What if Magic wasn't injured in 1989 NBA Finals?

[Odinn]

What was the chance of winning title for the Lakers?

And if the Lakers had won the title, how would that affect Magic's position in the goat list?

He would be the first player who threepeated as the man in the modern era. (one of three players along side Jordan and Shaq.)
6x NBA Champion
4x NBA Finals MVP
3x undisputed the best player on a championship team

???

[Nevaeh]

What was the chance of winning title for the Lakers?

And if the Lakers had won the title, how would that affect Magic's position in the goat list?

He would be the first player who threepeated as the man in the modern era. (one of three players along side Jordan and Shaq.)
6x NBA Champion
4x NBA Finals MVP
3x undisputed the best player on a championship team

???

Assuming Jordan did exactly what he did the same way (win 3, retire, win another 3), Magic would be no lower than top 3 based on his efficiency and leadership. Wilt would drop a spot IMO.

MJ
Magic
Russell
Wilt

[Bernie Nips]

There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.

[Swaggin916]

There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.

Yea I mean Bill walton being out a few games definitely swung the series...

[Collie]

Yea I mean Bill walton being out a few games definitely swung the series...

McHale was playing with a BROKEN foot. Bird was also beginning to have back problems. Not to mention Len Bias died.

[get these NETS]

think they still would have lost


Pistons got better.....

Aguirre fit their system better than AD

and the previous year....Lakers got bailed out in game 6 by a phantom call against Laimbeer and won in 7

[jlauber]

The Lakers came into the '89 Finals 11-0 in the playoffs, BUT, they had lost Byron Scott and his near 20 ppg in the last game of the WCF's.

Magic was injured mid-way thru game two of the Finals, with the score tied, and on the road.

Clearly we are dealing with hypotheticals, but had Magic not been injured, there is a possibility that the Lakers would have won game two. Given the fact that they lost game three, without BOTH Magic and Scott, by FOUR points, AND, given the fact that they lost game four, by eight points, by being outscored by ten points in the lasy quarter, and again, without BOTH Magic and Scott...well, they could easily have been up 3-1 (and probably doing so without Scott at all.)


There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.


The Lakers routed Boston in the first two games. They had 20+ point leads early in the 4th quarters of both games. In game three, Boston eked out a six point win, in a game that was decided in the last minute. True, Magic won game four with his"mini-hook", and Boston easily won game five. Then, in the clinching game six win, the Lakers blew the game open mid-way in the 4th quarter. Clearly, though, the Lakers were MUCH better than Boston in that series.

If we are going to say that Boston MIGHT have won in '87, then I could easily argue that the Lakers SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. In fact, even Larry Bird, himself, claimed as much. The Lakers BLEW games two and four, while cruising to an easy win in game one, and just annihilating the Celtics in game three.

And, after Boston massacred LA in game one of the '85 Finals, the Lakers took complete control of that series, winning four of the last five games, including a blowout win in game three.

So, in reality, the Lakers were a couple of missed FTs away from going 3-0 against Boston in the 80's.

Furthermore, had Magic not been injured in '81, and playing at nowhere near 100%, the Lakers probably would have beaten the 40-42 Rockets in round one, and, given the fact that LA easily wiped out Philly in '80 and '82 (my god, they won the clinching game six in '80, on the road, and without Kareem), and that Boston had to win three straight games by the narrowest of margins against that same Philly team to get to the Finals in '81...well, hypothetically, the BEST team did NOT win the title in '81.

The Lakers were CLEARLY the best team of the 80's. EIGHT Finals, and FIVE titles,...and a couple of points away from winning SIX...and injuries to Magic in '81, from winning number SEVEN,...and injuries to BOTH Magic and Scott from probably winning number EIGHT.


As for Magic's place in the GOAT conversation...I have him in my top-4. Aside from Russell, he was the greatest "winner" in NBA history. In his 12 seasons (and I am not counting his very productive part-time season in '96), he went to NINE Finals, and won FIVE rings. His WORST team record was 54-28, and he averaged 59 wins per season in those 12 years. And, without Kareem, he took his last two teams, to a league best 63-19 record, and then to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals (and that team was already on a severe decline, and then battered by injuries in the post-season.)

And Magic was just BRILLIANT in his post-season career. He shot .516 in his NINE Finals, including two Finals of .560 and .541. He usually LED his Lakers in rebounding in the playoffs and Finals. And he had Finals of 13.0 apg and 13.6 apg. His '87 Finals, in which he averaged 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, shot .541 from the field, .500 from the arc, and .960 from the line, is one of the greatest Finals in NBA history. And, of course, his game six in the '80 Finals, in his ROOKIE season, in which he scored 42 points, on 14-23 shooting (and 14-14 from the line), with a HUGE lead in rebounds, at 15, along with seven assists, AND, withOUT Kareem, has to rank among the greatest "close-out" games in Finals history.

[nycelt84]

The Pistons win in 6 instead of 4. They were the league's best team all year and were clearly a team of destiny.

[Kiddlovesnets]

lol this... Had the Refs not ripped Kings and sent the Lakers to 2002 NBA Finals, the Nets would've got their championship 10 years ago.
:rockon:

[Odinn]

lol this... Had the Refs not ripped Kings and sent the Lakers to 2002 NBA Finals, the Nets would've got their championship 10 years ago.
:rockon:
Claiming the Nets would defeat the Kings in 2002?

Actual :lol belong to this.:oldlol: :oldlol:

[Kiddlovesnets]

Claiming the Nets would defeat the Kings in 2002?

