School me on Magic and Bird from 79-80 through 82-83

[fpliii]

What were they like before Nixon was traded and when Bird had Fitch as his coach?

Most of the games I've seen of both are from 83-84 on...were their playstyles markedly different? Were they considered legit MVP caliber players at the time?

:cheers:

[Collie]

I didn't get to see them live, but according to Simmons' book, Magic was like a super Pippen in that he did everything. Score when needed, rebound, run the offense. He was more of a point forward when Nixon was still there, and they shared ballhandling duties.

One of the things I remember him saying specifically was that Magic was unique in that he could be the focal point of the team AND a utility guy. He called that version of Magic the best all-around player since Oscar.

Bird was more of less the same player, but wasn't as assertive on the scoring and passing side as he would be later on.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

I didn't get to see them live, but according to Simmons' book, Magic was like a super Pippen in that he did everything. Score when needed, rebound, run the offense.
Magic didnt play defense doe

[Collie]

Magic didnt play defense doe

He was a deadly help defender, and could defend players around his size ,especially during the early to mid 80's, before he got bulky. It was just small, fast PGs that he had a problem with (thus why they got Copper).

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

He was a deadly help defender, and could defend players around his size ,especially during the early to mid 80's, before he got bulky. It was just small, fast PGs that he had a problem with (thus why they got Copper).
Decent post defense against bigger guys. "Deadly help defender" is a gross overstatement thats what i would use to describe Birds defense. Magics wasnt as good and he gambled alot.

He was a below average defender for the most part

[Collie]

Decent post defense against bigger guys. "Deadly help defender" is a gross overstatement thats what i would use to describe Birds defense. Magics wasnt as good and he gambled alot.

He was a below average defender for the most part

Fair enough, though I'd say he was leaning more towards average than outright bad.

I do agree that Bird was underrated as a defender though.

[La Frescobaldi]

Bird was always the better player in those early years.

Johnson came into the League on a great great team which was almost built exactly for him, while the Celtics still had to cement some players and coaching. Thus Magic - in my opinion - got inflation of his reputation because he was playing with Kareem, Worthy, Jamaal Smooth, & McAdoo pretty much right out of the starting gate. No question that he was running that show, though. So Johnson was awesome from the start don't get me wrong. But while the rivalry was ferocious from day 1, few people had Magic over Bird in the early years.

There were real good arguments to be made that one or the other, or both, was already better than Julius Erving.
But, at that time, nobody ever thought either one of them was better than Moses Malone. That was not even close.

The drag of the story later on was that they were both improving at almost exponential rates.... but then Larry Bird jacked up his back.

Bird:
MVP Award Shares

1979-80 NBA 0.068 (4)
1980-81 NBA 0.613 (2)
1981-82 NBA 0.661 (2)
1982-83 NBA 0.485 (2)
1983-84 NBA 0.858 (1)
1984-85 NBA 0.978 (1)
1985-86 NBA 0.981 (1) <- Bird wrecked his back in mom's driveway
1986-87 NBA 0.357 (3)
1987-88 NBA 0.659 (2)
1989-90 NBA 0.005 (10)
1990-91 NBA 0.026 (9)
1991-92 NBA 0.002 (14)

Johnson:
MVP Award Shares

1980-81 NBA 0.026 (11)
1981-82 NBA 0.097 (8)
1982-83 NBA 0.406 (3)
1983-84 NBA 0.401 (3)
1984-85 NBA 0.338 (2)
1985-86 NBA 0.263 (3)
1986-87 NBA 0.964 (1)
1987-88 NBA 0.635 (3)
1988-89 NBA 0.782 (1)
1989-90 NBA 0.691 (1)
1990-91 NBA 0.518 (2)
1995-96 NBA 0.007 (12)

Bird was always either edging Magic, or was clearly ahead, until he hurt his back in the off-season before the triumphant '86 season. His decline was very noticeable the first couple months that year but he recovered..... but over seasons it slowly got worse and his back was injured more and more as the years went by.

At the time, Bird was the only player not named Russell or Chamberlain to win 3 MVPs in a row - the only guy to do it who was not a Center.

Of course, Jordan added his name later, but they are still the only 2 perimeter guys to ever dominate the league so consistently over such a long stretch of seasons.
Not even LB James nor Magic played at such a high level sustained over seasons like Bird.

[Pointguard]

Decent post defense against bigger guys. "Deadly help defender" is a gross overstatement thats what i would use to describe Birds defense. Magics wasnt as good and he gambled alot.

He was a below average defender for the most part
He was deadly in a way. When Magic stole the ball it was almost always converted on the other end. And Magic lead the league in assist twice in his first three years. Magic rarely ever got torched because the opposing team was always playing on their heels.

Both were rather unique. Bird was like a power forward with range and superb passing skills. He was tough as nails. He stood out most because of his passing and range. Both of them were very smart and had the best instincts. Bird didn't talk much and would have been call socially awkward today. Magic made it look worse. It took like two years for Bird to really get some confidence and even then it would drift at times - some of that I would attribute to his shot sometimes getting away from him. Marques Johnson and Doc. were in his conference and still played the positions better than him.

Magic could morph into all the positions on the court very early in his career. He could be the man or the support system without much adjustments on his part. He had unique control of the game very early on, was the first to balance the floor outside of the PG position. His position was weird with Nixon there. He was a great offensive rebounder - better than even Bird the first four years while not really being in position for offensive rebounds - as he was usually the set up man. Magic stood out because of his passing and team play.

With that said Bird was definitely the better regular season player. Magic was definitely better in the post season. Both stood out and would stand out today.

[Jameerthefear]

Pretty good but not as good as Lebron.

[stanlove1111]

Bird was always the better player in those early years.

Johnson came into the League on a great great team which was almost built exactly for him, while the Celtics still had to cement some players and coaching. Thus Magic - in my opinion - got inflation of his reputation because he was playing with Kareem, Worthy, Jamaal Smooth, & McAdoo pretty much right out of the starting gate. No question that he was running that show, though. So Johnson was awesome from the start don't get me wrong. But while the rivalry was ferocious from day 1, few people had Magic over Bird in the early years.

There were real good arguments to be made that one or the other, or both, was already better than Julius Erving.
But, at that time, nobody ever thought either one of them was better than Moses Malone. That was not even close.

The drag of the story later on was that they were both improving at almost exponential rates.... but then Larry Bird jacked up his back.

Bird:
MVP Award Shares

1979-80 NBA 0.068 (4)
1980-81 NBA 0.613 (2)
1981-82 NBA 0.661 (2)
1982-83 NBA 0.485 (2)
1983-84 NBA 0.858 (1)
1984-85 NBA 0.978 (1)
1985-86 NBA 0.981 (1) <- Bird wrecked his back in mom's driveway
1986-87 NBA 0.357 (3)
1987-88 NBA 0.659 (2)
1989-90 NBA 0.005 (10)
1990-91 NBA 0.026 (9)
1991-92 NBA 0.002 (14)

Johnson:
MVP Award Shares

1980-81 NBA 0.026 (11)
1981-82 NBA 0.097 (8)
1982-83 NBA 0.406 (3)
1983-84 NBA 0.401 (3)
1984-85 NBA 0.338 (2)
1985-86 NBA 0.263 (3)
1986-87 NBA 0.964 (1)
1987-88 NBA 0.635 (3)
1988-89 NBA 0.782 (1)
1989-90 NBA 0.691 (1)
1990-91 NBA 0.518 (2)
1995-96 NBA 0.007 (12)

Bird was always either edging Magic, or was clearly ahead, until he hurt his back in the off-season before the triumphant '86 season. His decline was very noticeable the first couple months that year but he recovered..... but over seasons it slowly got worse and his back was injured more and more as the years went by.

At the time, Bird was the only player not named Russell or Chamberlain to win 3 MVPs in a row - the only guy to do it who was not a Center.

Of course, Jordan added his name later, but they are still the only 2 perimeter guys to ever dominate the league so consistently over such a long stretch of seasons.
Not even LB James nor Magic played at such a high level sustained over seasons like Bird.

Agreed. Bird was clearly the better player from college until 1987. Bir4d could have been given the MVP award every year until 1987 and it would have been ok.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Well, they both arrived to different situations... Celtics were a hot mess internally, were at an all-time low in their history, and had the 2nd worst record in the league, no superstar caliber player either; Lakers had a pretty good team already, and getting better, with one of the GOAT's still in his prime, Wilkes also at his best, Nixon was a pretty good PG, Cooper was playing for the 1st time after being injured as a rookie, they got rid of Dantley because he didn't play team ball and defense, and got Haywood and Chones, mostly for rebounding and D.
Larry obviously had much more pressure on him and had to be the main man/leader out of the gate, not the same for Magic.

