When did Magic Johnson...?

[plowking]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.

[fpliii]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.


:biggums:

[Overdrive]

He was considered the GOAT at his peak, but that isn't of importance when ranking careers.

ROTY is a nice feat but when talents of Bird/Magic, Jordan/Hakeem among others join the league in bunches someone has to get it and someone who would take it most other seasons won't get it.

So losing out on the ROTY isn't a indicator of greatness.
Name the players who had the better career (so far) out of those:
Tyreke Evans, James Harden, Emeka Okafor, Dwight Howard, Vince Carter, Paul Pierce, Dirk Nowitzki, Allen Iverson, Kobe Bryant, Damon Stoudamire, Kevin Garnett,...

The ROTY is a bonus award not a tiebreaker comparing two equally skilled players imo.

[Champ]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.

Good question.

For starters, IMO both players belong in the top 5, perhaps even in the top 3. But when ranking players, I tend to put more stock in a how good that player was than in career accomplishments and longevity, which probably runs counter to how most members of this board think.

In terms of the comparison, for anyone who followed the NBA in the 1980s, Bird was clearly considered the better player until the '86-'87 season, when Magic truly had a breakout year and led a tremendous Lakers team to the title. I feel the two were neck and neck over the '86-'87 and '87-88 seasons, but Magic is often given the nod because his team won titles while Bird's was becoming increasingly hampered by injuries.

I honestly feel that Bird's career all but ended after 1988, and he has since said that in hindsight he should've retired at that time. From '88 until his retirement in '92, he was at least physically, a shell of his former self. I also believe those last four years of his career have tarnished his standing on many a GOAT list because they dilute his career numbers, which is unfortunate because it clouds the fact of just how great a player he was over the first 9 years of his career.

During that period, consider the following list of accomplishments:

Three NBA titles.
Two finals MVPs.
Rookie of the year.
Three regular season MVPs (runner-up 4 times, 3rd once, and 4th his rookie year).
First team all NBA every year.
First team all star every year.
Player of the month 7 times.
All defensive 2nd team three times.
Highest assist per game average among non-guards.
Top 10 in ppg 6 times.
Top 10 in rpg 7 times.
Top 3 in PER 6 times.
Top 10 in defensive rating 6 times.
Top 10 in steals 3 times.
Top 10 in free throw percentage 8 times.
Top 10 in 3-point field goals 5 times.
Led his team to 5 NBA finals, the ECF 8 out of 9 years, 6 60+ win seasons, 8 Atlantic division titles, and the best overall regular season record in the NBA from 1979 to 1988, despite playing in a much tougher conference than Magic.

In total, that 9 year run stands as one of the greatest all-around stretches in NBA history, but I don't think everyone who ranks Bird considers that, or just how dominant he was before injuries derailed him, and instead look at career numbers and titles in total, which would give players such as Magic, Kareem, Shaq or perhaps even Duncan, a perceived advantage in GOAT rankings.

Just my take.

[juju151111]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.
Lol at 7-8 the hell is this?:biggums:

[plowking]

Lol at 7-8 the hell is this?:biggums:

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Bird
5. Russell
6. Shaq
7. This is usually where I start putting Magic into it.

All those players were undeniably better players than Magic and just as rich in accolades and team success really.

[Champ]

He was considered the GOAT at his peak, but that isn't of importance when ranking careers.

I do think this stands for something. Throughout the history of the NBA, for any player who had been dominant to the extent of being considered GOAT, that consideration should bear at least some weight when assessing career success.

[juju151111]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Bird
5. Russell
6. Shaq
7. This is usually where I start putting Magic into it.

All those players were undeniably better players than Magic and just as rich in accolades and team success really.
Russell isn't even in my top 10 and I got Magic ahead of Bird. Magic put up better playoffs while Bird would get bothered more, Magic beat him 2-1 in the finals, and could match his accolades too

[Champ]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Bird
5. Russell
6. Shaq
7. This is usually where I start putting Magic into it.

All those players were undeniably better players than Magic and just as rich in accolades and team success really.

Magic was a remarkable player, and in IMHO, it's a stretch to say that the six players you rank ahead of him were "undeniably better," save for MJ perhaps.

I see 2 through 7 as being really close, and coming down to a matter of how much one emphasizes longevity, accolades/accomplishments, peak, or simply that player's skill and/or uniqueness.

[Sarcastic]

I got Magic at #3 all time.

He is the GOAT passer, and GOAT floor general. And he's pretty far ahead of any challengers as well to those titles.

[plowking]

Russell isn't even in my top 10 and I got Magic ahead of Bird. Magic put up better playoffs while Bird would get bothered more, Magic beat him 2-1 in the finals, and could match his accolades too

Bird got bothered in the playoffs? Wasn't Magic the one that received negative press for his poor playoff play?
If we're looking at head to heads strictly then you'd say that Deron has been better than Paul, which is clearly incorrect.

They have similar achievements, Magic having more titles, Bird having a ROTY and more defensive selections.
Does 2 titles put Magic above Bird despite Bird being the better player at his peak? Good enough to be called the GOAT at the time.

[Pointguard]

I think they were real close. I think both had two absolutely great years. Magic was a bit better in the other years - better H2H, better late in the playoffs and better in the finals. The Magic machine was the best oiled machine the NBA ever seen. His decision making and creativity together was/is unrivaled. I think there were players that made others better but I think Magic made the whole team better. Magic is the best starter and set up for the finish the game ever had as well. The game only had three guys that seemed to be related to winning (Duncan, Russell) and Magic is one of them.

The both got in each others way. Both could have had an argument for GOAT if the other one wasn't in their way.

[plowking]

I got Magic at #3 all time.

He is the GOAT passer, and GOAT floor general. And he's pretty far ahead of any challengers as well to those titles.

Is he above Bird on your list, and why?

[Papaya Petee]

To be honest, the top 10 GOAT list is very tricky and there will never be a set list. Those players were so amazing in their own regard and so close in total achievements, stats, and dominance, that a lot of the lists at that one point are based off of opinion.

[Champ]

Russell isn't even in my top 10 and I got Magic ahead of Bird. Magic put up better playoffs while Bird would get bothered more, Magic beat him 2-1 in the finals, and could match his accolades too

I disagree that Magic put up better playoffs. I think it's all in how you squeeze the numbers. Yes, Magic has the 2-1 finals advantage, but for anyone who followed the rivalry, there was all lot more to it than just those three series. And if Magic's Lakers were able to beat Houston in '86 (which they should have), they would've certainly fallen to the '86 Celtics, which would've evened the head to head finals numbers at 2-2.

[plowking]

Magic was a remarkable player, and in IMHO, it's a stretch to say that the six players you rank ahead of him were "undeniably better," save for MJ perhaps.

I see 2 through 7 as being really close, and coming down to a matter of how much one emphasizes longevity, accolades/accomplishments, peak, or simply that player's skill and/or uniqueness.

Every single player on that list that I mentioned has gotten GOAT talks while they were playing aside from Shaq. Though it's been said that Shaq arguably had one of the greatest peaks ever in 2000, and most agree. Not to mention his longevity, etc.
I don't see any reason for them not to be ranked ahead of Magic, who didn't get those talks, while a direct rival he was playing against got such praise.

It seems to me as if Magic has risen up the list through his time in the media and the fact he is still a common face for fans. Where as Bird went quite and didn't really participate in stuff like that after his career.

[Champ]

I got Magic at #3 all time.

He is the GOAT passer, and GOAT floor general. And he's pretty far ahead of any challengers as well to those titles.

I'll grant you this opinion, but at the time, in terms of sheer passing ability, many considered Bird as good as Magic. The two were closer in this regard than you may think.

I always felt that Magic was the best passer ever on the run, leading the break, and in transition, while Bird remains the best passer ever out of the half-court set.

[Sarcastic]

Is he above Bird on your list, and why?

Bird's longevity is what keeps him down. His peak is better than Magic's, but it was too short in comparison.


The Lakers averaged 59 wins per year with Magic, and as soon as he retired they became about a .500 team or so.

[2LeTTeRS]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

[Champ]

Every single player on that list that I mentioned has gotten GOAT talks while they were playing aside from Shaq. Though it's been said that Shaq arguably had one of the greatest peaks ever in 2000, and most agree. Not to mention his longevity, etc.
I don't see any reason for them not to be ranked ahead of Magic, who didn't get those talks, while a direct rival he was playing against got such praise.

It seems to me as if Magic has risen up the list through his time in the media and the fact he is still a common face for fans. Where as Bird went quite and didn't really participate in stuff like that after his career.

There was a brief period in the late-80s, just before Jordan peaked, when Magic was getting GOAT nods among the Basketball cognoscenti. Because this chatter was squeezed tightly between the Bird and Jordan GOAT talk, however, it's not often remembered.

As for Shaq, he came after Jordan, which is why he and everyone else who has come along since, has never been a GOAT candidate.

[plowking]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

Bird had to completely turn a team around where as Magic got to play with Kareem (which he said had to happen or he wasn't leaving college).
Bird's situation wasn't as easy to step into as Magic's was.

[Champ]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

Bird had the better regular season, which is what the award is based on. He also spearheaded the biggest turnaround in NBA history up to that point, which also counted for something.

I don't feel the finals advantage is a big enough piece of the puzzle to give Magic a career edge, but that's my opinion.

The NCAA title advantage is irrelevant in my view, and may even help Bird when you consider the team of scrubs he was able to lead to the NCAA title game.

I don't think Magic had a "longer prime." See my previous post. Both lasted about the same.

[Dictator]

I kinda agree with OP. Bird > Magic

[Pointguard]

If we're looking at head to heads strictly then you'd say that Deron has been better than Paul, which is clearly incorrect.


In the H2H in the finals is a little bit different. More than half of Bird's finals appearances were against Magic and all of his losses were from Magic's teams.

[Champ]

The Lakers averaged 59 wins per year with Magic, and as soon as he retired they became about a .500 team or so.

The same can be said for Bird, except his team stunk not only after but before he arrived.

[Pointguard]

I'll grant you this opinion, but at the time, in terms of sheer passing ability, many considered Bird as good as Magic. The two were closer in this regard than you may think.

I always felt that Magic was the best passer ever on the run, leading the break, and in transition, while Bird remains the best passer ever out of the half-court set.
Aren't most passes done in the half court? Most of Magic's passes were done in the half court. And you will never hear that Bird was a better passer. Even Bill Walton said he never saw anybody pass like Magic when he was Bird's teammate. Magic had to tone down his passing as he was hitting players in the head a lot. I think Bird was a great passer but Magic was the best ever.

[Overdrive]

I do think this stands for something. Throughout the history of the NBA, for any player who had been dominant to the extent of being considered GOAT, that consideration should bear at least some weight when assessing career success.

Yes and no. Of course it stands for something but GOAT is a term for one guy at a time. The moment Magic got to the same level as Bird(87) there was no clear cut GOAT no more. So for Magic to be named GOAT he would've had to surpass Bird a tie isn't enough to get GOAT consideration. For me they're tied and tied together.

[juju151111]

Bird got bothered in the playoffs? Wasn't Magic the one that received negative press for his poor playoff play?
If we're looking at head to heads strictly then you'd say that Deron has been better than Paul, which is clearly incorrect.

They have similar achievements, Magic having more titles, Bird having a ROTY and more defensive selections.
Does 2 titles put Magic above Bird despite Bird being the better player at his peak? Good enough to be called the GOAT at the time.
You cliamed to have watched the gms. Magic didn't play bad in 84. They played in the finals not the regular season.

[Odinn]

In my top 10 ever list;
4. Larry Bird
6. Magic Johnson

[iamgine]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.
I always thought they were considered equal before 86-87 season, maybe a slight edge to Bird. But then Magic stepped his game a whole notch when he took over the team from Kareem in 86-87. So maybe it was then.

[mrhoopfan]

Bird once said after a loss to the Lakers, "Magic....he's the best........." then got choked up and couldn't talk anymore

[Champ]

Aren't most passes done in the half court? Most of Magic's passes were done in the half court. And you will never hear that Bird was a better passer. Even Bill Walton said he never saw anybody pass like Magic when he was Bird's teammate. Magic had to tone down his passing as he was hitting players in the head a lot. I think Bird was a great passer but Magic was the best ever.

Yes, most passes are made out of the half court set, but that wasn't my point. I would argue that Bird's passes in the half court setting were more varied and ambidextrous than Magic's, while Magic's were more spectacular on the break. But we're comparing Aces to Aces here, depending on one's taste.

Though Magic's assist numbers were higher because he was, by virtue of his position, more ball dominant, during their peak years both players were receiving equal acclaim for their passing ability, unselfishness, creativity and making teammates better. Occasionally, sportswriters would try to parse the differences, and the transition vs. half-court argument was sometimes brought up (i.e. Jack McCallum).

[Champ]

Bird once said after a loss to the Lakers, "Magic....he's the best........." then got choked up and couldn't talk anymore

Yes. He said this after Game 4 of the '87 finals. It was a great game that came down to the wire, with the Lakers getting a bit of good fortune just before Magic hit the game winner. It was a devastating loss for the Celtics and for Bird, who nearly hit a deep buzzer beater.

Regarding the comment and its context:

At this point in his career, Bird had a assumed something of a leadership role in the league and usually reflected a generousness and maturity in his post-game comments (see the Isiah incident). He also had established a friendship with Magic two years prior and respected the hell out of him, so though it was surprising to see him lavish such praise on an opponent, in hindsight it does make sense..

[NumberSix]

ring counters strike again

[Indian guy]

I'm not an expert on either guy, but just from watching some of their games, I find 87-91 Magic a more involved player on the court than Bird. Bird didn't shoot enough for my liking.

[Champ]

I'm not an expert on either guy, but just from watching some of their games, I find 87-91 Magic a more involved player on the court than Bird. Bird didn't shoot enough for my liking.

Interesting.

If you can get your hands on some of Bird's games from '84 to '88, you'll see that he did take a lot of shots. By nature, he was always an unselfish player, but certainly offensive-minded.

[get these NETS]

Bird was a great player

the win increase by Celtics his rookie year illustrated what kind of impact he had


the three consecutive mvps are what created any backlash against Larry..

many felt that league was milking the white superstar player for the storied franchise angle too much and were using that to market the league to white fans.


it's always subjective but I think you can find 3-4 other players who could have gotten the MVP in 2 of those 3 years.

Magic felt slighted by not getting rook of the year and used that to fuel his finals clincher..including being a rookie..and having an ALLTIME........ALLTIME finals performance...and helping clinch first ring for Lakers in a long time....

42 points 15 rebounds 7 assists 3 steals



I can't how this thread exists if you acknowledge what Magic did as a ROOK on the HIGHEST level of pressure to win a ring.... and that the following years.....Lakers needed him to play a role within their system....and had other superstar players..


eventually magic developed his all around game & when kareem declined and magic became the focus of the offense....his stats reflected it, but clearly his rookie year showed him to be equal to any player in the league...

[Champ]

Bird was a great player

the win increase by Celtics his rookie year illustrated what kind of impact he had


the three consecutive mvps are what created any backlash against Larry..

many felt that league was milking the white superstar player for the storied franchise angle too much and were using that to market the league to white fans.


it's always subjective but I think you can find 3-4 other players who could have gotten the MVP in 2 of those 3 years.

