RealGM

Who do you think was better overall and why? Take into account their positional differences. Did Magic bring more value as a PG than Bird as a SF?

How would you rank them by year, taking the playoffs into account?


1979-80

Regular Season (Celtics 61-21, Lakers 60-22)


Playoffs (Lakers 12-4, Celtics 5-4)


NBA Finals (Lakers over Sixers, 4-2)



1980-81

Regular Season (Celtics 62-20, Lakers 54-28)


Playoffs (Celtics 12-5, Lakers 1-2)


NBA Finals (Celtics over Sixers, 4-2)



1981-82

Regular Season (Celtics 63-19, Lakers 57-25)


Playoffs (Lakers 12-2, Celtics 7-5)


NBA Finals (Lakers over Sixers, 4-2)



1982-83

Regular Season (Lakers 58-24, Celtics 56-26)


Playoffs (Lakers 8-7, Celtics 2-5)


NBA Finals (Sixers over Lakers, 4-0)



1983-84

Regular Season (Celtics 62-20, Lakers 54-28)


Playoffs (Lakers 14-6, Celtics 15-8)


NBA Finals (Celtics over Lakers, 4-3)



1984-85

Regular Season (Celtics 63-19, Lakers 62-20)


Playoffs (Lakers 15-4, Celtics 13-8)


NBA Finals (Lakers over Celtics, 4-2)



1985-86

Regular Season (Celtics 67-15, Lakers 62-20)


Playoffs (Celtics 15-3, Lakers 8-6)


NBA Finals (Celtics over Rockets, 4-2)



1986-87

Regular Season (Lakers 65-17, Celtics 59-23)


Playoffs (Lakers 15-3, Celtics 13-10)


NBA Finals (Lakers over Celtics, 4-2)



1987-88

Regular Season (Lakers 62-20, Celtics 57-25)


Playoffs (Lakers 15-9, Celtics 9-8)


NBA Finals (Lakers over Pistons, 4-3)



1988-89

Regular Season (Lakers 57-25, Celtics 42-40)


Playoffs (Lakers 11-4, Celtics 0-3)


NBA Finals (Pistons over Lakers, 4-3)



1989-90

Regular Season (Lakers 63-19, Celtics 52-30)


Playoffs (Lakers 4-5, Celtics 2-3)



1990-91

Regular Season (Lakers 58-24, Celtics 56-26)


Playoffs (Lakers 12-7, Celtics 5-6)


NBA Finals (Bulls over Lakers, 4-1)

May 16 1980: Los Angeles 123, Philadelphia 107
• 1/10 • 2/10 • 3/10 • 4/10 • 5/10 • 6/10 • 7/10 • 8/10 • 9/10 • 10/10

May 14 1980: Los Angeles 108, Philadelphia 103
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 11 1980: Philadelphia 105, Los Angeles 102

May 10 1980: Los Angeles 111, Philadelphia 101
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 07 1980: Philadelphia 107, Los Angeles 104
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 04 1980: Los Angeles 109, Philadelphia 102
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11


Apr 30 1980: Los Angeles 111, Seattle 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 27 1980: Los Angeles 98, Seattle 93
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 25 1980: Los Angeles 104, Seattle 100
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 23 1980: Los Angeles 108, Seattle 99
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11• 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

Apr 22 1980: Seattle 108, Los Angeles 107
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


Apr 15 1980: Los Angeles 126, Phoenix 101

Apr 13 1980: Phoenix 127, Los Angeles 101

Apr 11 1980: Los Angeles 108, Phoenix 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 09 1980: Los Angeles 131, Phoenix 128

Apr 08 1980: Los Angeles 119, Phoenix 110
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 05 1981: Houston 89, Los Angeles 86

Apr 03 1981: Los Angeles 111, Houston 106
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 01 1981: Houston 111, Los Angeles 107

Jun 08 1982: Los Angeles 114, Philadelphia 104
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 06 1982: Philadelphia 135, Los Angeles 102
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 03 1982: Los Angeles 111, Philadelphia 101
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 01 1982: Los Angeles 129, Philadelphia 108

