When did Magic Johnson...?

[plowking]

Magic was a remarkable player, and in IMHO, it's a stretch to say that the six players you rank ahead of him were "undeniably better," save for MJ perhaps.

I see 2 through 7 as being really close, and coming down to a matter of how much one emphasizes longevity, accolades/accomplishments, peak, or simply that player's skill and/or uniqueness.

Every single player on that list that I mentioned has gotten GOAT talks while they were playing aside from Shaq. Though it's been said that Shaq arguably had one of the greatest peaks ever in 2000, and most agree. Not to mention his longevity, etc.
I don't see any reason for them not to be ranked ahead of Magic, who didn't get those talks, while a direct rival he was playing against got such praise.

It seems to me as if Magic has risen up the list through his time in the media and the fact he is still a common face for fans. Where as Bird went quite and didn't really participate in stuff like that after his career.

[Champ]

I got Magic at #3 all time.

He is the GOAT passer, and GOAT floor general. And he's pretty far ahead of any challengers as well to those titles.

I'll grant you this opinion, but at the time, in terms of sheer passing ability, many considered Bird as good as Magic. The two were closer in this regard than you may think.

I always felt that Magic was the best passer ever on the run, leading the break, and in transition, while Bird remains the best passer ever out of the half-court set.

[Sarcastic]

Is he above Bird on your list, and why?

Bird's longevity is what keeps him down. His peak is better than Magic's, but it was too short in comparison.


The Lakers averaged 59 wins per year with Magic, and as soon as he retired they became about a .500 team or so.

[2LeTTeRS]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

[Champ]

Every single player on that list that I mentioned has gotten GOAT talks while they were playing aside from Shaq. Though it's been said that Shaq arguably had one of the greatest peaks ever in 2000, and most agree. Not to mention his longevity, etc.
I don't see any reason for them not to be ranked ahead of Magic, who didn't get those talks, while a direct rival he was playing against got such praise.

It seems to me as if Magic has risen up the list through his time in the media and the fact he is still a common face for fans. Where as Bird went quite and didn't really participate in stuff like that after his career.

There was a brief period in the late-80s, just before Jordan peaked, when Magic was getting GOAT nods among the Basketball cognoscenti. Because this chatter was squeezed tightly between the Bird and Jordan GOAT talk, however, it's not often remembered.

As for Shaq, he came after Jordan, which is why he and everyone else who has come along since, has never been a GOAT candidate.

[plowking]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

Bird had to completely turn a team around where as Magic got to play with Kareem (which he said had to happen or he wasn't leaving college).
Bird's situation wasn't as easy to step into as Magic's was.

[Champ]

Wait wait wait, are you seriously saying Bird was a better rookie based on winning rookie of the year, when Magic had the most historic ending to a rookie season that we've ever seen in sports?

I'd also say his 2-1 head-to-head edge in the finals (along with winning their collegiate finals match-up) along with having more titles all-together and a longer prime gives ample reason to rate him above Bird.

Bird had the better regular season, which is what the award is based on. He also spearheaded the biggest turnaround in NBA history up to that point, which also counted for something.

I don't feel the finals advantage is a big enough piece of the puzzle to give Magic a career edge, but that's my opinion.

The NCAA title advantage is irrelevant in my view, and may even help Bird when you consider the team of scrubs he was able to lead to the NCAA title game.

I don't think Magic had a "longer prime." See my previous post. Both lasted about the same.

[Dictator]

I kinda agree with OP. Bird > Magic

[Pointguard]

If we're looking at head to heads strictly then you'd say that Deron has been better than Paul, which is clearly incorrect.

In the H2H in the finals is a little bit different. More than half of Bird's finals appearances were against Magic and all of his losses were from Magic's teams.

[Champ]

The Lakers averaged 59 wins per year with Magic, and as soon as he retired they became about a .500 team or so.

The same can be said for Bird, except his team stunk not only after but before he arrived.

[Pointguard]

I'll grant you this opinion, but at the time, in terms of sheer passing ability, many considered Bird as good as Magic. The two were closer in this regard than you may think.

I always felt that Magic was the best passer ever on the run, leading the break, and in transition, while Bird remains the best passer ever out of the half-court set.

Aren't most passes done in the half court? Most of Magic's passes were done in the half court. And you will never hear that Bird was a better passer. Even Bill Walton said he never saw anybody pass like Magic when he was Bird's teammate. Magic had to tone down his passing as he was hitting players in the head a lot. I think Bird was a great passer but Magic was the best ever.

[Overdrive]

I do think this stands for something. Throughout the history of the NBA, for any player who had been dominant to the extent of being considered GOAT, that consideration should bear at least some weight when assessing career success.

Yes and no. Of course it stands for something but GOAT is a term for one guy at a time. The moment Magic got to the same level as Bird(87) there was no clear cut GOAT no more. So for Magic to be named GOAT he would've had to surpass Bird a tie isn't enough to get GOAT consideration. For me they're tied and tied together.

[juju151111]

Bird got bothered in the playoffs? Wasn't Magic the one that received negative press for his poor playoff play?
If we're looking at head to heads strictly then you'd say that Deron has been better than Paul, which is clearly incorrect.

They have similar achievements, Magic having more titles, Bird having a ROTY and more defensive selections.
Does 2 titles put Magic above Bird despite Bird being the better player at his peak? Good enough to be called the GOAT at the time.

You cliamed to have watched the gms. Magic didn't play bad in 84. They played in the finals not the regular season.

[Odinn]

In my top 10 ever list;
4. Larry Bird
6. Magic Johnson

[iamgine]

Suddenly become a better player than Bird for those of you who rate Magic higher?

From all the videos, news articles, etc that I've seen and read, and games I've watched, it was always Bird that was being called the best in the league, and during his stretch of MVP's the best ever. Magic never received such acclaim during his playing days, and since the two were competitors of the highest order, would it not be reasonable to say that Bird clearly had the better peak out of the two players?

Do Johnson's 2 extra championships weigh in that much and sway you towards having him ranked higher? Because as far as achievements go, that is all I can see in favor of Magic.
They came in the same year and Larry was ROTY and all NBA first team off the bat as well. Crazy.
He was also the better defender over their careers, although both not being anything extraordinary.


Basically, would you even say Magic's career was more decorated than Larry's? Sure he won 2 more championships, but its not like Larry wasn't a winner too. He has 3 of his own.

Do 2 championships make up for the fact that Bird had a better peak, was a better defender, won ROTY over him, etc?

I personally have Bird somewhere around 4th or 5th and Magic around the 7 or 8 spot.

I always thought they were considered equal before 86-87 season, maybe a slight edge to Bird. But then Magic stepped his game a whole notch when he took over the team from Kareem in 86-87. So maybe it was then.