Actual :lol belong to this.:oldlol: :oldlol:

Well I believe they could, Nets in 6.

But thats not really the point of my post though...

[Sarcastic]

For me, it wouldn't change his rank at all. I have him as the third best ever.

[Owl]

Assuming that Byron Scott was still out it wouldn't have made a huge difference, certainly not enough to turn a sweep into a Lakers victory.

The Lakers were killed in the backcourt without those two though, and shot poorly by their standards which one imagines was in significant part due to the absence of Magic. The Lakers top 7 for those finals (by minutes and points) featured no (non tweener) guards. They had guard-forward Michael Cooper, and were playing Tony Campbell (a small forward) alongside him. The Lakers were thin at the guard position.

Then again Kareem was falling off badly and Michael Cooper was no longer what he once was either.

And the Magic's legacy probably isn't affected much at all for the following reasons
1) The Laker's performance in the finals indicates how crucial he was to their success.
2) Most people don't judge individuals on team titles won.
3) Even those who do tend use it only against non-title winners, or those who supposedly should have won more (e.g. Wilt, David Robinson). With 5 titles Magic is probably safe.

Although if you are talking about missed opportunites for Magic the bigger what if pertains to his premature retirement. Without HIV Magic would have rejoined an NBA finalist having just turned 32. He never guarded the jets on the perimeter anyway so I don't know how much aging hurts his game. Not that I fancy his chances of any more titles against those Bulls teams.

[Da_Realist]

Clearly we are dealing with hypotheticals, but had Magic not been injured, there is a possibility that the Lakers would have won game two. Given the fact that they lost game three, without BOTH Magic and Scott, by FOUR points, AND, given the fact that they lost game four, by eight points, by being outscored by ten points in the lasy quarter, and again, without BOTH Magic and Scott...well, they could easily have been up 3-1 (and probably doing so without Scott at all.)

I hate this point of view. The Pistons won EVERY game by 3 points. They didn't win by dominating the scoreboard, they won by wearing down their opponent. They did just enough to outlast you. That was just how they played. It was said back then that a 5 point Pistons lead felt like 20.


The Pistons win in 6 instead of 4. They were the league's best team all year and were clearly a team of destiny.

Exactly

[32jazz]

I generally agree with JLauber, but on this one I tend to agree with those who believe the Pistons would have won that series in '89 no matter what.

As much as I love Magic/Lakers I think they were running on fumes in 88 and were basically done by 89. It was time for a 'retooling'(not rebuilding) to that Lakers squad around Magic & younger players like Divac.


The Lakers were swept in 88, in 89 they lost in 5 to the Suns(semis) & 5 in 90 to the Bulls(Finals).

The Lakers were making the same mistakes as the Celtics who after 1986 were futilely trying to win for the next 6 seasons with the same aging/injured/tired team. As well as the the Pistons who didn't age gracefully neither.

Danny Ainge remembers those Lakers,Celtics & Pistons teams and that's exactly the reason he is willing to get something of value for aging veterans. Nor did he have an issue trading the over valued Perkins.

Dr Buss also remembers the pitfalls of hanging on too long & had no problem trading an out of shape aging Shaq(who was demanding huge money) to retool with Kobe . And also willing to part with every one not named Kobe on this last championship squad(Gasol/Odom in particular & even Bynum). Dr Buss/Lakers had learned the lessons of an aging Showtime just as Ainge with the Celtics.

Worthy & Scott were becoming Dinosaurs(style of play) by 1990 & the Lakers should have considered trading them by 90 or 91 when they still had some value.

Scott was becoming a dinosaur in a emerging era of big Versatile SG's ushered in by Drexler/ MJ who dominated the 80's Sg's who were Scott prototypes.

6'2/6'3 jumpshooters like Scott, Ainge, Fat Lever, Dumars, Andrew Toney,A Robertson,Lucas,Battle, Sleepy Floyd,etc...... Were the norm in the 80's ,but becoming a thing of the past by the early 90's.


Worthy was a throw back to the less versatile scoring small forwards like English,Aguire, Dantley,Wilkins, King,Woolridge,etc.... Worthy was less effective for 2 seasons without Magic. Worthy spent his last season as a backup to the younger more versatile Doug Christie & abruptly retired at age 33.

In short I think the Lakers were done & should have thought about moving Worthy/Scott while they had value or anyone not named Magic. Hard as that may have been.

[Psileas]

32jazz, while I also agree with you plenty of times, I have to disagree with a couple of things on my own:

-The Lakers did struggle in the 1988 playoffs, but they still ended up being the champions, while having posted the best record in the league, at 62-20 (57-15 when Magic played, btw). I don't really think they struggled a lot more than the 1984 Celtics, for example, or the 2000 Lakers. The 1989 Lakers posted a less impressive 57-25 r.s record, but a much more impressive one in the p.o. Maybe it's the perspective we view things from, after knowing how things turned out, but I don't think this was the case back then (don't forget, many, especially Bulls' fans, laugh at the idea that the Lakers were old and washed out even in 1991, while others like you paint the exactly opposite picture - after all, the '91 Lakers still were led by Magic-Worthy and Scott was still very valuable).

-Scott had arguably his second best season in 1989, behind the one just one season earlier. He was still pretty young and in his prime. I think what you describe is mainly a late 90's-00's trend, rather than a late 80's-early 90's one.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

32jazz, while I also agree with you plenty of times, I have to disagree with a couple of things on my own:

-The Lakers did struggle in the 1988 playoffs, but they still ended up being the champions, while having posted the best record in the league, at 62-20 (57-15 when Magic played, btw). I don't really think they struggled a lot more than the 1984 Celtics, for example, or the 2000 Lakers. The 1989 Lakers posted a less impressive 57-25 r.s record, but a much more impressive one in the p.o. Maybe it's the perspective we view things from, after knowing how things turned out, but I don't think this was the case back then (don't forget, many, especially Bulls' fans, laugh at the idea that the Lakers were old and washed out even in 1991, while others like you paint the exactly opposite picture - after all, the '91 Lakers still were led by Magic-Worthy and Scott was still very valuable).

-Scott had arguably his second best season in 1989, behind the one just one season earlier. He was still pretty young and in his prime. I think what you describe is mainly a late 90's-00's trend, rather than a late 80's-early 90's one.

Any player averaging 20ppg for your ball club is going to be missed after succumbing to injuries, obviously. Byron was VERY efficient and an above average defender - but when your team loses your franchise player? Arguably the greatest offensive weapon in history? Good luck.

I don't know whether the Lakers win or not had both guys played (Magic 100% in those 4 games), but I can tell you I wouldn't bet against a healthy Showtime.

[AngelEyes]

lol this... Had the Refs not ripped Kings and sent the Lakers to 2002 NBA Finals, the Nets would've got their championship 10 years ago.
:rockon:

Those Nets teams were sooooo damn weak. The fact that those weak ass teams made it to the finals is a testament to Jason Kidd's greatness and how dreadful the eastern conference was back then. The 2003 Finals is still the ugliest finals I've ever seen. Absolutely hideous basketball and horrendous atmospheres.

[Scholar]

McHale was playing with a BROKEN foot. Bird was also beginning to have back problems. Not to mention Len Bias died.

:roll: WTF does Bias' death have to do with the 1989 NBA Finals?

Bias died on June 19, 1986. The 1989 NBA Finals were played in... wait for it...

NINTEEN ****ING EIGHTY NINE!

[Da_Realist]

Any player averaging 20ppg for your ball club is going to be missed after succumbing to injuries, obviously. Byron was VERY efficient and an above average defender - but when your team loses your franchise player? Arguably the greatest offensive weapon in history? Good luck.

I don't know whether the Lakers win or not had both guys played (Magic 100% in those 4 games), but I can tell you I wouldn't bet against a healthy Showtime.

Detroit was very, very good in 89. This was the Bad Boys at their absolute best. No disrespect to Showtime, but Detroit wanted that a$$. Showtime almost got tripped up the year before with homecourt advantage. Literally down to the last second of Game 7. Detroit was better, more confident and had homecourt advantage in their favor by 89. They were the best team that year.

I know LA went 11-0 to start the playoffs, but they came into the Palace for Game 1 and got it handed to them...with Magic playing. In fact, Magic was 0-3 against Detroit that season. Think about it like this...LA would have needed to win 4 of 6 playoff games to win the title after losing Game 1. I don't think they could have pulled that off.

[jlauber]

Detroit was very, very good in 89. This was the Bad Boys at their absolute best. No disrespect to Showtime, but Detroit wanted that a$$. Showtime almost got tripped up the year before with homecourt advantage. Literally down to the last second of Game 7. Detroit was better, more confident and had homecourt advantage in their favor by 89. They were the best team that year.

I know LA went 11-0 to start the playoffs, but they came into the Palace for Game 1 and got it handed to them...with Magic playing. In fact, Magic was 0-3 against Detroit that season. Think about it like this...LA would have needed to win 4 of 6 playoff games to win the title after losing Game 1. I don't see how they could have pulled that off.

The flip side is this, though, ... the Lakers were tied mid-way in game two when Magic went down. AND, withOUT Magic, the Lakers lost that game by THREE points. They lost game three by FOUR points, withOUT BOTH Magic, and obviously Scott, and they were in game four into the final minute (losing by five until late), again, withOUT Magic AND Scott.

Once again, had Magic not went down in game two, who knows? And had the Lakers pulled that game out, and given just how close games three and four were, withOUT Magic and Scott, I would argue that the Lakers could easily have been up 3-1.

It's all speculation, of course, but I sure didn't the Pistons routing a Magic-less (as well as without Scott) LA in those last three games.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The flip side is this, though, ... the Lakers were tied mid-way in game two when Magic went down. AND, withOUT Magic, the Lakers lost that game by THREE points. They lost game three by FOUR points, withOUT BOTH Magic, and obviously Scott, and they were in game four into the final minute (losing by five until late), again, withOUT Magic AND Scott.

Once again, had Magic not went down in game two, who knows? And had the Lakers pulled that game out, and given just how close games three and four were, withOUT Magic and Scott, I would argue that the Lakers could easily have been up 3-1.

It's all speculation, of course, but I sure didn't the Pistons routing a Magic-less (as well as without Scott) LA in those last three games.

Thats the way I look at it, at least. Da Realist does raise a good point; Detroit wanted retribution for that Finals the previous year; they were special and you can't take anything away from them. I just wonder how much of a fight LA puts up being injury-free.

[Da_Realist]

The flip side is this, though, ... the Lakers were tied mid-way in game two when Magic went down. AND, withOUT Magic, the Lakers lost that game by THREE points. They lost game three by FOUR points, withOUT BOTH Magic, and obviously Scott, and they were in game four into the final minute (losing by five until late), again, withOUT Magic AND Scott.

Once again, had Magic not went down in game two, who knows? And had the Lakers pulled that game out, and given just how close games three and four were, withOUT Magic and Scott, I would argue that the Lakers could easily have been up 3-1.

