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

[QUOTE=Smoke117]You have to be joking. The 1985 season was probably Larry Bird's Greatest season. There is no way you can give Magic 85. Larry Bird was the MVP of the season. Just because the Celtics lost to the Lakers in the finals that doesn't mean Magicwas better that season. He wasn't even the FMVP, Kareem was.[/QUOTE]
You could argue that that was when Bird was at his best but that was not his best season.

His best season was either 1986 or 1984, I would go with 1986.

Bird was the MVP in that 1985 season but he didn't particularly play well in the post-season mainly because of his hand injury. That hand injury was his own problem considering how he only injured it because he got in a bar fight. It's not like he just hurt it in a game or he just hurt it on accident, he put himself in a situation where he hurt his own hand.

Kareem was the Finals MVP in 1985 but Magic was the best player in LA. Plus, Magic had a great Finals series in '85 too, maybe not better than Kareem but still great.

18.4/14.0/6.8/2.2 with 49.4% shooting.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]1980 - Bird
1981 - Bird
1982 - Bird
1983 - Bird
1984 - Bird
1985 - Bird
1986 - Bird
1987 - Magic
1988 - Magic
1989 - Magic
1990 - Magic
1991 - Magic[/QUOTE]

[B]This[/B]

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]1980 - Bird
1981 - Bird
1982 - Bird
1983 - Bird
1984 - Bird
1985 - Bird
1986 - Bird
1987 - Magic
1988 - Magic
1989 - Magic
1990 - Magic
1991 - Magic[/QUOTE]

This

&

Give Bird Kareem & take away The Chief. I say Bird will have run table on Magic every year. Bird will have like 8-9 yrs & magic will have 2 yrs over him.

[QUOTE=get these NETS]it's acknowledged by everybody that Magic and Bird's popularity ushered in the modern nba...ratings, game show on tv live....finals airing LIVE,etc



Nobody since russell in the 1960s has gotten 3 consecutive mvp awards except Bird. Do you think it's a legit accomplishment, or do you think it was the league and reporters working to market the nba to white audience?

not Jordan,KAJ, Magic,Moses,Shaq, Duncan,Dream,...literally nobody else has done it.

I say there's no legit way that anyone can say that Bird enjoyed the most dominant 3 year stretch(relative to other players) in the NBA....post 1970..and that the 3 consecutive mvps were bullshit, to promote a white superstar to mainstream audiences.

Bird was in fact a Great player....an alltime great..legit superstar and winner..but I'm calling bull on the fact that he got award three straight years ...first and only player since Russell.[/QUOTE]


other times I've posted this...people have avoided answering the question..so this will be last time I bring this up..

clearly makes some people uncomfortable to mention this,but hey...c'est la vie.

Think about who votes for the regular season MVP award. If you don't know let me help you. Since the 1980

the 3 consec. mvps were bull...

when they talk about magic and bird "rescuing the league" , it was based on both of those guys winning games....winning rings...playing at a high level..and about them both being highly marketable players.

Bird and Magic doc. goes into detail about how the rise of the Celtics and white star players helped the league expand.
Nobody with a straight face can honestly say that Bird dominated the league over a 3 year stretch more than any other player...but he was nba dream come true....had backstory...played for storied franchise in huge sports city AND....lived up to the hype...and was white.

I like to think that alltime great players are in contention for mvp (1-5 finish in voting) for the bulk of their careers..so I mean Bird was obviously in contention those 3 years..legitimately, but him getting those 3 straight was bullshit.....especially in light of dominant all time great players before him and after him who haven't gotten same shine.

Don't expect any serious rebuttal on this topic because there is none....

People identify with Bird because he was a legitimately great white superstar....so logic and reasoning goes out of the window when his name comes up.

1979-80: tie (edge to Magic)
1980-81: Bird
1981-82: Magic
1982-83: tie (edge to Bird)
1983-84: Bird
1984-85: Bird
1985-86: Bird
1986-87: Magic
1987-88: Bird
1988-89: Magic
1989-90: Magic
1990-91: Magic

total: 5-5-2 (6-6 if you want to eliminate ties)

it's pretty close :confusedshrug: Magic is the better player IMO

Rubbish. The documentary did nothing of the sort. It just said that some people tried to play the white angle and Bird was having none of it. It was more than just their skin colour that drew comparisons.

You can't get a serious rebuttal because most people think he deserved the 3, and you think he didn't. Obviously, there are contenders most years and it can go either way sometimes. It can be subjective. But your initial point that Bird had to have the 3 consecutive best years of any player ever to win the 3 MVPs in a row is fallacious. He just had to be the best during those 3 years. A runner up in one year may be better than a winner in another year. Thems the breaks.

[QUOTE=get these NETS]the 3 consec. mvps were bull...

when they talk about magic and bird "rescuing the league" , it was based on both of those guys winning games....winning rings...playing at a high level..and about them both being highly marketable players.

Bird and Magic doc. goes into detail about how the rise of the Celtics and white star players helped the league expand.
Nobody with a straight face can honestly say that Bird dominated the league over a 3 year stretch more than any other player...but he was nba dream come true....had backstory...played for storied franchise in huge sports city AND....lived up to the hype...and was white.

I like to think that alltime great players are in contention for mvp (1-5 finish in voting) for the bulk of their careers..so I mean Bird was obviously in contention those 3 years..legitimately, but him getting those 3 straight was bullshit.....especially in light of dominant all time great players before him and after him who haven't gotten same shine.

Don't expect any serious rebuttal on this topic because there is none....

People identify with Bird because he was a legitimately great white superstar....so logic and reasoning goes out of the window when his name comes up.[/QUOTE]

Of course there's a rebuttal; I had one for you on the last thread and you've already forgotten about it.

To refresh your memory, it's not about race -- he was the best player in the league during each of those three years.

But by all means, please go ahead and enlighten the rest of us on who you think deserved the award more in '84, '85, and '86.

[QUOTE=LeBird]Rubbish. The documentary did nothing of the sort. It just said that some people tried to play the white angle and Bird was having none of it. It was more than just their skin colour that drew comparisons.

[/QUOTE]

Just because Bird didn't care about in and feed into it doesn't mean that him being a white superstar wasn't a huge factor in revitalizing the league. Of course it's not the only thing that drew comparisons between Bird and Magic but I feel the documentary is pretty clear that race was a big issue.

Race is ALWAYS an issue, especially when it comes to the NBA. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

[QUOTE=Kobe 4 The Win]Just because Bird didn't care about in and feed into it doesn't mean that him being a white superstar wasn't a huge factor in revitalizing the league. Of course it's not the only thing that drew comparisons between Bird and Magic but I feel the documentary is pretty clear that race was a big issue.[/QUOTE]

In College the race issue didn't exist (the rivalry barely did) and he still got an incredible amount of attention. He was a phenom and he got the attention his talent merited. This is about as stupid as saying that any black player got their MVP because of their race.

[QUOTE=LeBird]In College the race issue didn't exist (the rivalry barely did) and he still got an incredible amount of attention. He was a phenom and he got the attention his talent merited. This is about as stupid as saying that any black player got their MVP because of their race.[/QUOTE]


highest rated ncaa finals ever was ...guess which year?
still the highest rated..


coincidence?????

[url]http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2009-03-08-bird-magic-cover_N.htm[/url]


[B]Larry Bird of Indiana State and Earvin "Magic" Johnson of Michigan State embarked on a path through the NCAA tournament that would take them to the championship game of the Final Four, a showdown that remains the highest rated televised college basketball game. [/B]

[QUOTE=LeBird]In College the race issue didn't exist (the rivalry barely did) and he still got an incredible amount of attention. He was a phenom and he got the attention his talent merited. This is about as stupid as saying that any black player got their MVP because of their race.[/QUOTE]

At no time did I say the only reason Bird gets attention or wins awards is because he's white but I think you'd be a fool to ignore race and it's impact.

HIGHEST selling Sports illustrated cover EVER????


happens to be a special mid week edition they put out....when Mark McGwire beat the (then) single season home run record of Maris


[IMG]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/1998/62/coverfront.jpg[/IMG]


remember....the regular issue had come out already...but the midweek special edition sold more than any edition they had ever put out...

coincidence?

sammy and mark "brought back" baseball......... and we both know that had sosa broken the record that there is no way that the American public reaction would have been the same

one Sosa is not American
two..he's Black