May 30 1982: Philadelphia 110, Los Angeles 94
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 27 1982: Los Angeles 124, Philadelphia 117
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 15 1982: Los Angeles 128, San Antonio 123
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

May 14 1982: Los Angeles 118, San Antonio 108

May 11 1982: Los Angeles 110, San Antonio 101

May 09 1982: Los Angeles 128, San Antonio 117
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 02 1982: Los Angeles 112, Phoenix 107
• 1/10 • 2/10 • 3/10 • 4/10 • 5/10 • 6/10 • 7/10 • 8/10 • 9/10 • 10/10

Apr 30 1982: Los Angeles 114, Phoenix 106
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

Apr 28 1982: Los Angeles 117, Phoenix 98
• 1/9 • 2/9 • 3/9 • 4/9 • 5/9 • 6/9 • 7/9 • 8/9 • 9/9

Apr 27 1982: Los Angeles 115, Phoenix 96

May 31 1983: Philadelphia 115, Los Angeles 108

May 29 1983: Philadelphia 111, Los Angeles 94
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 26 1983: Philadelphia 103, Los Angeles 93
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 22 1983: Philadelphia 113, Los Angeles 107
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11


May 20 1983: Los Angeles 101, San Antonio 100
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 18 1983: San Antonio 117, Los Angeles 112

May 15 1983: Los Angeles 129, San Antonio 121

May 13 1983: Los Angeles 113, San Antonio 100

May 10 1983: San Antonio 122, Los Angeles 113

May 08 1983: Los Angeles 119, San Antonio 107


May 03 1983: Los Angeles 116, Portland 108

May 01 1983: Portland 108, Los Angeles 95

Apr 29 1983: Los Angeles 115, Portland 109

Apr 26 1983: Los Angeles 112, Portland 106

Apr 24 1983: Los Angeles 118, Portland 97

Jun 12 1984: Boston 111, Los Angeles 102

Jun 10 1984: Los Angeles 119, Boston 108
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 8 1984: Boston 121, Los Angeles 103
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

Jun 06 1984: Boston 129, Los Angeles 125
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 03 1984: Los Angeles 137, Boston 104
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 31 1984: Boston 124, Los Angeles 121
• 1/15 • 2/15 • 3/15 • 4/15 • 5/15 • 6/15 • 7/15 • 8/15 • 9/15 • 10/15 • 11/15 • 12/15 • 13/15 • 14/15 • 15/15

May 27 1984: Los Angeles 115, Boston 109
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 25 1984: Los Angeles 99, Phoenix 97

May 23 1984: Phoenix 126, Los Angeles 121

May 20 1984: Los Angeles 126, Phoenix 115

May 18 1984: Phoenix 135, Los Angeles 127

May 15 1984: Los Angeles 118, Phoenix 102

May 12 1984: Los Angeles 110, Phoenix 94


May 08 1984: Los Angeles 115, Dallas 99

May 06 1984: Los Angeles 122, Dallas 115

May 04 1984: Dallas 125, Los Angeles 115

May 01 1984: Los Angeles 117, Dallas 101

Apr 28 1984: Los Angeles 134, Dallas 91


Apr 22 1984: Los Angeles 108, Kansas City 102

Apr 20 1984: Los Angeles 109, Kansas City 102

Apr 18 1984: Los Angeles 116, Kansas City 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 09 1985: Los Angeles 111, Boston 100
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 07 1985: Los Angeles 120, Boston 111
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 05 1985: Boston 107, Los Angeles 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 02 1985: Los Angeles 136, Boston 111
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 30 1985: Los Angeles 109, Boston 102
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 27 1985: Boston 148, Los Angeles 114
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 22 1985: Los Angeles 153, Denver 109
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 19 1985: Los Angeles 120, Denver 116
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 17 1985: Los Angeles 136, Denver 118
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 14 1985: Denver 136, Los Angeles 114
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 11 1985: Los Angeles 139, Denver 122
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11