It's all speculation, of course, but I sure didn't the Pistons routing a Magic-less (as well as without Scott) LA in those last three games.


But that wasn't the Pistons style. They didn't go for the knockout, they wanted to go the distance and make you give up in the 15th round. Every game with them was like a Rocky Balboa/Apollo Creed fight. They were a defensive team that scored just enough to beat you by 3 or 5 points. Whether Magic played or not, the Pistons weren't going to blow them out.

And you're totally discounting the idea that the Pistons could have played better with Magic on the floor. Detroit was the better team that year, they were hungry and hell-bent on revenge. They were not going to lose to LA in 89. It is speculation, but I just don't see LA winning that year.

[Da_Realist]

I just wonder how much of a fight LA puts up being injury-free.

Yeah, we missed out. I think it had potential to be a worthy follow up to that classic 88 series. I was actually pulling for the Lakers cause
a) Magic was my 2nd favorite player and
b) I still hated Detroit.

I always felt LA was the underdog as crazy as that sounds but they had a chance to make another classic series... when Magic went down in Game 2 I couldn't believe it. I thought for sure he'd come out in the 4th like a hero and will his team to victory. But :(

He went out there to start Game 3 and everyone just knew. The man couldn't run. No heroics that year. Detroit was definitely going to win with Magic out...it was just a matter of whether it would be a sweep or not. We missed out on Part 2.

And the next year, the Suns ruined what could have been another Pistons Lakers Finals. LA always had Portland's number and probably would have beaten them, but they got snake bit by a come-out-of-nowhere Suns team in 5 games :eek:

[oolalaa]

The Lakers came into the '89 Finals 11-0 in the playoffs, BUT, they had lost Byron Scott and his near 20 ppg in the last game of the WCF's.

Magic was injured mid-way thru game two of the Finals, with the score tied, and on the road.

Clearly we are dealing with hypotheticals, but had Magic not been injured, there is a possibility that the Lakers would have won game two. Given the fact that they lost game three, without BOTH Magic and Scott, by FOUR points, AND, given the fact that they lost game four, by eight points, by being outscored by ten points in the lasy quarter, and again, without BOTH Magic and Scott...well, they could easily have been up 3-1 (and probably doing so without Scott at all.)




The Lakers routed Boston in the first two games. They had 20+ point leads early in the 4th quarters of both games. In game three, Boston eked out a six point win, in a game that was decided in the last minute. True, Magic won game four with his"mini-hook", and Boston easily won game five. Then, in the clinching game six win, the Lakers blew the game open mid-way in the 4th quarter. Clearly, though, the Lakers were MUCH better than Boston in that series.

If we are going to say that Boston MIGHT have won in '87, then I could easily argue that the Lakers SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. In fact, even Larry Bird, himself, claimed as much. The Lakers BLEW games two and four, while cruising to an easy win in game one, and just annihilating the Celtics in game three.

And, after Boston massacred LA in game one of the '85 Finals, the Lakers took complete control of that series, winning four of the last five games, including a blowout win in game three.

So, in reality, the Lakers were a couple of missed FTs away from going 3-0 against Boston in the 80's.

Furthermore, had Magic not been injured in '81, and playing at nowhere near 100%, the Lakers probably would have beaten the 40-42 Rockets in round one, and, given the fact that LA easily wiped out Philly in '80 and '82 (my god, they won the clinching game six in '80, on the road, and without Kareem), and that Boston had to win three straight games by the narrowest of margins against that same Philly team to get to the Finals in '81...well, hypothetically, the BEST team did NOT win the title in '81.

The Lakers were CLEARLY the best team of the 80's. EIGHT Finals, and FIVE titles,...and a couple of points away from winning SIX...and injuries to Magic in '81, from winning number SEVEN,...and injuries to BOTH Magic and Scott from probably winning number EIGHT.


As for Magic's place in the GOAT conversation...I have him in my top-4. Aside from Russell, he was the greatest "winner" in NBA history. In his 12 seasons (and I am not counting his very productive part-time season in '96), he went to NINE Finals, and won FIVE rings. His WORST team record was 54-28, and he averaged 59 wins per season in those 12 years. And, without Kareem, he took his last two teams, to a league best 63-19 record, and then to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals (and that team was already on a severe decline, and then battered by injuries in the post-season.)

And Magic was just BRILLIANT in his post-season career. He shot .516 in his NINE Finals, including two Finals of .560 and .541. He usually LED his Lakers in rebounding in the playoffs and Finals. And he had Finals of 13.0 apg and 13.6 apg. His '87 Finals, in which he averaged 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, shot .541 from the field, .500 from the arc, and .960 from the line, is one of the greatest Finals in NBA history. And, of course, his game six in the '80 Finals, in his ROOKIE season, in which he scored 42 points, on 14-23 shooting (and 14-14 from the line), with a HUGE lead in rebounds, at 15, along with seven assists, AND, withOUT Kareem, has to rank among the greatest "close-out" games in Finals history.

I was about to turn off my laptop but I need to say a couple of things real quick...

1. A fully healthy Laker team would have undoubtedly beaten the Pistons.

2. The Celtics were completely banged up throughout the '87 playoffs. It was a testament to Birds greatness that they even made it to the finals. They took L.A to 6 games!! It would have been very, very close if the Boston were injury free. Perhaps the greatest finals in history, considering both Bird and Magic were at the height of their powers.

3. Magic lost L.A the '84 finals....BY HIMSELF. He choked it away. That game 4 especially - L.A would have been up 3-1 if he didn't miss those FTs and turn the ball over in crunch time.

