: James, 6-8 (240) [+.1, -20]
SG: Ainge, 6-4 (175lb) | Ray Allen, 6-5 (205) [-.1, -30]
PG: DJ, 6-4 (185lb) | SG: Wade, 6-4 (212) [0, -27]
 
Mean: 6-8 (204lb) | 6-7 (220lb) [+.2", -16lb]
 
How could they keep up with the athleticism of James and Wade? The shooting of Allen, Bosh, Lewis, and James? Imagine trying to chase Allen around on the screens (which they've never seen anything like before), while staying in front of cutting James and Wade, while avoiding leaving Bosh and Lewis open for easy corner threes? All while giving up quite a bit of weight. You think an inch in height and some vague notion of basketball IQ is going to swamp that?
 
They would have no chance over a big enough sample. The '86 Celtics will have to settle for "just" one of the 3 most dominating teams of all-time. But they wouldn't beat today's Heat. 
 

 
This is a good question, and I'd point to the 83/84 series against the Lakers.  The Lakers had Worthy and Cooper who were better athletes than Ainge and Bird, and the Lakers could fly up and down the court to really take advantage of their superior speed.  But the Celts had a size advantage, by that we mean their bigs were collectively superior to the Lakers.  The Lakers had Kareem who played great offensively that series but he wasnt a great defender, and the Chief and McHale were able to protect the rim enough to control the Lakers offensively.  Plus for all his 'height' Kareem only averaged 7 rebounds in the series compared to Birds 14 and the Chiefs 11.
 
And as for keeping up the Celts would probably do the little things to negate the athleticism advantage.  For example the Celts had 36 more offensive rebounds than the Lakers in the series, took 43 more free throws, had 9 more steals (and remember this was done by an inferior team athletically).  Individually each of those components isnt a huge advantage, but collectively they begin to make a difference.  Overall its a clash of styles, and typically in those situations the team that can force the game into their style of play can take control of the game. 

 

[ivanvamp]

So now we're saying that the 86 Celts never saw screens?  Or multiple screens?
 
It's like they didn't even play basketball back then... did any of you guys actually see the 86 C's play?
 

 
I work at a big university here in New England, and I play basketball with the kids all the time.  I'm in my mid-40's, and I regularly roast these former starting high school players (who are obviously MUCH more athletic than me at this point).  How do I do it?  With my array of fundamental moves, pump fakes, the use of both hands, and basketball smarts.  They continually give me looks like, "How do you DO that?"  I mean, it's like they think that basketball was invented yesterday.
 
To the question of athleticism and whether the Celtics could guard today's athletes, let me suggest this.  The mid-80s Lakers were as athletic a bunch as I've ever seen.  Think about it:  Magic at 6'9" running the point.  Could really run.  Byron Scott was a terrific athlete.  Michael Cooper was a tremendous athlete.  James Worthy was every bit as good an athlete as Wade or Bosh is.  I'll put LeBron in his own category because he's a total freak.  But those Laker teams were incredibly athletic.  The Celtics managed to play with them despite not being as athletic.  

 

[Kliq]

Building on what Ivantrump said (not about his old man game, but about the Celtics athleticism) I don't think the Heat are THAT much superior to the Celtics. This is the 86 Celtics, not the 56 Celtics, they competed against MJ, Wilkins, Dr. J, etc. It isn't like they never saw a guy play above the rim before. And by 2014 standards, I don't think the Heat are actually that athletic as a team. Yes. LeBron is one of a kind, and Wade when healthy is also fantastic, but outside of that, the team is mostly veterans that can't get up very high. Battier, Allen, Rashard Lewis, Haslem, Cole, Chalmers, even Bosh, none of those guys are going to kill you with athleticism. The only other guy they have is Andersen. And remember, on the interior the Celtic's are not slouches. McHale,  before his injury, was a great athlete and could defend a bunch of different positions. Parish also wasn't bad and ran the floor like a 7-foot gazelle.

 

[Mugthis]

But once again, the Heat aren't just an athletic team, which is how they are being presented. They are an uber-athletic team, led by possibly the greatest player ever (I wouldn't put him there...yet, but it's an arguable position), with one of the 5 best shooting guards of all-time, they can shoot and space the floor as well as any team ever (is there any shooting/spacing equivalent to a Bosh/Lewis, Bosh/Battier, or the Heat's small ball lineup with Ray Allen?), they are smart, they pass the ball really well, and they are a tight-knit, unselfish team. They have a weaknesses at height and McHale would probably have a field day with whomever they put on him.
 