Magic felt slighted by not getting rook of the year and used that to fuel his finals clincher..including being a rookie..and having an ALLTIME........ALLTIME finals performance...and helping clinch first ring for Lakers in a long time....

42 points 15 rebounds 7 assists 3 steals



I can't how this thread exists if you acknowledge what Magic did as a ROOK on the HIGHEST level of pressure to win a ring.... and that the following years.....Lakers needed him to play a role within their system....and had other superstar players..


eventually magic developed his all around game & when kareem declined and magic became the focus of the offense....his stats reflected it, but clearly his rookie year showed him to be equal to any player in the league...

Good arguments, but I disagree there were 3 to 4 other players who could've taken the MVP award from Bird during the '84 to '86 stretch. Those were dominant years for him and the MVP voting reflects this.

[AlphaWolf24]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.


- Wasn't suddenly.....they battled for the Honor most of thier career's....but when Magic beat Larry 2 more times in the Finals.....then won another Title..(granted after 88' Bird was a shell of himself) Magic became widely regarded as better.

college Championship had some weight also.

- recap 2 star players / teams play 4 times in the Title game....super star Player A leads his team to 3 victories....superstar Player B wins once.

no amount of Math is gonna ovveride player A being better



deal wit it.

[Champ]

- Wasn't suddenly.....they battled for the Honor most of thier career's....but when Magic beat Larry 2 more times in the Finals.....then won another Title..(granted after 88' Bird was a shell of himself) Magic became widely regarded as better.

college Championship had some weight also.

- recap 2 star players / teams play 4 times in the Title game....super star Player A leads his team to 3 victories....superstar Player B wins once.

no amount of Math is gonna ovveride player A being better



deal wit it.

Overly simplistic post.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

How old are you plowking?

[plowking]

How old are you plowking?

I'm 21, but most of my favorite players played in the 70's and 80's. Earl Monroe, Dominique, Bird, Bernard King, etc. I did a whole bunch of reading and watched a lot of tape while I was 16 until about 18 or 19. I had about 240 gigs of old games from tapes, etc. Now its all gone for the most part.
Now I just enjoy watching my Heat play, and that's about it.

[DKLaker]

Times were different back then, a black athlete on the west coast was NEVER going to get as much credit as a white player on the east coast.
I am more than old enough to remember all the crap.
Magic proved himself to be a better player, not only in the NBA but in college head to head. Not to knock Bird at all but Magic was always better.

[Thorn]

It started about 1987 when Magic got his first MVP. Bird was still excellent in 87 and 88, but I think the tide started to turn a little by those two years and certainly Magic was considered better from 1988 afterwards. It's also interesting because had Magic's career not been cut short by HIV, Magic may have started to play until he declined sharply, possibly giving Bird's case a slight boost. Or maybe Magic sticks around until Shaq shows up. Who knows?

I disagree that Magic put up better playoffs. I think it's all in how you squeeze the numbers. Yes, Magic has the 2-1 finals advantage, but for anyone who followed the rivalry, there was all lot more to it than just those three series. And if Magic's Lakers were able to beat Houston in '86 (which they should have), they would've certainly fallen to the '86 Celtics, which would've evened the head to head finals numbers at 2-2.
I don't think the Lakers should've beaten the Rockets that year. The Rockets were a terrible match up for LAL - Hakeem and Sampson destroyed an old Kareem and wreaked havoc, while their undersized forwards such as Worthy and AC Green. Houston's guards such as Reid and McCray bothered Magic.

And what does it matter if the Celtics would've beaten the Lakers in 1986? They probably would have, but I don't see people saying "well the Lakers would've beaten the Celtics in 1982 so the finals record is really 4-2". Or "well if the Celtics were so good in 1980 and won 61 games why did they get upset by Philly"? I don't understand why people try to give teams and players accomplishments they didn't get or deserve. As far as I'm concerned the 1980s Lakers beat the 1980s Celtics in the finals two of three times.

[AlphaWolf24]

Times were different back then, a black athlete on the west coast was NEVER going to get as much credit as a white player on the east coast.
I am more than old enough to remember all the crap.
Magic proved himself to be a better player, not only in the NBA but in college head to head. Not to knock Bird at all but Magic was always better.


this

(also watching Bird score only 8 points in back 2 back finals games)

[get these NETS]

Good arguments, but I disagree there were 3 to 4 other players who could've taken the MVP award from Bird during the '84 to '86 stretch. Those were dominant years for him and the MVP voting reflects this.

I don't think that Bird had the best 3 year stretch of any player in the league since 1970..yet he is the only one with 3 straight mvps since bill russell was winning them every year in 1960s.

not Kareem, not Moses, not MJ, not Wilt, not Duncan, not Oscar,not Lebron, not Magic, not Barkley, not K. Malone.

and no disrespect, but if you read your own comments "taken the MVP award from Bird"......kind of reflects what I was saying about the league and marketing legit superstar white player to white fans.
People identified with Bird and league understood that.

"Won the award over Bird" is a bit more objective.

[StateOfMind12]

Why is Magic above Bird?

He was the better player and that was about it. Bird was considered better in the early 80s and Magic was considered clearly better in the late 80s.

How was he a better player?

-Magic was the GOAT offensive player
-Magic was the GOAT playmaker/facilitator
-Magic accomplished more than Bird did.
-Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.
-Magic had more dominant/elite years than Bird did.

The last two are the main reasons for me.

Bird was actually not that great of a post-season performer so I always find it funny how much people constantly overrate his clutch play. Magic on the other hand was a tremendous post-season performer. He has some dents and faults himself in the post-season such as '84 Finals, '81 1st round vs. Houston but it's still better than Bird's.

[Odinn]

Why is Magic above Bird?

He was the better player and that was about it. Bird was considered better in the early 80s and Magic was considered clearly better in the late 80s.

How was he a better player?

-Magic was the GOAT offensive player
-Magic was the GOAT playmaker/facilitator
-Magic accomplished more than Bird did.
-Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.
-Magic had more dominant/elite years than Bird did.

The last two are the main reasons for me.

Bird was actually not that great of a post-season performer so I always find it funny how much people constantly overrate his clutch play. Magic on the other hand was a tremendous post-season performer. He has some dents and faults himself in the post-season such as '84 Finals, '81 1st round vs. Houston but it's still better than Bird's.
And this is what annoying about you...:facepalm :facepalm You sound like you know the thing but you do not.

[StateOfMind12]

And this is what annoying about you...:facepalm :facepalm You sound like you know the thing but you do not.
Well, you sure convinced me with this post. I think Bird is better than Magic now. :rolleyes:

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

I'm 21, but most of my favorite players played in the 70's and 80's. Earl Monroe, Dominique, Bird, Bernard King, etc. I did a whole bunch of reading and watched a lot of tape while I was 16 until about 18 or 19. I had about 240 gigs of old games from tapes, etc. Now its all gone for the most part.
Now I just enjoy watching my Heat play, and that's about it.
Exactly dude. I knew you were a young buck when your only argument was numbers. Please bring back your old avatar. I used to spend mins at a time lost in a daze just looking at that shit.

I was actually thinking about last night how it seems Larry bird is getting lost in the shuffle. I bet in ten years people will be like, "Larry who?".

[plowking]

Times were different back then, a black athlete on the west coast was NEVER going to get as much credit as a white player on the east coast.
I am more than old enough to remember all the crap.
Magic proved himself to be a better player, not only in the NBA but in college head to head. Not to knock Bird at all but Magic was always better.

You're a Laker fan, and you hardly give a lick of reason apart from black/white. Its safe to say your opinion could be a little biased.

Even I would say that I have a slight Laker bias when it comes to the two biggest franchises, but prior to 87 Bird was undoubtedly better. So much so that no one questioned it, and he was getting GOAT talks. Then come on the injuries and Bird fades slowly.
Yet Magic never reached his level of play and critical acclaim around the league.

Head-to-head mean very little, particularly over such a small collection of data. 2-1? Okay, but its over 3 series.

[Odinn]

Well, you sure convinced me with this post. I think Bird is better than Magic now. :rolleyes:
It's not the point. It's your "good-looking" priggery. The only difference you and the classic stans, they show their arrogance and you don't.

-Magic was the GOAT offensive player (No. It's Kareem or Jordan.)
-Magic was the GOAT playmaker/facilitator
-Magic accomplished more than Bird did. (No. He didn't.)
-Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.
-Magic had more dominant/elite years than Bird did. (Not accurate again.)

Let me know when a poster that you and I respect agrees with you. Such as ShaqAttack, KBlaze etc.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

You're a Laker fan, and you hardly give a lick of reason apart from black/white. Its safe to say your opinion could be a little biased.

Even I would say that I have a slight Laker bias when it comes to the two biggest franchises, but prior to 87 Bird was undoubtedly better. So much so that no one questioned it, and he was getting GOAT talks. Then come on the injuries and Bird fades slowly.
Yet Magic never reached his level of play and critical acclaim around the league.

Head-to-head mean very little, particularly over such a small collection of data. 2-1? Okay, but its over 3 series.
They met in the high school and college championships I think. Might not represent who's better, but still a fun fact.

[plowking]

Exactly dude. I knew you were a young buck when your only argument was numbers. Please bring back your old avatar. I used to spend mins at a time lost in a daze just looking at that shit.

I was actually thinking about last night how it seems Larry bird is getting lost in the shuffle. I bet in ten years people will be like, "Larry who?".

It's not so much numbers with this particular debate. I assumed Magic was the better player at around 16 before reading into any of this greatly, and having a chance to dig up games from the internet, and also a giant stash of taped games of the two.

Watching the two, formed my own debate, and I found it odd reading articles and hearing commentators mention that Bird was being called the GOAT, then this all suddenly changed? And for what? Just because one player won a few more titles?

Just my opinion. I thought Bird was more dominant in his prime, which is backed by the opinion of the leagues players and consensus at the time. I just don't think Magic's 2 more championships edge him as a better player. It's not like he has longevity over Bird. They played a similar amount.
So basically most people that make the choice of Magic over Bird seem to do it for the sole reason of championships? Or so it seems to me. I'm just trying to find out through this thread.

[StateOfMind12]

It's not the point. It's your "good-looking" priggery. The only difference you and the classic stans, they show their arrogance and you don't.

-Magic was the GOAT offensive player (No. It's Kareem or Jordan.)
-Magic was the GOAT playmaker/facilitator
-Magic accomplished more than Bird did. (No. He didn't.)
-Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.
-Magic had more dominant/elite years than Bird did. (Not accurate again.)
He is in the argument for greatest offensive player ever. I personally do think he is the greatest offensive player ever and I'm a Bulls fan too.

I would like to hear an explanation of how Magic accomplished less than Bird did because if you just simply look at their resumes Magic's was better.

Feel free to explain how Bird had more dominant/elite years than Magic did as well.

Anyone who knows anything about the two knows that Magic has the longevity advantage and put up more years of dominance than Bird did. Bird's career was declining and going downhill after '87 whereas Magic continued to flourish and be one of the best in the game. Actually Magic's prime and peak years was pretty much from '87-'91.


Let me know when a poster that you and I respect agrees with you. Such as ShaqAttack, KBlaze etc.
ShaqAttack usually does agree with me though. I don't think he agrees with me on this subject though but that doesn't make it wrong.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

Eh seems I'm wrong about Larry bird and magic meeting in high school.

[plowking]

Why is Magic above Bird?

He was the better player and that was about it. Bird was considered better in the early 80s and Magic was considered clearly better in the late 80s.

How was he a better player?

-Magic was the GOAT offensive player
-Magic was the GOAT playmaker/facilitator
-Magic accomplished more than Bird did.
-Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.
-Magic had more dominant/elite years than Bird did.

The last two are the main reasons for me.

Bird was actually not that great of a post-season performer so I always find it funny how much people constantly overrate his clutch play. Magic on the other hand was a tremendous post-season performer. He has some dents and faults himself in the post-season such as '84 Finals, '81 1st round vs. Houston but it's still better than Bird's.

More dominant/elite seasons? They both have 9 All NBA first team selections, and the same amount of MVP's. Bird's coming three in a row. I'd say that's more dominant actually.

As far as the better post season performer? I find it funny when Magic gets on Lebron about clutch play, considering how SI went in on him during the playoffs in 84. The famous "Tragic Johnson" articles, etc.
Now Johnson is remembered as a clutch player, its hard not to when you're a top elite talent, since none of the top 10 are considered chokers.
It'll be the same thing if Lebron goes on to win several titles. People will completely forget how often his clutchness and inability to close were brought up.

[magnax1]

To me it's pretty odd to say Magic was better. Bird had one of the most complete games of all time. He was the best passer ever at his position, and arguably the best scorer and rebounder at his position ever too, he was also a good defender. Magic is arguably similar in terms of offensive impact, but otherwise is quite far off. He was during his best years one of the worst defenders in the league, and also was not near the rebounder that Bird was. Of course he did win more, but that is really just caused by the fact that he consistently had better teams around him. He was drafted onto a team with the best player in the league who had made it to the 2nd round the year before, and many many more all star caliber players were added through his career. McAdoo, Worthy, Scott, Green, Mychal Thompson, Orlando Woolridge, Terry Teagle, Sam Perkins, Vlade Divac were all high caliber all star or borderline all star players. While Parish and McHale were both better 2nd options then Worthy at their best, I don't think you could make the argument that Bird consistently had that level of talent around him. The only thing the argument seems to be based on is that Magic won more which to me is a silly argument in the first place.

[StateOfMind12]

More dominant/elite seasons? They both have 9 All NBA first team selections, and the same amount of MVP's. Bird's coming three in a row. I'd say that's more dominant actually.
The difference is that Magic in his first three years in the league was a better and more of an impact player than Bird was in his last three to four years in league.

All-NBA teams mean very little to me and winning MVPs consecutively is just a good narrative storyline but is not indicative of how good they were.


As far as the better post season performer? I find it funny when Magic gets on Lebron about clutch play, considering how SI went in on him during the playoffs in 84. The famous "Tragic Johnson" articles, etc.
Now Johnson is remembered as a clutch player, its hard not to when you're a top elite talent, since none of the top 10 are considered chokers.
It'll be the same thing if Lebron goes on to win several titles. People will completely forget how often his clutchness and inability to close were brought up.
I already mentioned Magic had some poor post-season outings such as the '84 Finals and '81 1st round vs. Houston but at the end his overall post-season performances were still much better than Bird's.

[Odinn]

He is in the argument for greatest offensive player ever. I personally do think he is the greatest offensive player ever and I'm a Bulls fan too.
At their bests, Shaq-Kareem-Hakeem-Wilt-Jordan and even Bird better than Magic.


I would like to hear an explanation of how Magic accomplished less than Bird did because if you just simply look at their resumes Magic's was better.
Having the best player in the L as a teammate helps you a lot. That's what happened in 1980-83 span. It'd be like Kobe > Duncan because 5 > 4.