People like to emphasize all that athleticism stuff, that Larry was not a good athlete to add to the legend and whatnot, but Bird was a nice athlete, especially in his 1st years, clear when watching him... He was a pretty mobile 6'9 forward with a tremendous all-around game and cold veins, since his 1st years, already with terrific skill-level and an understanding of the game that few reach at their best, let alone as a rookie.
Larry was extremely gritty and tough as nails, hustled like crazy, as he toned it down with the years to preserve his body more too. Was a better rebounder at 1st, as most.
He established himself as a really good help defender from the jump, and in those 1st years he used to guard opponents' SF's more than afterwards (like Erving and so on) but then Fitch saw that he was better as a help defender roaming around, too.
And he was also taking more jumpers than afterwards, as he developed and went to the post more too, later on.
Larry was also a bit "timid" about shooting the ball at 1st, Fitch was a different coach than KC though (who started to "give" more shots to Larry), but even he had to told Bird to shoot more, at some point, I believe.
He was a great passer since the start but handled the ball less, as he also played alongside Tiny, who liked to hold on to the ball plenty, stagnating the offense at times (as he could not do things as before), it was different with DJ though.
His instant impact was crazy, as he quickly turned the Celtics around and was leading them to a title in his sophomore season. 4th in MVP voting in his 1st year, then always 2nd til he got it, by 1982 he was already being described as the best all-around player in the game.

You can say Nixon was the main PG for the Lakers in the early 80s, but Magic also did it plenty, running the break a lot, playing like a point forward at times, running the offense every now and then too, and Norm also had more of a gunner's mentality than Johnson, but yea, when Magic got there, Nixon was more the PG.
Magic was already a terrific passer out of the gate, that didn't come by chance, in his 1st years he was at his best as a rebounder, even getting close to 10 a game once, he also drove and played in the post more (6'8 with handles and guard mobility, plus lots of skill, stop that...), he wasn't a solid shooter at 1st so teams sagged off plenty til he developed a good spot-up jumper from mid (and even beyond) when open. He also developed into a better m2m defender as his career progressed (even as he was losing speed/quickness) because in the beginning he gambled a lot, that still enabled him to get lots of steals and start the break, due to having good instincts also. He wasn't as assertive and clutch as later on, too. But no doubt that he was already great from the start, his play proved it.

As overall players, while they were both (mostly) healthy, Larry was mostly on top and also had a better peak... Needs to be said.

[Dr.J4ever]

I want to say this very carefully because I know Magic and Bird are on the altars of most posters here.

Very simply, Magic and Bird may have saved the NBA. The NBA was declining, and NHL games were often bigger draws and college basketball Final Fours were called an insulting "the biggest event in all of basketball". When college basketball analysts would discuss the future of a player, very rarely would the NBA be mentioned.

Analysts would say, "he's the best forward in the country" to describe a college player. I always felt insulted by that, I remember. But what can you do? After all, NBA games were often played in arenas with college basketball markings on the floor. They always took precedence over NBA games.

Magic and Bird changed all that. The league recognized a good thing(business wise), and proceeded to hype the Magic/Bird angle beyond recognition.

The truth is both Magic and Bird played with historically stacked teams. I don't think anyone on this board can dispute this. It's really unbelievable how much talent they played with off the bat.

I remember watching the 76ers/Lakers 1982 Finals, and it was deflating how much Doc had to contend with to overcome these Lakers. Obviously, KAJ, but also Wilkes, Nixon, Cooper, Mcadoo off the bench. They ran the ball like crazy, and when things got tough in the half court, Magic would dump a pass down low to the best half court option in NBA history, KAJ's skyhook!

Bird also got into a great situation. Playing with Archibald, and Maxwell, and playing with the greatest low post combo in NBA history in Parish and Mchale. They had the luck of the Irish too when they beat Philly in 7 games in 1981 after falling behind by 3-1 in the ECF, and winning game 7 by 1 point after Philly led with 4 minutes left. Of course, who would be waiting for the Celtics in Bird's first title? The formidable Rocket team of Moses, who bulldozed their way to a .500 record in the regular season.:facepalm

So what am I saying here? That Bird and Magic weren't great players? Far from it, but they are over hyped.

And to answer specifically FPLII's question, from 1979-1983, Erving was also considered by many as the game's premiere player(all around wise). After 1983, Bird took over, and then, Magic was in the conversation around 1985, and overtook Bird after 1987.

A big caveat in all this is that during that era, centers were often the most dominant players. Players like KAJ and Moses ruled the NBA, but Magic, Bird, and yes, Erving early in the decade, were discussed by media as the best all around players.

[pauk]

Except for the extra intangibles/iq/tuned skills they got later with time (and the incremental decrease in athleticism compared to them in late 80s) there was not to much difference for them individually.... Well, for Magic perhaps... as you may know/not know he actually didnt touch the PG position all the way from his rookie year until Nixon was gone (83-84), Nixon was the starting PG & Magic started SG/SF all the time, but he got that point-forward role, a la Lebron/Pippen.... so essentially he didnt play much different than he did when he got the PG gig 83-84, his mindset was the same offensively, his natural instincts, but because he did start PG his possessions increased and hence so did his productions (well, i mean especially in the APG & highlight flashy/crazy assists department).

[SHAQisGOAT]

Bird also got into a great situation. Playing with Archibald, and Maxwell, and playing with the greatest low post combo in NBA history in Parish and Mchale.



Great situation? Internal problems with the change of owners, Red almost gone, attendances at an all-time low, 29-53 record (2nd worst in the league), all in the season before Bird got there, with the players you've mentioned: Archibald (playing after a tore ACL and a ruptured one), Maxwell (never all-star or all-nba), or Cowens (past his prime)... I fail to see how that's a great situation. He also had major pressure on his shoulders, as some saw him as a savior and most doubted him, and he had to be the leader and main-man from the get-go, with no superstar caliber player around him.

Bird quickly turned them around though, with amazing instant impact (just like in college) and they got the best record while almost making the Finals, in his 1st season; then Cowens was gone and they got Parish (McHale wasn't playing much at 1st), who was already 27 and never viewed as all that (not an all-star or all-nba before), and Larry led them to the championship in his sophomore season... Then because of all of that and more, people usually say he walked into a great situation, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Plus many of his teammates names mentioned, he "made" those names what they are now.

Like I've said, McHale didn't play much at 1st only started his prime around 1985, peaking in 1987, then succumbing to injuries later on that same year...
Even in their 2nd championship run, in the post-season neither Kevin or Parish averaged more than 15 PPG, while shooting below 50% combined, as Larry led the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, all the way to the title vs some great teams. People forget stuff like that though.

[Shep]

Bird was always the better player in those early years
magic was easily better than bird in 1980, 1982, and 1983

[SHAQisGOAT]

magic was easily better than bird in 1980, 1982, and 1983

Right :rolleyes: All I'm gonna say is: switch their "situation" from the start (Larry with the Lakers, Magic with the Celtics) and Bird would've had more than 5 rings by now, while Magic less than 3.

[Shep]

Right :rolleyes: All I'm gonna say is: switch their "situation" from the start (Larry with the Lakers, Magic with the Celtics) and Bird would've had more than 5 rings by now, while Magic less than 3.
:lol the old argument of "switch them and he gets 100 rings" argument :rolleyes:

[colts19]

magic was easily better than bird in 1980, 1982, and 1983
Then why did Bird win rookie of the year vote 63 to 3. I read a SI article that year that said if Bird had gone to LA and Magic to Boston LA might not have lost more than 10 games.

[pudman13]

The truth is both Magic and Bird played with historically stacked teams. I don't think anyone on this board can dispute this. It's really unbelievable how much talent they played with off the bat.

And to answer specifically FPLII's question, from 1979-1983, Erving was also considered by many as the game's premiere player(all around wise).

I'll dispute it. The Celtics were a mess in '78-'79, and while Archibald did make a major comeback upon Bird's arrival, and Maxwell made strides towards being a star, I'd hardly call that team stacked just a year later. (Yes, Cowens was on it, but he was not the same player he was just a few years before.)

RE: Erving, yes, I do think he was considered the NBA's biggest star at the time, but pretty immediately both Bird and Johnson showed themselves to be more versatile, and essentially better, players. I'm not saying this to disparage Dr. J at all, just to point out how special these two guys were.

RE: The poster's original question, it's hard to remember this now, but after Magic led the team to the championship his first year, he actually spent the next few years as something of a whipping boy, with people questioning him. It wasn't until Nixon left the team that he was in a comfortable situation where his playing style was not restricted in any way. Looking back at the stats, and the fact that the team won a championship in 1982 (and also watching video of games from that era), it's hard to understand the criticism, but it was there. So, yes, his playing style was just a tad different, simply because the team had another point guard (Magic was also a more aggressive rebouder in those early years.) Bird improved some over time, as all great players do, but he seems thave been fully formed as a pro from day 1. The only obvious difference is that Bird took fewer 3's in the early years.