May 07 1985: Los Angeles 139, Portland 120
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 05 1985: Portland 115, Los Angeles 107

May 03 1985: Los Angeles 130, Portland 126
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 30 1985: Los Angeles 134, Portland 118
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 27 1985: Los Angeles 125, Portland 101
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


Apr 23 1985: Los Angeles 119, Phoenix 103

Apr 20 1985: Los Angeles 147, Phoenix 130
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 18 1985: Los Angeles 142, Phoenix 114
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 21 1986: Houston 114, Los Angeles 112
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 18 1986: Houston 105, Los Angeles 95
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 16 1986: Houston 117, Los Angeles 109
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 13 1986: Houston 112, Los Angeles 102
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 10 1986: Los Angeles 119, Houston 107
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11


May 08 1986: Los Angeles 120, Dallas 107

May 06 1986: Los Angeles 116, Dallas 113
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 04 1986: Dallas 120, Los Angeles 118

May 02 1986: Dallas 110, Los Angeles 108

Apr 30 1986: Los Angeles 117, Dallas 113
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 27 1986: Los Angeles 130, Dallas 116


Apr 23 1986: Los Angeles 114, San Antonio 94
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 19 1986: Los Angeles 122, San Antonio 94

Apr 17 1986: Los Angeles 135, San Antonio 88

Jun 14 1987: Los Angeles 106, Boston 93
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 11 1987: Boston 123, Los Angeles 108
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 09 1987: Los Angeles 107, Boston 106

Jun 07 1987: Boston 109, Los Angeles 103
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 04 1987: Los Angeles 141, Boston 122
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 02 1987: Los Angeles 126, Boston 113
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 25 1987: Los Angeles 133, Seattle 102
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 23 1987: Los Angeles 122, Seattle 121
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

May 19 1987: Los Angeles 112, Seattle 104
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

May 16 1987: Los Angeles 92, Seattle 87
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13


May 12 1987: Los Angeles 118, Golden State 106
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 10 1987: Golden State 129, Los Angeles 121
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 09 1987: Los Angeles 133, Golden State 108

May 07 1987: Los Angeles 116, Golden State 101

May 05 1987: Los Angeles 125, Golden State 116


Apr 29 1987: Los Angeles 140, Denver 103
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 25 1987: Los Angeles 139, Denver 127
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 23 1987: Los Angeles 128, Denver 95
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 21 1988: Los Angeles 108, Detriot 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 19 1988: Los Angeles 103, Detriot 102

Jun 16 1988: Detriot 104, Los Angeles 94
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 14 1988: Detriot 111, Los Angeles 86
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 12 1988: Los Angeles 99, Detriot 86
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 09 1988: Los Angeles 99, Detriot 86
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 07 1988: Detriot 105, Los Angeles 93
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


Jun 04 1988: Los Angeles 117, Dallas 102
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 02 1988: Dallas 105, Los Angeles 103
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 31 1988: Los Angeles 119, Dallas 102
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 29 1988: Dallas 118, Los Angeles 104
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 27 1988: Dallas 106, Los Angeles 94
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 25 1988: Los Angeles 123, Dallas 101
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 23 1988: Los Angeles 113, Dallas 98
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 21 1988: Los Angeles 109, Utah 98
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 19 1988: Utah 108, Los Angeles 80
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 17 1988: Los Angeles 111, Utah 109
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 15 1988: Los Angeles 113, Utah 100
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 13 1988: Utah 96, Los Angeles 89

May 10 1988: Utah 101, Los Angeles 97
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 08 1988: Los Angeles 110, Utah 91
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 03 1988: Los Angeles 109, San Antonio 107

May 01 1988: Los Angeles 130, San Antonio 112

Apr 29 1988: Los Angeles 122, San Antonio 110
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 13 1989: Detroit 105, Los Angeles 97

Jun 11 1989: Detroit 114, Los Angeles 110
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

Jun 08 1989: Detroit 108, Los Angeles 105
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 06 1989: Detroit 109, Los Angeles 97
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