Feel free to explain how Bird had more dominant/elite years than Magic did as well.
From his rookie season to injury, 9 season span, Bird was a dominant force. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons. Magic got a lot of respect and got FMVP due to Game 6 of 1980 Finals but he was not better Bird until 1987-88 season. Magic was not their go-to-guy until 1985-86 season. How can you be dominant as you claimed while not being the go-to-guy? Magic retired at the end of 1990-91 season. If we say it was his 9th dominant season, his first was 1982-83 season. It was the first season which Magic had a case over Kareem for being the best Laker but I do not think he was. How can Magic had more dominant years than Bird?:facepalm


Anyone who knows anything about the two knows that Magic has the longevity advantage and put up more years of dominance than Bird did. Bird's career was declining and going downhill after '87 whereas Magic continued to flourish and be one of the best in the game. Actually Magic's prime and peak years was pretty much from '87-'91.
Bird was a 30/9/6 player while declining? We never know Bird's and Magic's true longevity due to their situations. But Bird injured after his 30/9/6 season. If you want to talk about 1987 finals, talk about injuries the Celtics had before. Bird injured at his 10th season and Magic retired after his 12th season.


ShaqAttack usually does agree with me though. I don't think he agrees with me on this subject though but that doesn't make it wrong.
Your claims are just unrealastic on this. Face it.

[StateOfMind12]

Your claims are just unrealastic on this. Face it.
I just read your entire post and it seems like you don't want to give credit to Magic because you want Kareem to get all of the credit so I'm not really going to get into further because your bias and agenda against Magic and for Kareem is strikingly obvious. It is similar to how Kobe and Shaq fans don't want to give credit to one another because they want their favorite to get all the glory instead.

With that being said, I should have posted '89-'92 as Bird's last three years, not '88 to '91.

[Smoke117]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.

People need to stop saying that stupid shit. Before injuries came into play Larry Bird was one of the best help/team defensive players in the league. Larry Bird was miles ahead of Magic Johnson as a defensive player.

[StateOfMind12]

Bird was without a doubt better than Magic defensively. They were similar defensively though since they both read and made great plays in the passing lane but Bird was just better at it. Bird was clearly better than Magic defensively but at the same time it's close. Close, but clear.

[Odinn]

I just read your entire post and it seems like you don't want to give credit to Magic because you want Kareem to get all of the credit so I'm not really going to get into further because your bias and agenda against Magic is strikingly obvious. It is similar to how Kobe and Shaq fans don't want to give credit to one another because they want their favorite to get all the glory instead.
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm
Did I say Kareem was the reason for Magic's all titles? Your assumptions just as pathetic as your claims.


With that being said, I should have posted '89-'92 as Bird's last three years, not '88 to '91.
Great achievement being a better player than post-injury Bird.:cheers: :cheers:

[plowking]

People need to stop saying that stupid shit. Before injuries came into play Larry Bird was one of the best help/team defensive players in the league. Larry Bird was miles ahead of Magic Johnson as a defensive player.

I wouldn't go that far. I'd say he had great awareness on the defensive end. He knew where to be to prevent certain plays, or even allow the thought of driving in for certain players.

[StateOfMind12]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm
Did I say Kareem was the reason for Magic's all titles? Your assumptions just as pathetic as your claims.
No, but it's obvious that you refuse to give credit to Magic (in the early 80s) for the most part because you want Kareem to get all of the glory. This is where I already disagree with you but I'm not getting into this with you because the point of thread was Magic vs. Bird, not Magic vs. Kareem.



Great achievement being a better player than post-injury Bird.:cheers: :cheers:
Yes, as I was referring to Magic had more and longer dominant seasons than Bird did, specifically longer.

Magic was a high impact player from the day he was drafted from the Lakers to the day he retired due to HIV. Bird on the other hand fell off and was no longer a high impact player after '88.

Injuries are part of the game as well and it's another reason to state that Magic was better since he was far more durable than Bird was.

[Smoke117]

Bird was without a doubt better than Magic defensively. They were similar defensively though since they both read and made great plays in the passing lane but Bird was just better at it. Bird was clearly better than Magic defensively but at the same time it's close. Close, but clear.

No it was not. Jesus christ, how many times do I have to tell you to shut up about talking about players and defense. Every single thing you say is WRONG. Just stick to slobbering over Lebron because you know absolutely NOTHING about basketball history or it seems any other players frankly. Magic Johnson was average at best defensively. Larry Bird was a good bordering on very good defensive player before his injuries. It's not about making plays in the passing lanes you idiot. It's about helping out your teammates when they need it and keeping your defense a cohesive unit. You don't have to be defensive stopper one on one to be a good defensive player. Larry Bird had great defensive instincts and it showed in his help/team defense.

[StateOfMind12]

No it was not. Jesus christ, how many times do I have to tell you to shut up about talking about players and defense. Every single thing you say is WRONG. Just stick to slobbering over Lebron because you know absolutely NOTHING about basketball history or it seems any other players frankly. Magic Johnson was average at best defensively. Larry Bird was a good bordering on very good defensive player before his injuries. It's not about making plays in the passing lanes you idiot. It's about helping out your teammates when they need it and keeping your defensive a cohesive unit.
I just agreed with you that Bird was a better defender than Magic and now you are going off on a tangent for absolutely no reason. Congratulations, unless you are mad that I said that it was somewhat close which it appears that plowking/OP agrees with, I think...

[Sarcastic]

No it was not. Jesus christ, how many times do I have to tell you to shut up about talking about players and defense. Every single thing you say is WRONG. Just stick to slobbering over Lebron because you know absolutely NOTHING about basketball history or it seems any other players frankly. Magic Johnson was average at best defensively. Larry Bird was a good bordering on very good defensive player before his injuries. It's not about making plays in the passing lanes you idiot. It's about helping out your teammates when they need it and keeping your defense a cohesive unit. You don't have to be defensive stopper one on one to be a good defensive player. Larry Bird had great defensive instincts and it showed in his help/team defense.

Magic Johnson was better than just "average at best" on defense. You don't lead the league in steals twice just being "average at best". There is nothing average about leading the league in any category.

[pauk]

I rank Birds & Magics career the same...

Bird was a MUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH better individual talent/skill than Magic tho....

[Smoke117]

Magic Johnson was better than just "average at best" on defense. You don't lead the league in steals twice just being "average at best". There is nothing average about leading the league in any category.

Allen Iverson led the league in steals four times and he was a terrible defensive player. Debunked.

[Sarcastic]

Allen Iverson led the league in steals four times and he was a terrible defensive player. Debunked.

No he wasn't.

[WockaVodka]

I would like to know the evidence that Magic was just average defensively at best. Magic and Bird were about the same on that end. When comparing those two, nobody ever talks about their defense.

[Sarcastic]

I would like to know the evidence that Magic was just average defensively at best. Magic and Bird were about the same on that end. When comparing those two, nobody ever talks about their defense.


Evidence = agenda.

[WockaVodka]

Wilt doesnt even compare to Shaq.

Not only does Wilt have a lower fg% AND ft% than Shaq, his skillset (more or less his footwork) isnt even remotely close to Shaq's. Not even close. Wilt was so pathetic at times he was settling for fadeaways in game 7 of the 1970 finals vs Willis reed. That's right...the season on the line, and Wilt was leaping away from a 6'9" dude with a bad leg in a winner-take-all game for the title. :facepalm

lol, the ugliest shot in history may be Wilt's finger roll.
:confusedshrug: What does this have to do with anything?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

:confusedshrug: What does this have to do with anything?

Wrong thread. :oldlol:

[Champ]

At their bests, Shaq-Kareem-Hakeem-Wilt-Jordan and even Bird better than Magic.


Having the best player in the L as a teammate helps you a lot. That's what happened in 1980-83 span. It'd be like Kobe > Duncan because 5 > 4.


From his rookie season to injury, 9 season span, Bird was a dominant force. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons. Magic got a lot of respect and got FMVP due to Game 6 of 1980 Finals but he was not better Bird until 1987-88 season. Magic was not their go-to-guy until 1985-86 season. How can you be dominant as you claimed while not being the go-to-guy? Magic retired at the end of 1990-91 season. If we say it was his 9th dominant season, his first was 1982-83 season. It was the first season which Magic had a case over Kareem for being the best Laker but I do not think he was. How can Magic had more dominant years than Bird?:facepalm


Bird was a 30/9/6 player while declining? We never know Bird's and Magic's true longevity due to their situations. But Bird injured after his 30/9/6 season. If you want to talk about 1987 finals, talk about injuries the Celtics had before. Bird injured at his 10th season and Magic retired after his 12th season.


Your claims are just unrealastic on this. Face it.

This is a great post, Odinn, and for me the crux of the argument is Bird's 9 year run from '79 to '88, where over the majority of their careers, titles not withstanding, he was the better player with more accomplishments.

Still, I always have them ranking back-to-back on any GOAT list. As I said, it's really close given their whole careers.

[Champ]

I don't think that Bird had the best 3 year stretch of any player in the league since 1970..yet he is the only one with 3 straight mvps since bill russell was winning them every year in 1960s.

not Kareem, not Moses, not MJ, not Wilt, not Duncan, not Oscar,not Lebron, not Magic, not Barkley, not K. Malone.

and no disrespect, but if you read your own comments "taken the MVP award from Bird"......kind of reflects what I was saying about the league and marketing legit superstar white player to white fans.
People identified with Bird and league understood that.

"Won the award over Bird" is a bit more objective.

No disrespect taken, but I think you're reading too much into my quote because in no way was I thinking along those lines.

But certainly there where white fans and writers alike who were trying to prop him up because of skin color, and that was unfortunate.

It would be a shame if this debate devolved into an issue of race; it's been well-documented just how race-blind Bird was, and it always seemed an issue that mattered more to everyone else than to him.

[Champ]

And what does it matter if the Celtics would've beaten the Lakers in 1986? They probably would have, but I don't see people saying "well the Lakers would've beaten the Celtics in 1982 so the finals record is really 4-2". Or "well if the Celtics were so good in 1980 and won 61 games why did they get upset by Philly"? I don't understand why people try to give teams and players accomplishments they didn't get or deserve. As far as I'm concerned the 1980s Lakers beat the 1980s Celtics in the finals two of three times.

My point is that Magic's 2 to 1 finals advantage is somewhat due to random chance. For instance, the best, most dominant team Magic had ('87) got the opportunity to face the Celtics in the finals, while Bird's best, most dominant team ('86) never got that same chance.

If it had, I think most would agree the (head-to-head) series would be tied at 2-2, thus negating one of the main reasons many who rank Magic over Bird point toward.

[get these NETS]

No disrespect taken, but I think you're reading too much into my quote because in no way was I thinking along those lines.

But certainly there where white fans and writers alike who were trying to prop him up because of skin color, and that was unfortunate.

It would be a shame if this debate devolved into an issue of race; it's been well-documented just how race-blind Bird was, and it always seemed an issue that mattered more to everyone else than to him.

what about the other point?

about being only 3 x consecutive mvp since the early days of Russell?

[Champ]

what about the other point?

about being only 3 x consecutive mvp since the early days of Russell?

A lot that has to do with competition in a given year, so that's certainly a variable we would have to consider and look into.

Perhaps Magic could've gotten three straight MVP's had a guy named Jordan not entered the league.

I was an avid basketball fan during Bird's prime, and in all honesty, he really was the best player in the league from '84 to '86. I don't think there was any hidden agenda. You could also make the argument that Bird could've won the award in award over Doc in '81; it was a very close vote.

[Raz]

Russell isn't even in my top 10 and I got Magic ahead of Bird. Magic put up better playoffs while Bird would get bothered more, Magic beat him 2-1 in the finals, and could match his accolades too

6,773 posts and you haven't been banned? No Russell in your top 10? Get off the crack

[get these NETS]

A lot that has to do with competition in a given year, so that's certainly a variable we would have to consider and look into.

Perhaps Magic could've gotten three straight MVP's had a guy named Jordan not entered the league.

I was an avid basketball fan during Bird's prime, and in all honesty, he really was the best player in the league from '84 to '86. I don't think there was any hidden agenda. You could also make the argument that Bird could've won the award in award over Doc in '81; it was a very close vote.


I was the only Celtics fan in my high school...
I became a big Bird fan because I was always watching Mchale play.


Bird was a great player, without question but he didn't have the greatest 3 year peak in modern nba history.
Fact that he is only modern player to get 3 straight mvps, and not any of the other all time greats mentioned tells me all I need to know.
not a coincidence.
It's the sticking point/dead end when these debates come up.
and like I said it's what creates the backlash against Bird

[jstern]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.

I always mention this during top ten list, how in 2008, 2009 or so everyone's list on ish had Bird ahead of Magic, and a year or two later Magic was ahead of bird, and no questions about it, not even close. That's why I don't take top ten lists seriously, because the human mind is just not capable of taking thousands of different factors and putting them together, and their minds are also so distracted. And because people follow each other, then their list is mostly based on what others have on their list.

Look at Kobe, two years ago, he wasn't on anyone's top ten list, unless it was a huge Kobe fanboy. He hasn't had any Kobe good season's since. Getting sweeped against Dallas unable to step it up, shooting 43%, costing the Lakers those games against OKC, but since the Kobe fanboys have been relentlessly calling Kobe a top 6 players, making threads about it, now even the non fanboys have him as top ten. The bottom line is that people are just extremely mentally flawed.

[OldSchoolBBall]

When Laker fans completed their takover of all internet basketball forums. Then the Magic >> Bird mythology (and even worse, the Magic = GOAT mythology) really started to become entrenched.

[StateOfMind12]

When Laker fans completed their takover of all internet basketball forums. Then the Magic >> Bird mythology (and even worse, the Magic = GOAT mythology) really started to become entrenched.
But don't you have Magic ranked above Bird in your all-time list though? I think Bird's peak might have been better than Magic's but there is no way his career and his all-time ranking is higher than Magic's..

[The Iron Fist]

I always mention this during top ten list, how in 2008, 2009 or so everyone's list on ish had Bird ahead of Magic, and a year or two later Magic was ahead of bird, and no questions about it, not even close. That's why I don't take top ten lists seriously, because the human mind is just not capable of taking thousands of different factors and putting them together, and their minds are also so distracted. And because people follow each other, then their list is mostly based on what others have on their list.

Look at Kobe, two years ago, he wasn't on anyone's top ten list, unless it was a huge Kobe fanboy. He hasn't had any Kobe good season's since. Getting sweeped against Dallas unable to step it up, shooting 43%, costing the Lakers those games against OKC, but since the Kobe fanboys have been relentlessly calling Kobe a top 6 players, making threads about it, now even the non fanboys have him as top ten. The bottom line is that people are just extremely mentally flawed.
Kobe>magic>bird.


Kobe has one hof teammate. Magic and bird had 7 between them.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

A lot of people rank Bird ahead of Magic and a lot rank Magic ahead of Bird. Many people consider them equal because their skills and mindsets were so similar.

For those that do consider Magic better they usually point to the fact that Magic beat Bird in 3 out of 4 Championships. He really could have been 4 for 4 because the Lakers totally blew 2 early games of the 84 series and it still came down to 7 games before Boston won.

Also take into consideration that Magic had to defer to Kareem the first half of his career and he held back a little of his game. Once he was asked to take on more responsability he was a 3 time league MVP. It wasn't that he suddenly got better. This was what the last years of Magic's career looked like regarding the MVP award.

1986-87 MVP
1987-88 3rd
1988-89 MVP
1989-90 MVP
1990-91 2nd

Bird also gets marked down by a lot of people becasue injuries really hampered him late in his career. He was a little older than Magic too. Also, Boston fell out of title contention in his last few years where as Magic's teams were still right there even without Kareem.