[Dr.J4ever]

Great situation? Internal problems with the change of owners, Red almost gone, attendances at an all-time low, 29-53 record (2nd worst in the league), all in the season before Bird got there, with the players you've mentioned: Archibald (playing after a tore ACL and a ruptured one), Maxwell (never all-star or all-nba), or Cowens (past his prime)... I fail to see how that's a great situation. He also had major pressure on his shoulders, as some saw him as a savior and most doubted him, and he had to be the leader and main-man from the get-go, with no superstar caliber player around him.

Bird quickly turned them around though, with amazing instant impact (just like in college) and they got the best record while almost making the Finals, in his 1st season; then Cowens was gone and they got Parish (McHale wasn't playing much at 1st), who was already 27 and never viewed as all that (not an all-star or all-nba before), and Larry led them to the championship in his sophomore season... Then because of all of that and more, people usually say he walked into a great situation, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Plus many of his teammates names mentioned, he "made" those names what they are now.

Like I've said, McHale didn't play much at 1st only started his prime around 1985, peaking in 1987, then succumbing to injuries later on that same year...
Even in their 2nd championship run, in the post-season neither Kevin or Parish averaged more than 15 PPG, while shooting below 50% combined, as Larry led the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT%, all the way to the title vs some great teams. People forget stuff like that though.


The rosters for the 78/79 Celtics were different though as compared to the 79/80 division winners. Among the players who remained like Maxwell and Cowens, they were 19/10 and 16/10 guys respectively the previous years.

The 1979/80 Celtics had 8 double figure scorers on their team with Gerald Henderson being the 9th best ppg guy at 6.5ppg. I'm not saying Bird walked into as great a situation as Magic, but it was a pretty good lineup.

Of course in later years, the Celtics would have these incredibly stacked teams historically, culminating with that 1986 team. Bird played with 2 HOFers and top 50 players in the front line with Parish and Mchale. Need I say more?

Just as a footnote. To this day, Erving has played with just one HOFer in his 76er days in Malone, who is also a top 50 player. Before Moses, when doc had to contend with the loaded Lakers and front line heavy Celtics, Doc played with no HOFers.

And to think people hold this against Doc that he needed Moses to win a title.:facepalm

[miles berg]

Bird was a much better player than Magic up until he broke his back. For the first 7 years it was no contest. Then Magic had a few years but at that point Michael was emerging and it didn't matter if it was Bird or Magic at the top...by the time the late 80s/early 90s hit it was going to be Michaels league.

[pudman13]

Just as a footnote. To this day, Erving has played with just one HOFer in his 76er days in Malone, who is also a top 50 player. Before Moses, when doc had to contend with the loaded Lakers and front line heavy Celtics, Doc played with no HOFers.



I'm not knocking him at all any more than I would knock Stockton and Malone for never winning a title (J not winning more titles is because his team was up against two of the greatest teams in NBA history), and in fact the most exciting basketball I ever watched were the playoff series between the Celtics and 76ers in the early 80s, but just because there weren't hall of famers, that doesn't mean those Philadelphia teams weren't stacked:

Mo Cheeks is one of the greatest point guards I've ever seen, maybe the most underrated. Andrew Toney was unstoppable offensively (and before him, Doug Collins was an all star.) Bobby Jones is as underrated as Cheeks, someone I think is desevring of HoF honors, and he was just the teams' 6th man. They had Darryl Dawkins, Lionel Hollins (Hollins was the most reliable scorer on the '77 Blazers championship team), and Caldwell Jones, all excellent players. I guarantee you there are weaker players than Cheeks and Jones in the HoF, including players from their era.

Has there even been a time in NBA history when three teams this good all played at the same time?

[bizil]

Looking back, I think what made both of these guys standout is the fact that they were as big as many PF's, BUT they had the skillsets of guards. However, Bird played plenty of PF throughout his career and Magic would play the power positions at times too. In terms of alpha dog ability, Bird always had the edge on Magic. Bird's scoring skillset and killer instinct are among the very best of all time. What separates Bird from the pack was the fact he was a pure shooter in addition to being able to dominate from other areas of the floor scoring. A great post game, midrange game, and even underrated slashing ability.

However Magic was still an alpha dog level scorer too. But he was a natural floor general whose best attribute was passing the rock. Magic was also more versatile than Bird too. So for those that say Bird was CLEARLY better than Magic in those early years, I disagree. Magic's formula of being arguably the most versatile player of all time and being a pass first player that was still an alpha dog gave him an argument over Bird too. Bird in my book NEEDED to be the top scorer on his teams.

Magic had guys like Kareem, Wilkes, Nixon, and Worthy around him in those early years. With Magic being a pure PG or point forward in those early years, Magic played to that strength. But once again, I feel u could argue either one being better than the other. If Bird being the better alpha dog swings it his way, then fine. But I'M NOT BUYING Bird was CLEARLY better! That's makes it seem like there is no argument! Magic showed his worth in the Finals his rookie year!

[bizil]

Bird was a much better player than Magic up until he broke his back. For the first 7 years it was no contest. Then Magic had a few years but at that point Michael was emerging and it didn't matter if it was Bird or Magic at the top...by the time the late 80s/early 90s hit it was going to be Michaels league.

No way in hell Bird was a MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN MAGIC! If u prefer Bird then fine, but there was certainly an argument to be made for Magic too. Magic was arguably the most versatile player of all time at the time AND was a pass first alpha dog. The Lakers had more offensive weapons than Boston so Magic was doing what a PG should do and that's dropping dimes first. He didn't need to score as much as Bird did. Sure Bird was the better scorer, but Magic was an alpha dog too.

What separated Jordan from Magic and Bird later down the road was being a freak athlete who was an epic two way player WHILE still being epic on a fundamental level. Jordan could play or defend PG, SG, and SF so he was as versatile as a 6'6 player could be.

But with that said, offensively Magic and Bird were more versatile because they could play the PF in addition to the perimeter. But what MJ brought to the NBA was like combining Dr. J's and Thompson's athletic ability, Jerry West's epic all around domination of SG, and George Gervin's scoring skillset all into one basically.

[ArbitraryWater]

From what I know and I get from my Informarmation so far...

Bird was the better player, routinely in the top 4 MVP rankings, but come playoff time Magic outplayed him every year but '81. (1980, 1982, 1983 go to Magic)

Bird took his game to a new level in 1984. He was a man now, and ready for the big stage. He became more agressive and developed a championship mentality.

[bizil]

From what I know and I get from my Informarmation so far...

Bird was the better player, routinely in the top 4 MVP rankings, but come playoff time Magic outplayed him every year but '81. (1980, 1982, 1983 go to Magic)

Bird took his game to a new level in 1984. He was a man now, and ready for the big stage. He became more agressive and developed a championship mentality.

Well said! I have no problem with people thinking Bird was better. Or vice versa. But for those who say MUCH BETTER in either scenario doesn't make sense to me. They were very similar BUT YET very different. Magic was a PG who's main attribute is too pass first and dominate scoring if he has too. Bird from DAY ONE was asked to be the dominant scorer on his teams playing off the ball. But Bird was such an epic passer that he was still a point forward in the halfcourt.

[SHAQisGOAT]

:lol the old argument of "switch them and he gets 100 rings" argument :rolleyes:

At 1st

Nixon (prime)
Cooper (1st years)
Wilkes (prime)
Bird (1st years)
Kareem (still prime)

then

Cooper (prime)
Scott
Worthy
Bird (prime)
Kareem (later years, still more than good enough)

(if they wanted to draft a PG instead of James, they could've gotten Fat Lever or something... that's if they still got the pick)

with role players such as McAdoo, Green, Rambis, Thompson...

Imagine that :eek:

And not in the East, but playing in the West... Most likely they would've won it in 1980, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988... before Bird blew out his back and whatnot. I wouldn't say 1986 if the C's build up a team similar (at the same level) as the actual 1986 Celtics, but with Magic instead.

For the most part, while they were both healthy, Bird was a better overall player and had a better peak, plus he walked into a considerably worse situation and had to be the main-man/leader out of the gate, with no superstar-talent teammate at 1st, bulding from the ground up... playing in the best conference, probably the GOAT conference, in a better era for SF's.

[SHAQisGOAT]

From what I know and I get from my Informarmation so far...

Bird was the better player, routinely in the top 4 MVP rankings, but come playoff time Magic outplayed him every year but '81. (1980, 1982, 1983 go to Magic)

Bird took his game to a new level in 1984. He was a man now, and ready for the big stage. He became more agressive and developed a championship mentality.