4. The chemistry of that '81 Laker team wasn't good. Magic bitched and whined about the coach, got him fired and then got handed a 25 million dollar contract. Even without Magic's injury, there's no way they would have won title imo.

[jlauber]

I was about to turn off my laptop but I need to say a couple of things real quick...

1. A fully healthy Laker team would have undoubtedly beaten the Pistons.

2. The Celtics were completely banged up throughout the '87 playoffs. It was a testament to Birds greatness that they even made it to the finals. They took L.A to 6 games!! It would have been very, very close if the Boston were injury free. Perhaps the greatest finals in history, considering both Bird and Magic were at the height of their powers.

3. Magic lost L.A the '84 finals....BY HIMSELF. He choked it away. That game 4 especially - L.A would have been up 3-1 if he didn't miss those FTs and turn the ball over in crunch time.

4. The chemistry of that '81 Laker team wasn't good. Magic bitched and whined about the coach, got him fired and then got handed a 25 million dollar contract. Even without Magic's injury, there's no way they would have won title imo.

Magic was also aided by Worthy missing TWO FTs in the last 41 seconds of that game four, as well. And "Big Game" James (and BTW, he really was), also lost the Lakers game two with a horrible cross-court inbounds pass while Magic was standing right next to him.

Kareem didn't help too much either, only shooting .481 in that series, including a game five meltdown of 7-25 from the floor.

As for "Tragic Johnson", all he did in that series was lead the Lakers in rebounding, at 7.7 rpg, average 18.1 ppg, hand out 13.6 apg, and shoot .560 from the floor.

[32jazz]

Magic was also aided by Worthy missing TWO FTs in the last 41 seconds of that game four, as well. And "Big Game" James (and BTW, he really was), also lost the Lakers game two with a horrible cross-court inbounds pass while Magic was standing right next to him.

Kareem didn't help too much either, only shooting .481 in that series, including a game five meltdown of 7-25 from the floor.

As for "Tragic Johnson", all he did in that series was lead the Lakers in rebounding, at 7.7 rpg, average 18.1 ppg, hand out 13.6 apg, and shoot .560 from the floor.


Isn't that insane to blame Magic for an entire series:facepalm

Worthy just flat out admitted he wanted nothing to do with that ball that he threw away to Gerald Henderson when the Lakers only needed to kill the clock to secure the win.

Magic was singled out since he was obviously the teams most important player, but for someone to blame an entire series on Magic is just ignorant.

There was not than enough blame to go around to the admitted frightened Worthy on the "Henderson stole the ball" play as well as Kareem.

[32jazz]

32jazz, while I also agree with you plenty of times, I have to disagree with a couple of things on my own:

-The Lakers did struggle in the 1988 playoffs, but they still ended up being the champions, while having posted the best record in the league, at 62-20 (57-15 when Magic played, btw). I don't really think they struggled a lot more than the 1984 Celtics, for example, or the 2000 Lakers. The 1989 Lakers posted a less impressive 57-25 r.s record, but a much more impressive one in the p.o. Maybe it's the perspective we view things from, after knowing how things turned out, but I don't think this was the case back then (don't forget, many, especially Bulls' fans, laugh at the idea that the Lakers were old and washed out even in 1991, while others like you paint the exactly opposite picture - after all, the '91 Lakers still were led by Magic-Worthy and Scott was still very valuable).

-Scott had arguably his second best season in 1989, behind the one just one season earlier. He was still pretty young and in his prime. I think what you describe is mainly a late 90's-00's trend, rather than a late 80's-early 90's one.

Not saying the Lakers were completely washed up ,but they were only 2-12:( in Magic's final 3 closeout series. Just like todays Celtics who are competitive with 2 Finals appearAnces, 2 60 win seasons & 2 50+ win seasons, but no one believes this team is a championship teAm. Namely Ainge who learned from the Celtics of the 80's who clung on too long to that team which is why he has no issues trading his players for assets while they have value.

Dr Buss/Lakers learned that lesson as well seing how they had no problem trading Shaq for assets & every one but Kobe after this latest run. I am certain like Danny Ainge, the Lakers know they cannot keep going to the same well.

I agree with you that the complete transformation of the sg position from 6'2/6'3 jumpshooters didn't completely take place until the late 90's/early 2000's, but it was led by MJ/Drexler & a few lesser guards like Harper/Richmond/Gill then later Sprewell/JR Rider/Eddie Jones,etc.....The transition had begun modestly in the early 90's , but yes it wasn't wholesale until late 90's/2000's

Versatility wise neither Worthy nor Scott were any match for Pippen/MJ and with no more Michael Cooper(who drew the defensive assignment on Larry Bird) the Lakers had no answers for the Bulls. Worthy/Scott were dinosaurs/throwbacks in style of play compared to Pippen/MJ.

Certainly I'm basing this hypothetical question on hindsight ,but even I Knew by 91 the Lakers would have to start thinking about making moves while certain players still had value. Frustratingly Magic knew it as well as I never saw him so vocally critical/tough on a teammate like he was on poor Divac.

Worthy would abruptly retire(only 33) coming off the bench behind the more versatile Christie in 3 seasons & Scott would be released for nothing. They still had value in 91 & why not see what assets they could get for anyone not named Magic?

Mitch Richmond was traded for Billy Owens at that time. A longshot for the Lakers ,but why not try for a Richmond type or more versatile wings to run with Magic. They finally got Magic a legit backup in Sedale Threatt,but unfortunately he retired way too young.

The Lakers run was over just like today's Celtics.