I don't know how wise it is to declare one of these guys "better" than the other one. They played different positions and their roles were different. Magic probably had a little better career overall. Bird's peak might have been a little better overall. It's a coin toss in my opinion. I'm a Laker fan but I love both of these guys and I did get to watch their careers unfold. I'm not using youtube or magazine articles to evaluate them.

[Sound and Fury]

Be very careful of your sources. In the 1980's, most sports coverage was still regional, and most major newspapers and TV stations were on the East Coast, which means you have to be on the watch for "East Coast Bias." The best sources from this period are probably Sports Illustrated (the only real "national magazine")... and if you can line up newspaper coverage from "both sides" (in this case, Boston papers and LA papers) you'll have a chance of getting a better view of the story.

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever.

Take the videos you're watching with a grain of salt. During the Magic/Bird era, most of the nationally televised games were called by Dick Stockton or Brent Musberger, with Tom Heinsohn as the color analyst. Heinsohn was a former Celtic great and during that time period was on the Celtics' broadcasts. Like most announcers, he's a bit "homerish" (though he does a better job than most of being reasonably fair) and preferred to build up Bird more than Magic. (I imagine if they'd had Chick Hearn, the late Lakers' announcer, on the broadcasts, you'd have seen him praise Magic more than Bird). Given the Lakers/Celtics rivalry, it only makes sense that Heinsohn would try to do that.


Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days,
Actually, he probably did. I posted elsewhere a link to an SI article written in 1992 about Jordan: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1140177/index.htm - in it is this phrase:

A two-time MVP, he was probably the best player in the world even before Magic Johnson's retirement, but now the subject isn't even worth debating. If Jordan was "probably" the best player in the world before Magic's retirement, but now "there is no discussion" it's clear that Magic was considered to be in the discussion for "best player in the world" during his playing days.

Here's another one from the Chicago Tribune, written just before the start of the 1991 NBA Finals (Bulls-Lakers). http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-06-02/sports/9102190091_1_magic-johnson-guard-in-nba-history-phoenix-coach-cotton-fitzsimmons - I would expect this source to take Magic down a little bit (because he was up against Chicago's Jordan) but it definitely lacks any Los Angeles-Boston bias, which is helpful. The first sentence:

To put your finger on it, to determine unequivocably what makes Magic Johnson one of the greatest players ever, one of the greatest winners ever

(My point was not to prove that Magic "is the best" but rather to refute your statement that nobody ever thought or wrote Magic was the best in his time.)


and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?
Others on the thread have said that Larry was the better player in the early 80's and Magic was better in the late 80's. That's probably a fair assessment, considering he was winning MVPs and won the ROY. But I don't think there was a vast gulf between Magic and Larry back then. Larry was seen as "a little bit better" because his role on the Celtics was more prominent - a scorer - than Magic's on the Lakers - a distributor.

If I recall correctly, Bird hurt his back shovelling a stone driveway (his own or his mom's?) after the 1985 season. He still had two or three more great seasons statistically, but you can see the influence of the back injury - suddenly his three-point attempts jumped and his rebound totals dipped a bit. He tended to float out on the perimeter just a little more often. And of course, he was never the same player after missing most of the '89 season. The two were REALLY close up until that point but I think that back injury limited Bird just enough to let Magic move ahead of him. To answer the original question, the back injury to Bird marked the point that Johnson became the better player because it diminished what Larry could do.

In a lot of ways, it probably really helps bolster Magic's perception that he went out close to "at the top of his game" (he had been to 4 Finals in 5 years, even if he only won 2 titles) just as Jordan did in 1998 and Elway did with the Broncos... and Magic's performances in the 1992 All-Star-Game (MVP) and Olympics (Team Captain) kind of sealed that image of him with the public. We never really saw Magic in basketball decline, but we saw Bird in decline as his back betrayed him. (Just like we ignore Jordan's Washington days, we ignore Magic-Comes-Back-as-Power-Forward in 1996).

(Full disclosure of my own bias: I grew up in California watching Magic).

I think the Magic-Bird question winds up the same as a lot of debates. I think Bird had a "slightly higher prime peak" but Magic "peaked for a lot longer" - how much you value the height of the peak versus the length of the peak will affect where you rank the players. For me, Magic's peak (13 years) was so much longer than Larry's (8 years) that the little extra dominance at the top of Bird's peak isn't enough for me to overlook the length Magic was dominant and put Bird ahead of him. But your mileage may vary.

[jstern]

Kobe>magic>bird.


Kobe has one hof teammate. Magic and bird had 7 between them.

This is what I mean by people being dumb and mentally incapable. Since he has a man crush on Kobe, he brings a very simplistic and superficial argument. That's why top ten list can't be trusted.

[The Iron Fist]

This is what I mean by people being dumb and mentally incapable. Since he has a man crush on Kobe, he brings a very simplistic and superficial argument. That's why top ten list can't be trusted.
Why is one guy being punished for doing more, with less?

Its called rationale, not dumb.

[Jacks3]

Huh? There were plenty of non-Laker fans putting Bryant in the top 10 after 2010. Hell, he widely considered top 10 after his 1st ring post-Shaq.

:confusedshrug:

[StateOfMind12]

I think the Magic-Bird question winds up the same as a lot of debates. I think Bird had a "slightly higher prime peak" but Magic "peaked for a lot longer" - how much you value the height of the peak versus the length of the peak will affect where you rank the players. For me, Magic's peak (13 years) was so much longer than Larry's (8 years) that the little extra dominance at the top of Bird's peak isn't enough for me to overlook the length Magic was dominant and put Bird ahead of him. But your mileage may vary.
:applause: Will rep as soon as I can. This was the perfect post to explain why Magic is ranked higher than Bird.


This is what I mean by people being dumb and mentally incapable. Since he has a man crush on Kobe, he brings a very simplistic and superficial argument. That's why top ten list can't be trusted.
:rolleyes: Coming from you, a guy that has to bring up Kobe in every single one of his posts because he is extremely insecure about him and his legacy.

[OldSchoolBBall]

But don't you have Magic ranked above Bird in your all-time list though? I think Bird's peak might have been better than Magic's but there is no way his career and his all-time ranking is higher than Magic's..

OP was talking about player rating, i.e. who the better (not higher ranked) player is.

[eliteballer]

Bird peaked when there wasn't another GOAT level player peaking, added to the fact that he was the great white hope that the media loved.

Magic was 3 years younger yet still completely outplayed Bird in the Finals and his peak coincided with Jordan who obviously took a lot of attention.

[eliteballer]

Not to mention East Coast media bias.

[1987_Lakers]

When both players were at their absolute best, Bird was the better player, just a better scorer, shooter, post player, defender, & rebounder. Magic has an edge on Bird in terms of longevity and career accomplishments.

[JohnnySic]

Back in the '80-'87 period, no one talked about Magic being on Bird's level, not even Lakers fans.

Only after Bird (and actually the whole team) strated falling apart due to injuries in '87 and thereafter did the pro-Magic arguments come around.

[eliteballer]

When both players were at their absolute best, Bird was the better player, just a better scorer, shooter, post player, defender, & rebounder. Magic has an edge on Bird in terms of longevity and career accomplishments.

Wrong. Bird scored more but he wasnt as efficient, better scorer overall maybe but its not a huge gap. Magic lead the league in steals and was solid at guarding guys who were at or near his size. Bird just couldnt guard ANYONE. Bird got more total boards because of his position, but Magics rebounding from the PG spot is more impressive. Magic could also comfortably play all 5 positions, Bird couldn't because Magic's ballhandling was far superior. Magic could also get into the lane far easier because of his speed/size combo.

When a guy is 3 years younger and outplaying you at your absolute peak, its hard to make an argument/

[DatAsh]

OP was talking about player rating, i.e. who the better (not higher ranked) player is.

I don't usually differentiate between those two, they're usually one in the same.

[1987_Lakers]

Wrong. Bird scored more but he wasnt as efficient, better scorer overall maybe but its not a huge gap. Magic lead the league in steals and was solid at guarding guys who were at or near his size. Bird just couldnt guard ANYONE. Bird got more total boards because of his position, but Magics rebounding from the PG spot is more impressive. Magic could also comfortably play all 5 positions, Bird couldn't because Magic's ballhandling was far superior. Magic could also get into the lane far easier because of his speed/size combo.

When a guy is 3 years younger and outplaying you at your absolute peak, its hard to make an argument/

Bird was clearly a better defender than Magic, Larry was making All-Defensive Teams before his back problems, 1 on 1 both Bird & Magic were below average, both were good team/help defenders, but Bird clearly has an edge in that department, his instincts were just better, he had better anticipation than Magic. Bird was also a better post defender than Magic.

Both were very good rebounders, but again, I give the edge to Bird. This is a guy who was neck to neck with Moses Malone in the rebounding department in the '81 Finals. Bird had multiple seasons where he averaged 9-10 rpg as a starting SF, he was also playing with Parish/Walton/McHale which effected his numbers. Magic played with Kareem, Rambis, Worthy, those 3 were not known for their rebounding.

And to say Magic could play all 5 positions is ludicrous. I can imagine a good center taking a big crap on Magic everytime Magic is playing defense.

[Champ]

Wrong. Bird scored more but he wasnt as efficient, better scorer overall maybe but its not a huge gap. Magic lead the league in steals and was solid at guarding guys who were at or near his size. Bird just couldnt guard ANYONE. Bird got more total boards because of his position, but Magics rebounding from the PG spot is more impressive. Magic could also comfortably play all 5 positions, Bird couldn't because Magic's ballhandling was far superior. Magic could also get into the lane far easier because of his speed/size combo.

When a guy is 3 years younger and outplaying you at your absolute peak, its hard to make an argument/

Couldn't disagree more with this post.

[RRR3]

Bird was clearly a better defender than Magic, Larry was making All-Defensive Teams before his back problems, 1 on 1 both Bird & Magic were below average, both were good team/help defenders, but Bird clearly has an edge in that department, his instincts were just better, he had better anticipation than Magic. Bird was also a better post defender than Magic.

Both were very good rebounders, but again, I give the edge to Bird. This is a guy who was neck to neck with Moses Malone in the rebounding department in the '81 Finals. Bird had multiple seasons where he averaged 9-10 rpg as a starting SF, he was also playing with Parish/Walton/McHale which effected his numbers. Magic played with Kareem, Rambis, Worthy, those 3 were not known for their rebounding.

And to say Magic could play all 5 positions is ludicrous. I can imagine a good center taking a big crap on Magic everytime Magic is playing defense.
Must be why he led the NBA in rebounding and averaged 11.2 RPG for his career

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Back in the '80-'87 period, no one talked about Magic being on Bird's level, not even Lakers fans.

Only after Bird (and actually the whole team) strated falling apart due to injuries in '87 and thereafter did the pro-Magic arguments come around.

I think you are full of shit when you say no one talked about Magic being on Bird's level from 80 to 87.

I think when he was winning finals MVP in 1980 and 1982 people though Magic was pretty good.

Your location = Boston. Hmmmmm

[1987_Lakers]

Must be why he led the NBA in rebounding and averaged 11.2 RPG for his career

Look at Kareem's rebounding numbers from 83-88 then get back to me. Here is a 7 foot 2 player playing 33 MPG, playing in a fast paced era and he only averages 7 rpg?

[1987_Lakers]

I think you are full of shit when you say no one talked about Magic being on Bird's level from 80 to 87.

I think when he was winning finals MVP in 1980 and 1982 people though Magic was pretty good.

Your location = Boston. Hmmmmm

Bird was clearly a better player from 80 to 86. From 87-92 you give the edge to Magic.

[RRR3]

Look at Kareem's rebounding numbers from 83-88 then get back to me. Here is a 7 foot 2 player playing 33 MPG, playing in a fast paced era and he only averages 7 rpg?
IDK I didn't see him play. I assume he was getting older :confusedshrug:

[Psileas]

Bird was clearly a better defender than Magic, Larry was making All-Defensive Teams before his back problems, 1 on 1 both Bird & Magic were below average, both were good team/help defenders, but Bird clearly has an edge in that department, his instincts were just better, he had better anticipation than Magic. Bird was also a better post defender than Magic.

I could accept certain arguments to what makes a great defender, but All-Defensive teams aren't one of these, at least not as a main argument. Bird never was a top-4 defensive forward in the league, as these All-D teams implied. Besides, I do remember quotes about Magic that don't help your argument about Bird being a "clearly better team defender", including a Lakers' game, iirc in 1989, when the commentator was calling Magic "arguably the best team defender in the league" - again, an exaggeration, but an indicator that he was really good at that. After all, a young Magic averaged 2.5 spg over the course of 5 seasons, and you don't do this at 6'8, non-elite athleticism, against much smaller, quicker opponents, without great anticipation skills.

[1987_Lakers]

IDK I didn't see him play. I assume he was getting older :confusedshrug:

Age had something to do with it and from alot of 80's Lakers games I have seen he really wasn't good at boxing out. Look at this stat...

1986
Kareem - 33 MPG | 6.1 RPG
Bill Walton - 19 MPG | 6.8 RPG

[StateOfMind12]

Look at Kareem's rebounding numbers from 83-88 then get back to me. Here is a 7 foot 2 player playing 33 MPG, playing in a fast paced era and he only averages 7 rpg?
:oldlol: I have no idea what he is doing in this thread. He has absolutely no clue when it comes to anything before like 2009, lol and even then I question him and now he enters and tries to talk about something in the 80s.


When both players were at their absolute best, Bird was the better player, just a better scorer, shooter, post player, defender, & rebounder. Magic has an edge on Bird in terms of longevity and career accomplishments.
I'm alright with this but I do think '87 Magic was better than Bird ever was but I understand the arguments for '84 and '86 Bird. It's too bad they never really played each other during their peaks. The closest they did was '85 and '87 but Bird was kind of past it '87 and Magic was just starting to enter it by '85.

[Round Mound]

Bird > Magic from 1979 to 1986
Magic > Bird from 1987 to 1992

Peek Wise Bird Was Better. Sadly His Injuries from 1989 on Made Him Struggle Playing Wise.

Offensively They Where Close Magic a Little Better but Bird Defensively Was Way Better than Magic

[Sarcastic]

The way some people post on here, it seems like Magic was a slouch on defense and Bird was a lockdown defender. Neither of which is true.

[colts19]

To me it's pretty odd to say Magic was better. Bird had one of the most complete games of all time. He was the best passer ever at his position, and arguably the best scorer and rebounder at his position ever too, he was also a good defender. Magic is arguably similar in terms of offensive impact, but otherwise is quite far off. He was during his best years one of the worst defenders in the league, and also was not near the rebounder that Bird was. Of course he did win more, but that is really just caused by the fact that he consistently had better teams around him. He was drafted onto a team with the best player in the league who had made it to the 2nd round the year before, and many many more all star caliber players were added through his career. McAdoo, Worthy, Scott, Green, Mychal Thompson, Orlando Woolridge, Terry Teagle, Sam Perkins, Vlade Divac were all high caliber all star or borderline all star players. While Parish and McHale were both better 2nd options then Worthy at their best, I don't think you could make the argument that Bird consistently had that level of talent around him. The only thing the argument seems to be based on is that Magic won more which to me is a silly argument in the first place.