I don't know about that but it's easier to be/play "better" when you got a still-in-his-prime Kareem alongside as a 1st option and leader, Jamaal Wilkes at his best as a 2nd option, a pretty good PG in Nixon to learn from and relieve you from ball-handling duties and such, and even Coop on the bench; since the start, already a very good team... Bird on the other had to be the leader and the main option out of the gate, on a team that previously had the 2nd worst record, with no superstar talent by his side til McHale was in his prime and playing more (around 1985).

[pudman13]

Not that this makes him better, but people don't realize that Bird was actually an inch and a half taller than Magic. Bird was listed by his real height, 6'9", and Magic was also listed at 6'9" even though he's 6' 7 1/2"

[SHAQisGOAT]

The rosters for the 78/79 Celtics were different though as compared to the 79/80 division winners. Among the players who remained like Maxwell and Cowens, they were 19/10 and 16/10 guys respectively the previous years.

The 1979/80 Celtics had 8 double figure scorers on their team with Gerald Henderson being the 9th best ppg guy at 6.5ppg. I'm not saying Bird walked into as great a situation as Magic, but it was a pretty good lineup.

Of course in later years, the Celtics would have these incredibly stacked teams historically, culminating with that 1986 team. Bird played with 2 HOFers and top 50 players in the front line with Parish and Mchale. Need I say more?

Just as a footnote. To this day, Erving has played with just one HOFer in his 76er days in Malone, who is also a top 50 player. Before Moses, when doc had to contend with the loaded Lakers and front line heavy Celtics, Doc played with no HOFers.

And to think people hold this against Doc that he needed Moses to win a title.:facepalm

Different? Yea, but not by much AT ALL... Maxwell was the "same" (or even better by playing alongside Larry), Cowens was not in his prime anymore and even worse/older in 1980, Chris Ford something similar was in his last years, Henderson was a rookie, that version of Tiny was after a tore achilles and a ruptured one, a shell that even stagnated the offense plenty because he couldn't do the same things... They had a new coach (Fitch), added ML Carr who wasn't much, Pistol Pete played 20 something games but as a complete shell, they even had the likes of Jo Jo White, McAdoo and Billy Knight before, and they were gone at that point. Guess we figured out the reasons :rolleyes: :oldlol:
The MAIN difference and MAIN impact came from Bird.
...
And again, this wasn't a 15W-games improvement or something, it was 32 more wins (!), 2nd worst record to best record in the league and almost the Finals, with the same core roster. With the main addition of Parish, and Cowens gone, led them to the championship as a sophomore.

A pretty good lineup that only won 29 games the year before :rolleyes:
Plus, attendances were at an all-time low, owners changing, Red almost left, Bird had all the pressure on his shoulders.
Good situation? Not even close, gimme a break...

One more time, you call Parish a HoF'er, but most likely he wouldn't have been one without playing for the Celtics, alongside Bird... Chief was already 27 before he joined the C's with 4 seasons under his belt, never was viewed as much, never had much impact, never was in the Playoffs apart from his rookie season (didn't play much), never was all-nba or an all-star.

And McHale joined as a rookie who wasn't playing all that much. He had a terrific prime/peak no doubt, but it lasted little, he only started to come into his own and playing more around 1985, peaked in 1987 and then was never equal after that same year due to injuries.

That 1986 team was indeed amazing (GOAT imho) but it lasted little... Again, McHale had a short prime due to injuries, Walton only was healthy (relatively at least) during that one season, Wedman was gone after it, they had virtually no bench after 1986, (Bias died too), DJ got old.
They were not the same in 1987 already, and not that close to that level in 1984 even... One more time, neither McHale or Parish averaged more than 15 PPG in the 1984 post-season, combined less than 50%, while Larry was carrying the team, leading them in points, rebounds, assists, steals, FG% and FT% :eek: all the way to the title, in the Finals against one of the most stacked dynasties.

I can also stand here and say that Doc played with:
-Moses Malone (a legit top15 player of all-time, 3x MVP, at his best when he joined the 76ers, better than any teammate Bird ever had)
-George McGinnis (one of the best PF's in the league at one point)
-Bobby Jones (one of the best defenders ever, terrific role player, shameful that he's not in the HoF)
-Mo Cheeks (one of the best all-around PG's in the league at some point
-Charles Barkley (already good in his 1st years, oh and he's a HoF'er)
-Andrew Toney (would've been a very good 1st option even, would've definitely been a HoF'er if he didn't fall to injuries)
-Doug Collins (very good SG)
-Lionel Hollins (former important piece for a championship team, before)
-Darryl Dawkins (one of he most athletic C's ever, had skill too)
-Caldwell Jones (one of the best defensive bigs in the league, at some point)
-World B Free (later on as a 1st option, was a 30 PPG scorer)

I can name names too, and let's not act like he didn't have some great teammates, while saying that Bird walked into a pretty good situation (which is preposterous).
And I don't hold nothing against Doc.

Again, people love to mention names and leave it at that, not even discussing how the situation was at 1st and how it all was "created", level of certain player at a certain time, and names that Bird "made"... Sometimes I think his incredible and instant impact is very underrated.

[Thorpesaurous]

There's a lot of good stuff in here. I grew up in that era going to a lot of those Celtic games.

I wish I had time to say more, but the truth is most of everything has been covered.

I will say something I always point out when the notion that "these guys played on unbelievably stacked teams" thing starts coming out.

That is true, but the ability to play and be great on those stacked teams is absolutely a skill. And it's a skill we've lost in the sport as a whole, and specifically in this country, shortly after those guys retired, and the league expanded and thinned out. And in addition to it being a skill, those two guys are probably the most talented guys of all time in that particular skill.

[SHAQisGOAT]

There's a lot of good stuff in here. I grew up in that era going to a lot of those Celtic games.

I wish I had time to say more, but the truth is most of everything has been covered.

I will say something I always point out when the notion that "these guys played on unbelievably stacked teams" thing starts coming out.

That is true, but the ability to play and be great on those stacked teams is absolutely a skill. And it's a skill we've lost in the sport as a whole, and specifically in this country, shortly after those guys retired, and the league expanded and thinned out. And in addition to it being a skill, those two guys are probably the most talented guys of all time in that particular skill.

Well said... And people, when saying that, also forget that they had to go against each other many times, plus vs teams like the 76ers, Pistons, Bucks, so on... Most stacked league, especially the East.

[Lebronxrings]

a ton of fastbreaks

[Hey Yo]

The end of the 82-83 season, Magic still had no jumpshot or really a set shot. He was a back-to-the-basket player who would pound the rock and work his way closer to the basket. He'd either score in the post or find the slashing teammate for the easy layup. The now "5 second" rule which some refer to it as the "Mark Jackson" rule, should really be referred to as the "Magic Johnson" rule. At the other end of the court, his defensive assignment was usually the worst offensive threat on the floor.

I'd say the only thing Magic had on Bird was running the floor on the fast break and a slight edge in the passing department. Bird was a very good passer.

People say that Magic made his teammates better, but don't know of any examples of a guy who was considered just an avg. player for another team but then came to LAL and became an above avg. / borderline All-Star.

[La Frescobaldi]

Then why did Bird win rookie of the year vote 63 to 3. I read a SI article that year that said if Bird had gone to LA and Magic to Boston LA might not have lost more than 10 games.

It's a valid question, isn't it.

So far all I've heard is

http://rusetsy.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/cricket-c.gif

[La Frescobaldi]

The rosters for the 78/79 Celtics were different though as compared to the 79/80 division winners. Among the players who remained like Maxwell and Cowens, they were 19/10 and 16/10 guys respectively the previous years.

The 1979/80 Celtics had 8 double figure scorers on their team with Gerald Henderson being the 9th best ppg guy at 6.5ppg. I'm not saying Bird walked into as great a situation as Magic, but it was a pretty good lineup.

Of course in later years, the Celtics would have these incredibly stacked teams historically, culminating with that 1986 team. Bird played with 2 HOFers and top 50 players in the front line with Parish and Mchale. Need I say more?

Just as a footnote. To this day, Erving has played with just one HOFer in his 76er days in Malone, who is also a top 50 player. Before Moses, when doc had to contend with the loaded Lakers and front line heavy Celtics, Doc played with no HOFers.

And to think people hold this against Doc that he needed Moses to win a title.:facepalm

He wasn't better than Johnson in the early 80s, and Bird was better still. It's just the way it was. Erving in the old days, in the ABA, yeah that Doc had an argument. But not in the '80s.

[gcvbcat]

why as magic picked #1 when bird was so much better?

[fpliii]

why as magic picked #1 when bird was so much better?
Bird was drafted the year before, stayed in college for an extra year. From my understanding (someone can correct me if I'm wrong), the reason he fell to 6th is because there was some concern that wouldn't sign. Auerbach decided to take the risk.

