That last figure is phenomenal for a college player. Since he was obviously still improving, it's not unreasonable to assume he would have been a 88-90% free throw shooter by the age of 25, which is Larry Bird territory. I believe Bird was 84% as a rookie in the NBA and Bias was already there as a college senior.

Bias was much better than James Worthy. He had shooting and ballhandling skills that Worthy could only dream about. He was also a better rebounder. Bias ability-wise and body wise is similar to LeBron james, though I'm not sure he would ever gotten as good as LeBron.

I grew up a Celts fan as well, and I remember the adults being very hung up on Bias, but I never watched him myself. I can tell you one thing - drawing comparisons to Jordan does not might not guarantee success, but there's been a long lineage of very good players who were all named the "next" at some point. Ron Harper, Clyde Drexler, Harold Minor (kinda), Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, Kobe Bryant, Vince Carter, LeBron James, and Dwyane Wade. They don't suck.

Before MJ played a game at UNC, he was touted by Al McGuire as a player who would, one day in the future, go down in Hoops History as, "The Greatest Tar Heel Of Them All". Was Coach McGuire wrong?

Evaluating basketball players accurately involves a great deal more than simply crunching numbers.

-------------------

Kevin,

Like you, I, too, can recall seeing Len Bias play on more than one occasion against elite level competition.

Although there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that he was an outstanding college player, who was likely going to have a very good pro career, as an under-sized Power Forward, ala James Worthy, IMO, any comparison of Bias' actual skill-set to that of Michael Jordan's, as the quintessential NBA OG/SF, is simply off-base.

Please re-read carefully the anecdotal comments referenced in this thread praising Len's ability to play the game at a high level. What you should be able to see are subtle hints that reveal a distinct qualitative difference between Bias' physical and skill-based assets:

* He was not quite as quick
* He was not quite as agile
* His ball-handling and passing skills needed to improve
* His range on his jumper needed to increase
* His driving ability was not that of a prototypical SF in the NBA

in comparison with His Airness.

Forget a statistical analysis of these two elite level hoopsters.

Len Bias Highlights

In all likelihood:

* Len Bias would not have become "a poor man's James Worthy"; James Worthy would have become "a poor man's Len Bias"

* Len Bias would have become a much better NBA player than Brad Dougherty

* Len Bias, as an under-sized PF, would still have fallen short of names like Russell, Jordan, Oscar, Chamberlain, The Logo, Erving, Magic, Bird, Kareem and Hakeem, as the GOATs.

There is little/no shame in that ... considering the quality of those aforementioned names.

And I don't have only anecdotal evidence. As I said, I actually got to see him play live. Twice. The first time he was impressive. The second time, he was so good, I was wondering if he was the best player I'd ever seen. And I go all the way back to the Russell days in Boston.

Having said that, I do think Simmons goes too far sometimes. Bias projecting as a superstar isn't the same as being one. He would have had to develop some to become that. But my opinion of him was it would have required no stretch of his abilities to develop. Nothing like stretching Walker by hoping he'd develop a jumpshot or hoping Person would become a better rebounder.