May 28 1989: Los Angeles 122, Phoenix 117

May 26 1989: Los Angeles 110, Phoenix 107
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 23 1989: Los Angeles 101, Phoenix 95
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 20 1989: Los Angeles 127, Phoenix 119


May 14 1989: Los Angeles 97, Seattle 95

May 12 1989: Los Angeles 91, Seattle 86
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 10 1989: Los Angeles 130, Seattle 108
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 07 1989: Los Angeles 113, Seattle 102


May 03 1989: Los Angeles 116, Portland 108
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

Apr 30 1989: Los Angeles 113, Portland 105
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 27 1989: Los Angeles 128, Portland 108
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 15 1990: Phoenix 106, Los Angeles 103
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 13 1990: Phoenix 114, Los Angeles 101
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 12 1990: Phoenix 117, Los Angeles 103
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 10 1990: Los Angeles 124, Phoenix 100

May 08 1990: Phoenix 104, Los Angeles 102


May 03 1990: Los Angeles 109, Houston 88
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 01 1990: Houston 114, Los Angeles 108
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Apr 29 1990: Los Angeles 104, Houston 100
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 27 1990: Los Angeles 101, Houston 89
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

Jun 12 1991: Chicago 108, Los Angeles 101

Jun 09 1991: Chicago 97, Los Angeles 82
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Jun 07 1991: Chicago 104, Los Angeles 96
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

Jun 05 1991: Chicago 107, Los Angeles 86
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

Jun 02 1991: Los Angeles 93, Chicago 91
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13


May 30 1991: Los Angeles 91, Portland 90
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 28 1991: Portland 95, Los Angeles 84
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 26 1991: Los Angeles 116, Portland 95
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11

May 24 1991: Los Angeles 106, Portland 92
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

May 21 1991: Portland 109, Los Angeles 98
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 18 1991: Los Angeles 111, Portland 106
• 1/11 • 2/11 • 3/11 • 4/11 • 5/11 • 6/11 • 7/11 • 8/11 • 9/11 • 10/11 • 11/11


May 14 1991: Los Angeles 124, Golden State 119
• 1/15 • 2/15 • 3/15 • 4/15 • 5/15 • 6/15 • 7/15 • 8/15 • 9/15 • 10/15 • 11/15 • 12/15 • 13/15 • 14/15 • 15/15

May 12 1991: Los Angeles 123, Golden State 107
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12

May 10 1991: Los Angeles 115, Golden State 112
• 1/14 • 2/14 • 3/14 • 4/14 • 5/14 • 6/14 • 7/14 • 8/14 • 9/14 • 10/14 • 11/14 • 12/14 • 13/14 • 14/14

May 08 1991: Golden State 125, Los Angeles 124

May 05 1991: Los Angeles 126, Golden State 116
• 1/12 • 2/12 • 3/12 • 4/12 • 5/12 • 6/12 • 7/12 • 8/12 • 9/12 • 10/12 • 11/12 • 12/12


Apr 30 1991: Los Angeles 94, Houston 90
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

Apr 27 1991: Los Angeles 109, Houston 98

Apr 25 1991: Los Angeles 94, Houston 92
• 1/13 • 2/13 • 3/13 • 4/13 • 5/13 • 6/13 • 7/13 • 8/13 • 9/13 • 10/13 • 11/13 • 12/13 • 13/13

I always thought this was a tie. Oh, and great posts Minge, I now have something to do this weekend.

1980-1986 Bird
1987 Magic
1988 Bird
1989-1991 Magic

My breakdowns from the RPOY project:

1980 wrote:That said, Bird was 4th in MVP voting and was the primary force behind a ~11 SRS turnaround in Boston (!). I'm not sure how many people thought Magic was better than Bird in May of 1980. Bird was 1st team all-NBA. Magic made neither.

It seems obvious to me from an all-around standpoint that Bird was well ahead of Magic in these early years (one SI reader in 1980 called Bird and Erving the two best forwards in NBA history). Bird's shouldering a scoring load while Magic isn't even doing what would come to make him legendary...running the offense. During one game from 1980 the commentator (Barry?) thought Bird -- not Magic -- was the best passer in the NBA, as a rookie.

1980 wrote:Even rookie Magic was a great passer, no doubt. Although when I watch film I think he was clearly better, or at the least a far more confident passer by 1984. I also always do a bit of a mental reduction for LA assist numbers after reading about all of the score-keeping inflation for assists in LA over at APBR. I have to say I've watched many old Laker games and looked at the box and thought "he had THAT many assists?"

My assessment of Magic's scoring contributions are from watching him and his team play in a handful of games every year from 80-87. His scoring repertoire clearly expanded over the years, and most noticeably his jump shot opened his scoring game a lot. By 87 -- where he scored his career high of 46 points in a game without Cap -- I think he was more n individual scoring force. I think the numbers back this up as he's doing this on a team where he's driving the offense and Nixon, Wilkes and dominant Kareem aren't there anymore.

But keep in mind from 84-87 that team would sometimes get 50 or 60 fastbreak points a game. Now, I think Magic ran the GOAT fastbreak, but I don't think it's right to be overly impressed by his scoring/efficiency because he picks up a few extra layups in those spots. Before that, with Nixon around, he's really getting points as a 3rd or 4th option in the halfcourt or in transition. That's why he has low scoring volume and high efficiency IMO.

So no, I don't really connect what he did later in his career to my interpretation of his 1980 stats. Although perhaps I am incorrect and Magic was 90% of the scorer Bird was.

One more thing I want to hammer home. When it comes to points, turnovers, TS% and assists I really value how those statistics are accrued. No. 1 options in offenses typically carry a burden that, for example, increases TO%. Their TS% decreases. Assists can vary, depending on the team structure. I'm not a huge fan of assists in general, so what I want to know is how much defensive pressure you're alleviating for teammates, and if you get 5 assists because you lob it into Kareem who hits a skyhook (useless) or if you throw an 80-foot outlet on a dime for a layup that no other player could throw (very valuable).

1981 -- Magic missed must of the season, clashed with coaching/management, was described as a cancer and was the goat of the playoff upset against Houston. This year is Bird by a landslide.

1982 wrote:Originally, I had Magic above Bird next. That would fly in the face of my usual standards and tie-breakers. Magic is very hard to categorize: he's sort of playing a wing position for the Lakers (Norm Nixon is running point, and doing so quite well). His defensive is, well, very good. Led the league in steals, active and disruptive, often spearheading Riley's trap. The defensive rebounding speaks for itself (13.7% TRB as a wing).

But it's Rondo-esque. I've harped on circumstances mattering throughout the project (eg Nash in Dallas not being used right) and for 1982, Magic wasn't in a situation that (presumably) maximized his contributions. He was still fantastic, but he's only running point for 5-10 minutes a game when Nixon is out. In the playoff games I watched, when he runs point, he will drive and score and initiate. Otherwise, more of his offense comes from transition, put-backs or teammates (often Kareem) finding him off cuts and screens. His scoring rate is quite low, even lower than Nash's first season in Phoenix. He will make a couple great passes a game that 99% of people can't make -- outlets for layups or halfcourt passes to cutters for layups, right over an unsuspecting opponents ear.

But I think in terms of that kind of impact, it's night and day from when was "running" the offense versus being a cog in a it with the occasional flash of brilliance. Nixon ran point, pushed the fast-break like a racehorse, Wilkes could score the ball and when things bogged down, they'd just throw it into Kareem in the halfcourt. Hard to see how Magic should be getting a lot of credit for any of that.

So Bird, as a guy who was regarded by many as the best (or top 2-3 guy) in the NBA in these pre-peak years, is commanding massive attention still. He's a fantastic passer and creating a lot of offense for his teammates. The solid elements of his defense (team concepts/help and quick hands) are still there, as well as tremendous rebounding. He's scoring a considerably better rate than Magic and doing more of it as a focal point. I've always defaulted to that type of offensive threat (eg Malone over Pippen, Kobe over Dwight 2010), although here the lines were blurred between the two. Very tough choice.

Bird's fall from the elite isn't quite David Robinson territory in that he has flaws in his game that present problems, but at this point in his career he had yet to shoot particularly well in the postseason. Frankly, I just think he's a better shooter as his career progresses (as evidenced by his FT shooting). But the rest of the game is there. 20-20 G5 vs Philly. 18-17 G6. Still getting 2 steals and nearly a block and half per in the playoffs.

Many have mentioned Parish, who was by all accounts the teams postseason MVP. But one can make that claim about Pau Gasol in 2010 for LA, fairly easily. It still doesn't change the fact that for the entire year Bird is a better, overall more important player than Parish. 20-11 and great defense were enough to earn Chief an all-NBA nod, but he's more of a black-hole type option offensively. His post game isn't driving the offense, in other words. It just so happens that he made more shots in the postseason against Caldwell Jones and Haywood/Mahorn than Bird did against those defenses. At the end of the season, it was Bird who almost took MVP from Malone (507 points to 456). Parish did finish 4th in MVP (and would probably be my No. 7).

1983 wrote:Btw, people were asking about Bird in the Bucks series.

Bird G1: 17-12 in G1 on something like 7-18 (extrapolating).
Bird G2: DNP Virus
Bird G3: 21-12-6 6 steals on 10-21
Bird G4: I think he had 19 (from telecast). Didn't count assists or boards but they were plentiful as well.

The boradcasters were singing his praises throughout the game -- made some ridiculous passes and active as usual on the glass. Celts shot 38% in first 3 quarters and were destroyed on glass. Lanier's presence was huge throughout the series, as was Moncrief's ability to get in lane/post and Johnson's wing scoring. Boston struggled in the backcourt, in particular Henderson and Tiny.

In game 1 Bird dislocated a finger -- or as it's called today, "broke" finger. In games 3 and 4, Bird makes a number of great team defensive plays. Sneaks around Lanier from the backside for a steal on the post. Rotates over and blocks a layup. Understandable why he was so esteemed as a team defender. (Marques Johnson does bake him 1 v 1, but Bird didn't guard him unless McHale was in the game and even then not always). The two games from the series I saw he was frequently commanding double teams, breaking down the defense with drives (usually of jab steps and head fakes) and Boston ran a lot of their offense through him. McHale wasn't at his peak. DJ wasn't there yet. But Bird was Bird (or 95% of "Bird").

Anyway, Magic doesn't seem to have the same offensive arsenal he would possess as the years progressed. The Lakers also had a lot of offensive balance on that team, so it certainly wasn't like everything was running through him or they were in full showtime mode that was to come. I wish we had more articles/logs/film, but I gather from my exposure and the playoff numbers that he didn't take over after some team injuries in the manner he could/did in later years when asked to play an expanded role.

In 1984 Magic took over at point, but it was a weaker season than he would have in 85. Bird had one of his best season's, taking on a larger role in the offense while improving his shooting and posting a career-best in post-season scoring.

1985 wrote:Bird, as always, so active off ball. When Boston doesn't post McHale, they run so much stuff for Bird off curls and screens and posts and isos. Parish in the post or Ainge off screens seem like tertiary options, at least when Bird is aggressive mode. Bird is always looking for someone to box out. The thing that is impressive on defense is his solid positioning and anticipation on rotations or jumping passes.

1985 - Bird again with injuries creeping into the postseason. He missed a game with elbow bursitis. Then he injured his hand in a bar fight during the Philly series and his shooting numbers dipped for the last few weeks of the playoffs.

Still, this is Bird for me by a small margin. He was the best player in the game from 83-86 and this postseason didn't change that.

1986 - Bird's peak season (and one of the better seasons ever). Capped with a ho-hum 26-9-8 62% TS% postseason. Magic (again) improved to me and was fantastic, but it wasn't as good as Bird's iconic season.