[Pointguard]

Then why did Bird win rookie of the year vote 63 to 3. I read a SI article that year that said if Bird had gone to LA and Magic to Boston LA might not have lost more than 10 games.
With the way things are today, if you win in the post season you are simply the better player. Who had the best year in 2011? Was Dirk even close to Lebron during the regular season? Read the boards here. Dirk is considered better than Barkley and Malone despite not being close to them in the regular season. No way could Bird be considered better than Magic if you follow the same pattern. Especially before '84. I have them very close. Magic came in the league with a winner's way about him and was close to the greatest team player right away {Bird too}. Bird did have learn how to win and gain some consistency in the playoffs. He was up and down from one series to the next for his first 3 years.

[JohnFreeman]

They were very good players

[Shep]

Then why did Bird win rookie of the year vote 63 to 3. I read a SI article that year that said if Bird had gone to LA and Magic to Boston LA might not have lost more than 10 games.
Bird was rookie of the year and deservedly so, however Johnson's performance in the Playoffs was the difference between the two players on an overall scale in 1980.

I don't care for hypotheticals, and never will, I deal with facts.

At 1st

Nixon (prime)
Cooper (1st years)
Wilkes (prime)
Bird (1st years)
Kareem (still prime)

then

Cooper (prime)
Scott
Worthy
Bird (prime)
Kareem (later years, still more than good enough)

(if they wanted to draft a PG instead of James, they could've gotten Fat Lever or something... that's if they still got the pick)

with role players such as McAdoo, Green, Rambis, Thompson...

Imagine that

And not in the East, but playing in the West... Most likely they would've won it in 1980, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988... before Bird blew out his back and whatnot. I wouldn't say 1986 if the C's build up a team similar (at the same level) as the actual 1986 Celtics, but with Magic instead.

For the most part, while they were both healthy, Bird was a better overall player and had a better peak, plus he walked into a considerably worse situation and had to be the main-man/leader out of the gate, with no superstar-talent teammate at 1st, bulding from the ground up... playing in the best conference, probably the GOAT conference, in a better era for SF's.
Hypothetical drivel

[MastaKilla]

Nah man

[Round Mound]

Bird > Magic 1979-1986
Magic > Bird 1987-1992

Magic Was Funner To Watch For The Common NBA Fan
Bird Was Funner To Watch For The More Knowledgeable or Older Fans

[Dr.J4ever]

He wasn't better than Johnson in the early 80s, and Bird was better still. It's just the way it was. Erving in the old days, in the ABA, yeah that Doc had an argument. But not in the '80s.

Good. But see, this is exactly my point in my original post on this thread. I mentioned there the NBA almost had to over hype the Bird/Magic or Laker/Celtic rivalry for it's own survival.

How many fans know, save for knowledgeable posters on this board, that Doc in his prime form during the 70s had an "argument" vs. Bird or Magic? Surely, not most of the younger fans.

Just to add, I am very wary of anything that comes off as NBA marketing stuff from these 2 players because I actually saw both these players win and lose games against Doc and Philly. I know their weaknesses as well their strengths. I still remember the articles,story lines, and tactics used vs. these players. I can recognize when they are being lifted up to be some kind of basketball saints.

Most younger fans know that the NBA started with Bird and Magic due to all those NBA hype videos. I am here on this thread to let others know Erving's own attributes.

Fans should understand that Bird and Magic played behind a great storyline, what with the Laker/Celtic rivalry and Larry and Magic's college rivalry all in one. The NBA jumped on a good thing and used it to the hilt.

This was the beginning of the NBA's good TV deals. NBA fans growing up then like me saw these games, but didn't see Doc in the ABA because of lack of coverage.

Imagine if Doc of the 70s played under the backdrop of today's media age and internet talking heads? Imagine all the chatter and debate about Doc's legendary last ABA Finals when he averaged 37.7PPG vs. the best defensive forward in either league in Bobby Jones? If Doc's last couple of years in a rival league that was close to or equal in many experts estimation to the NBA were played today under the bright lights of today's modern age, would Doc be ranked higher or thought of better against Magic or Bird?

The answer is pretty clear in my mind. Unfortunately for Doc, it's out of sight and out of mind for him when the 70s ended.

The NBA wanted to close the chapter of the 70s since it wasn't a very good decade financially. And so they did.

[Shep]

Bird > Magic 1979-1986
Magic > Bird 1987-1992
Actually Bird > Magic 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988
Magic > Bird 1980, 1982, 1983, 1989, 1990, 1991

[Psileas]

The end of the 82-83 season, Magic still had no jumpshot or really a set shot. He was a back-to-the-basket player who would pound the rock and work his way closer to the basket. He'd either score in the post or find the slashing teammate for the easy layup. The now "5 second" rule which some refer to it as the "Mark Jackson" rule, should really be referred to as the "Magic Johnson" rule. At the other end of the court, his defensive assignment was usually the worst offensive threat on the floor.

I'd say the only thing Magic had on Bird was running the floor on the fast break and a slight edge in the passing department. Bird was a very good passer.

People say that Magic made his teammates better, but don't know of any examples of a guy who was considered just an avg. player for another team but then came to LAL and became an above avg. / borderline All-Star.

You don't have to. Just look at how mediocre the '92 Lakers were compared to the '91 ones, Worthy's efficiency plummeting, Divac's efficiency plummeting, Byron Scott's non long range shots doing the same (no Magic = less fastbreak passes and easy baskets). Their whole offense pretty much collapsed, dropping by 6 ppg and by 4 percentage points in FG%.
Magic really made his teammates better, even the ones who were good or even great already.

[Round Mound]

Actually Bird > Magic 1981, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988
Magic > Bird 1980, 1982, 1983, 1989, 1990, 1991

Ok :cheers:

[Pointguard]

Ok :cheers:
Naaah no way can Bird get 1987. The rest I'm ok with. Magic averaged 24 ppg that year, ran the best offense ever, large discrepancy in efficiency, and got to the line more. Outplayed him in the playoff overall and Then he really outplayed Bird in the FMVP, out scored him, as per usual was much more efficient, had a lot less turnovers, while the rebounding was 10 to 8 in favor of Bird that is really a small gap. Magic had four beast games and clutch scoring:

In the finals Magic had a 20/20 game, a 29 points, 13 assists, eight rebounds and no turnovers game, the epic game four 29 point 8 reb game with game winning clutch shot, the 29 points, 12 assists, eight rebounds and four steals game, and the 16/19/8 finale.

This was the best team play probably ever played in the NBA and Magic did every facet of the game very well including clutch scoring throughout the year til the end.

[Shep]

Naaah no way can Bird get 1987. The rest I'm ok with. Magic averaged 24 ppg that year, ran the best offense ever, large discrepancy in efficiency, and got to the line more. Outplayed him in the playoff overall and Then he really outplayed Bird in the FMVP, out scored him, as per usual was much more efficient, had a lot less turnovers, while the rebounding was 10 to 8 in favor of Bird that is really a small gap. Magic had four beast games and clutch scoring:

In the finals Magic had a 20/20 game, a 29 points, 13 assists, eight rebounds and no turnovers game, the epic game four 29 point 8 reb game with game winning clutch shot, the 29 points, 12 assists, eight rebounds and four steals game, and the 16/19/8 finale.

This was the best team play probably ever played in the NBA and Magic did every facet of the game very well including clutch scoring throughout the year til the end.
It is very close with Bird having the slightly better regular season and Johnson the slightly better playoffs. The following factors got Bird over the edge:

- Bird led the Celtics to 59 wins averaging 28/9/8/2/1 on 52%fg/40%3p/91%ft on one of the slowest paces in the league, Johnson got his on one of the fastest.

- The Celtics had a much tougher time in the Eastern Conference Playoffs compared to the Lakers in a historically easy West. Sweeping a top 3 player in Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls in round 1, getting by star studded 50 win Milwaukee in the conference semi finals, and eclipsing a top 5 player in Isiah Thomas and the 52 win Detroit Pistons in the conference finals. Who did the Lakers play? 36 win Nuggets, 42 win Warriors, and 39 win SuperSonics in the conference finals :roll: .

- The Lakers had the best and deepest bench in the league including Michael Cooper, Mychal Thompson, and Kurt Rambis.

- Kevin McHale played like trash in the playoffs.

[bizil]

Naaah no way can Bird get 1987. The rest I'm ok with. Magic averaged 24 ppg that year, ran the best offense ever, large discrepancy in efficiency, and got to the line more. Outplayed him in the playoff overall and Then he really outplayed Bird in the FMVP, out scored him, as per usual was much more efficient, had a lot less turnovers, while the rebounding was 10 to 8 in favor of Bird that is really a small gap. Magic had four beast games and clutch scoring:

In the finals Magic had a 20/20 game, a 29 points, 13 assists, eight rebounds and no turnovers game, the epic game four 29 point 8 reb game with game winning clutch shot, the 29 points, 12 assists, eight rebounds and four steals game, and the 16/19/8 finale.