You guys bring the mid-80's Lakers as an athletic equivalent. I agree, they are also an uber-athletic team. And they were roughly evenly matched with the Celtics in those years. But unlike the Heat, they have no equivalent to Ray Allen, Bosh, and their 3-point spacing. The Heat, led by LeBron and Wade, are one of the most dangerous fast-break teams of all-time, up there with the 80s Lakers. But the peak Heat team (last year), made over 500 more 3 points shots at a much higher efficiency and a much slower pace than the Lakers.
 
The Lakers, of course, had Kareem, and the Heat have no equivalent. So there's that.
 
In fairness, while I think I have a good argument that the modern-day Heat could beat the mid-80's Celtics, I don't really have much evidence to support the idea that the Heat would destroy them. That's hyperbole on my part. 

 

[wutang112878]

You guys bring the mid-80's Lakers as an athletic equivalent. I agree, they are also an uber-athletic team. And they were roughly evenly matched with the Celtics in those years. But unlike the Heat, they have no equivalent to Ray Allen, Bosh, and their 3-point spacing. The Heat, led by LeBron and Wade, are one of the most dangerous fast-break teams of all-time, up there with the 80s Lakers. But the peak Heat team (last year), made over 500 more 3 points shots at a much higher efficiency and a much slower pace than the Lakers.
 
The Lakers, of course, had Kareem, and the Heat have no equivalent. So there's that.
 
In fairness, while I think I have a good argument that the modern-day Heat could beat the mid-80's Celtics, I don't really have much evidence to support the idea that the Heat would destroy them. That's hyperbole on my part. 

 
This is a huge difference and there are some others.  The Lakers could run the fast break like no other and significant, not marginally, better than the Heat today.  The Heat's break is made great primarily by Lebron and Wade.  The Lakers could go small with Worthy at the 4, Cooper at the 3 and Scott at the 2, Kareem & Magic.  Thats a very fast team and in terms of height they had Magic at 6 8, Scott at 6 3, Cooper at 6 5, Worthy at 6 9 and Kareem at 7 2, basically a nightmare to deal with.  If they werent small Magic always had 2 super fast and athletic running mates in Worthy, Cooper or Scott.  Magic was an amazing scoring and passing PG who could average close to 20 a game while dishing out 12 assists, the Heat have nothing like Magic.  And if they were limited to a half court set they could dump it to Kareem and his sky hook was genuinely unstoppable even when the Chief, McHale and Walton tried they failed. And I know you mentioned that but it cant be overstated because in the 86 Finals Kareem averaged 20 a game and shot 51% which is pretty scary.
 
I'm not trying to match the Lakers up to the Heat and show they are comparable, I just want to point out all the incredible facets that were the 86 Lakers that the Celtics had to deal with.  They won in 86 and the other matchups against them were amazingly competitive.  This is why while the 86 Celts most certainly wouldnt dominate the Heat, but they most certainly without a doubt had a great chance at beating them.

 

[Mugthis]

 
This is a huge difference and there are some others. 

 
Is it? Stylistically, it's a huge difference, but in terms of effectiveness? Statistically, Bosh is as valuable if not more so than mid-80's Kareem. I know i know i know. Kareem vs. Bosh? Har har har. This should not be crazy. We're talking 10-15 years after Kareem's peak. He was about to retire. He was old as shit. It shouldn't be controversial to say that 39-year old (back when that really meant something) Kareem isn't a huge advantage over an all-star center in their prime. 
 

The Heat's break is made great primarily by Lebron and Wade. [/quote]
 
Well, that's basically all you need. Fast breaks are run by wing players primarily. And it's also misleading, Bosh is a good moving big-man, who can also spot up for a 3 on a fast break, and LeBron and Wade can run down the court like no other while having always have the option to kick out to Ray Allen or the many other 3-point shooters that trail on their fast breaks. This didn't exist much in the 80s but it's a huge part of today's game, especially for the Heat. To claim that any team is superior to Heat in the open court requires A LOT of evidence.
 
And the Heat have nothing like Magic? LeBron is like Magic, only better and more versatile.  

 

[DJnVa]

Well, I just played it out on whatif sports and the Heat won it in 7 games, winning game 7 in Boston.
 
So there.

 

[Mugthis]

Well, I just played it out on whatif sports and the Heat won it in 7 games, winning game 7 in Boston.
 
So there.

 
This seems like irrefutable proof to me.