[Brickz187]

How much higher can Magic go? Most people I know have him as the best or 2nd behind Jordan.

[Duncan21formvp]

What was the chance of winning title for the Lakers?

And if the Lakers had won the title, how would that affect Magic's position in the goat list?

He would be the first player who threepeated as the man in the modern era. (one of three players along side Jordan and Shaq.)
6x NBA Champion
4x NBA Finals MVP
3x undisputed the best player on a championship team

???
No difference because the Pistons were going to beat them anyway. In fact they should have beaten them in 1988. If it wasn't for that BS call on Laimbeer with like 15 seconds left in game 6 and Detroit up 1, then Detroit would have won.

[Owl]

Having earlier indicated my leanings that Magic alone would not have sufficiently impacted the balance of the series, I'd like to throw another thought out there.

With a healthy LA backcourt the series could have gone either way, which leads me to my point that it is easy, when looking at hypotheticals, to say that it would definitely have gone this way or that, as though events were predetermined, partially because, we look back on history from the perspective of looking back along the chosen path. I suppose in even entertaining counterfactuals (or "what if"s) we are acknowledging that events were not predestined, but as soon as we suggest an alternate history we become confident of what "would" have happened, as though tiny changes in a players pregame feelings, or the bounce of the first shot of the game don't change or set the dynamics for what may happen later.

Not to drag this off topic but this is why I dislike the "rings" argument for comparing/ranking individual players. It implies the inevitability of events turning out as they did (not to say that hypothetical scenarios should carry the same weight as actual events, just it seems harsh/sad that tiny changes could hugely alter how we percieve players).

Crazy ramblings over.

[oolalaa]

Magic was also aided by Worthy missing TWO FTs in the last 41 seconds of that game four, as well. And "Big Game" James (and BTW, he really was), also lost the Lakers game two with a horrible cross-court inbounds pass while Magic was standing right next to him.

Kareem didn't help too much either, only shooting .481 in that series, including a game five meltdown of 7-25 from the floor.

As for "Tragic Johnson", all he did in that series was lead the Lakers in rebounding, at 7.7 rpg, average 18.1 ppg, hand out 13.6 apg, and shoot .560 from the floor.

It's very, very simple....


-- Magic choked, in crunch time, in games 2, 4 and 7.

-- If Magic didn't choke, in crunch time, in games 2, 4 and 7, the Lakers would have won the championship.

-- It wasn't like he had to take the game over, or make a spectacular play. No, all he needed to do was not CHOKE. He couldn't manage it.

-- "Kareem didn't help too much either" - Are you joking? :confusedshrug: A 27/7/4/2/2 is not helping? Seriously, you are FIXATED on efficiency. You are a FG% addict. I think you should seek some professional help.

But seeing as you are obsessed with efficiency....It's funny, I've seen you write multiple times that Bird went 6-18 in that game 7 WIN for Boston. I've never seen you mention that Magic was 5-14, and had 7 turnovers in that same game 7 LOSS for L.A! You have curious double standards.

[OldSchoolBBall]

:roll:
How much higher can Magic go? Most people I know have him as the best or 2nd behind Jordan.

You must live in LA, then, because the notion that Magic is GOAt or even #2 all time is certainly a minority opinion. Jordan and KAJ have the top 2 spots locked up, with Russell right there for a sizeable contingent based on his winning. Don't forget Wilt. I have Magic at #5 personally, but anywhere from 4-6 is reasonable. #3 tops.

[Kiddlovesnets]

:roll:

You must live in LA, then, because the notion that Magic is GOAt or even #2 all time is certainly a minority opinion. Jordan and KAJ have the top 2 spots locked up, with Russell right there for a sizeable contingent based on his winning. Don't forget Wilt. I have Magic at #5 personally, but anywhere from 4-6 is reasonable. #3 tops.

Wilt Chamberlain says hi.

[jlauber]

It's very, very simple....


-- Magic choked, in crunch time, in games 2, 4 and 7.

-- If Magic didn't choke, in crunch time, in games 2, 4 and 7, the Lakers would have won the championship.

-- It wasn't like he had to take the game over, or make a spectacular play. No, all he needed to do was not CHOKE. He couldn't manage it.

-- "Kareem didn't help too much either" - Are you joking? :confusedshrug: A 27/7/4/2/2 is not helping? Seriously, you are FIXATED on efficiency. You are a FG% addict. I think you should seek some professional help.

But seeing as you are obsessed with efficiency....It's funny, I've seen you write multiple times that Bird went 6-18 in that game 7 WIN for Boston. I've never seen you mention that Magic was 5-14, and had 7 turnovers in that same game 7 LOSS for L.A! You have curious double standards.

Magic AND Bird BOTH played poorly in game seven. At least by THEIR normal standards. BUT, if you think Magic CHOKED in crunchtime in games two and four, the man was BRILLIANT for nearly the entire game in BOTH.

In game two, Magic put up a 27 point game, on 10-14 shooting, with a team-high 10 rebounds and 9 assists. And YES, once again, as he did in game five, Kareem shot poorly. He had a 20 point, on 9-22 shooting game. Had he hit even ONE more FGA LA would not only have won that game, they would have won the series. Of course, Worthy's botched pass is what really cost the Lakers in "crunchtime", but here again, I find it pretty difficult to blame him, either, with a 29 point game, on 11-12 shooting from the field.

In game four, all Magic did was put up his usual triple-double, with a 20 point game, on 8-12 shooting, with a team high 11 rebounds, and 17 assists. And again, Kareem shot rather poorly, for him, as he went 12-25 from the floor. Had he had a normal shooting game, and LA would have won that game, as well as the series.