This was the best team play probably ever played in the NBA and Magic did every facet of the game very well including clutch scoring throughout the year til the end.

I agree! I think Magic was hitting his peak in 87 at 27 years old. Riley asked him to assume more of the scoring load and Magic did just that. When Magic retired in 91, he was still the 2nd or 3rd best player in the world. Over the years, Magic got better and better BECAUSE he was asked to score more and STILL be the ultimate floor general!

[colts19]

Good. But see, this is exactly my point in my original post on this thread. I mentioned there the NBA almost had to over hype the Bird/Magic or Laker/Celtic rivalry for it's own survival.

How many fans know, save for knowledgeable posters on this board, that Doc in his prime form during the 70s had an "argument" vs. Bird or Magic? Surely, not most of the younger fans.

Just to add, I am very wary of anything that comes off as NBA marketing stuff from these 2 players because I actually saw both these players win and lose games against Doc and Philly. I know their weaknesses as well their strengths. I still remember the articles,story lines, and tactics used vs. these players. I can recognize when they are being lifted up to be some kind of basketball saints.

.

Most younger fans know that the NBA started with Bird and Magic due to all those NBA hype videos. I am here on this thread to let others know Erving's own attributes.

Fans should understand that Bird and Magic played behind a great storyline, what with the Laker/Celtic rivalry and Larry and Magic's college rivalry all in one. The NBA jumped on a good thing and used it to the hilt.

This was the beginning of the NBA's good TV deals. NBA fans growing up then like me saw these games, but didn't see Doc in the ABA because of lack of coverage.

Imagine if Doc of the 70s played under the backdrop of today's media age and internet talking heads? Imagine all the chatter and debate about Doc's legendary last ABA Finals when he averaged 37.7PPG vs. the best defensive forward in either league in Bobby Jones? If Doc's last couple of years in a rival league that was close to or equal in many experts estimation to the NBA were played today under the bright lights of today's modern age, would Doc be ranked higher or thought of better against Magic or Bird?

The answer is pretty clear in my mind. Unfortunately for Doc, it's out of sight and out of mind for him when the 70s ended.

The NBA wanted to close the chapter of the 70s since it wasn't a very good decade financially. And so they did.

I tend to agree with a lot of what your saying, about the NBA marketing stuff. I feel the same way about MJ. I think the NBA and Nike hyped him up beyond anything I have ever seen.

I live in Terre Haute, Indiana and I saw Larry play every home basketball game for ISU, so I admit I am bias towards Bird. I do think its crazy that you don't see Dr. J in top ten list anymore. I also think it crazy that you don't see the Big O in top ten list. It's just what happens as time goes by.

[ArbitraryWater]

They were very good players

Are you fukkin serious?

What kind of comment is this?

[Hey Yo]

You don't have to. Just look at how mediocre the '92 Lakers were compared to the '91 ones, Worthy's efficiency plummeting, Divac's efficiency plummeting, Byron Scott's non long range shots doing the same (no Magic = less fastbreak passes and easy baskets). Their whole offense pretty much collapsed, dropping by 6 ppg and by 4 percentage points in FG%.
Magic really made his teammates better, even the ones who were good or even great already.
Worthy only played 54 games that reg. season and Vlade played 36 while only starting in 18 of them. That's going to hurt offensively

Another reason one could easily say the for the PPG drop would be because Magic's replacement, Sedale Threatt, avg. 15ppg while Magic avg. 19 the previous season. Byron Scott played the same MPG each season. His FG% went from .477 in 91 to .458 the following season, while his 3pt % went up. Not a drastic difference in 2P%

To say that their offense collapsed, because Magic missed the season and wasn't there to set up easy shots, is an exaggeration at best. There were more factors.

[SHAQisGOAT]

[B]Larry Legend just posted a v

[Psileas]

Worthy only played 54 games that reg. season and Vlade played 36 while only starting in 18 of them. That's going to hurt offensively

Another reason one could easily say the for the PPG drop would be because Magic's replacement, Sedale Threatt, avg. 15ppg while Magic avg. 19 the previous season. Byron Scott played the same MPG each season. His FG% went from .477 in 91 to .458 the following season, while his 3pt % went up. Not a drastic difference in 2P%

To say that their offense collapsed, because Magic missed the season and wasn't there to set up easy shots, is an exaggeration at best. There were more factors.

The Lakers were hurt offensively regardless of Worthy's or Divac's presence. Their overall record didn't depend on them, either. Especially with Worthy, it was only marginally positive and in the next season, with Divac and Worthy playing all 82 games, it only got worse.
Threatt's 15 ppg vs Magic's 19 ppg might be a factor, but not nearly as big as his 7 apg vs Magic's 12.5...Their ppg margin only accounts for roughly 4% of the Lakers' offensive production, their apg margin, much more.
Scott's 3 point shooting doesn't mean much, because we were still not in the era that defenses and offenses took 3 point shots as seriously as they do now, so, reasonably, Magic's absence didn't impact Scott's 3p%. But his shorter range shots are a different story.

The Lakers' offense might not have collapsed only because of Magic's presence, but claiming that missing the GOAT floor general and replacing him with a player who hadn't proven himself at the highest level isn't an important factor is just off.

[SHAQisGOAT]

The Lakers were hurt offensively regardless of Worthy's or Divac's presence. Their overall record didn't depend on them, either. Especially with Worthy, it was only marginally positive and in the next season, with Divac and Worthy playing all 82 games, it only got worse.
Threatt's 15 ppg vs Magic's 19 ppg might be a factor, but not nearly as big as his 7 apg vs Magic's 12.5...Their ppg margin only accounts for roughly 4% of the Lakers' offensive production, their apg margin, much more.
Scott's 3 point shooting doesn't mean much, because we were still not in the era that defenses and offenses took 3 point shots as seriously as they do now, so, reasonably, Magic's absence didn't impact Scott's 3p%. But his shorter range shots are a different story.

The Lakers' offense might not have collapsed only because of Magic's presence, but claiming that missing the GOAT floor general and replacing him with a player who hadn't proven himself at the highest level isn't an important factor is just off.

Again, Worthy was never the same as before after ankle injury in the 1991 playoffs followed by season-ending knee surgery in 1992... Robbed him of plenty of his quickness and even jumping ability, plus he wasn't getting no younger. And, scoring-wise, Big Game James lived off of a very quick 1st step (one of the quickest ever) against bigger opponents and size in the post against smaller ones, lots of rim attacks, plus running/finishing the break.

I agree with what you've said about Scott but you're undervaluing his 3pt shooting. He was one of the best 3pt shooters in the league (along with Coop) and that helped to spread the floor for them, plus punish teams trying to double Lakers' players in the post. Byron was also a great athlete and a very good overall shooter that could create his own shot. That whole era talk doesn't mean much here.

[Pointguard]

Worthy only played 54 games that reg. season and Vlade played 36 while only starting in 18 of them. That's going to hurt offensively

Another reason one could easily say the for the PPG drop would be because Magic's replacement, Sedale Threatt, avg. 15ppg while Magic avg. 19 the previous season. Byron Scott played the same MPG each season. His FG% went from .477 in 91 to .458 the following season, while his 3pt % went up. Not a drastic difference in 2P%

To say that their offense collapsed, because Magic missed the season and wasn't there to set up easy shots, is an exaggeration at best. There were more factors.
Worthy's shooting percentage dropped 50 percentage points and in the playoff he was really bad that next year and his shooting percentage dropped about 200% in the playoffs. And Worthy was at his peak in Magic's last year. They lost 15 more games.

Scott was no longer a factor. His career went on a serious humble. Kareem's career before and after Magic is tremendously different. Jamal Wilkes percentage jumps up 40% points as well once Magic joined. Magic could feed the post better than any player ever. And don't even try to say somebody was an equal passer. And Magic could feature a player better than any player that ever played. Rambis was a star on his birthdays and when his parents came to town. Magic is the clearest example of a player making others better.

[pudman13]

- Kevin McHale played like trash in the playoffs.

(1987.) McHale was playing with a broken foot, which Rick Mahorn purposely stepped on repeatedly during the Detroit series.

[La Frescobaldi]

Worthy's shooting percentage dropped 50 percentage points and in the playoff he was really bad that next year and his shooting percentage dropped about 200% in the playoffs. And Worthy was at his peak in Magic's last year. They lost 15 more games.

Scott was no longer a factor. His career went on a serious humble. Kareem's career before and after Magic is tremendously different. Jamal Wilkes percentage jumps up 40% points as well once Magic joined. Magic could feed the post better than any player ever. And don't even try to say somebody was an equal passer. And Magic could feature a player better than player that ever played. Rambis was a star on his birthdays and when his parents came to town. Magic is the clearest example of a player making others better.

Tim Duncan is right up there. Not saying better than Magic at that....... but it does get a true maybe. The more film of Duncan I watch, the more impressed I get.