I like Magic and Bird both, but I always rooted for Larry Legend because he played college ball in my home town and I saw every game he played at home in college.

I can say that I remember their rookie years everyone was saying, how many games would the lakers have lost if they had bird instead of magic. A lot of sports writers thought they would have set a new record for wins in a season. ROTY voting was a landslide for Bird.

Moving on to later in their careers. I remember the Lakers bringing in guys like Michael Thompson and Bob Mcadoo. The Celtics never did that and it cost them a couple Championships. Jerry West did a great job of bringing a player that was just good enough to put them over the top.


I think Bird had a little higher Peak. Magic had a little better career. So I call it a TIE.

[ThaRegul8r]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league

Then you haven't seen/read/watched enough.


and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days

See above.


Los Angeles bounded into championship orbit on a booster rocket provided by the Utah Jazz. For signing Gail Goodrich as a free agent three years earlier, Utah surrendered a first-round draft choice the Lakers used to select the greatest player in the history of hoops: Magic Johnson.

[QUOTE=Billy Cunningham]If someone said Magic is the greatest of all time, I couldn

[Pointguard]

Steals, as in the case of Magic, were superior to block shots on defense. Steals always end the offensive possession, whereas blocks don't. In Magic's case, a steal was as close to two points as any defensive play. It is usually a four point reversal claimed by the defense. So yeah, his steals are a major part of defense. And yeah teams would be extra careful, and less creative for fear of a steal or a Magic rebound. Transition is considered defense because that's where it is initiated.

The reason why the Lakers beat the Celtics was Magic's transition. He literally ran them to the point they couldn't keep up. Magic had more influence on his four other players than anybody ever. His teammates played great defense because they knew it could get them easy baskets. Magic lead the best shooting team ever because they were fully invested into Magic's lead.

[Pointguard]

When Magic played against MJ it was billed as the greatest team player against the greatest individual player.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

People can rank people however they want; I don't particularly care. But they need to stop making statements about things they clearly know nothing about.

I couldn't agree more with this.

Also, thank you for doing what I refuse to do which is take the time to post things to disprove some of the idiotic and innaccurate trash that has found it's way into this thread.

[ThaRegul8r]

People can rank people however they want; I don't particularly care. But they need to stop making statements about things they clearly know nothing about.

I couldn't agree more with this.

Also, thank you for doing what I refuse to do which is take the time to post things to disprove some of the idiotic and innaccurate trash that has found it's way into this thread.

You're welcome, but I spend far less time doing this that I used to in the past. I've found that the ignorant will continue believing what they want, regardless how many facts you present them with, so I rarely even bother anymore.

[StarJordan]

Bird had a higher peak, but magic's prime lasted longer

[The Choken One]

I'm a Lakers fan...only reason for me. :D

but seriously...the margin is so slim that it's based completely on opinion. They're interchangeable at the 3rd/4th spot to me.

[Sarcastic]

What it looks like to me is that the people who actually watched them play will put them even or Magic slightly higher. The people who base their rankings off of basketball-reference will put Bird higher.

[DKLaker]

You're a Laker fan, and you hardly give a lick of reason apart from black/white. Its safe to say your opinion could be a little biased.

Even I would say that I have a slight Laker bias when it comes to the two biggest franchises, but prior to 87 Bird was undoubtedly better. So much so that no one questioned it, and he was getting GOAT talks. Then come on the injuries and Bird fades slowly.
Yet Magic never reached his level of play and critical acclaim around the league.

Head-to-head mean very little, particularly over such a small collection of data. 2-1? Okay, but its over 3 series.

Biased? I am way too old to be biased, out grew that stuff a very long time ago. Are you really going to act like there was no racism back then?
Are you going to act like there was no east coast bias? Are you going to act like the NBA didn't have an agenda to try to make a white faced star player the face of the league. Are you going to act like the media voters for MVP of which 98% of were east coast white guys who grew up when there was segregation.......like these guys were not biased in Birds favor?

There was no NBA team in LA until 1960 when the Lakers moved here, meaning there were no basketball sports writers who grew up out here in 1979-1989, everyone was brought in from the east coast.....just do your homework on the MVP voters back then. White East Coast.

It's extremely ignorant or horribly naive. Maybe you're just a kid who doesn't know history and what things were like.

Head to Head means a whole lot, plus Magic won more Championships including NCAA head to head......BECAUSE, even in college Magic was better!!!!!

Magic had a better NBA finals game as a rookie than Bird had in his Finals career. From day 1 Magic was better!!!!

[Champ]

What it looks like to me is that the people who actually watched them play will put them even or Magic slightly higher. The people who base their rankings off of basketball-reference will put Bird higher.

I feel the opposite is true.

[plowking]

Biased? I am way too old to be biased, out grew that stuff a very long time ago. Are you really going to act like there was no racism back then?
Are you going to act like there was no east coast bias? Are you going to act like the NBA didn't have an agenda to try to make a white faced star player the face of the league. Are you going to act like the media voters for MVP of which 98% of were east coast white guys who grew up when there was segregation.......like these guys were not biased in Birds favor?

There was no NBA team in LA until 1960 when the Lakers moved here, meaning there were no basketball sports writers who grew up out here in 1979-1989, everyone was brought in from the east coast.....just do your homework on the MVP voters back then. White East Coast.

It's extremely ignorant or horribly naive. Maybe you're just a kid who doesn't know history and what things were like.

Head to Head means a whole lot, plus Magic won more Championships including NCAA head to head......BECAUSE, even in college Magic was better!!!!!

Magic had a better NBA finals game as a rookie than Bird had in his Finals career. From day 1 Magic was better!!!!

I've seen your posts today on Lebron and other players outside of Kobe, your not unbiased and you still post like a teenager.

[Dictator]

I kinda agree with OP. Bird > Magic

Dang I forgot to add white text......MJ is better.

[plowking]

What it looks like to me is that the people who actually watched them play will put them even or Magic slightly higher. The people who base their rankings off of basketball-reference will put Bird higher.

I feel like its the exact other way around. Even in this thread the posters who are old enough to have watched seem to have gone with Bird.

I was in the same boat ranking Magic better as a teenager, though after reading as much as I could find and watching as much film as I could, I changed my mind.

[ThaRegul8r]

What it looks like to me is that the people who actually watched them play will put them even or Magic slightly higher. The people who base their rankings off of basketball-reference will put Bird higher.

I feel the opposite is true.

How would this be the case when Bird has the better scoring numbers? If you were going off basketball-reference, Bird was the better scorer, and so > Magic.

[plowking]

Then you haven't seen/read/watched enough.


Did you come to this conclusion from what you claim you've seen or read, or did you already think that Bird > Magic and thus look for stuff to confirm what you already thought? Because I've noticed that that's all most people do for whichever player they advocate. They only look up whatever makes their player look good and ignore/disregard anything else.

People can rank people however they want; I don't particularly care. But they need to stop making statements about things they clearly know nothing about.

There are always cases of great players being called the best by a select few. Even Kobe has received that praise from very respected basketball heads around the league, yet I wouldn't say that he was being called the GOAT when discussing his career later on after hes stopped playing. The fact is, from the reading I did, and the footage I watched, it was never a consensus thing like that of Bird.

[DKLaker]

I've seen your posts today on Lebron and other players outside of Kobe, your not unbiased and you still post like a teenager.

I didn't post anything about Lebron??? WTF are you talking about kid???

I am opinionated and speak my mind......not biased.

As far as I've seen I am the oldest person on ISH.....if not, then 2nd oldest.......anyone else on here over 60????

[Sarcastic]

I feel the opposite is true.

What stats does Magic have over Bird, other than assists? And most people here are putting Bird as an equal passer (for some strange reason), at least in the half court, which is not true. Bird rebounded more, scored more, had better shooting %s, more All-Defense teams. According to this thread Magic was awful on defense and got torched for 30+ on a nightly basis, whereas Bird was the GOAT help defender.

[eliteballer]

plowking you piece of trash, dont you accuse anyone of bias when you've been hating on the Lakers for years.

Magic destroyed Peak Bird in the Finals despite being 3 years younger. Scored more efficiently. More versatile, better man defender, at worst an equal team defender. Better passer. A bigger mismatch on the floor.

Wilt said he wasn't sure he'd ever seen a better player than Magic.

[StateOfMind12]

Sound of Fury and ThaRegular completely trashed this thread and explained it in perfect detail why Magic is usually ranked above Bird and why he probably should be.

It is apparent though that OP is already convinced that Bird is better since he just completely dodges their points.

There is no point in trying to convince the OP Magic was better than Bird because he has already made up his mind that Bird was better despite the fact that all the evidence pointing to Magic as the better player.

[plowking]

plowking you piece of trash, dont you accuse anyone of bias when you've been hating on the Lakers for years.

Magic destroyed Peak Bird in the Finals despite being 3 years younger. Scored more efficiently. More versatile, better man defender, at worst an equal team defender. Better passer. A bigger mismatch on the floor.

Wilt said he wasn't sure he'd ever seen a better player than Magic.

LOL...

Go look at posts from when the Lakers and Celtics were playing in the finals not too long ago. Go look at posts before Lebron joined the Heat. Lakers were legitimately my second favorite team pretty much.

I don't have a reason to lie since I don't care what your opinion of my opinion is. Simply your opinion on basketball, if you'd care to share it.

[Round Mound]

The way some people post on here, it seems like Magic was a slouch on defense and Bird was a lockdown defender. Neither of which is true.

Defensive Rating

1979-80 NBA 98.2 (6)
1980-81 NBA 98.6 (10)
1981-82 NBA 99.4 (6)
1983-84 NBA 100.8 (2)
1984-85 NBA 102.8 (9)
1985-86 NBA 99.4 (4)

Defensive Win Shares

1979-80 NBA 5.6 (1)
1980-81 NBA 6.1 (1)
1981-82 NBA 5.7 (2)
1982-83 NBA 5.6 (5)
1983-84 NBA 5.6 (1)
1984-85 NBA 5.2 (2)
1985-86 NBA 6.2 (1)
1986-87 NBA 4.8 (6)
Career NBA 59.0 (25)

NBA & ABA Yearly Playoff Leaders and Records for Defensive Rating

Year Lg Player DRtg Tm
2012 NBA Josh Smith 93.20 ATL
2011 NBA Dwight Howard 95.73 ORL
2010 NBA Dwight Howard 92.98 ORL
2009 NBA Dwight Howard 98.35 ORL
2008 NBA Tim Duncan 98.51 SAS
2007 NBA Jason Kidd 94.63 NJN
2006 NBA Alonzo Mourning 95.13 MIA
2005 NBA Ben Wallace 93.48 DET
2004 NBA Ben Wallace 83.91 DET
2003 NBA Ben Wallace 90.51 DET
2002 NBA Ben Wallace 86.41 DET
2001 NBA David Robinson* 92.42 SAS
2000 NBA David Robinson* 84.01 SAS
1999 NBA David Robinson* 87.33 SAS
1998 NBA David Robinson* 93.42 SAS
1997 NBA Alonzo Mourning 94.64 MIA
1996 NBA Scottie Pippen* 96.07 CHI
1995 NBA David Robinson* 97.53 SAS
1994 NBA Patrick Ewing* 94.34 NYK
1993 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 96.56 HOU
1992 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.35 DET
1991 NBA Scottie Pippen* 99.52 CHI
1990 NBA Bill Laimbeer 96.32 DET
1989 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.38 DET
1988 NBA Bill Laimbeer 99.51 DET
1987 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 102.24 HOU
1986 NBA Bill Walton* 100.62 BOS
1985 NBA Ralph Sampson* 97.16 HOU
1984 NBA Buck Williams 99.41 NJN
1983 NBA Moses Malone* 95.76 PHI
1982 NBA Larry Bird* 94.21 BOS
1981 NBA Truck Robinson 94.51 PHO
1980 NBA Larry Bird* 95.93 BOS

How was Larry a Bad Defender?

Statistically It Shows Otherwise..

:confusedshrug:

[TheBigVeto]

Answer: Never.
Magic had the advantage of playing with a GOAT (or at least top 3 all time) in Kareem.
As great as McHale was, he's not even in top 20 of all time.

[plowking]

Sound of Fury and ThaRegular completely trashed this thread and explained it in perfect detail why Magic is usually ranked above Bird and why he probably should be.

It is apparent though that OP is already convinced that Bird is better since he just completely dodges their points.

There is no point in trying to convince the OP Magic was better than Bird because he has already made up his mind that Bird was better despite the fact that all the evidence pointing to Magic as the better player.

I directly responded to ThaRegular... I'm not sure what else can be done apart from wait for him to respond.
I'm not one stuck in his ways either, I'm using this as a learning thread. If he could provide links to those articles about Magic, I'd love to read them. Maybe my opinion will change again.

You're often very vague in your rundown of basketball in the 80's and even early 90's, so I'm assuming you're even younger than I am. Take a lesson and start reading instead of acting like you know everything.

[Sarcastic]

:lol @ using def rating, and I never said Bird was a bad defender.


Carlos Boozer had a 95 def rating last year. Dwight Howard had a 96. Boozer must be better than Howard, amirite?

[Dictator]

Defensive Rating

1979-80 NBA 98.2 (6)
1980-81 NBA 98.6 (10)
1981-82 NBA 99.4 (6)
1983-84 NBA 100.8 (2)
1984-85 NBA 102.8 (9)
1985-86 NBA 99.4 (4)

Defensive Win Shares

1979-80 NBA 5.6 (1)
1980-81 NBA 6.1 (1)
1981-82 NBA 5.7 (2)
1982-83 NBA 5.6 (5)
1983-84 NBA 5.6 (1)
1984-85 NBA 5.2 (2)
1985-86 NBA 6.2 (1)
1986-87 NBA 4.8 (6)
Career NBA 59.0 (25)

NBA & ABA Yearly Playoff Leaders and Records for Defensive Rating

Year Lg Player DRtg Tm







2012 NBA Josh Smith 93.20 ATL








2011 NBA Dwight Howard 95.73 ORL
2010 NBA Dwight Howard 92.98 ORL
2009 NBA Dwight Howard 98.35 ORL
2008 NBA Tim Duncan 98.51 SAS
2007 NBA Jason Kidd 94.63 NJN
2006 NBA Alonzo Mourning 95.13 MIA
2005 NBA Ben Wallace 93.48 DET
2004 NBA Ben Wallace 83.91 DET
2003 NBA Ben Wallace 90.51 DET
2002 NBA Ben Wallace 86.41 DET
2001 NBA David Robinson* 92.42 SAS
2000 NBA David Robinson* 84.01 SAS
1999 NBA David Robinson* 87.33 SAS
1998 NBA David Robinson* 93.42 SAS
1997 NBA Alonzo Mourning 94.64 MIA
1996 NBA Scottie Pippen* 96.07 CHI
1995 NBA David Robinson* 97.53 SAS
1994 NBA Patrick Ewing* 94.34 NYK
1993 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 96.56 HOU
1992 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.35 DET
1991 NBA Scottie Pippen* 99.52 CHI
1990 NBA Bill Laimbeer 96.32 DET
1989 NBA Dennis Rodman* 99.38 DET
1988 NBA Bill Laimbeer 99.51 DET
1987 NBA Hakeem Olajuwon* 102.24 HOU
1986 NBA Bill Walton* 100.62 BOS
1985 NBA Ralph Sampson* 97.16 HOU
1984 NBA Buck Williams 99.41 NJN
1983 NBA Moses Malone* 95.76 PHI
1982 NBA Larry Bird* 94.21 BOS
1981 NBA Truck Robinson 94.51 PHO
1980 NBA Larry Bird* 95.93 BOS

How was Larry a Bad Defender?

Statistically It Shows Otherwise..

:confusedshrug:

wtf

[jlauber]

What stats does Magic have over Bird, other than assists? And most people here are putting Bird as an equal passer (for some strange reason), at least in the half court, which is not true. Bird rebounded more, scored more, had better shooting %s, more All-Defense teams. According to this thread Magic was awful on defense and got torched for 30+ on a nightly basis, whereas Bird was the GOAT help defender.

Magic was one of the, if not THE, most efficient shooters at the guard position in NBA history. He even had seasons of .561 and .565. And he was FAR more efficient in both the playoffs, and the Finals, than Bird.

Not arguing with most of the rest of your post, either, but IMHO, other than perhaps Russell, IMHO, no other player made their teammates better than Magic.

And for those that will claim that Magic had Kareem...keep in mind these three things. One, as great as Kareem was, and at his best he was right near the top, the Laker franchise was nothing more than slightly above average for the four seasons he was there BEFORE Magic arrived. Magic IMMEDIATELY turned them into a 60-22 title-winning team (and had one of the greatest title-clinching game's in NBA history...sans Kareem, as well.) The Lakers would AVERAGE 59 wins per season in Magic's 12 years, with a LOW record of 54-28.

Two, AFTER Kareem retired in '89, the Lakers IMPROVED from a 57-25 team to a 63-19 record, which, BTW, was their second best mark in the Magic-era. Not only that, but Magic then took a rapidly declining and injury-plagued roster to a 58-24 record, and his NINTH trip to the Finals (75% of the time in his career he played in the Finals.)

And finally, AFTER Magic retired, the Lakers IMMEDIATELY plummetted to a 43-39 record, and just to show that that was no fluke, they followed that up a year later with a 39-43 record.

I personally have Magic in my all-time Top-4, and Bird around 8-10. I know that I am probably in the minority, but in terms of career success, aside from Russell, Magic was the greatest "winner" in NBA history.

[DKLaker]

Answer: Never.
Magic had the advantage of playing with a GOAT (or at least top 3 all time) in Kareem.
As great as McHale was, he's not even in top 20 of all time.

LMFAO, you never watched any of these guys play basketball....don't even try to lie. The honest truth is that these were 2 amazingly stacked teams, the talent was equal without any question.
I have always compared McHale to Tim Duncan and if you look at the best season the 2 ever had the numbers are spot on identical. McHale was a fking BEAST!!!!
You have proven you don't know crap about basketball in that era so your comments are meaningless.

[1987_Lakers]

Answer: Never.
Magic had the advantage of playing with a GOAT (or at least top 3 all time) in Kareem.
As great as McHale was, he's not even in top 20 of all time.

To be fair, by the '86 season McHale was better than Kareem. Kareem had stretches where he seemed like a liability out there during his last two seasons.

[DKLaker]

You kids didn't see this but in 1987 the All-Star game was in Seattle and Tom Chambers of the Sonics was on the team, he was a solid player but not a great or anything, it was his 6th season and 1st ASG. Magic went to him and told him he would make him the MVP, Magic then made it public, people laughed....not for long.
Magic hit Chambers with pass after pass for short jumpers, dunks and layups.
Chambers scored 34 points and was named the All-Star Game MVP as the West won. Chambers had only been added to the team so that Seattle could have a player in the game.
Chambers made 3 more ASG appearances scoring a combined total of 43 points.

Magic could made anyone look good, that's the kind of impact he had.

[TheBigVeto]

LMFAO, you never watched any of these guys play basketball....don't even try to lie. The honest truth is that these were 2 amazingly stacked teams, the talent was equal without any question.
I have always compared McHale to Tim Duncan and if you look at the best season the 2 ever had the numbers are spot on identical. McHale was a fking BEAST!!!!
You have proven you don't know crap about basketball in that era so your comments are meaningless.

You are a Laker fan. Your opinion on this thread is as useless as shit.

[DKLaker]

You are a Laker fan. Your opinion on this thread is as useless as shit.

I am the only one of the who was an adult and saw them play. You were in diapers or not yet born :oldlol: I'd say I am the most qualified.
I'm so biased that I say Coach Pop > Phil Jackson......oh yeah I am biased.......NEXT :D

[Collie]

What made Magic was his play AFTER Bird went down due to back problems. His last 2 championships meant much more for his legacy than his first 3.

If we cut both careers in 1986, then no doubt Bird was a far far more accomplished player and would unanimously be considered better. That 87-91 stretch where they made 4 Finals and won 2 rings (and Magic won 3 MVPs), was the deal breaker.

It's kinda like Kobe vs Shaq, where some people rank Kobe higher due to his more lasting success over the absolute dominance Shaq had during his prime.

[DKLaker]

What made Magic was his play AFTER Bird went down due to back problems. His last 2 championships meant much more for his legacy than his first 3.

If we cut both careers in 1986, then no doubt Bird was a far far more accomplished player and would unanimously be considered better. That 87-91 stretch where they made 4 Finals and won 2 rings (and Magic won 3 MVPs), was the deal breaker.

It's kinda like Kobe vs Shaq, where some people rank Kobe higher due to his more lasting success over the absolute dominance Shaq had during his prime.

If I hadn't stubbed my toe real bad in 1972, I could beat Usain Bolt :oldlol: :oldlol: No excuses dude, their careers were what they were and Magic came out clearly on top. At one point before Jordan won his first ring he wasn't a top 10 all time player......let's just pretend time just stopped there :banghead: Magic beat Bird 3-1 including college, Won more titles 5-3.....end of story. Bird said Magic was better.........buried thread with a shovel.

[plowking]

What made Magic was his play AFTER Bird went down due to back problems. His last 2 championships meant much more for his legacy than his first 3.

If we cut both careers in 1986, then no doubt Bird was a far far more accomplished player and would unanimously be considered better. That 87-91 stretch where they made 4 Finals and won 2 rings (and Magic won 3 MVPs), was the deal breaker.

It's kinda like Kobe vs Shaq, where some people rank Kobe higher due to his more lasting success over the absolute dominance Shaq had during his prime.

Kobe hasn't had more lasting success though. Shaq has great longevity. Its like when people argued Duncan had better longevity than Shaq. After a while, people kept repeating it on here and it almost became fact aside from the truth being that Shaq was far more dominant over a longer period of time.

Same goes with Magic and Bird. I've heard longevity arguments in here for Magic, though the thing is they played the same amount of seasons and made the same number of All NBA teams.
Plus, Magic's glory and apparent hailing as the best (as I'm told to believe this was the turn; around 1988) came when Bird was down and out with injuries. While Bird proved to be the number 1 guy in the league with KAJ, Magic, Moses, etc.

[plowking]

If I hadn't stubbed my toe real bad in 1972, I could beat Usain Bolt :oldlol: :oldlol: No excuses dude, their careers were what they were and Magic came out clearly on top. At one point before Jordan won his first ring he wasn't a top 10 all time player......let's just pretend time just stopped there :banghead: Magic beat Bird 3-1 including college, Won more titles 5-3.....end of story. Bird said Magic was better.........buried thread with a shovel.

Magic said Bird was better too...

And no one is including their college game. Professional basketball is all anyone cares about when ranking a players career.

[bizil]

I think once Magic really got more of a firm grip of taking over games scoring with Kareem in the game, (hell we saw what Magic did without Kareem in terms of taking over) and improving his scoring skillset, it meant he was considered by more people better than Bird. For a while, I could see the argument with Bird being considered better than Magic. But looking back, it seemed Magic had more upside to get better than LB had. LB's offensive arsenal was flawless, passing flawless, rebounding flawless, leadership flawless. And Bird was a better defender than Magic. Magic had the passing, leadership, and rebounds in a flawless manner. But even though he was a very good-great scorer, he still had things he could improve on. Couple all of this with Bird amazingly slowing down some in his early 30's, Magic passed him by. Bird was having back problems at 31 or 32 (prime-peak type years normally, however Bird was still great and a top player) while Magic was only 28.

[Legends66NBA7]

Professional basketball is all anyone cares about when ranking a players career.

Anyone ?

Depends how you rank a career. You can add high school and college, if you want too.

[plowking]

Anyone ?

Depends how you rank a career. You can add high school and college, if you want too.

They weren't playing against the best. I've never seen college and high school accolades counted until some nonsense poster used it to try and further KAJ's case over Jordan. Downright stupid.

[JMT]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Bird
5. Russell
6. Shaq
7. This is usually where I start putting Magic into it.

All those players were undeniably better players than Magic and just as rich in accolades and team success really.

If you've got Shaq ahead of Magic it says all that's necessary about your ability to assess basketball players.

[Psileas]

Same goes with Magic and Bird. I've heard longevity arguments in here for Magic, though the thing is they played the same amount of seasons and made the same number of All NBA teams.
Plus, Magic's glory and apparent hailing as the best (as I'm told to believe this was the turn; around 1988) came when Bird was down and out with injuries. While Bird proved to be the number 1 guy in the league with KAJ, Magic, Moses, etc.

Uh, Magic won the 1987 MVP by a landslide, with Bird still in peak form (actually, someone can argue that, statistically, this was his greatest season ever), with Jordan producing his first super season, with Hakeem already beasting and McHale having easily his best season. Not to mention his 1989 and 1990 MVP's which came against such competition that many claim that he shouldn't have won them (I definitely think he deserved the 1989 one and that he wasn't a bad choice at all for 1990, either).

[plowking]

If you've got Shaq ahead of Magic it says all that's necessary about your ability to assess basketball players.

Why shouldn't he be? He was a better basketball player at his peak, had a longer career, and he was a proven winner. Why is Magic entitled to be rated higher?

[Sarcastic]

Why shouldn't he be? He was a better basketball player at his peak, had a longer career, and he was a proven winner. Why is Magic entitled to be rated higher?


http://i.minus.com/ibz5Ugv7G9aTFs.gif

[plowking]

Uh, Magic won the 1987 MVP by a landslide, with Bird still in peak form (actually, someone can argue that, statistically, this was his greatest season ever), with Jordan producing his first super season, with Hakeem already beasting and McHale having easily his best season. Not to mention his 1989 and 1990 MVP's which came against such competition that many claim that he shouldn't have won them (I definitely think he deserved the 1989 one and that he wasn't a bad choice at all for 1990, either).

Magic's team won more games, and statistically they were close. Of course he won the MVP.

[plowking]

http://i.minus.com/ibz5Ugv7G9aTFs.gif

Did you just seriously imply that Magic was better than a 30/14/4 Shaq?

Seriously? I don't think I'm the only one on here that thinks this. Shaq at his best is probably the best basketball player to step on the court along with Wilt, Jordan and Kareem.

A big mans impact on the game trumps anything a guard can do for the most part.

[Psileas]

Magic's team won more games, and statistically they were close. Of course he won the MVP.

Of course statistically the were close. Like I said, Magic won his MVP's against stiff competition. You admitted that Bird was the No1 guy in a league with some great competitors, so it's not as if there weren't a few players who were statistically close to him, as well.

[Sarcastic]

Did you just seriously imply that Magic was better than a 30/14/4 Shaq?

Seriously? I don't think I'm the only one on here that thinks this. Shaq at his best is probably the best basketball player to step on the court along with Wilt, Jordan and Kareem.

A big mans impact on the game trumps anything a guard can do for the most part.


Yea, I put peak Magic ahead of peak Shaq. I don't think you realize how dominant Magic Johnson was.

24/6/12 from a point guard is pretty unheard of. Shaq was coming from an era in which dominant centers were putting up monster years pretty normally. Hakeem, Robinson, and Ewing had dominant years that weren't that much worse than Shaq's. Shaq never even got to the sacred 4 blocks per game that the others did.

[Dictator]

I feel like making a thread about Shaq's place on the top 10 list. Is magic really that much better than him?

[get these NETS]

I feel like making a thread about Shaq's place on the top 10 list. Is magic really that much better than him?


if you want to talk about impact and winning..I think Magic's team was in the FINALS more than half the years he played.and he left with five rings...

think about that....

[Sarcastic]

if you want to talk about impact and winning..I think Magic's team was in the FINALS more than half the years he played.and he left with five rings...

think about that....

He was in the finals 9 times in 12 years, disregarding the year the year he came back for 30 games with HIV.


KAJ went to the finals only 2 other times without Magic.

[Overdrive]

if you want to talk about impact and winning..I think Magic's team was in the FINALS more than half the years he played.and he left with five rings...

think about that....

If Shaq retired after '04(as many seasons as Magic) he would've been in 5 finals. Not a bad ratio itself. (And just think about it, if he came back the same way Magic did he'd have been on the '09 Lakers)

Magic retired way before anyone saw how he fell down, we'll never found out what would've happened had he played till '96 through his retirement years.

Don't get me wrong Shaq has no case over Magic, but you can't compare the "accolade ratio" of guys who had to retire during there prime to guys who played until they literally fell apart.

[plowking]

Yea, I put peak Magic ahead of peak Shaq. I don't think you realize how dominant Magic Johnson was.

24/6/12 from a point guard is pretty unheard of. Shaq was coming from an era in which dominant centers were putting up monster years pretty normally. Hakeem, Robinson, and Ewing had dominant years that weren't that much worse than Shaq's. Shaq never even got to the sacred 4 blocks per game that the others did.

Since when did an arbitrary amount of blocks come to matter?

Exactly. Shaq was coming from an era where he had the most competition at his spot than any other spot, and yet if you look at his head to head numbers, there is not a single match up he lost. He got the better of every single center of his era over the span of their careers, with all that competition.

You can take the point guard, I'll have the big man. Every great team that wins has size. This Heat team is a rarity that won this year. Look at every other team that has won titles over the years, its always one of, if not the biggest team in the league.

I don't realize how dominant Magic was? I understand how good he was. I just don't think you understand that a big man is far better than a guard. Always has been, always will be. Look at the top 10 for proof. Hakeem, Wilt, Russell, KAJ, Duncan, Shaq, etc... More than half the top 10 are centers. There is a reason for it.

[get these NETS]

If Shaq retired after '04(as many seasons as Magic) he would've been in 5 finals. Not a bad ratio itself. (And just think about it, if he came back the same way Magic did he'd have been on the '09 Lakers)

Magic retired way before anyone he fell down, we'll never found out what would've happened had he played till '96 through his retirement years.

Don't get me wrong Shaq has no case over Magic, but you can't compare the "accolade ratio" of guys who had to retire during there prime to guys who played until they literally fell apart.

I think Magic, much like Kidd, could make ANY team better.
We can only guess, but Magic was about winning first and foremost....think one year he took a paycut or renegoitated his contract so the lakers could get a backup pg...so that he would be fresher in playoffs..

WHO does that?

So I'm speculating that Magic's leadership and presence would elevate any team he was on..perhaps not to ring or finals level but definitely maximizing their talent.

also.as a 6'9" multiskilled player he could play potentially other positions as he did when he came back as a point forward

proven leader and winner,PROFESSIONAL about taking care of his body,places premium on winning above all else, versatile, willing to sacrifice for the team and happens to have skills that aren't based on speed or strength so they won't decline as rapidly as player whose game IS based on those things


Magic's game would have aged gracefully...