[EllEffEll]

If 'if's and but's' were candy and nuts, we'd all have a real good Christmas.

No point in speculating when injuries have been a factor in NBA Finals lore for ever. If there were mulligans for injuries, NBA history would be much different, and that sword would likely cut both directions.

[jlauber]

If 'if's and but's' were candy and nuts, we'd all have a real good Christmas.

No point in speculating when injuries have been a factor in NBA Finals lore for ever. If there were mulligans for injuries, NBA history would be much different, and that sword would likely cut both directions.

Unfortunately, very true. I have long maintained that the REAL best team did not win an NBA title in '68, or '84, and I'm sure some might add other's like the '02 Kings (although I wouldn't agree.)

Having said that, however, when a player of Magic's caliber goes down in a series in which the opposing team eked out wins in the three games (or 2 1/2 of you like) that he missed, it certainly is an interesting "what if."

[Blzrfn]

Magic's and Scott's presence would have made the 89 Finals a lot better, at least, but that is how the breaks go.

The Lakers always seemed to get more than their fair share of breaks throughout history. You can't win em' all.

[ThaRegul8r]

I have long maintained that the REAL best team did not win an NBA title in '68, or '84, and I'm sure some might add other's like the '02 Kings (although I wouldn't agree.)

Of course a Laker fan would be happy with the way events turned out in 2002, and wouldn't agree the best team didn't win.

[Lover]

What if Isiah wasn't injured in the 1988 Finals?

[jlauber]

Of course a Laker fan would be happy with the way events turned out in 2002, and wouldn't agree the best team didn't win.

The game six officiating was deplorable to be sure, but many forget that it was just as awful in game five, and against the Lakers. All anyone needs to know about that game five, was that Shaq took ONE FT. The officiating was every bit as one-sided in that game, as it was in game six.

[nycelt84]

What if Isiah wasn't injured in the 1988 Finals?

Then the Pistons end the series in game 6 and go on to 3 peat resulting in different legacies for Isiah and Dantley.

[Zenji]

For me, it wouldn't change his rank at all. I have him as the third best ever.

Same except i have him 2nd.

[JohnnySic]

The Pistons were the best team by '89. They were at least equal to the Lakers in '88 as well.

[oolalaa]

Magic AND Bird BOTH played poorly in game seven. At least by THEIR normal standards. BUT, if you think Magic CHOKED in crunchtime in games two and four, the man was BRILLIANT for nearly the entire game in BOTH.

In game two, Magic put up a 27 point game, on 10-14 shooting, with a team-high 10 rebounds and 9 assists. And YES, once again, as he did in game five, Kareem shot poorly. He had a 20 point, on 9-22 shooting game. Had he hit even ONE more FGA LA would not only have won that game, they would have won the series. Of course, Worthy's botched pass is what really cost the Lakers in "crunchtime", but here again, I find it pretty difficult to blame him, either, with a 29 point game, on 11-12 shooting from the field.

In game four, all Magic did was put up his usual triple-double, with a 20 point game, on 8-12 shooting, with a team high 11 rebounds, and 17 assists. And again, Kareem shot rather poorly, for him, as he went 12-25 from the floor. Had he had a normal shooting game, and LA would have won that game, as well as the series.

You are a world class cherry picker.

Yes, of course, Magic had a great game for 3 1/2 quarters of games 2 and 4.....but.....SO WHAT??? What is the friggin point in playing well for most of the game, and then stinking up the joint in crunch time, when it matters most?

That's what Wilt did his entire career! :lol :hammerhead:

Magic was one of the most clutch players of all time, but.....come on. You are being blinded by STATS again. L.A should have beaten Boston! You said it yourself! Magic failed big time.

[32jazz]

You are a world class cherry picker.

Yes, of course, Magic had a great game for 3 1/2 quarters of games 2 and 4.....but.....SO WHAT??? What is the friggin point in playing well for most of the game, and then stinking up the joint in crunch time, when it matters most?



Magic was one of the most clutch players of all time, but.....come on. You are being blinded by STATS again. L.A should have beaten Boston! You said it yourself! Magic failed big time.


Cherry picker?:oldlol: But you are simply ignoring that game 2 was won until Worthy missed free throws & threw away a cross court pass.

Big Game James Worthy made the most memorable blunder of the series by throwing away the ball to Gerald Henderson because he has admitted he wanted nothing to do with the ball. "The Henderson stole the ball" is right up there with Havelicik's steal(64 or 65) & Bird's steal versus the Pistons.

It shows you don't remember the series when you fail to mention Worthy in game 2. When your pg(Magic) is consistently outrebounding his own center (Kareem) one can hardly claim Kareem was perfect into that series.

Magic made some mistakes ,but only an idiot like you could possibly blame the entire series on him. :facepalm

I think the question was about the 89 finals anyway:hammerhead:

[oolalaa]

Cherry picker?:oldlol: But you are simply ignoring that game 2 was won until Worthy missed free throws & threw away a cross court pass.

Big Game James Worthy made the most memorable blunder of the series by throwing away the ball to Gerald Henderson because he has admitted he wanted nothing to do with the ball. "The Henderson stole the ball" is right up there with Havelicik's steal(64 or 65) & Bird's steal versus the Pistons.

It shows you don't remember the series when you fail to mention Worthy in game 2. When your pg(Magic) is consistently outrebounding his own center (Kareem) one can hardly claim Kareem was perfect into that series.

Magic made some mistakes ,but only an idiot like you could possibly blame the entire series on him. :facepalm

I think the question was about the 89 finals anyway:hammerhead:

WOW, you're actually completely clueless. That's impressive.

