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

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.

[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]

and Magic averaged 18/6/13/1.5 on 57/84. Gee, I wonder if Birds dropoff in production had anything to do with the fact that the Sixers were a FAR FAR superior team to those he played in the first two rounds. Magic outplayed Bird statistically in 84 and completely outplayed in him in 87, so for you to jump around and assume Bird would outplay him in 85 based on a couple of tit tat injuries, is beyond laughable. All the evidence points in Magics favor.

[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.


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]

I'm saying Bird WOULD get burned worse than Magic if he had to guard those players, and usually Magic was switched with the SG if there was great potential for being burned. Magic wasn't as big a liability as you're trying to make him out to be, especially when you see how teams purposely attacked Bird because he was such a bad man defender of ANY position. You think Maagic couldn't have played forward like Bird? He played PG because the advantages FAR outweighed any negatives. That positional versatility is an advantage over Bird. As for Magic being superior in 82 and 83, one only need look at their peformances in the playoffs. Magic was putting up historical numbers while Bird was choking to the Bucks and failing to crack 42% shooting in either run.

[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]

agreed...and adding onto your point,la had prime kareem for years before magic....and year after year of failure....what happens when magic comes? year after year of success with an old kareem

i always hear things like "shaq had kobe"..."shaq had wade". who says kareem had oscar robertson and magic? mj(magic) and shaq were far more valuable than kareem and kobe.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]I'm saying Bird WOULD get burned worse than Magic if he had to guard those players, and usually Magic was switched with the SG if there was great potential for being burned. Magic wasn't as big a liability as you're trying to make him out to be, especially when you see how teams purposely attacked Bird because he was such a bad man defender of ANY position. You think Maagic couldn't have played forward like Bird? He played PG because the advantages FAR outweighed any negatives. That positional versatility is an advantage over Bird[B]. As for Magic being superior in 82 and 83, one only need look at their peformances in the playoffs.[/B] Magic was putting up historical numbers while Bird was choking to the Bucks and failing to crack 42% shooting in either run.[/QUOTE]
Excellent Post.

I didn't know the playoff difference was that humongous in those two years. I do remember thinking that Bird had problems in the playoffs but I didn't know it was that bad. In what way are people even thinking about giving Bird 1982??? Its not close. It wasn't close in the regular season. Not only did Magic win FMVP, but he was, like you said, flirting with a triple double in the regular season.

Regular Season 1982
Magic..18.6 ppg 9.6ast. 9.5reb 527% 226% 3pt 3.7 TO
Bird....22.9ppg 5.8 ast. 10.9reb 503% 212% 3pt 3.3 TO

Magic lead the league in steals. Magic has one of the best years of a player showing great balance and judgment. The rebounds are very close as are the turnovers. Two huge plus for Magic. Magic gets distance on shooting percentage and obviously assist. The shooting percentage coupled with scoring is close to even but we'll give Bird a slight edge.


Playoffs 1982
Bird.. .427% .822FT 17.8ppg 12.5reb 5.6ast 80%FT
Magic .529% .828FT 17.4ppg 11.3reb 9.3ast 83%FT

Magic wins Finals MVP. Bird has a very bad shooting percentage for that time period. Bird barely outscores Magic. Bird has only one decent shooting game in two series (12 games) and had other guys hitting at a much better clip and who were scorers.

The funny thing is that Magic was like Kidd in that stats don't really show his impact. He rebounded with more value than any other rebounder. He lead the league in steals and that too had more value than any other defensive play in the game because it was usually a 4 point reversal. His control of pace wasn't recorded, and neither was his ability to keep everybody in the offense.

A lot of people here either did not see 1982 and just assumed Bird was a more polished player. Magic was much further along in the playoffs the first four years. His spontaniety and adaption to different teams was just a lot better than Birds. I couldn't tell if it was good defenses or the playoffs that got Bird off of his game. Magic was playoff ready since day one and therefore was further along than Bird was. Until '84 Bird was unpredicatable and, in general had a bad shooting touch in the playoffs. Though, like Magic, he had all around game he could resort to when his shot went astray as it often did. Magic used better judgment to navigate his shooting woes but that rarely happened in the years in question here.

[QUOTE=juju151111]Magic Johnson averaged a near triple double in 82. Who cares about the coach? They won the chip.[/QUOTE]

If people are going to bring up Magic's intangibles then that's certainly relevant. Any player today gets slammed for anything remotely similar.

Intangibles were brought up in the Magic/Kareem debate for '82. Kareem also won a title, went about his business, didn't try to play GM and was the best player on that championship team.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]and Magic averaged 18/6/13/1.5 on 57/84. Gee, I wonder if Birds dropoff in production had anything to do with the fact that the Sixers were a FAR FAR superior team to those he played in the first two rounds. Magic outplayed Bird statistically in 84 and completely outplayed in him in 87, so for you to jump around and assume Bird would outplay him in 85 based on a couple of tit tat injuries, is beyond laughable. All the evidence points in Magics favor.[/QUOTE]

Magic's regular season was not as impressive as Bird's, and it's not particularly close.

:oldlol: at you acting like the numerous reports of Bird's injuries were bullsh[SIZE="2"]i[/SIZE]t.

Here's a list of Bird's injuries from a May 20th, 1985 article, and it's basically what I remembering them saying throughout the finals broadcasts.

[QUOTE]Larry Bird floating bone chips

Bird was a better basketball player up until his injuries began to surface.

[QUOTE=Hands of Iron]Bird was a better basketball player up until his injuries began to surface.[/QUOTE]

Yup, but the fact that Magic continued at such a high level (hell, he could have kept going after HIV) for those extra couple years puts him above Bird. Barely.

[QUOTE=Math2]Yup, but the fact that Magic continued at such a high level (hell, he could have kept going after HIV) for those extra couple years puts him above Bird. Barely.[/QUOTE]

No problem with that at all. He ended up accomplishing more in the end and outlasted Larry. He was never far behind to begin with. That was probably the most blunt, worst post I've made so far on here. I do consider it the truth, though. We can talk numbers all day long, particular seasons and series and this and that. Overall, Bird was a better scorer, shooter and rebounder. Even at Magic's forte, Bird registers in all likelihood as the greatest passing forward there's ever been. He is - at worst - amongst the top three all-time clutch players. He will take over games and murder you in cold blood. Obviously neither were great defensively on the ball, but Larry was phenomenal as far as playing team defense when healthy and it's thanks in large part to his basketball IQ, instincts and relentless hustle. Damn near Perfect Player.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]If people are going to bring up Magic's intangibles then that's certainly relevant. Any player today gets slammed for anything remotely similar.

Intangibles were brought up in the Magic/Kareem debate for '82. Kareem also won a title, went about his business, didn't try to play GM and was the best player on that championship team.



Magic's regular season was not as impressive as Bird's, and it's not particularly close.

:oldlol: at you acting like the numerous reports of Bird's injuries were bullsh[SIZE="2"]i[/SIZE]t.

Here's a list of Bird's injuries from a May 20th, 1985 article, and it's basically what I remembering them saying throughout the finals broadcasts.



I don't think it's a coincidence that with numerous reports of injuries, Bird's performance suffers greatly.

No evidence points in Magic's favor. It's complete revisionist history to rank Magic over Bird in '85.

Your entire case is that Magic had a better finals series than Bird. Well, Kareem had a better finals series than both, so by this logic, he was better than both.

Are you willing to be consistent and admit this? Not that I believe you're finally going to answer this question because you've continued to dodge it.

The difference is, Magic vs Kareem was debatable in '85. Bird was clearly better than both and anyone in the league at that time.



Bird wasn't in a position to defend guards so I don't really care what either of us think would happen. He did a better job defending the players he actually defended than Magic did and was also the better help defender.

Magic didn't have the half court skill set to be ranked over Bird in '82 and '83. No real outside shot or post game.

Bird was close to getting voted MVP over Moses Malone who had a historic season in '82. Nobody else got a significant amount of votes. And that was with Bird dealing with injuries throughout that season.[/QUOTE]
I am sorry, but thats BS. Magic outlayed Bird twice in the finals and in 84 his stats were still good. I am not paying this injury excuse, when Bird never really outplayed him Magic. Why does it matter if Magic didn't master his Post game in 82? He was more athlethic back then and ur missing the fact that he averged a near triple double.

[QUOTE=juju151111]I am sorry, but thats BS. Magic outlayed Bird twice in the finals and in 84 his stats were still good. I am not paying this injury excuse, when Bird never really outplayed him Magic. Why does it matter if Magic didn't master his Post game in 82? He was more athlethic back then and ur missing the fact that he averged a near triple double.[/QUOTE]

Bird outplayed Magic in the '84 finals.

[QUOTE=juju151111]I am sorry, but thats BS. Magic outlayed Bird twice in the finals and in 84 his stats were still good. I am not paying this injury excuse, when Bird never really outplayed him Magic. Why does it matter if Magic didn't master his Post game in 82? He was more athlethic back then and ur missing the fact that he averged a near triple double.[/QUOTE]

First of all, Bird did have a better finals series in '84 than Magic, and what does Magic outplaying Bird in the finals twice mean? It's not like it's inevitable no matter how many times they play each other as we saw in '84 when Bird outplayed Magic. 1 series doesn't decide who the better player is either.

It's not an "injury excuse", he was injured. It's just a fact.

Why does it matter that he didn't have a post game back then? :oldlol: Because his half court game was limited, especially without an outside shot too.

I'm well aware of the fact that he nearly averaged a triple double, I'm not missing that. But it doesn't make him a better basketball player than Bird was in 1982, and certainly not better than Kareem was. And 1982 Magic was certainly not the player he'd become from '87-'91, or '84-'86 for that matter.

Was that post supposed to convince me?

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Excellent Post.

I didn't know the playoff difference was that humongous in those two years. I do remember thinking that Bird had problems in the playoffs but I didn't know it was that bad. In what way are people even thinking about giving Bird 1982??? Its not close. It wasn't close in the regular season. Not only did Magic win FMVP, but he was, like you said, flirting with a triple double in the regular season.

Regular Season 1982
Magic..18.6 ppg 9.6ast. 9.5reb 527% 226% 3pt 3.7 TO
Bird....22.9ppg 5.8 ast. 10.9reb 503% 212% 3pt 3.3 TO

Magic lead the league in steals. Magic has one of the best years of a player showing great balance and judgment. The rebounds are very close as are the turnovers. Two huge plus for Magic. Magic gets distance on shooting percentage and obviously assist. The shooting percentage coupled with scoring is close to even but we'll give Bird a slight edge.


Playoffs 1982
Bird.. .427% .822FT 17.8ppg 12.5reb 5.6ast 80%FT
Magic .529% .828FT 17.4ppg 11.3reb 9.3ast 83%FT

Magic wins Finals MVP. Bird has a very bad shooting percentage for that time period. Bird barely outscores Magic. Bird has only one decent shooting game in two series (12 games) and had other guys hitting at a much better clip and who were scorers.

The funny thing is that Magic was like Kidd in that stats don't really show his impact. He rebounded with more value than any other rebounder. He lead the league in steals and that too had more value than any other defensive play in the game because it was usually a 4 point reversal. His control of pace wasn't recorded, and neither was his ability to keep everybody in the offense.

A lot of people here either did not see 1982 and just assumed Bird was a more polished player. Magic was much further along in the playoffs the first four years. His spontaniety and adaption to different teams was just a lot better than Birds. I couldn't tell if it was good defenses or the playoffs that got Bird off of his game. Magic was playoff ready since day one and therefore was further along than Bird was. Until '84 Bird was unpredicatable and, in general had a bad shooting touch in the playoffs. Though, like Magic, he had all around game he could resort to when his shot went astray as it often did. Magic used better judgment to navigate his shooting woes but that rarely happened in the years in question here.[/QUOTE]

:applause:

I share these same thoughts, but for once didn't feel like creating a book long post, LoL.

Waiting for a rebuttal with actual evidence to combat this (Magic was the better player in 1982) from any of the posters who said/believe Bird was the better player that season.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]First of all, Bird did have a better finals series in '84 than Magic, and what does Magic outplaying Bird in the finals twice mean? It's not like it's inevitable no matter how many times they play each other as we saw in '84 when Bird outplayed Magic. 1 series doesn't decide who the better player is either.

It's not an "injury excuse", he was injured. It's just a fact.

Why does it matter that he didn't have a post game back then? :oldlol: Because his half court game was limited, especially without an outside shot too.

I'm well aware of the fact that he nearly averaged a triple double, I'm not missing that. But it doesn't make him a better basketball player than Bird was in 1982, and certainly not better than Kareem was. And 1982 Magic was certainly not the player he'd become from '87-'91, or '84-'86 for that matter.

Was that post supposed to convince me?[/QUOTE]
I said Magic tats were still good in 84 finals not that he outplayed him. The fact is Bird got outplayed twice. What did Bird do in 1982 then have a poor performance in the playoffs. Magic averaged a near triple double and then won finals MVP

[QUOTE=Psileas]A team that "almost entirely depended on Bird" would not have as a Finals' MVP (1981) another player but Bird. OK, you may argue that the voting was flawed, but a team that depended on Bird that much would not easily win Finals' games when Bird would only score 8 and 12 points respectively, regardless of the rest of his game, unless [B]maybe [/B]he played some Bill Russell level defense (than again, we all know Russell himself had plenty of help).
Also, a team that dependent on Bird would not include multiple other All-Stars (not even multiple All-Stars [B]including Bird[/B], but multiple All-Stars [B]except [/B]Bird), including the 1981 ASG MVP, it would not have a guy producing close to 19/10/3 blocks/54.5% FG in just 28.0 mpg (for PER lovers, that's 25.2, compared to Bird's 19.9), [B]it would not use Kevin McHale as a 6th man[/B], it would not have 8 of its players play for 80-82 games, etc.
Enough with this "Celtics were not deep" myth.[/QUOTE]

McHale was a rookie in 1981 and played 20 minutes a game, just slightly more than the 19 played by Rick Robey or Gerald Henderson.

In the game Bird scored 8 points and the Celtics won, he had 13 rebounds, 10 assists and 5 steals and two blocks. In the game he scored 12 points and they won he had 12 rebounds and 8 assists and a block. So he pretty active otherwise. But you're right, when the Celtics defense was playing well and they got out on the break, that team could roll you over.

[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]

So who else should have won the MVP in 1984 or 85 or 86?

[QUOTE=KevinNYC]So who else should have won the MVP in 1984 or 85 or 86?[/QUOTE]

Nobody.

Given their play in the post-season, I would give Magic an edge in the majority of their seasons in the league together. Furthermore, Magic could have scored considerably more had he been so inclined. Instead, he directed the most prolific offense of the 80's, with a devastating fast break that just torched the league. Hell, the '85 Lakers AVERAGED 126 ppg in the entire post-season. As great an offensive player as Kareem was, it was Magic that LED the Laker attack.

Having said, that, the fact that opinions on this subject are divided nearly down the middle is all we need to know. They were BOTH great, and they brought the NBA back from the decline that followed Wilt's retirement. (Yes, read Rosen's book on the '72 Lakers, and then take a look at where the NBA was by the 78-79 season.)

They were both among the greatest "winners" in NBA history, and are generally ranked pretty close to each other in all-time "rankings"...and that is as it should be. The two were tied together, just as Russell and Chamberlain were tied together.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Given their play in the post-season, I would give Magic an edge in the majority of their seasons in the league together. Furthermore, [B]Magic could have scored considerably more had he been so inclined[/B]. Instead, he directed the most prolific offense of the 80's, with a devastating fast break that just torched the league. Hell, the '85 Lakers AVERAGED 126 ppg in the entire post-season. As great an offensive player as Kareem was, it was Magic that LED the Laker attack.

Having said, that, the fact that opinions on this subject are divided nearly down the middle is all we need to know. They were BOTH great, and they brought the NBA back from the decline that followed Wilt's retirement. (Yes, read Rosen's book on the '72 Lakers, and then take a look at where the NBA was by the 78-79 season.)

They were both among the greatest "winners" in NBA history, and are generally ranked pretty close to each other in all-time "rankings"...and that is as it should be. The two were tied together, just as Russell and Chamberlain were tied together.[/QUOTE]

So too could Bird, really. He could score playing with or off the ball from pretty much anywhere on the floor. It came all too natural, and was within the team concept. You don't earn the title of 'Greatest Passing Forward' by being a selfish or limited player. He was just as good at setting up and feeding teammates as he was at dropping 30 or 40 on you.

[QUOTE=BlackVVaves]:applause:

I share these same thoughts, but for once didn't feel like creating a book long post, LoL.

Waiting for a rebuttal with actual evidence to combat this (Magic was the better player in 1982) from any of the posters who said/believe Bird was the better player that season.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Bird was already getting talk of being the best player of all time by '82. I don't agree with it at all, but he was better than Magic.

As I said, Moses Malone had a historically dominant '82 season which I covered here. [URL="http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272312"]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272312[/URL]

And Bird, who struggled with injuries and even came off the bench for a significant stretch because of thst led Boston to 63 wins, was selected to the all-defensive second team and was still almost voted MVP.

Moses had 40 first place votes and 507 points overall, Bird had 20 first place votes and 456 points overall. Nobody else was close.

But outside of just listing accomplishments and playing paper basketball(which is the only type of case I've seen made for '82 Magic), Larry's skill set was just far above Magic's at that point. Their impact was closer than skill sets, but Larry's vastly superior half court game matters to me.

[QUOTE=juju151111]I said Magic tats were still good in 84 finals not that he outplayed him. The fact is Bird got outplayed twice. What did Bird do in 1982 then have a poor performance in the playoffs. Magic averaged a near triple double and then won finals MVP[/QUOTE]

I'm not really concerned with Magic's stats in the '84 finals, my claim was purely that Bird played better than him. Bird didn't have what I'd call bad stats in any of his finals vs the Lakers either.

Why do you keep repeating Magic's near triple double? It may seem more significant, and it's a cooler stat line, but it doesn't make you a better player.

Magic won a title, but that doesn't automatically make him better. The best player isn't always on a championship team. Moses Malone was the best player in '82, yet he lost in the first round best of 3 mini-series. Kareem was either the 2nd or 3rd best player in the league, right there with Bird.

We're not talking about '87-'91 Magic here, or '84-'86 Magic for that matter. We're talking about Magic in his 3rd year at 22 years old. A great player already, top 5 in the league, imo, but he still had a lot to add to his game.

You can list his near triple double all you want, but it doesn't mean as much to me as watching '82 Laker games and simply seeing that while he was great in transition, he wasn't a dominant half court player yet. That means a lot to me, and it's why watching the games will always help more than stats.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Yeah, Bird was already getting talk of being the best player of all time by '82. I don't agree with it at all, but he was better than Magic.

As I said, Moses Malone had a historically dominant '82 season which I covered here. [URL="http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272312"]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272312[/URL]

And Bird, who struggled with injuries and even came off the bench for a significant stretch because of thst led Boston to 63 wins, was selected to the all-defensive second team and was still almost voted MVP.

Moses had 40 first place votes and 507 points overall, Bird had 20 first place votes and 456 points overall. Nobody else was close.

[B]But outside of just listing accomplishments and playing paper basketball(which is the only type of case I've seen made for '82 Magic), [/B]Larry's skill set was just far above Magic's at that point. Their impact was closer than skill sets, but Larry's vastly superior half court game matters to me.
[/QUOTE]

Who was the better playoff performer? Whose level of play went down considerably the bigger the games got their first four years? Whose level of play got better the bigger the games got their first 4 years? Who was the better clutch player til that point? You need paper for that? In 1982 the league was very excited about Bird looking like he was as ready, and when Magic got caught up in that coach mess the league needed somebody to concentrate on because it had definitely built up some momentum with Magic and Bird. Malone wasn't the man you could turn to - and Bird was ripe. Otherwise, Magic gets significantly more votes than he ended up with. Afterall, Magic was proven on the big stage. That MVP count was much like DH's last year - it wasn't about the play.

Bird did have a better skill set... until the playoffs hit. All of a sudden Magic shoots 100 percentage points better and even shoots a better FT percentage and they score an almost identical amount per game. Magic executes significantly better, shows better judgement of when to shoot or pass, and rebounds pretty much at the same clip. Who handled the ball better? Who passed better? Which player could play at two speeds? Whose team looked more organized under pressure? Who created more chaos for the other team?

Which player was affected by good defenses more? Which player found more ways to win?

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Yeah, Bird was already getting talk of being the best player of all time by '82. I don't agree with it at all, but he was better than Magic.

But outside of just listing accomplishments and playing paper basketball(which is the only type of case I've seen made for '82 Magic), Larry's skill set was just far above Magic's at that point. Their impact was closer than skill sets, but Larry's vastly superior half court game matters to me.[/QUOTE]

wow

what type of skillset produces

17/12/5 on .427 in 12 playoff games after avg

23/11/6 on .503 during the regular season

show me anyone that said bird was best ever in 82
and i'll show you an idiot . . . was he even the
most dominant on his team ... parish avg
21/11 on .488 and 4blk in the playoffs

17/12 on .427 = far above magic?

.

was mr. skillset his team's best player 81 finals

was he even better than the doctor in 82
H2H doc avg 27 to bird's 19 during rs
and knocked him from the playoffs

magic in 82

18/9/9/3 on .537 in rs
17/11/9/3 on .529 in ps
16/11/8/2 on .533 and fmvp

led the league in steals

but bird's halfcourt game was vastly superior

incredible

.

first 4 years

bird
rs 22/11/5/2 on 48% ........ 18/8/9 on 53%
ps 20/12/5/2 on 45% ........ 18/10/10 on 50%
fin 15/15/7/2 on 42% ......... 19/11/8 on 55% 2f

1 title / zero fmvp ................. 2 titles / 2 fmvp

the only rookie ever to be named fmvp

. . . . . . . but that bird skillset

.

.

.

.

best ever

in 1986 a panel of 60 experts chose

kareem as the best player ever

oscar got 14 votes

bird got 4

from

red , cousy , kc jones and tommy heinsohn

[QUOTE=aau]in 1986 a panel of 60 experts chose

kareem as the best player ever

oscar got 14 votes

bird got 4

from

red , cousy , kc jones and tommy heinsohn[/QUOTE]

Not to Hi-jack the thread. This just show how underated Oscar has become on this board.

I'm not white and I'm not black.

I'm not a Laker fan and I'm not a Celtics fan.

I don't have bias in this argument. I really like Magic, but Bird is better. I don't understand how anyone can say Magic is better.

Magic is an amazing player, but Bird has a GOAT argument. Magic doesn't...

Well, you can say I am biased because Bird is one of my favorite players ever. But that's just because while watching him I am constantly amazed at what he does. I wonder if people who don't really understand basketball realize how well Larry played the game.

-Smak

I am a big Bird fan but how can you say Magic doesn't have a case?

I really love Bird's game - I wish players coming up tried to model themselves on him more than trying to imitate Jordan for example. He was a much more cerebral player, playing chess when everybody else is playing checkers. Magic has a very high basketball IQ too but IMO he lacked Bird's offensive threat when it came to shouldering the scoring himself. I also identify more with Bird's attitude towards the game too.

But amongst the top candidates for GOAT, it gets a bit subjective so I can see how people vote for Magic and he's got a fine case. Admittedly, on this forum there seems to be more clamour for Kareem than Magic from that Lakers team.

[QUOTE=aau]in 1986 a panel of 60 experts chose

kareem as the best player ever

oscar got 14 votes

bird got 4

from

red , cousy , kc jones and tommy heinsohn[/QUOTE]
Is this a joke?

At any rate the same people who trump up Bird are likely to be the same people that trump up Kareem. It's called downing Magic. Its the exact same agenda poster's here use.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Is this a joke?

At any rate the same people who trump up Bird are likely to be the same people that trump up Kareem. It's called downing Magic. Its the exact same agenda poster's here use.[/QUOTE]

Big Bird fan here and I'd take Magic over Kareem.

honestly

what does it really mean that kevin mchale led bird
in points and rebounds in both the 85 & 86 finals

what it means is that bird was outscored by a
teammate in 3 of his 5 final appearances

81 cornbrd 17 on .568 . . . bird 15 on .419
85 mchale 26 on .598 . . . bird 23 on .449
86 mchale 26 on .573 . .. bird 24 on .482

84 bird 27 on .484 . . . . no one was close
87 bird 24 on .445 . . . . dj 21 on .481

.

bird better than magic in 85?

84 was bird's absolute best season ........ magic's 85

rs 24/10/6 on .492 mvp .................. 18/6/12 on .561
ps 27/11/6 on .524 ......................... 17/7/15 on .513
fin 27/14/3 on .484 fmvp ................. 18/6/14 on .494

.

no doubt bird's best rs was in 85

28/10/6 on .522 . . . only oscar has done that

but again , , he str8 no-showed in the finals after coming
to the aid of a friend who was talking to another guy's
girl in a bar after G3 - knocked dude out cold with
one punch - - - but injured his right index finger

.

seeing that only a few can truly understand the ultrally-unique
impact he was having , , let's contextualize magic's numbers
knowing that not even the league understood their meaning

.

using basketball reference's game and season index
(final numbers since 1985 only)

to keep it somewhat close i'll use bird's 84 avgs

enter bird's rs 24/10/6 . . . . 3 names pop up - oscar bird wilt
enter bird's ps 27/11/6 . . . . one name pops up , twice - - oscar
bird's final avg 27/14/3 . . . . 6 names pop up incl td worthy lebron

somewhat rare performances indeed . . . just not moreso than magic's

.

enter magic's rs 18/6/12 . . . one name appears , 4x - magic
enter magic's ps 17/7/15 . . . one name appears , 2x - magic
magic's final avg 18/6/14 . . . one name appears , 2x - magic

that's individual finals games - - not finals averages

.

what really blows bird away is that this wasn't
even close to magic's best performance

1987

rs 24/6/12 on .522
ps 21/7/12 on .539
fin 26/8/13 on .541

no need to index these being that no one was
even close to his more pedestrian numbers

.

but strictly for schitts n giggles
let's remove an assist from his finals average

just 3 new names pop up

jordan had 36/8/12 game in 91 finals
lebron had 26/11/13 game vs thunder
mr.bird had 29/11/12 game vs rockets

.

that's all folks

[QUOTE=LeBird]Big Bird fan here and I'd take Magic over Kareem.[/QUOTE]

You haven't posted much but from what I see of you, I never see an agenda. You are uncommonly balanced.

[QUOTE=LeBird]Big Bird fan here and I'd take Magic over Kareem.[/QUOTE]

I think the thing with Magic Johnson is a 6'9" point guard is just so disruptive and creates crazy matchup problems. Bird used to create match-up problems on offense too, as the guys tall enough to guard him, usually weren't quick enough on the perimeter. Then if you put a smaller guy on him, he would take them inside. But this is still not nearly the matchup problems that Magic caused.

Magic was a threat to go coast-to-coast after any missed shot. Then in a half-court set, he almost always could see over or pass over the top of the defense. And once Magic's outside shot improved, he was just an offensive threat from virtually anywhere.

Magic's height and mobility allowed him to get so many easy baskets in his career. If the defense wasn't set, he could pretty much get to the rim on anyone. His FG% for his career is .520. That is pretty crazy for a point guard. Steve Nash is a crazy shooter now, but his career percentage is still under 50%. John Stockton's is .515 and he took 4 shots less per game than Magic.

Is there any top 15 point guard with a higher FG%?

Even Penny Hardaway at 6'7" never shot .520 for a single season, let alone a career.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Who was the better playoff performer? Whose level of play went down considerably the bigger the games got their first four years? Whose level of play got better the bigger the games got their first 4 years? Who was the better clutch player til that point? You need paper for that? In 1982 the league was very excited about Bird looking like he was as ready, and when Magic got caught up in that coach mess the league needed somebody to concentrate on because it had definitely built up some momentum with Magic and Bird. Malone wasn't the man you could turn to - and Bird was ripe. Otherwise, Magic gets significantly more votes than he ended up with. Afterall, Magic was proven on the big stage. That MVP count was much like DH's last year - it wasn't about the play.

Bird did have a better skill set... until the playoffs hit. All of a sudden Magic shoots 100 percentage points better and even shoots a better FT percentage and they score an almost identical amount per game. Magic executes significantly better, shows better judgement of when to shoot or pass, and rebounds pretty much at the same clip. Who handled the ball better? Who passed better? Which player could play at two speeds? Whose team looked more organized under pressure? Who created more chaos for the other team?

Which player was affected by good defenses more? Which player found more ways to win?[/QUOTE]

Which player was the primary focus of opposing defenses? As Bill Russell said in the '82 finals "When you talk about the Lakers, you start with number 33."

Bird was playing the Kareem role if you will as the number 1 option to go along with his own brilliant passing, rebounding that was also second to none at his position and defense that was superior to Magic's.

You can praise Magic's all around game all you want, and it was great, even by his 3rd year, but Bird was also one of the great all around players who has ever played, and unlike Magic in '82, he was an excellent scorer who you could go to when you needed a basket, regardless of if you were in your half court set.

[QUOTE=aau]wow[/QUOTE]

Rather than quote that mess, I'm just going to say what I've always said to you. If you want me to engage in any sort of discussion with you, try writing your posts like an adult.

[QUOTE=Pointguard]You haven't posted much but from what I see of you, I never see an agenda. [B]You are uncommonly balanced[/B].[/QUOTE]

Cheers, I hope so!

[QUOTE=KevinNYC]I think the thing with Magic Johnson is a 6'9" point guard is just so disruptive and creates crazy matchup problems. Bird used to create match-up problems on offense too, as the guys tall enough to guard him, usually weren't quick enough on the perimeter. Then if you put a smaller guy on him, he would take them inside. But this is still not nearly the matchup problems that Magic caused.

Magic was a threat to go coast-to-coast after any missed shot. Then in a half-court set, he almost always could see over or pass over the top of the defense. And once Magic's outside shot improved, he was just an offensive threat from virtually anywhere.

Magic's height and mobility allowed him to get so many easy baskets in his career. If the defense wasn't set, he could pretty much get to the rim on anyone. His FG% for his career is .520. That is pretty crazy for a point guard. Steve Nash is a crazy shooter now, but his career percentage is still under 50%. John Stockton's is .515 and he took 4 shots less per game than Magic.

Is there any top 15 point guard with a higher FG%?[/QUOTE]
This KNYC, Magic had the best judgment of when to shoot and when not to. Along with when to dribble/lob or bounce pass/push/slow down/delay attack/create/ put pressure on, Magic was on a level by himself (Nash, Kidd and CP get props tho). He did it efficienctly and with great control. He could incorporate Kurt Rambis into the offense if he saw him not getting rebounds - and Kurt wasn't made for offense. He would make the play slightly in front of players so that his teammate would catch up to the play - this kept his teammates alert and active. Magic could beat you in the chess match and if you got too mental he would beat you athletically. The mental skill mix belonged to Magic.

There were definitely more skilled players than Magic... but there no players that knew when to use which skill better than Magic.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]
Rather than quote that mess, I'm just going to say what I've always said to you. If you want me to engage in any sort of discussion with you, try writing your posts like an adult.[/QUOTE]

wow , shaq

i'm impressed . . you actually replied

wasn't expecting that . . . . . wasn't expecting you to come off like
a pompous bhitch neither , as if we've been going at it for years

not even close

you and i have had one , count it , ONE debate a long long
time ago , , about shaq being the first option and kobe
going outside the offense , , , obviously you caught
feelings as we havn't exchanged a word since

why you trying to come off as if we have , i'm not sure

just know that it's not a good look either way

either reply , or stfu and keep it pushin

like you been doin

[QUOTE=aau]wow , shaq

i'm impressed . . you actually replied

wasn't expecting that . . . . . wasn't expecting you to come off like
a pompous bhitch neither , as if we've been going at it for years

not even close

you and i have had one , count it , ONE debate a long long
time ago , , about shaq being the first option and kobe
going outside the offense , , , obviously you caught
feelings as we havn't exchanged a word since

why you trying to come off as if we have , i'm not sure

just know that it's not a good look either way

either reply , or stfu and keep it pushin

like you been doin[/QUOTE]:lol
Shit getting real lmao