[JellyBean]

What were they like before Nixon was traded and when Bird had Fitch as his coach?

Most of the games I've seen of both are from 83-84 on...were their playstyles markedly different? Were they considered legit MVP caliber players at the time?

:cheers:

It was fun to watch. I mean the game of basketball was dull before Magic and Bird arrived. I am not trying to knock Dr. J or Kareem and the other icons of the late 70s. But Magic and Bird took the game of basketball to another level of excitement. I just know that it was fun to watch or listen to a game on the radio back in the game. With Magic, you never knew who he was going to pass to or how he could make a 74 foot pass to a teammate with two defenders on that teammate. With Bird, the shooting display was outstanding. He could miss 4-5 shots in a row and then the next 5 would be nothing but net. It was just a magical time for fans and the NBA. Oh and one more thing, with Magic, it was all about sharing the ball. He did not care if he scored 20-30 points, it was all about that pass to a teammate. Bird was pretty much in the same boat. Hit the shot, grab a key rebound, or hit a teammate for a quick 2 or 3 points. Those were the days.

[Pointguard]

Tim Duncan is right up there. Not saying better than Magic at that....... but it does get a true maybe. The more film of Duncan I watch, the more impressed I get.

Yeah, I like Duncan and have him highly ranked because of that. I did say "clearest" because of Duncan. Magic gets players the ball in the position they want it, when they can do the most with it. Watch any Magic highlight film and see how he will hold the ball for just a second extra so that the defender gets himself out of the play and his teammate has less to worry about. You can watch whole 10 minute clips for this feature alone and be amazed at how it was such a refined skill it was.

The only thing about Duncan is that when he played a step slow and off beat 2011ish to 2012ish the team still flourished. He didn't have his own timing so no way could he have it for others. So I'm less apt to say its all him. And it isn't obvious like it is with Magic.

[Psileas]

Again, Worthy was never the same as before after ankle injury in the 1991 playoffs followed by season-ending knee surgery in 1992... Robbed him of plenty of his quickness and even jumping ability, plus he wasn't getting no younger. And, scoring-wise, Big Game James lived off of a very quick 1st step (one of the quickest ever) against bigger opponents and size in the post against smaller ones, lots of rim attacks, plus running/finishing the break.

I agree with what you've said about Scott but you're undervaluing his 3pt shooting. He was one of the best 3pt shooters in the league (along with Coop) and that helped to spread the floor for them, plus punish teams trying to double Lakers' players in the post. Byron was also a great athlete and a very good overall shooter that could create his own shot. That whole era talk doesn't mean much here.

Well, Worthy fell harder in 1993, but someone would guess that the improvement of a healthy Divac the same season would be able to make up for at least a part of Worthy's decline (obviously in general, not positionally). So, if a somewhat declining '92 Worthy who played for 54 games and an ailing '92 Divac who got limited action were a major reason the Lakers played like that, someone would expect that a heavier declining Worthy, but an improved Divac, both with 82 games now, would at least achieve some moderate success, along with Green, Scott (who missed games, though). Yet, the '93 Lakers were even worse than the '92 ones.
No doubt Scott was a good shooter, but my era reference has to do with his increased 3p percentage without Magic: This isn't yet the era when Magic (or a PG in general) would drive, kick it out, then the ball quickly moves in the perimeter for a good long shot by Scott. Good perimeter offensive plays can make even average 3p shooters make shots at decent %'s. However, the use of the 3 in '91 or '92 is only slowly picking up speed and we definitely can't say that the Lakers were basing a big part of their offense on Scott's (or anyone's) 3's, so all these weird fluctuations in %'s which include Scott shooting 3's at better %'s without Magic (thus hurting his overall FG% comparatively less) can be explained. In other words, Magic's value as a team improver couldn't be seen in team 3p%.
(Btw, Scott's '91 season looks like a bit off when it comes to 3p shooting anyway compared to his previous seasons, with Magic present. So, 32% in 3's still wasn't exactly the rule with Scott playing alongside Magic. Still, I don't believe these fluctuations would exist today, when Scott would be probably averaging 5+ 3p FGA per game).

[LAZERUSS]

Well, Worthy fell harder in 1993, but someone would guess that the improvement of a healthy Divac the same season would be able to make up for at least a part of Worthy's decline (obviously in general, not positionally). So, if a somewhat declining '92 Worthy who played for 54 games and an ailing '92 Divac who got limited action were a major reason the Lakers played like that, someone would expect that a heavier declining Worthy, but an improved Divac, both with 82 games now, would at least achieve some moderate success, along with Green, Scott (who missed games, though). Yet, the '93 Lakers were even worse than the '92 ones.
No doubt Scott was a good shooter, but my era reference has to do with his increased 3p percentage without Magic: This isn't yet the era when Magic (or a PG in general) would drive, kick it out, then the ball quickly moves in the perimeter for a good long shot by Scott. Good perimeter offensive plays can make even average 3p shooters make shots at decent %'s. However, the use of the 3 in '91 or '92 is only slowly picking up speed and we definitely can't say that the Lakers were basing a big part of their offense on Scott's (or anyone's) 3's, so all these weird fluctuations in %'s which include Scott shooting 3's at better %'s without Magic (thus hurting his overall FG% comparatively less) can be explained. In other words, Magic's value as a team improver couldn't be seen in team 3p%.
(Btw, Scott's '91 season looks like a bit off when it comes to 3p shooting anyway compared to his previous seasons, with Magic present. So, 32% in 3's still wasn't exactly the rule with Scott playing alongside Magic. Still, I don't believe these fluctuations would exist today, when Scott would be probably averaging 5+ 3p FGA per game).

Excellent response.

Take a look at Divac in his first two seasons, both regular season, and post-season. Career highs in FG%. Without Magic? Never again approached that efficiency.

And, of course, you can go right down the list. KAJ's career high(s) in FG%...ALL with MAGIC. Worthy? Just staggering FG%'s, both in the regular season, and post-season.

Scott? Same.


Furthermore, Magic took his 90-91 Lakers...a team that was injury-plagued and rapidly declining...all the way to the Finals.

And you hit on the Lakers withOUT Magic. Records of 43-39, and then 39-43. Not only that, but the Laker rosters were the best in the league in '78 and '79, and they were slightly better than a .500 team that was routed by much less talented Sonic teams in those two years.

What happened when Magic arrived? 60-22, and a rout of that same Sonics team in the playoffs...en route to a title. And don't forget...the Lakers easily won a game six, on the road, in the clinching game of the Finals...withOUT Kareem. How? MAGIC.

And it was no coincidence that in their ten years on the same team, that KAJ won 60% of his game in which Magic did not play....while Magic won 75% of his games in which Kareem did not play. And these were not small samples, either. Hell, Magic led his teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24...AFTER Kareem (not to mention 22-10 in his brief return in '96.)

And the reality was, the Lakers could win titles, or at least nearly win them, when Kareem played poorly. On the rare occasions when Magic played poorly in the post-season, the Lakers were wiped out.

A STACKED Laker roster didn't win shit without Magic. And IMMEDIATELY after Magic retired, they plummeted back to mediocrity.

Magic was, quite simply, the greatest "winner" in NBA history.

[colts19]

Excellent response.

Take a look at Divac in his first two seasons, both regular season, and post-season. Career highs in FG%. Without Magic? Never again approached that efficiency.

And, of course, you can go right down the list. KAJ's career high(s) in FG%...ALL with MAGIC. Worthy? Just staggering FG%'s, both in the regular season, and post-season.

Scott? Same.


Furthermore, Magic took his 90-91 Lakers...a team that was injury-plagued and rapidly declining...all the way to the Finals.

And you hit on the Lakers withOUT Magic. Records of 43-39, and then 39-43. Not only that, but the Laker rosters were the best in the league in '78 and '79, and they were slightly better than a .500 team that was routed by much less talented Sonic teams in those two years.

What happened when Magic arrived? 60-22, and a rout of that same Sonics team in the playoffs...en route to a title. And don't forget...the Lakers easily won a game six, on the road, in the clinching game of the Finals...withOUT Kareem. How? MAGIC.

And it was no coincidence that in their ten years on the same team, that KAJ won 60% of his game in which Magic did not play....while Magic won 75% of his games in which Kareem did not play. And these were not small samples, either. Hell, Magic led his teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24...AFTER Kareem (not to mention 22-10 in his brief return in '96.)

A STACKED Laker roster didn't win shit without Magic. And IMMEDIATELY after Magic retired, they plummeted back to mediocrity.

Magic was, quite simply, the greatest "winner" in NBA history.

Big Magic fan, Bill Russell says HI>

[LAZERUSS]

[/B]
Big Magic fan, Bill Russell says HI>

Magic's career winning percentage is the HIGHEST in NBA HISTORY.

[colts19]

Magic's career winning percentage is the HIGHEST in NBA HISTORY.
I may be wrong, but I thought I saw something once that said Bird had the highest and Magic was like 5th.

When I think of WINNER, I think championships. Sticking with Russell as the greatest Winner. No one else even close.

[32jazz]

Excellent response.

Take a look at Divac in his first two seasons, both regular season, and post-season. Career highs in FG%. Without Magic? Never again approached that efficiency.

And, of course, you can go right down the list. KAJ's career high(s) in FG%...ALL with MAGIC. Worthy? Just staggering FG%'s, both in the regular season, and post-season.

Scott? Same.


Furthermore, Magic took his 90-91 Lakers...a team that was injury-plagued and rapidly declining...all the way to the Finals.

And you hit on the Lakers withOUT Magic. Records of 43-39, and then 39-43. Not only that, but the Laker rosters were the best in the league in '78 and '79, and they were slightly better than a .500 team that was routed by much less talented Sonic teams in those two years.

What happened when Magic arrived? 60-22, and a rout of that same Sonics team in the playoffs...en route to a title. And don't forget...the Lakers easily won a game six, on the road, in the clinching game of the Finals...withOUT Kareem. How? MAGIC.

And it was no coincidence that in their ten years on the same team, that KAJ won 60% of his game in which Magic did not play....while Magic won 75% of his games in which Kareem did not play. And these were not small samples, either. Hell, Magic led his teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24...AFTER Kareem (not to mention 22-10 in his brief return in '96.)

And the reality was, the Lakers could win titles, or at least nearly win them, when Kareem played poorly. On the rare occasions when Magic played poorly in the post-season, the Lakers were wiped out.

A STACKED Laker roster didn't win shit without Magic. And IMMEDIATELY after Magic retired, they plummeted back to mediocrity.

Magic was, quite simply, the greatest "winner" in NBA history.


:applause:


Contrast this with the myth that Michael Jordan made teammates better & pull up the Bulls stats after his first retirement in 93. Unlike Magic , MJ's Bulls teammates collectively improved their efficiency without MJ & only dropped 2 games in the regular season( down to 55 from 57 with MJ despite the Bulls going 3-7 without Pippen & Grant missing quite a few games). Who knows what happens in the playoffs if not for the 'phantom foul' on Pippen & the Bulls may not win it all ,but may have returned to the Finals or ECF at least.


Magic Johnson was also replaced with a legitimate NBA talent (Sedale Threatt) & not replaced by a CBA journeyman who scored 4 pts per game(Pete 'tricking' Myers).. Instead of going after Derek Harper whom the Bulls biggest rival at the time (Knicks) picked up for peanuts the Bulls decided to go with Pete 'tricking' Myers.:facepalm Who knows what happens had the Bulls gone after Harper & not only improved themselves ,but kept Harper from their toughest rival.


The Kareem pre Magic years were seen as an overall disappointment in L.A. with mediocre to bad teams & Magic /Lakers never missed a beat without Kareem(although I think it was time for the Lakers to retool & keep up with the more athletic Bullls).

The only player not really negatively affected by Magics absence(efficiency wise) was perhaps AC Green whose small offensive output thrived off 'garbage buckets'.

[La Frescobaldi]

:applause:


Contrast this with the myth that Michael Jordan made teammates better & pull up the Bulls stats after his first retirement in 93. Unlike Magic , MJ's Bulls teammates collectively improved their efficiency without MJ & only dropped 2 games in the regular season( down to 55 from 57 with MJ despite the Bulls going 3-7 without Pippen & Grant missing quite a few games). Who knows what happens in the playoffs if not for the 'phantom foul' on Pippen & the Bulls may not win it all ,but may have returned to the Finals or ECF at least.


Magic Johnson was also replaced with a legitimate NBA talent (Sedale Threatt) & not replaced by a CBA journeyman who scored 4 pts per game(Pete 'tricking' Myers).. Instead of going after Derek Harper whom the Bulls biggest rival at the time (Knicks) picked up for peanuts the Bulls decided to go with Pete 'tricking' Myers.:facepalm Who knows what happens had the Bulls gone after Harper & not only improved themselves ,but kept Harper from their toughest rival.


The Kareem pre Magic years were seen as an overall disappointment in L.A. with mediocre to bad teams & Magic /Lakers never missed a beat without Kareem(although I think it was time for the Lakers to retool & keep up with the more athletic Bullls).

The only player not really negatively affected by Magics absence(efficiency wise) was perhaps AC Green whose small offensive output thrived off 'garbage buckets'.

Not all great players make their teammates better. Jordan is a classic example; Kareem is another. They both had to have an Aaron to their Moses (Pippen, Oscar, Magic) in order to play at their highest levels. They had to have a guy that could translate their drive and skill and intensity into something that normal human beings could recognize and understand.

Contrary to popular opinion, Wilt Chamberlain was a wunderkind at improving his teammates. Look at what his teammates did with him, and what they did without him - no comparison at all. So too Magic & Bird. Walt Frazier was elite at this skill, Tim Duncan... Russell & Havlicek had it in spades.
Michael Jordan never did have that ability.

[La Frescobaldi]

Excellent response.

Take a look at Divac in his first two seasons, both regular season, and post-season. Career highs in FG%. Without Magic? Never again approached that efficiency.

And, of course, you can go right down the list. KAJ's career high(s) in FG%...ALL with MAGIC. Worthy? Just staggering FG%'s, both in the regular season, and post-season.

Scott? Same.


Furthermore, Magic took his 90-91 Lakers...a team that was injury-plagued and rapidly declining...all the way to the Finals.

And you hit on the Lakers withOUT Magic. Records of 43-39, and then 39-43. Not only that, but the Laker rosters were the best in the league in '78 and '79, and they were slightly better than a .500 team that was routed by much less talented Sonic teams in those two years.

What happened when Magic arrived? 60-22, and a rout of that same Sonics team in the playoffs...en route to a title. And don't forget...the Lakers easily won a game six, on the road, in the clinching game of the Finals...withOUT Kareem. How? MAGIC.

And it was no coincidence that in their ten years on the same team, that KAJ won 60% of his game in which Magic did not play....while Magic won 75% of his games in which Kareem did not play. And these were not small samples, either. Hell, Magic led his teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24...AFTER Kareem (not to mention 22-10 in his brief return in '96.)

And the reality was, the Lakers could win titles, or at least nearly win them, when Kareem played poorly. On the rare occasions when Magic played poorly in the post-season, the Lakers were wiped out.

A STACKED Laker roster didn't win shit without Magic. And IMMEDIATELY after Magic retired, they plummeted back to mediocrity.

Magic was, quite simply, the greatest "winner" in NBA history.

Not knocking Johnson, and I agree with the levels he brought his teammates to was unmatched. But that Lakers team was massively injured.

However, it is an absolute absurdity to say the Bulls beat Showtime because the '90s Lakers were NEVER Showtime. That team was done by late '80s. The Bulls NEVER beat Showtime Lakers, and never saw that team in the Finals. They beat a fine Laker team that was heavily injured.

[Taller than CP3]

I'm just amazed how Magic can do everything and never get tired. I understand he had plenty of sex off the court too.

[G.O.A.T]

Not all great players make their teammates better. Jordan is a classic example; Kareem is another. They both had to have an Aaron to their Moses (Pippen, Oscar, Magic) in order to play at their highest levels. They had to have a guy that could translate their drive and skill and intensity into something that normal human beings could recognize and understand.

Contrary to popular opinion, Wilt Chamberlain was a wunderkind at improving his teammates. Look at what his teammates did with him, and what they did without him - no comparison at all. So too Magic & Bird. Walt Frazier was elite at this skill, Tim Duncan... Russell & Havlicek had it in spades.
Michael Jordan never did have that ability.

Jordan most certainly did improve his teammates at least according to them and Phil Jackson and everyone else. Pippen wasn't a leader with the Bulls until after MJ's first retirement. Steve Kerr says the Bulls would have never won 70 games in 1996 if Jordan wasn't pushing them so hard. Kareem is a fine example, Wilt before Alex Hannum is another good example, Shaq (aside from creating open three's) is a third good example. Jordan is a poor example.

[DatAsh]

Not all great players make their teammates better. Jordan is a classic example; Kareem is another. They both had to have an Aaron to their Moses (Pippen, Oscar, Magic) in order to play at their highest levels. They had to have a guy that could translate their drive and skill and intensity into something that normal human beings could recognize and understand.

Contrary to popular opinion, Wilt Chamberlain was a wunderkind at improving his teammates. Look at what his teammates did with him, and what they did without him - no comparison at all. So too Magic & Bird. Walt Frazier was elite at this skill, Tim Duncan... Russell & Havlicek had it in spades.
Michael Jordan never did have that ability.

Disagree with your take on Jordan and Wilt(somewhat), but the others I absolutely agree with.