[Sarcastic]

Since when did an arbitrary amount of blocks come to matter?

Exactly. Shaq was coming from an era where he had the most competition at his spot than any other spot, and yet if you look at his head to head numbers, there is not a single match up he lost. He got the better of every single center of his era over the span of their careers, with all that competition.

You can take the point guard, I'll have the big man. Every great team that wins has size. This Heat team is a rarity that won this year. Look at every other team that has won titles over the years, its always one of, if not the biggest team in the league.

I don't realize how dominant Magic was? I understand how good he was. I just don't think you understand that a big man is far better than a guard. Always has been, always will be. Look at the top 10 for proof. Hakeem, Wilt, Russell, KAJ, Duncan, Shaq, etc... More than half the top 10 are centers. There is a reason for it.


Magic isn't some 6'1" guard. It's incredibly hard to account for 6'9" ball handler.

[plowking]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.

Magic actually never played on a bad team in his career. He wasn't some holy basketball player that made everything good. No one was. He made the game easier for his teammates, sure. He though, like every other basketball player, didn't make anyone better though.

[plowking]

Magic isn't some 6'1" guard. It's incredibly hard to account for 6'9" ball handler.

Magic is a less athletic, pass first Lebron. Lebron is also that 6'8 ball handler.
Lebron isn't better than a prime Shaq either, and Lebron as an individual talent and player > Magic.

[Sarcastic]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.

Magic actually never played on a bad team in his career. He wasn't some holy basketball player that made everything good. No one was. He made the game easier for his teammates, sure. He though, like every other basketball player, didn't make anyone better though.

They went from 58 wins in 1991 to 43 wins in 1992, when he left. The reason he never played on a bad team was due to him. The year before he got to the Lakers, they were in 3rd place in their division. The next year they were champs.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.

Magic actually never played on a bad team in his career. He wasn't some holy basketball player that made everything good. No one was. He made the game easier for his teammates, sure. He though, like every other basketball player, didn't make anyone better though.

An elite (or in Magic's case, legendary) PG doesn't make his teammates better? :oldlol:

[get these NETS]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.

Magic actually never played on a bad team in his career. He wasn't some holy basketball player that made everything good. No one was. He made the game easier for his teammates, sure. He though, like every other basketball player, didn't make anyone better though.
think you replying to my comment that magic would make any TEAM better


which he does....

I think it's a sports cliche to write that players make other players better.....only time it's true is if you're a young guy playing behind/backing up a better player and he destroys you every day in practice and you develop by having to learn to stop and score on him..


other than that..you are right....great players make the game easier for lesser players and make the TEAM better



Kidd made kenyon, rj, kittles look like REAL stars when in reality they were all just great finishers on the break with limited skills



in tefms of magic never playing on a bad team.....come on man...how many on-paper stacked teams UNDER achieve for whatever reason? plenty

Magic, the leader, just did whatever it took to get maximum out of his teams....that lakers team that played bulls in finals had NO business beating the trail blazers in wcf...but I bet magic's fingerprints are all over that series win....

[Overdrive]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.


Nobody does, that's true, but an elite PG knows the sweet spots of their teammates, knows on which style of play they shine, knows where to put the ball, because he knows where his teammate runs, he doesn't make teammates better than they are, but he can trigger their best play. That's actually the task of a point guard. We just recentl grew accustomed to undersized college SGs playing PG in the NBA, back in the 80s and 90s they'd just play SG.

[plowking]

An elite (or in Magic's case, legendary) PG doesn't make his teammates better? :oldlol:

I think the saying is redundant and incorrect. No player makes another player better. He makes the game easier. Setting up shots, setting picks, etc is not making someone better, its making the game easier on them.


They went from 58 wins in 1991 to 43 wins in 1992, when he left. The reason he never played on a bad team was due to him. The year before he got to the Lakers, they were in 3rd place in their division. The next year they were champs.

Like I said, he never played on a bad team. The team he came into was a 45+ win team. When he left, they were essentially that all over again.

[plowking]

Nobody does, that's true, but an elite PG knows the sweet spots of their teammates, knows on which style of play they shine, knows where to put the ball, because he knows where his teammate runs, he doesn't make teammates better than they are, but he can trigger their best play. That's actually the task of a point guard. We just recentl grew accustomed to undersized college SGs playing PG in the NBA, back in the 80s and 90s they'd just play SG.

I agree with this, and is what I bring up. He makes the game easier. Just like a center does like Shaq, Kareem, Wilt... Someone you constantly had to collapse on, hence they could find open teammates.

[Sarcastic]

I think the saying is redundant and incorrect. No player makes another player better. He makes the game easier. Setting up shots, setting picks, etc is not making someone better, its making the game easier on them.



Like I said, he never played on a bad team. The team he came into was a 45+ win team. When he left, they were essentially that all over again.


In between they were a 59win team, with 5 rings and 9 finals appearances in 12 years.

[plowking]

In between they were a 59win team, with 5 rings and 9 finals appearances in 12 years.

What are you trying to prove? I said Magic never played on a bad team. You haven't exactly done anything to prove that wrong. In fact I'm not sure if you're even trying to.

All your telling me is that Magic was great. Yeah, I know... I have him top 10.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I think the saying is redundant and incorrect. No player makes another player better. He makes the game easier. Setting up shots, setting picks, etc is not making someone better, its making the game easier on them.

Was AC Green better with or without Magic? Byron Scott, Sedale Threatt, Kurt Rambis, the '96 Lakers; were they better without Magic?

Setting up shots and "making the game easier" for your teammates =/= makes them better.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.



You couldn't be more wrong

Magic never played on a bad team because he made them good. Can you name one player from Michigan State that had any success in the NBA. Magic played with a lot of talent in LA just like Bird did in Boston but those same rosters didn't perform as well before he got there or after he left. Magic creates better shots for his teammates and his style of play encouraged his teammates to share the ball and pass more. Larry Bird himself even said that there's something about playing with Magic that makes you want to make the extra pass.

Magic and Bird changed the entire culture of the NBA from a selfish one on one league to a pass friendly league that valued teamwork. Michael Jordan promptly changed it back after they retired. lol.

[DatAsh]

Exactly. Shaq was coming from an era where he had the most competition at his spot than any other spot, and yet if you look at his head to head numbers, there is not a single match up he lost. He got the better of every single center of his era over the span of their careers, with all that competition.
.


That's not true at all. Maybe statistically you have a case, but it's not all about stats. Shaq himself will tell you that's not true.

[DatAsh]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.


:facepalm

[Replay32]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better.

:roll: :facepalm



:coleman:

[jlauber]

For those that believe that Bird was the better player than Magic from '80 thru '86, I would argue that Magic's run from '80 to '82 was more dominant, especially if you include the post-season ( a 2-0 edge in FMVP's.)

[midatlantic09]

1. Jordan
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Bird
5. Russell
6. Shaq
7. This is usually where I start putting Magic into it.

All those players were undeniably better players than Magic and just as rich in accolades and team success really.

:no: :no:

[colts19]

For those that believe that Bird was the better player than Magic from '80 thru '86, I would argue that Magic's run from '80 to '82 was more dominant, especially if you include the post-season ( a 2-0 edge in FMVP's.)

I can't believe that anyone who watched them, could say Magic was better btw 80 to 85. Bird was clearly the better player at that time. After that Magic caught him and passed him as bird declined after 87. All I know is what my eyes told me.

Put Bird with Kareem those first 3 years and I believe they would have won all 3 years.

[jlauber]

I can't believe that anyone who watched them, could say Magic was better btw 80 to 85. Bird was clearly the better player at that time. After that Magic caught him and passed him as bird declined after 87. All I know is what my eyes told me.

Put Bird with Kareem those first 3 years and I believe they would have won all 3 years.

Well, had Magic been completely healthy in '81 (and ShaqAttack has presented evidence that he night have been by the playoffs...although I disagree), and I think the Lakers three-peat. Why? Because the '80 and '82 Lakers handled the Sixers without too much trouble (including a clinching win on the Sixers home floor in '80, and in game in which Magic's 42-15-7 was one for the ages...and accomplished withOUT Kareem.) In the '81 ECF's, Boston had to rally from a 3-1 series deficit against Philly, with wins by the narrowest of margins in the last three games, to get to the Finals.

And I have long maintained that Magic suffered in the MVP voting in the first half of the 80's, BECAUSE of Kareem. Clearly, as was proven time-and-again, Magic COULD have scored much more, had he been so inclined. And his FG% efficiencies were thru the roof in the early to mid-80's (with seasons as high as .561 and .565.)

The fact was, while Kareem was the main SCORING option from '80 thru '85, it was Magic who was directing that offense. And he routinely was the Laker's best rebounder (especially in the post-season.)

In any case, BOTH players were among the best there ever was (as was Kareem), and it is really not fair to diminish what they BOTH accomplished. I just won't accept that Bird was better...nor will you accept that Magic was the better player.

We will just have to agree to disagree...

:cheers:

[TheBigVeto]

I can't believe that anyone who watched them, could say Magic was better btw 80 to 85. Bird was clearly the better player at that time. After that Magic caught him and passed him as bird declined after 87. All I know is what my eyes told me.

Put Bird with Kareem those first 3 years and I believe they would have won all 3 years.

You're talking to a Wilt/Magic/Kobe slurper. In other words, he's a Laker-tard.

[jlauber]

You're talking to a Wilt/Magic/Kobe slurper. In other words, he's a Laker-tard.

Chamberlain was a SIXER in his prime. And I rank Russell, MJ, and Duncan above Kobe (as well as Shaq, Kareem, Magic, and Chamberlain.)

Magic's resume speaks for itself. 59 wins per season, on average, with NINE trips to the Finals in his 12 prime seasons (I never count 95-96), and FIVE rings. And, along the way, THREE MVPs, and THREE FMVP's (and he SHOULD have won a 4th in '88.)

BTW, show me a LEGITIMATE all-time list without Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Magic, and Kobe.

[eliteballer]

You guys are seriously forgetting what a complete all around beast Magic was from the moment he stepped into the league:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYNDWaEmqto

3 years younger and outplaying Peak Bird in the Finals...I'll take it every time:pimp:

[DKLaker]

lol Magic didn't make teammates better... Nobody does.

Magic actually never played on a bad team in his career. He wasn't some holy basketball player that made everything good. No one was. He made the game easier for his teammates, sure. He though, like every other basketball player, didn't make anyone better though.

Obviously you are too young to have seen him play otherwise you wouldn't say something so idiotic. EVERYONE back then knew Magic made everyone better....there was NEVER a single person who disputed this.

[DKLaker]

You guys are seriously forgetting what a complete all around beast Magic was from the moment he stepped into the league:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYNDWaEmqto

3 years younger and outplaying Peak Bird in the Finals...I'll take it every time:pimp:


THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DKLaker]

Magic said Bird was better too...

And no one is including their college game. Professional basketball is all anyone cares about when ranking a players career.

Point is that Magic was ALWAYS the better player, if not, Bird would've beaten him......if not Magic couldn't have won the NBA title with a legendary performance in game 6 of the Finals......something Bird could never match......if not, Bird would've won more titles than Magic. Little kids on here trying to argue about stuff that is way before their time :facepalm :facepalm :banghead:

[Kobe 4 The Win]

One thing I want to reiterate is that Magic's game didn't make some huge leap late in his career. As game 6 in the 1980 Finals showed, Magic Johnson was Magic Johnson from day one. He was capable of dominating at that time but he held back some of his game because of Kareem. He was allowed to be more agressive on offense as Kareem aged. That is why he was able to rack up regular season MVP awards that he didn't get early on.

I have no doubt that Magic could have scored 28 or 30ppg any season he wanted from 1980 to 1991 when he retired. His ring count and legacy benefited greatly from being a Laker but for me it's fun to think about what he would have done if he was drafted by a shit team and he was counted on to be "The Man" from day one.

[plowking]

How exactly does a player make another player better? I'd really like that answered.
They don't. If Magic got me 4 open layups a game compared to another guard who got me 2 open, and 2 contested, hes not making me better, hes making it easier.

Magic isn't teaching these guys how to make layups, shots, play defense.

No one makes anyone better. Just makes the game easier. The saying is redundant and incorrect.

[plowking]

Point is that Magic was ALWAYS the better player, if not, Bird would've beaten him......if not Magic couldn't have won the NBA title with a legendary performance in game 6 of the Finals......something Bird could never match......if not, Bird would've won more titles than Magic. Little kids on here trying to argue about stuff that is way before their time :facepalm :facepalm :banghead:

So Bird is responsible for the fact he didn't have as good a teammates as Magic throughout his career?
It wasn't Magic who stepped into a 20 win team his first season. No. It was Bird.
It wasn't Magic who went to a team without making sure the best player in the league would be there, and saying he'd stay in college if he didn't get to play with him. It was Bird.

Really? He would have beaten him? There was maybe 2-4 years where Bird had as good or better a team than Magic.

[ThaRegul8r]

One thing I want to reiterate is that Magic's game didn't make some huge leap late in his career. As game 6 in the 1980 Finals showed, Magic Johnson was Magic Johnson from day one. He was capable of dominating at that time but he held back some of his game because of Kareem. He was allowed to be more agressive on offense as Kareem aged. That is why he was able to rack up regular season MVP awards that he didn't get early on.

This.

He clearly showed he was capable of it as a rookie, if it was what the team needed in order to win. After Kareem went out, it became necessary, and so he rose to the occasion, providing what the team needed. And when it became necessary for him to become the #1 option in order to the team to win, he did, and the result was the best team of the Showtime era and an MVP.

For the life of me, I don't know why it would be seen as a negative for a player to do whatever is necessary in order for the team to win. The object of everything done on a basketball court should be to help your team to win. If it isn't needed for the team to win, then it's meaningless.

[DatAsh]

How exactly does a player make another player better? I'd really like that answered.
They don't. If Magic got me 4 open layups a game compared to another guard who got me 2 open, and 2 contested, hes not making me better, hes making it easier.

Magic isn't teaching these guys how to make layups, shots, play defense.

No one makes anyone better. Just makes the game easier. The saying is redundant and incorrect.


You listed some of the things yourself like teaching them offense/defense, much in the same way a coach would, but more of the nitty gritty.

There are many ways a player can make another player better : motivating him to play/practice harder, teaching him those invaluable tricks that are often hard for coaches to get across, building his confidence, leading by example and allowing human nature to do what it does best. Even if a player does none of those things, he can still make his teammates better just by being a better player himself.

Anyone who's ever played a competitive sport knows that practicing with and against a good player helps you more than practicing with and against a bad player.

Guarding Lebron James every day in practice is going to improve your defense a hell of a lot faster than guarding Derrick Brown. Likewise, being guarded by Lebron every practice is going to improve your offense faster than being guarded by Derrick Brown. It's just the way it is.

Take two players of the exact same skill/size/athletic ability, both SGs, and have one of them practice everyday with me for the first five years of his career. Have the other one do the exact same thing with a 88-93 Jordan. When those five years are up, Jordan's practice buddy will be the better overall player 99.9% of the time, just by the very nature of Jordan being better than me. That scenario isn't even taking into account the fact that Jordan can teach his man offensive and defensive tricks of the trade that I can't, nor is it taking into account that Jordan's guy would probably end up practicing an extra 1-3 hours a day(trying to keep up with Jordan's work ethic), like all of Jordan's teammates usually did.