Firstly, I watched that entire series again recently.

Secondly, Magic was the leader and the best player on the Lakers. He was burdened with the biggest share of responsibility for the result of that series, WIN or LOSE. The Lakers had more talent than Boston. Magic choked in the 3 of the biggest/most pivotal games of that series. The Lakers lost the series. He deserved the biggest share of the blame, even if he didn't choke it up. But.....he did choke it up! It's not good enough to say - "but, but, but.....Worthy choked as well. It wasn't just Magic! :cry: ". Magic was the superstar. Worthy was the 3rd wheel. They had different standards.



Game 2: Yeh, Worthy made a bad turnover - I'm not making any excuses. But, Magic did call a dumb timeout to put Worthy in that situation (again. Not an excuse). Riley wanted L.A to call a time out, only if McHale made the 2nd free throw. But, McHale missed it, and Magic called a timeout anyway - this allowed Boston to set up their defence and get the steal. And then, as you know, Magic inexplicably ran out the clock, preventing L.A from attempting a game winning shot. Magic Johnson! Not paying attention to the clock! In one of the most crucial posessions of the entire season! The Lakers could have been up 2-0.


Game 4: The pivotal, series altering game 4. Worthy clanked a couple of free throws, with 10 seconds to go (he made up for it somewhat with 11 points in OT). But Magic, for some reason, was determined to outdo him. He didn't JUST miss 2 free throws himself, down the stretch.

No.

Again, Magic.....with the ball in his hands.....the final posession.....a chance to win the game and go up 3-1.....throws one of the dumbest passes I have ever seen him make. Seriously, Parish was all over Worthy. He had no right to let that ball go out of his hands :no:


Game 7: Lets ignore his 5-14, 7 turnover statline, and the fact that he didn't score a single point in the last 5 minutes, shall we. He had 2 of the most pathetic turnovers I've ever seen, in crunch time, of a still very winnable game.

1:30 remaining, 5 points down.....he employs some of the shoddiest ball security I've seen from him. He gave Dennis Johnson one of the easiest steals of his career. What was he doing anyway, trying to drive into the lane, past one of the greatest perimeter defenders of all time? Maybe he wanted to give Kareem a big bear hug? :confusedshrug:

1:00 remaining, 3 points down.....he dribbles up the court, jumps into McHale (WHY??), throws the ball to Dennis Johnson and then complains to the ref. :roll: :roll:



So.....No, I'm very, very sorry, Magic wasn't the SOLE reason that the Lakers lost (surely you must have realised I was exaggerating?!). But, he was undoubtedly the overwhelming one - he didn't just make "some mistakes". He made a calamity of game losing, and ultimately series losing, errors. 'Tragic Johnson' was an apt nickname. And you are A.....DUMB.....ASS.

[jlauber]

Magic "choked" like MJ did in his 63 point game against the Celtics. Jordan missed a FT that could have won the game in the last second of regulation, and the game went into OT, where Boston won.

Damn "chokers."

As for Wilt...I covered this in another thread, but he played in nine game sevens, one game five of a best-of-five series, and one game three of a best-of-three series. In those 11 games, all he did was average 29.9 ppg, 26.6 rpg, and shot nearly .600. That "choker" only averaged a 30-27 .600 in his 11 absolute elimination games. In the game three of a best-of-three, all he did was hang a 53-22 game. In the game five of the best-of-five series, all he could do was put up a 56-35 game.

He also had a game seven against Russell, in which he scored 30 points, with 32 rebounds, and on 12-15 shooting from the floor (which included six of Philly's last eight points...including 2-2 from the line with 36 secs left, and a dunk over Russell with 5 secs left, which brought the Sixers to within 110-109.) And after the "clutch" Russell hit a guidewire with his inbound pass, the Sixers had a chance to win, but, "Havlicek stole the ball."

Of course, I am in the process of posting ALL of his "must-win" and "clinching game" performances....

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=250076

Pretty interesting stuff. He was not only BRILLIANT in vast majority of those games, he also DOMINATED his OPPOSING centers in nearly all of them, as well.

[oolalaa]

Magic "choked" like MJ did in his 63 point game against the Celtics. Jordan missed a FT that could have won the game in the last second of regulation, and the game went into OT, where Boston won.

Damn "chokers."



1. It's a joke to even attempt to compare Jordan's 63 with any of Magic's games in the finals.

2. Do you think I would be chastising Magic, if The Lakers still lost, and his only crunch time error for the whole series was missing just 1 free throw?

Of course not! It's the fact that he had MULTIPLE, bad crunch time errors, in MULTIPLE games.

[Da_Realist]

Magic "choked" like MJ did in his 63 point game against the Celtics. Jordan missed a FT that could have won the game in the last second of regulation, and the game went into OT, where Boston won.

:facepalm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m83dSDbqSaQ#t=8m14s

[oolalaa]

:facepalm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m83dSDbqSaQ#t=8m14s

Haha wow :applause: I couldn't remember exactly what happened. Thanks for the reminder :oldlol:

BTW, keep posting those classic games on youtube! :cheers: They're awesome :rockon:

[Da_Realist]

Haha wow :applause: I couldn't remember exactly what happened. Thanks for the reminder :oldlol:

BTW, keep posting those classic games on youtube! :cheers: They're awesome :rockon:

Thanks! Unfortunately, my main channel was deleted. I'm slowly adding more vids on my new channel (DaRealistOne3). All the 80's games were deleted with the old channel. :ohwell: