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

[QUOTE=Champ]Not buying it. They both got plenty of press.

Magic was in a bigger media market, and sought public attention far more than Bird did.[/QUOTE]

Bird played for a storied franchise..in fact THE storied franchise of the NBA at the time....in a MAJOR sports town...and he lived up to the incredible hype immediately....reflected in addition team wins from previous year

he resurrected the Celtics...was a legitimately great clutch player...white guy dominating a sport where majority of the players were Black..and he played in one of the top 3 sports cities in America



central casting couldn't have created a better sports icon for the NBA...

Magic completely outplayed Peak Bird in the Finals despite being 3 years younger.

More versatile due to speed and ballhandling ability. More efficient scorer. Led the league in steals. It's Magic.

[QUOTE=Champ]Trying to stay on topic here.

Yes. Sadly, race is always a factor.

However, it had far, far less to do with Bird winning three straight MVPs than the fact that he was simply the best player in the league during those three years.

Were you watching the NBA then? I would venture that most anyone who was at that time and paying attention would agree that Bird was the best player in the game.

You had said that during that period, the award could've gone to perhaps 2 or 3 other guys who also had great years, and I'm still waiting to hear who those guys might be.

King in '84? He came in second and it wasn't close.

Magic in '85? Bird had 73 first place votes and Magic had one.

And who, pray tell, would it have been in '86? Again, Bird had 73 votes, and Wilkins got 5.

Bird's accomplishments had permeated American sports so deeply that year that he was voted the AP athlete of the year -- unprecedented at the time for an NBA athlete and the only other player ever to do it since is Jordan.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Champ]Trying to stay on topic here.

Yes. Sadly, race is always a factor.

However, it had far, far less to do with Bird winning three straight MVPs than the fact that he was simply the best player in the league during those three years.

Were you watching the NBA then? I would venture that most anyone who was at that time and paying attention would agree that Bird was the best player in the game.

You had said that during that period, the award could've gone to perhaps 2 or 3 other guys who also had great years, and I'm still waiting to hear who those guys might be.

King in '84? He came in second and it wasn't close.

Magic in '85? Bird had 73 first place votes and Magic had one.

And who, pray tell, would it have been in '86? Again, Bird had 73 votes, and Wilkins got 5.

Bird's accomplishments had permeated American sports so deeply that year that he was voted the AP athlete of the year -- unprecedented at the time for an NBA athlete and the only other player ever to do it since is Jordan.[/QUOTE]


ok..let's go by the same criteria I've been using all along

the amount of votes given to other players doesn't mean anything to as I've already established that I think reporters were promoting Bird

in 84 Magic went for 17.6 13.1 7.3 lakers went 54-28
...Magic in 85 for 18.3 points 12.6 assists 6.3 rebounds for 62-20 lakers team

86 magic went 18 12.3 5. 9 and lakers went 62-20

here is magic's statline for the 3 years he did win the mvp

1987 23.9 12.2 6.3 65-17

1988 22.5 12.8 7.9 62-20
1990 22.3 11.5 6.6 63-19 team record

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Magic completely outplayed Peak Bird in the Finals despite being 3 years younger.

More versatile due to speed and ballhandling ability. More efficient scorer. Led the league in steals. It's Magic.[/QUOTE]

Bird was every bit a versatile and multifaceted as Magic.

[QUOTE=get these NETS]ok..let's go by the same criteria I've been using all along

the amount of votes given to other players doesn't mean anything to as I've already established that I think reporters were promoting Bird

in 84 Magic went for 17.6 13.1 7.3 lakers went 54-28
...Magic in 85 for 18.3 points 12.6 assists 6.3 rebounds for 62-20 lakers team

86 magic went 18 12.3 5. 9 and lakers went 62-20

here is magic's statline for the 3 years he did win the mvp

1987 23.9 12.2 6.3 65-17

1988 22.5 12.8 7.9 62-20
1990 22.3 11.5 6.6 63-19 team record[/QUOTE]

If reporters were promoting Bird to such a degree, and he was the beneficiary of preferential voting as you say, then why did he suddenly fall out of favor with those same voters during the '87 and '88 seasons, when he was still one of the best players in the game? Did American sportswriters secretly conspire and agree that 3 MVPs were enough?

Of course not. The reason was the same as when Bird had one his awards -- other players, namely Magic and Jordan, had better seasons.

While we're at it, why didn't they give Bird the MVP award in '81 over Dr. J? Given how close it was, and how both players had very comparable seasons, you'd think an agenda-driven, racially-motivated votership would've given the award to Bird easily.

[QUOTE=Champ]Bird was every bit a versatile and multifaceted as Magic.[/QUOTE]


No, he wasn't. He didnt have the ballhandling or slashing ability Magic did.

[QUOTE=StateOfMind12]They said the same about Magic as well and they said that even in the 90s.

Plus, I read a post about it earlier saying that the main reason why Bird may have gotten more GOAT recognition because most news and broadcasts were from the East coast which is to Bird's advantage. It doesn't mean he is better, it just means Bird was in a better situation to get more recognition.


Magic didn't get overrated, Magic just got better and was utilized more for the Lakers. Magic's prime was from like '87-'90 whereas Bird's prime was '84-'86. Magic always did whatever it took to win. Earlier in his career, he set up his teammates a lot because he played on a great team and he won. Later in his career, he started having more responsibility with the scoring load because his teammates weren't that great anymore and they still won.

It's not Magic's fault that he happens to be very good at the game of basketball.[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see a video/article/quote/anything of someone with any kind of credibility whatsoever saying Magic was the GOAT during the 80s. Sounds like a bullshit statement with nothing to back it up. Prove me wrong.

Yeah Bird got more recognition than the guy who was a media whore, drafted first by the lakers, and won an NCAA title and NBA Title in back to back years. Cool story bro.

Magic won in the late 80s because the Celtics reign ended due to them setting up their reliance in a Len Bias drafted 2nd overall in 86, which was great as the 86 Celtics are arguably the best team of all-time and ON TOP OF THAT adding arguably the greatest prospect. Magics team was still better. His competition just wasn't as good due to Bird breaking down and not having the help Magic did. The Sixers were also done too at the time. The only real great team was the Pistons and they didn't have any top tier hall of famers like other great teams. (Bird-Jordan-Malone tier)

Magic didn't get any better in those later years. He just scored more, and he had to be a bigger scoring option. This came at a price as his efficiency dropped and he never was above 50% after 87 which you said his prime was.

[QUOTE=MiamiThrice]I'd like to see a video/article/quote/anything of someone with any kind of credibility whatsoever saying Magic was the GOAT during the 80s. Sounds like a bullshit statement with nothing to back it up. Prove me wrong.[/quote]
[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7623446&postcount=114[/url]

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

[QUOTE]Billy Cunningham -If someone said Magic is the greatest of all time, I couldn’t disagree.[/QUOTE]


[QUOTE]Cotton Fitzsimmons - Magic might be the greatest player I’ve ever seen, and at 6 feet 9, he’s definitely the best point guard I’ve seen.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]He is, arguably, the best player of all time. Unquestionably, he is the most versatile. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]The greatest basketball player in the history of the game is playing in this NBA championship — and it isn’t Michael Jordan.

Do you believe in Magic? [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Bob Ryan - he’s the greatest basketball player I’ve ever seen
[/QUOTE]

There is more in that post that I linked for you. He posted all the people that said Magic was the greatest ever or arguably. Even Bob Ryan, who is from Boston said that Magic is the greatest he's ever seen and better than Bird.

[quote]Magic didn't get any better in those later years. He just scored more, and he had to be a bigger scoring option. This came at a price as his efficiency dropped and he never was above 50% after 87 which you said his prime was.[/QUOTE]

1987 - 23.9 ppg with 52.2% FG
1988 - 19.6 ppg with 49.2% FG
1989 - 22.5 ppg with 50.9% FG
1990 - 22.3 ppg with 48% FG

It would appear he did and he was still close to the 50% range even after '87 when he took on more of the scoring load.

Also, he was injured in 1988 for about 10 games and he even came off the bench for two games that season.

His TS% was also the same, if not better during his prime years which goes to show you that he was more aggressive with his scoring and got more trips to the line.

1987 - 60.2% TS
1988 - 58.1% TS
1989 - 62.5% TS
1990 - 62.2% TS

He almost always shot in the low 60% range for TS% every season in his career.

His playoff numbers were always great as well even his efficiency and that lies the difference between Bird and Magic. Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.


[QUOTE]Magic won in the late 80s because the Celtics reign ended due to them setting up their reliance in a Len Bias drafted 2nd overall in 86, which was great as the 86 Celtics are arguably the best team of all-time and ON TOP OF THAT adding arguably the greatest prospect.[/QUOTE]
The biggest reason is actually because most Celtics players especially Bird were not very durable.

The Lakers stayed healthy longer which led them to play longer and win more championships specifically Magic Johnson.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]No, he wasn't. He didnt have the ballhandling or slashing ability Magic did.[/QUOTE]

And Magic didn't have the rebounding or shooting ability Bird had.

This could go point/counterpoint ad nauseum because both players are so comparable. Trust me.

Magic might have arguably accomplished more, but i think Larry Bird was a better talent/more skilled individual player...

Hell, if Larry Bird had 1st all-defensive/DPOY type of defense would there even be any doubt who the most complete individual player ever was? He could do literally anything as good as anybody...

[QUOTE=pauk]Magic might have arguably accomplished more, but i think Larry Bird was a better talent/more skilled individual player...

Hell, if Larry Bird had 1st all-defensive/DPOY type of defense would there even be any doubt who the most complete individual player ever was?[/QUOTE]

I'm willing to bet your foreign a$$ hasn't seen one full game of either of them.

[QUOTE=Champ]And Magic didn't have the rebounding or shooting ability Bird had.

This could go point/counterpoint ad nauseum because both players are so comparable. Trust me.[/QUOTE]

Magic was just good a rebounder. He was getting 8-10 boards [B]from the PG [/B]spot, and shooting ability doesnt affect positional versatility as much as ballhandling does. Magic could play 1-5. Bird couldnt play PG or SG due to his lack of comparable ballhandling ability.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]I'm willing to bet your foreign a$$ hasn't seen one full game of either of them.[/QUOTE]

I have over 200 80s Lakers and Celtics games on dvd/vhs/divx.. excluding those i dont have which i have seen thanks to youtube and various sites... so if you have not seen more than that then its to bad you didnt really put your money on my "foreign a$$" because you would have lost, big time...

Larry Bird was a better individual talent/skill than Magic... ask Magic and travel back in time and witness majority of fans/players/coaches etc. consider Larry Bird being better... Magic was not any noticeably better until 1988-1991... all due to a screwed back Larry had (which he played thru)...

[QUOTE=StateOfMind12][url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7623446&postcount=114[/url] [/quote]

So your source is some poster on this website? Wrong, I want the actual newspaper articles/quotes or videos saying such. I want credible sources, not probable bullshit. I googled the first few quotes and the only result I got was insidehoops pages

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rto2_oYVs0I[/url]

See 2:40 of this video, this is in 1985 and the announcer mentions how Naismith basketball hall of famers Red Auerbach(Mr 9 rings), Bob Cousy(best point guard other than Magic), and KC Jones all say that Bird is the best they've ever seen. Again this is in 1985. And this is indefinetly, not arguably as most of your probable BS Magic quotes are.

[QUOTE]
1987 - 23.9 ppg with 52.2% FG
1988 - 19.6 ppg with 49.2% FG
1989 - 22.5 ppg with 50.9% FG
1990 - 22.3 ppg with 48% FG

It would appear he did and he was still close to the 50% range even after '87 when he took on more of the scoring load.

Also, he was injured in 1988 for about 10 games and he even came off the bench for two games that season.

His TS% was also the same, if not better during his prime years which goes to show you that he was more aggressive with his scoring and got more trips to the line.

1987 - 60.2% TS
1988 - 58.1% TS
1989 - 62.5% TS
1990 - 62.2% TS

He almost always shot in the low 60% range for TS% every season in his career.[/QUOTE]

How does this disprove that his efficiency was worse at the end of his career when he took on a bigger load? That was my claim. Compare them for yourself if you don't believe me.[QUOTE]

His playoff numbers were always great as well even his efficiency and that lies the difference between Bird and Magic. Magic was a much better post-season performer than Bird was.[/QUOTE]

Playoff numbers
Bird: 24 PPG 10 RPG 7 APG 47% shooting 89% FT shooting
Magic: 19 PPG 7 RPG 12 APG 50% shooting 83% FT shooting

Yeah bro Magic was definetly a "much better post-season performer" LOL. Shit Ill argue that Bird was better. Better go to scorer, more points, superior rebounding, only averages less assists because he doesn't hog the ball.

[QUOTE]

The biggest reason is actually because most Celtics players especially Bird were not very durable.

The Lakers stayed healthy longer which led them to play longer and win more championships specifically Magic Johnson.[/QUOTE]

Funny since Magic Johnson had to retire from basketball prematurely for contracting the HIV virus via a homosexual affair he had in the later part of his career. At least Birds premature retirement was because he gave it his all on the court and his body paid for it.

[QUOTE]to retire from basketball prematurely for contracting the HIV virus via a homosexual affair he had in the later part of his caree[/QUOTE]

Yeah, you DONT have an agenda:roll: