Magic Johnson vs Larry Bird. Year-by-Year.

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]That`s His Jobe cause he is a Point-Guard. I Know He Influced Pace More Than Any PG Ever (but Maybe Stockton, More than Nash) but Still It Was His Job..While Having Alot of Athletic Players Along Side Him for Break Passes Made It Easier for Himself and His Fellow Teamates.

Still Doesn`t Change the Fact that Bird Had More Impact on Defense than Magic. While Magic Had More Impact on Offense Slightly...Yet Bird Had Both Impacts In the Game While Magic One.[/B][/QUOTE]
Ohhhh, so KG is definitely had more impact than Barkley??? Glad that argument is put to rest. And you say it so convincingly!

The argument of pace is an argument of defense. If I can control the way an opponents team executes its offense, then it's under the category of defense. When teams get tired and start missing at the end of games its like Motombo back there for defense, except tiredness affects judgement and all execution. I don't care if it is their job. If it affected the other's teams offensive execution it's under the category of defense. If it affects their shots at the end of the game its clutch defense. I know you don't see it that way but its a reality that the offensive team has to deal with because they played Magic's pace.

Bird shot about 54% in the first two games of '87 and about 37% the last two games. And Bird could handle Worthy. In '85 he starts missing foul shots and just doesn't have the energy to shoot in the last two games. Magic pushes the pace, Bird gets tired. Bird's execution level goes down. A very definite relationship between the events. Bird and Celtics can't stop Magic. One player has definitely affected the game and series more than the other. At the very least, pace affects offense and is in the category of defense.

Why did you say Stockton had impact on pace??? He was a great precision passer off of the pick and role but no way was he on Nash's level of influence on pace. MJ's flu game is a classic example of Stockton not pushing the pace when he should have, MJ showed signs of being tired at half time - no way do Nash or Magic do not go on their horse upon seeing that. Nash, Magic and Kidd are in their separate category in regards to pace - except Kidd's pace didn't suck you up mentally like Nash and Magic. Wall has the capacity to supersede them all but that's guess work for now. But this is why you won't hear me complain about Nash's MVP. Overall teams were missing a lot at the end of games and he was the reason why.

Why exactly are some taking Magic over Bird in '80?

[QUOTE=juju151111]The list you made seems like a regular season nd not including everythin. How is Bird better then Magic in 82 and 88?[/QUOTE]

No, my list is just the better player. Postseason is factored in, and it's one of the reasons I went with Magic over Bird in '87 despite not being convinced Magic was the better player yet. Despite Bird having a great playoff run, Magic playing so well in the finals sealed it.

Magic's regular season in '88 definitely didn't reach his '87 level, while Bird's '88 regular season was at least as good as '87, probably a bit better.

With Magic and Bird being so close in '87, the fact that Magic's '88 season was clearly below his '87 one, and Bird's '88 season has a case over '87, but just barely falls short, imo due to his superior playoff run in '87 it makes '88 an easier choice to me.

I'm not going to say Bird is a worse player because he shot poorly in the Detroit series. Shooting that poorly was an anomaly for prime Larry Bird. But look at what he did up until that point, not just the duel with Nique, but he was ridiculously good all year. Whether it was leading the Celtics to such a great record without his second best player McHale despite no bench, or getting Boston to a record not far below the Lakers despite not having nearly the depth Magic did.

Give Boston a bench in '88 and they probably get the championship back, as it is, even with no bench, fatigue(with an older team having to play such big minutes due to the lack of a bench after coming off 4 straight deep playoff runs to the finals), and Bird shooting so poorly, they still had a legitimate chance to beat Detroit. And despite that being one of Bird's worst series, if not his worst, it shows how good his all around game.

And while I rarely do this type of thing, the Lakers got extremely lucky in the finals, just look at the call Kareem got on that missed sky hook. The Lakers should have lost that series.

Magic was not a better player in 1982, I can see why some choose it just looking at the season on paper, but he was not as complete of a player. He didn't have much of a half court skill set yet due to the lack of an outside shot or post game.