I could go on, but the point stands as is. Players really can make other players better, and not just in the sense that they make it easier for them on court.

[jlip]

This.

He clearly showed he was capable of it as a rookie, if it was what the team needed in order to win. After Kareem went out, it became necessary, and so he rose to the occasion, providing what the team needed. And when it became necessary for him to become the #1 option in order to the team to win, he did, and the result was the best team of the Showtime era and an MVP.

For the life of me, I don't know why it would be seen as a negative for a player to do whatever is necessary in order for the team to win. The object of everything done on a basketball court should be to help your team to win. If it isn't needed for the team to win, then it's meaningless.

Haven't you heard? Being "the man" is what's important, and you're only as good as the points you score.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

So Bird is responsible for the fact he didn't have as good a teammates as Magic throughout his career?

Last time I checked Mchale, Parish and DJ were all elected to the Hall of fame. Then you have guys like Cedric Maxwell, Tiny Archibald, Bill Walton, Gerald Henderson. LA had a stacked roster but so did Boston.


It wasn't Magic who stepped into a 20 win team his first season. No. It was Bird.

True, Boston was worse off before Larry got there than LA was before Magic. However, the Lakers had largely the same main players in 1979 as they did in 1980 and they didn't go anywhere.


It wasn't Magic who went to a team without making sure the best player in the league would be there, and saying he'd stay in college if he didn't get to play with him. It was Bird.

That's bullshit


Really? He would have beaten him? There was maybe 2-4 years where Bird had as good or better a team than Magic.

It's no guarantee but I think a good case was made that if Magic had been healthy in 1981 LA could have beaten Boston. They did seem to handle Philly better.

[plowking]

Are you denying that Magic said he didn't want to come out of college if he didn't play with Kareem? Go read up.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

How exactly does a player make another player better? I'd really like that answered.
They don't. If Magic got me 4 open layups a game compared to another guard who got me 2 open, and 2 contested, hes not making me better, hes making it easier.


I think you should take the word of Magic Johnson's teammates as they have repeatedly said that Magic made them better. Or as I said before you can take Larry Bird's word for it when he says "There's something about playing with Magic that he just makes you want to make the extra pass." Most coaches will tell you that making an extra pass makes their team better.


No one makes anyone better. Just makes the game easier. The saying is redundant and incorrect.Also, if the game is made easier for you then you are going to be more efficient. If your team becomes more efficient you become better.


Magic isn't teaching these guys how to make layups, shots, play defense.

You sure about that? Magic seemed to do a lot of teaching/coaching when I watched him. I seem to remember him doing a lot of instuction/development with Divac on the court in the NBA Finals.

[LeBird]

You guys are getting into semantics.

As for the thread: when Bird declined a bit and Magic gained stature through more titles.

Both are top 5, but if I was asked to start a franchise on a player it would be Bird. He was simply the best all-round skilled player and did them to an incredibly high standard. Magic was more positionally versatile. Bird, even through a lot of his injury plagued years was putting up crazy numbers. If Bird doesn't get injured, I think there'd be little argument in Basketball who the GOAT is (at least for the modern era).

Also, for interest's sake: Bird mangled his finger before his NBA season ever began. He was an even better shooter before it. Crazy.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Are you denying that Magic said he didn't want to come out of college if he didn't play with Kareem? Go read up.

Of course he wanted to play with Kareem in LA. Common sense. Look, Magic Johnson wasn't going back to Michigan State after winning the National Championship, period. His stock was at it's highest point and he wasn't going to risk a knee injury messing up his payday. That quote was from 1991 after he had made a boatload of cash in the NBA so I take it with a grain of salt.

[LeBird]

Point is that Magic was ALWAYS the better player, if not, Bird would've beaten him......if not Magic couldn't have won the NBA title with a legendary performance in game 6 of the Finals......something Bird could never match......if not, Bird would've won more titles than Magic. Little kids on here trying to argue about stuff that is way before their time :facepalm :facepalm :banghead:

No, he wasn't. And the above point has little to do with individual brilliance and more to do with team success. For the grand majority of Magic's career he had a better (in some years much much better) team than Bird. Swap teams and Bird wins about the same or more than Magic. Bird-Kareem-Worthy would have been lights out for the rest of the NBA.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

No, he wasn't. And the above point has little to do with individual brilliance and more to do with team success. For the grand majority of Magic's career he had a better (in some years much much better) team than Bird. Swap teams and Bird wins about the same or more than Magic. Bird-Kareem-Worthy would have been lights out for the rest of the NBA.

I can't believe that you can say that game 6 in the 1980 Finals had little to do with individual brilliance. That is the epitomy of individual brilliance. We are talking about 42/15/7 in the close out game of the NBA Finals as a rookie while league MVP Kareem was at home on the couch.

With that said I don't think people ranking Magic ahead of Bird is because they think Magic was better than Bird. I think it's the legacy, longevity thing. Bird in his prime was a God. He was such a dominant player. He had his hands on every aspect of a game. Like Magic stats don't tell the whole story on Bird. It's hard to understand how great he was unless you were there experiencing it.

Magic and Bird were so similar it's hard to say one of them is better than the other. I can't.

[ILLsmak]

I remember you made this thread before... just sayin lol

-Smak

[DKLaker]

No, he wasn't. And the above point has little to do with individual brilliance and more to do with team success. For the grand majority of Magic's career he had a better (in some years much much better) team than Bird. Swap teams and Bird wins about the same or more than Magic. Bird-Kareem-Worthy would have been lights out for the rest of the NBA.

Stupid as they come......The Lakers and Celtics had equal talent, obviously you weren't around back then. Magic was better and a better winner......so no mystery that he won more.

[LeBird]

I can't believe that you can say that game 6 in the 1980 Finals had little to do with individual brilliance. That is the epitomy of individual brilliance. We are talking about 42/15/7 in the close out game of the NBA Finals as a rookie while league MVP Kareem was at home on the couch.

With that said I don't think people ranking Magic ahead of Bird is because they think Magic was better than Bird. I think it's the legacy, longevity thing. Bird in his prime was a God. He was such a dominant player. He had his hands on every aspect of a game. Like Magic stats don't tell the whole story on Bird. It's hard to understand how great he was unless you were there experiencing it.

Magic and Bird were so similar it's hard to say one of them is better than the other. I can't.

You're insinuating that Magic having 1 great game equals Bird in the 1980 season? That's inane. Bird won the ROTY and it wasn't even close. Magic was a fantastic player, even in the beginning, but Bird's turnaround of the Celts was far more impressive from an individual impact point of view.

So saying if x > y they would have won the title is stupid. That depends on the teams they're inheriting. Magic inherited arguably the best player in the league - with a decent team - and Bird got crappola.

Both great players, both top 5 (if not top 3) IMO, but I'd give the edge to Bird as he was more responsible for all that he achieved than Magic. Magic was a great playmaker and a very good scorer; whereas I think Bird was great at both. Defense, it's Bird. The way I see it there are some facets I think Magic may be better than Bird, however, Larry isn't far off anyway; whereas in others that I think Bird was superior, I don't think Magic is as close.


Stupid as they come......The Lakers and Celtics had equal talent, obviously you weren't around back then. Magic was better and a better winner......so no mystery that he won more.

No, they didn't. And only a moron will claim otherwise. So I'll let you claim otherwise.

[DKLaker]

You're insinuating that Magic having 1 great game equals Bird in the 1980 season? That's inane. Bird won the ROTY and it wasn't even close. Magic was a fantastic player, even in the beginning, but Bird's turnaround of the Celts was far more impressive from an individual impact point of view.

So saying if x > y they would have won the title is stupid. That depends on the teams they're inheriting. Magic inherited arguably the best player in the league - with a decent team - and Bird got crappola.



No, they didn't. And only a moron will claim otherwise. So I'll let you claim otherwise.

STFU.....you never saw either of them play live......just admit it!

[Kobe 4 The Win]

So saying if x > y they would have won the title is stupid. That depends on the teams they're inheriting. Magic inherited arguably the best player in the league - with a decent team - and Bird got crappola.

So you are saying Cedric Maxwell, Tiny Archibald, Dave Cowens, Pete Maravich and Gerald Henderson are crappola? You are f**king nuts dude.

And your post count troubles me.

[1987_Lakers]

1984 - Lakers had more talent, just choked.

1985 - Talent pretty even, but LA did have a deeper bench and Bird was banged up.

1986 - Celtics had more talent, but LA was upset vs Houston in the WCF.

1987 - Lakers CLEARLY had more talent by this point.

[LeBird]

STFU.....you never saw either of them play live......just admit it!

I saw both. Address the facts, stop talking nonsense. I'm pretty sure no one who watched both, at that time, thought Magic was better. As I said, the ROTY voting was a landslide to Bird.


So you are saying Cedric Maxwell, Tiny Archibald, Dave Cowens, Pete Maravich and Gerald Henderson are crappola? You are f**king nuts dude.

And your post count troubles me.

They had the 2nd worst record in the league and Bird took them to the best in his Rookie season. This is such a well-known fact it shouldn't need repeating to any serious basketball fan.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

They had the 2nd worst record in the league and Bird took them to the best in his Rookie season. This is such a well-known fact it shouldn't need repeating to any serious basketball fan.

Everyone knows about he improvment from 78-79 to 79-80. That doesn't mean the players I listed are crappola. They were excellent and in some cases legendary players. They are far from crap. Furthermore it wasn't the exact same roster in 78-79 that played in 79-80.

[Pointguard]

I can't believe that anyone who watched them, could say Magic was better btw 80 to 85. Bird was clearly the better player at that time. After that Magic caught him and passed him as bird declined after 87. All I know is what my eyes told me.

Put Bird with Kareem those first 3 years and I believe they would have won all 3 years.
I think finals play is what did Bird in. Magic was just better in the finals when you seen them playing each other or when they weren't playing each other. Magic always shot more efficiently, showed better judgement of when to shoot and when to pass, pushed the pace to a level the Celtic's couldn't keep up, and just had a bigger impact when you got to see them compete with one another.

In the Lakers two series wins - Magic scored like Bird and shot the 3 pointer at a superior rate, was within 2 rebounds per game, nearly tripled the assist number, shot free throws better - and despite Magic totally pushing the issue the turnovers were very close to equal.

In the one Laker loss, Bird didn't shoot better, had less total points, but definitely outplayed Magic that time. However, the other two series Magic had visibly more impact and just was better.

Player FG%... FT%... PTS... TRB... AST... TOV
Bird 84.. 48%... 84%... 27.4... 14... 3.6... 25 FMVP
Mag84 L..56%... 74%... 18..... 7.7... 13.6... 31

Mag85 49%... 87%... 18.3... 6.8... 14... 20
Bird85 L 45%... 85%... 23.8... 8.8... 5... 13

Mag87 54%... 96%... 26.2... 8... 13... 13 FMVP
Bird87 L 45%... 92%... 24.2... 10.. 5.5.. 18

1984 was Bird's coming out party in the Finals. Magic had already won two finals MVP's by that time and was in contention for FMVP in '88 played very well in '85 among winning it in '87. Bird had a stellar year in '86 when he won his second. So if you went by Finals work there was separation. Both as individuals and team work.

The Celtics had the best front court in the league throughout those years with two HOF's.

[LeBird]

If the Lakers got to the finals in 86 they would have been beat. The fact that they didn't is the only reason it isn't 2-2 in finals. Magic didn't bring it 'always'. He basically choked in crucial moments for one.

[LeBird]

Everyone knows about he improvment from 78-79 to 79-80. That doesn't mean the players I listed are crappola. They were excellent and in some cases legendary players. They are far from crap. Furthermore it wasn't the exact same roster in 78-79 that played in 79-80.

AI may be legendary, but he isn't performing at that legendary rate. That team - 'team' being the keyword - was crap. It was performing crap, and was the second worst team the season before Bird arrived.

That Bird inherited a far worse team than Magic is not trivial - even Magic, and his fans, would accept that.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

People act like that 1978 team was full of guys like Kwame Brown and Smush Parker but it wasn't. Who knows why they didn't win a lot of games. Maybe they were tanking for more draft picks. lol.

[Legends66NBA7]

plowking, why do you rank Bird over Shaq and Russell too ?

Just curious.

[Pointguard]

You can take the point guard, I'll have the big man. Every great team that wins has size. This Heat team is a rarity that won this year. Look at every other team that has won titles over the years, its always one of, if not the biggest team in the league.

I don't realize how dominant Magic was? I understand how good he was. I just don't think you understand that a big man is far better than a guard. Always has been, always will be. Look at the top 10 for proof. Hakeem, Wilt, Russell, KAJ, Duncan, Shaq, etc... More than half the top 10 are centers. There is a reason for it.

Bird and Magic changed the game from being center oriented. As speed and creativity evolve the game moved away from that. In the age of great centers, Jordan was definitely the best player. Not one of those centers were in his league. KAJ was not a great winner at all in the 70's in an era without franchise players he couldn't make his statement. He truely went thru a Magic make-over. Most of the dynasties had a superstar guard that was gifted with great creativity and leadership. The dynasties went from Magic, Bird, Isiah, Jordan, Hakeem would not have won if Jordan played but he qualifies for sure, Kobe won more than Shaq or Duncan but Shaq and Duncan were truely dynastic. Kobe, Wade and Lebron were really PG when their teams won. Dirk and Durant are the new wave skilled players with great influence.

As the league got more skilled, quicker and faster the center became less effective. Guys with good judgement and strong wills to win is where the game evolutionized too. Shaq had nearly every great quality in a center with about 12 years of being coupled with a top notch player, yet he couldn't distinguish himself winning wise. Things have moved on.

[ThaRegul8r]

If the Lakers got to the finals in 86 they would have been beat. The fact that they didn't is the only reason it isn't 2-2 in finals. Magic didn't bring it 'always'. He basically choked in crucial moments for one.

I could post stuff on Bird to equal that statement, but I won't, because there are people who would just use it to further agendas, and as I couldn't care less about people's agendas or giving them ammo to use, I won't. Unlike some, I have no need to bash other players.

[eliteballer]

I remember you made this thread before... just sayin lol

-Smak

:oldlol: this chump has some obsession with trying to prove Bird was better than Magic.

[LeBird]

I could post stuff on Bird to equal that statement, but I won't, because there are people who would just use it to further agendas, and as I couldn't care less about people's agendas or giving them ammo to use, I won't. Unlike some, I have no need to bash other players.

Then do so. I don't consider it bashing. As I don't consider saying that Bird was better in the beginning as bashing. I think it is simply a far more reliable opinion.

Magic was a great player. As I said before, probably top 5 - meaning you can place him anywhere in that 5 you want and I wouldn't complain much.

Outside the comparison between them; I really wish the league had two superstars like these guys again. Pass-first kind of guys who could also dominate if the need was there. Guys who didn't need more than a handful of shots to be the dominating player on the floor. These guys were truly freakish talents and I am sure their rivalry kept them pushing each other further more. Players who did something amazing - more than just physical, but cerebral - every night and whose teammates loved playing aside them. They made the game fun while elevating it to a whole other plane.