Bird was more complete entering the league, which isn't a knock on Magic who was 3 years younger and not the man on his team. While Magic was arguably the Lakers best player by '84, he didn't get to be the man until '87.

Yes, he won a championship, but that was still Kareem's team. Not only because Kareem was by far their best scorer and the one Laker consistently drawing double teams, but because he was still blocking about 3 shots per game which gives him a considerable edge over Magic as far as defensive impact.

Plus, while Magic always had his incredible ability as a passer, his impact as a playmaker on that team wasn't the same as '84-'91 because he was still splitting ball-handling duties with Norm Nixon.

Team success is not a fair way to compare. Kareem was the Lakers clear 1st option in '82, and also their best player. And the Lakers also had Nixon and Wilkes to give them at least 4 all-star caliber players, and they had a rejuvenated Bob McAdoo who played like an all-star, plus Michael Cooper who is arguably the best role player of all-time.

Magic and Bird were not in comparable situations for the first 5 seasons of their career. And the '82 Lakers in particular are one of the most talented teams of all-time.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Everything in 85 is even until you look at the Finals where Magic completely outplayed him. Everyone is banged up by that point, using a thumb injury of all things as if its a knee, ankle, or wrist issue is completely laughble.[/QUOTE]

How the f[SIZE="2"]u[/SIZE]ck is everything even until the '85 finals? :facepalm Larry averaged 29/11/7, 1.6 spg, 1.2 bpg on 52/43/88 shooting.

Bird didn't just have a thumb injury, he had an assortment of injuries, they were mentioned during the series. Look at how limited Larry was in the Philly series. The first 2 series, Bird averages 30.3 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 6.1 apg on 49% in 9 games despite missing a game in the Cleveland series with bursitis on bone chips in his elbow.

He then averages just 20.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 6 apg on 42% in the Philly series. But yeah, he was healthy, despite numerous reports to the contrary and his performance suffering greatly.

[QUOTE]Magic could get burned by smaller players, but so would Bird-even worse I might add. Difference is Magic was far better at guarding players at or near his own size.[/QUOTE]

Bird usually didn't guard smaller players, in fact, he guarded power forwards quite often. Neither were known for their man to man defense, but I haven't seen Bird exploited the way Magic was defensively. If you're going to give Magic credit for his rebounding because of his position you can't ignore his inability to guard smaller players since he faced them much more than Bird because of his position.

[QUOTE]I have to add Magic has a great argument in 82 and 83 as he was FAR SUPERIOR in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

He doesn't have a great argument, he was clearly not even the best player on his team at that point. His argument is reasonable, but more looking at the season on paper than actually watching their games from those seasons.

And Magic over Bird in '85 is just laughable. Bird was about as clear cut of a best player as you'll see. If you're going to choose Magic over Bird because of a better finals series then you should remain consistent and rank Kareem over Magic because he was clearly the best player in that series.

The difference is, Kareem and Magic were debatable in '85, Bird and Magic really weren't. You have to wait until '87 for that.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Magic was the more productive rebounder. Not all rebounds are created equal. When Magic rebounded the opposing team went in panic mode. Magic was an impact rebounder. He unbalanced the floor and could get points off of the rebound unlike any player ever. I doubt that there is a coach around that would want 10 of Bird's rebounds over 8 of Magics. The whole Laker team would lick their lips when Magic would get the rebound. Their juices got flowing. There is no way you could have seen 87 or 85 finals and could possibly think that there was any semblance of their rebounds being equal. Boston got deflated when Magic rebounded or stole the ball and the inverse happened for the Lakers.[/QUOTE]

I think the exact opposite, Bird's rebounding was something I noticed more watching the games. His technique and instinct seemed better. Magic was a better rebounder than Jason Kidd for example, but much like Kidd, he got quite a few uncontested rebounds the other players conceded so he could start the break.

Bird also played with clearly superior rebounders. Parish for example averaged 12.5 rpg in '89 when Bird missed the season, then there was McHale who was definitely capable of 10 rpg on most teams, as it is, he basically averaged 10 with Bird and Parish(9.9 rpgin '87), and in a season like '86, you add Walton into the mix, and he was still an excellent rebounder.

Kareem post-'81 wasn't a great rebounder either. Plus, before '84 especially, Magic was rarely used as a 1 on 1 player in the half court, with the ball frequently going in to Kareem, Magic could move without the ball and get in position for rebounds

[QUOTE=Pointguard]So let me get this straight, the best way to guard Magic is hold him to 43 ppg while shooting a stellar 55% and this great defense will somehow transfer into Coop, Worthy and Scott missing every shot Magic didn't spoon feed them with? And you wonder why it didn't catch on, huh?[/QUOTE]

My point was that Magic was such a good passer that if you double teamed him, he pick your team apart. Instead, they made him a scorer, and went with the strategy of letting Magic get his instead of letting everyone else. It's a strategy that's been used a variety of times, and with success, even vs guys who were more scorers than Magic.

The Lakers weren't built with Magic averaging 30 or dropping 40+ in mind. But playing him 1 on 1 most of the time may have contributed to the other Lakers struggling. Those players have to be held accountable offensively, not Magic, but credit also goes to Cotton Fitzsimmons for the strategy.

[QUOTE]Hornacek wasn't breaking Magic down off of the dribble. Rarely ever did Hornacek get points on the initial defender. He scored like Reggie Miller. Magic was by far the best player in that series. And he was twice as good as any Laker in the series. While Majerle's good defense on Magic was stoping Magic at 43/7/8 we somehow missed how it totally crushed Worthy to 24% shooting in his last 80 minutes.[/QUOTE]

As far as defense, well, that is the one thing you can blame Magic for. That's why his defense could be a problem, they knew they couldn't put him on KJ(who went off on a much smaller, better defender in Scott, just as he had outplayed another good defender around his size in Stockton the previous series), so he ended up on Hornacek a lot, but Hornacek was a phenomenal shooter, and since Magic roamed quite a bit, he was vulnerable against shooters.

Offensively, Worthy was a legit star in his prime, and he deserved the blame, especially with Tom Chambers guarding him a lot. And there's no excuse for a cast as talented as the '90 Lakers to not get theirs regardless.

Again, I'm not blaming Magic for his offense, or even in general for the series loss. There's not really much of an argument to be had on the '90 series.

Magic 82 >>> Bird 82.

Don't know why people put Bird as the better player other than seeing a double/double.

20 years from now people on ISH will say,

"Kobe in 01 and 02 >> Duncan in 01 and 02

Don't know why people put Duncan as the better player other than seeing a double/double"

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Magic 82 >>> Bird 82.

Don't know why people put Bird as the better player other than seeing a double/double.[/QUOTE]
He averaged a near triple double. You can even look at the 84 finals Magic shot 56% I think and Bird like 49%. Birds teammates saved his ass. Shaqattacck blaming Bird inconsistent Finals performer on his injury. Ohh pls cry me a river everybody is nicked up. What happen in 87 then? Was he injured again. Bird never really dominated FG% wise in the finals. Bird got outplayed

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]
Yes, he won a championship, but that was still Kareem's team. Not only because Kareem was by far their best scorer and the one Laker consistently drawing double teams, but because he was still blocking about 3 shots per game which gives him a considerable edge over Magic as far as defensive impact. [/quote]
Magic not only controlled the pace but he made all the major decisions. When they ran, and when they didn't, what side of the floor the play would flow and who got it where. Do we wait for Kareem or do we not. When do we set up Worthy instead of Kareem. Kareem came down the court late and was neatly placed on the blocks. He wasn't the leader, he wasn't the inspirational leader, he barely rebounded, he wasn't the first option, he wasn't the glue - he bocked a few shots and posted up. The majority of execution, leadership, team guidance, excitement, attention to detail, risk taking and setting up was on Magic. At the end of the day, Magic's leadership, decision making, winning ways had more impact on the team than Kareem had on any of his previous teams when he did much more than he did on those 80 Laker teams.

In fact Kareem's Laker lead teams lacked leadership, excitement, cohesion and good decision making. They were always a dead end team. Kareem was the better scorer and shot blocker but too much of the Laker teams were a mix and gel of other qualities.

[quote]
I think the exact opposite, Bird's rebounding was something I noticed more watching the games. His technique and instinct seemed better. Magic was a better rebounder than Jason Kidd for example, but much like Kidd, he got quite a few uncontested rebounds the other players conceded so he could start the break. [/quote]
You missed the point I made about the difference in the value of Magic's rebounding vs. anybody else in the game. Its not just the rebound it's what happens after the rebound. Once Magic rebounded the ball the opposing team immediately began playing Magic ball and was subject to Magic's decision making. Its not like just grabbing a rebound. With Magic it was transition, and playing on your heels if you were the defense.
[quote]
My point was that Magic was such a good passer that if you double teamed him, he pick your team apart. Instead, they made him a scorer, and went with the strategy of letting Magic get his instead of letting everyone else. It's a strategy that's been used a variety of times, and with success, even vs guys who were more scorers than Magic.

The Lakers weren't built with Magic averaging 30 or dropping 40+ in mind. But playing him 1 on 1 most of the time may have contributed to the other Lakers struggling. Those players have to be held accountable offensively, not Magic, but credit also goes to Cotton Fitzsimmons for the strategy.
[/quote]
The team has to adjust. I too would try to isolate the brain from the body. But Worthy played horribly (24% is just crazy), Scott played scared and Coop was just off. Magic was on an island by himself. It wasn't the last time Scott and Worthy would do that to Magic. When Worthy lost his blinding speed he lived off of Magic and lost his creativity.

[quote]
As far as defense, well, that is the one thing you can blame Magic for. That's why his defense could be a problem, they knew they couldn't put him on KJ(who went off on a much smaller, better defender in Scott, just as he had outplayed another good defender around his size in Stockton the previous series), so he ended up on Hornacek a lot, but Hornacek was a phenomenal shooter, and since Magic roamed quite a bit, he was vulnerable against shooters. [/quote]
When Cooper and Scott were in the game they frequently guarded Horny and KJ like the Laker's did with most teams that had guys like Majerle and Eddie Johnson at SF. That was the usual and it made sense height wise. It was like that with Coop and Nixon before Scott came. Coop always took the hardest cover and Scott usually the smallest. I can't say I remember this series like that, but I thought it was Magic on Majerle.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]The team has to adjust. I too would try to isolate the brain from the body. But Worthy played horribly (24% is just crazy),[B] Scott played scared[/B] and Coop was just off. Magic was on an island by himself. It wasn't the last time Scott and Worthy would do that to Magic. When Worthy lost his blinding speed he lived off of Magic and lost his creativity.[/QUOTE]

That's the thing that bugs me about Scott. He was a great athlete with some offensive skill, but in big games he always seemed to disappear. Pat Riley use to have private conversations with Scott just to boost his confidence.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Magic not only controlled the pace but he made all the major decisions. When they ran, and when they didn't, what side of the floor the play would flow and who got it where. Do we wait for Kareem or do we not. When do we set up Worthy instead of Kareem. Kareem came down the court late and was neatly placed on the blocks. He wasn't the leader, he wasn't the inspirational leader, he barely rebounded, he wasn't the first option, he wasn't the glue - he bocked a few shots and posted up. The majority of execution, leadership, team guidance, excitement, attention to detail, risk taking and setting up was on Magic. At the end of the day, Magic's leadership, decision making, winning ways had more impact on the team than Kareem had on any of his previous teams when he did much more than he did on those 80 Laker teams.
[/QUOTE]

Great stuff :applause: People can compare respective Xs & Os of players all they want but it's about IMPACT. Magic was running that Laker team from '82 onwards. He was their leader and their driving force. I certainly wouldn't call him their clear cut best player but I've always thought it was a 1a/1b scenario (Magic 1a, Kareem 1b) until 83/84, when Magic officially took over.

1980: Bird
1981: Bird
1982: Magic
1983: Bird
1984: Bird
1985: Bird
1986: Bird
1987: Magic
1988: Magic
1990: Magic
1991: Magic

imo

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Magic was not a better player in 1982, I can see why some choose it just looking at the season on paper, but he was not as complete of a player. He didn't have much of a half court skill set yet due to the lack of an outside shot or post game.

Yes, he won a championship, but that was still Kareem's team. Not only because Kareem was by far their best scorer and the one Laker consistently drawing double teams, but because he was still blocking about 3 shots per game which gives him a considerable edge over Magic as far as defensive impact.[/QUOTE]


[QUOTE=Pointguard]Magic not only controlled the pace but he made all the major decisions. When they ran, and when they didn't, what side of the floor the play would flow and who got it where. Do we wait for Kareem or do we not. When do we set up Worthy instead of Kareem. Kareem came down the court late and was neatly placed on the blocks. He wasn't the leader, he wasn't the inspirational leader, he barely rebounded, he wasn't the first option, he wasn't the glue - he bocked a few shots and posted up. The majority of execution, leadership, team guidance, excitement, attention to detail, risk taking and setting up was on Magic. At the end of the day, Magic's leadership, decision making, winning ways had more impact on the team than Kareem had on any of his previous teams when he did much more than he did on those 80 Laker teams.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=oolalaa]Great stuff :applause: People can compare respective Xs & Os of players all they want but it's about IMPACT. Magic was running that Laker team from '82 onwards. He was their leader and their driving force. I certainly wouldn't call him their clear cut best player but I've always thought it was a 1a/1b scenario (Magic 1a, Kareem 1b) until 83/84, when Magic officially took over.[/QUOTE]

A good discussion. I don't think there is any way to say it was Kareem's team in 1982. Certainly he was still there most overall skilled player, but all the evidence says it was Magic's team and that he was perceived to have more impact/value. From 1982 on Magic always finished higher in the MVP voting. During the 1982 season the Lakers organization made a clear shift from Kareem to Magic as their centerpiece. They fired a coach who favored an offense built around Kareem and hired a coach whose offense would be tailored to Magic.

Now this was however intended to be a subtle transition. Kareem's role did not diminish except for what time took away. He was still their number one scoring option in the half court. It wasn't until 1986-87 that coach Pat Riley went to Magic and told him he needed to be more assertive and that Kareem too now felt it was Magic's time. Magic had thought it was his team for years, but in reflection understood the difference after the 86-87 season and the junior sky hook which punctuated it.

Still the primary reason I just can't see calling it Kareem's team is he didn't do anything to suggest it was off the court. He didn't even try, or feel he needed to. That wasn't much different then before Magic, but when you have a player as dynamic as Magic with the personality to match, that's whothe rest of the team is turning to. In the case of LA, that's very much how it played out.

1980: Bird
1981: Bird
1982: Magic
1983: Bird
1984: Bird
1985: Magic
1986: Bird
1987: Magic
1988: Magic
1990: Magic
1991: Magic

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]A good discussion. I don't think there is any way to say it was Kareem's team in 1982. Certainly he was still there most overall skilled player, but all the evidence says it was Magic's team and that he was perceived to have more impact/value. From 1982 on Magic always finished higher in the MVP voting. During the 1982 season the Lakers organization made a clear shift from Kareem to Magic as their centerpiece. They fired a coach who favored an offense built around Kareem and hired a coach whose offense would be tailored to Magic.

Now this was however intended to be a subtle transition. Kareem's role did not diminish except for what time took away. He was still their number one scoring option in the half court. It wasn't until 1986-87 that coach Pat Riley went to Magic and told him he needed to be more assertive and that Kareem too now felt it was Magic's time. Magic had thought it was his team for years, but in reflection understood the difference after the 86-87 season and the junior sky hook which punctuated it.

Still the primary reason I just can't see calling it Kareem's team is he didn't do anything to suggest it was off the court. He didn't even try, or feel he needed to. That wasn't much different then before Magic, but when you have a player as dynamic as Magic with the personality to match, that's whothe rest of the team is turning to. In the case of LA, that's very much how it played out.[/QUOTE]

Yes. Magic setup Kareem but the team played/vibed around Magic. The Lakers and Celtics were dynasty oriented and vaulued their players as such. There's a reason the Lakers totally invested in Magic after a couple of years and always looked at Kareem differently. The owners, president, vice-president, GM and coaches all knew where the bread and butter was. Magic had convinced everybody in a way Kareem never could. And the 80's could be labelled the rise of the dynasties. Kareem wasn't dynastic when there were few good teams.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Magic not only controlled the pace but he made all the major decisions. When they ran, and when they didn't, what side of the floor the play would flow and who got it where. Do we wait for Kareem or do we not. When do we set up Worthy instead of Kareem. Kareem came down the court late and was neatly placed on the blocks. He wasn't the leader, he wasn't the inspirational leader, he barely rebounded, he wasn't the first option, he wasn't the glue - he bocked a few shots and posted up. The majority of execution, leadership, team guidance, excitement, attention to detail, risk taking and setting up was on Magic. At the end of the day, Magic's leadership, decision making, winning ways had more impact on the team than Kareem had on any of his previous teams when he did much more than he did on those 80 Laker teams.[/QUOTE]

I'm not interested in the typical sports cliches like inspirational leader which is impossible to measure how much of a difference that makes. Plus "winning ways" is too vague for me. But I'm not giving Magic the edge for intangibles in '82.

Magic got their coach Paul Westhead fired purely for selfish reasons. It wasn't that the Lakers weren't winners under Westhead, they were a little over a year removed from a championship, and it was still early in the '81-'82 season, but the Lakers were on a 5 game winning streak. That's not leadership to me.

You're pretty much just listing things a point guard does that a center won't, and I'm not factoring in excitement to who the better player is.

These are some quotes from '82 and describe some of the big advantages Kareem had at that time over Magic.

As I've mentioned, Kareem had a huge advantage as a scorer, and particularly a half court scorer. Here's Robert Parish talking about how unstoppable he still was.

[QUOTE=Robert Parish]"There's not much you can do when Kareem gets the ball down there. You just try to deny him position, but that's easier said than done," said Celtics center Robert Parish,[/QUOTE]

Here's Bernard King talking about how Kareem being out of the line up allowed them to play strong man to man defense since they didn't have to double without Kareem.

[QUOTE=Bernard King]"Sure, having Kareem out of there made a difference," said Bernard King, who scored 20 of his game-high 33 points in the first half for the Warriors. "With him out we could play real strong man-to-man defense."[/QUOTE]

Here's Magic talking about Kareem's presence defensively.

[QUOTE=Magic Johnson]"They could do a lot of different things when they didn't have to worry about the big guy in there," said the Lakers' Magic Johnson. "They took advantage of that situation by running hard, getting inside and taking advantage of some mismatches."[/QUOTE]

And here's one more quote, this time from Pat Riley talking about Kareem had not lost anything. I think he had declined a bit, but not a huge decline..

[QUOTE=Pat Riley]"Kareem, the guy never left, he's never going anywhere," said Los Angeles coach Pat Riley. "It was a difficult game Thursday night. For him to come back tonight showed me the guy's got just about everything he always had."[/QUOTE]

Did you seriously say Kareem wasn't the 1st option? It's a documented fact that kareem was the first option for the first 7 seasons they played together. It was only in the '86-'87 season that Riley decided to make Magic the 1st option.

Credit to ThaRegul8r for this quote.

[QUOTE=Magic Johnson]
In 1986, the Lakers finished the season with a record of 62-20. That was a great start, but we were only warming up. As always, we came into the playoffs with high hopes and expectations. For five of the previous six years we had gone all the way to the championship series In 1980, and again in 1982, we had defeated Philadelphia to win the title. We had lost to Boston in 1984, but the following year we came back to beat them. Now, as the defending champions, we were looking forward to another title series against the Celtics.......

We won the opening game in the Forum. But Houston shocked us by winning the next four to take the series. The Rockets, with their

pre Magic, what exactly did the Kareem Lakers do?


pressure forms diamonds or busts pipes

magic blamed for getting coach fired..then goes out and wins more rings with new and inexperienced coach

years later penny is blamed for getting coach fired, tries to spread blame around to entire team and then his game regressed and he doesn't ever amount to shit after that

Magic Johnson averaged a near triple double in 82. Who cares about the coach? They won the chip.