1987 wrote:Bird is a handful off the ball. When he cuts and scores, it's captured in the box. But I see times when his constant motion forces a defensive sag or literally mesmerizes defenders who feared his shooting (players made a LOT more defensive errors and were what we'd call "lazy" defensively back then). He also draws a lot of fouls off the ball jostling for position which aren't shooting fouls.

For someone who averages ~12 apg, Magic doesn't drive/dish a lot or breakdown defenses. He does sometime, but he also racks up a bunch of assists running that fastbreak and making the correct open pass in the halfcourt. Heck, sometimes it's not even the correct open pass -- he'll make passes most PG's can't think of, like whipping the ball across the lane (by about 6 players) to James Worthy on the baseline simply because Worthy's man turned his head briefly. He was also the best at running that break. Ever.

Defensively, Magic makes more mistakes. Gambles a little, demonstrates those lazy feet of the 1980s. Bird is actually quite good as a team defender and has really good hands, batting or slapping a lot of balls in his vicinity. Both use their size well as mediocre man defenders. Their rebounding numbers are difficult to interpret; Both were fantastic for their positions, but Magic often matched up with 2s defensively and Bird switched onto 4's if McHale guarded the SF.

In 87, given Magic's improvements they are extremely close. I think Bird is doing more that can be quantified or analyzed, whereas Magic has a little more Steve Nash going on -- he deserves a lot of credit for making that offense so much better than everyone else's. He's opening up less in the halfcourt than, say, Nash with his pick and roll game. But then again, he must be responsible for a considerable spike in efficiency from running that break so well...and the Lakers ran a good amount.

Magic gets the nod because one can argue he actually got better in the playoffs (hard to do) whereas Bird had a small dip. That was the difference to me -- fantastic year for him obviously.

One thing to add about 1987 was that Magic finally polished his outside jumper, which allowed him to become sort of a one-man offensive machine. He truly quarterbacked that offense -- whenever something wasn't there, they'd just pass it right back to him in the halfcourt, and he could use his size, drive, post (baby hook) or if not respected, just shoot his outside jumper/set shot. This was Magic's iconic season, and it was one of the best in NBA history as well.

1988 wrote:It should be noted that the Celtics wore down heavily in 88. By G6 v Detroit, Ainge and DJ had injured backs and Parish left the game with a knee injury. To quote SI:

Sports Illustrated wrote:The starters carried the load throughout the regular season and then increased it in the playoffs, when they logged an astounding 83.6% of the playing time. By comparison, Detroit's first-teamers had played 67.2% of the playoff minutes through last weekend.

That Celtic team had no bench. McHale, post broken foot, missed 18 games. Parish and Johnson clearly on the decline, had down seasons. Yet there was Bird, shouldering more scoring to make up for this. He was 4-17 against Detroit in the final game of the series, but he didn't exactly have much help by that point. Just something to consider for those who consider his tough go against the Pistons in 88 something emblematic of an overall playoff struggle.

And yet, despite all this, a 6 SRS and 2 games from the NBA FInals...I tend to agree that Bird seems to be overlooked this year.

Overall, 1988 was extremely close, but it was the down year in this period for Magic (87-90), and Bird was an absolute offensive machine. Boston's failures were not offense, but defensive, and likely caused by the team wearing down and McHale's post-foot injury. Extremely small (and final) edge to Bird here.

1989 - Bird's back finally catches up to him (he'd never be the same). The Celtics fall apart without Larry. Magic has another ridiculously good year. Magic in a landslide.

1990-1991 - Bird is back but barely on the radar. Magic has two more fantastic years. These years aren't remotely close either.

--

Overall, I had Magic with more POY value in my RPOY analysis. I consider their careers *extremely* close, and if anything give Magic a slight edge because of the extra longevity.

Their peaks are also extremely close. If forced to choose, I'd probably take 86 Bird over 87 Magic. This is closer than the career disparity IMO.

Definitely two of the five best players ever, both in terms of career and peak. Perhaps the two best passers I've ever seen as well. Hard to go wrong either way, regardless of the circumstances of the criteria. Always a legendary debate...

I posted his in the summary thread, but it's probably more relevant here even though it's a response to another poster.

semi-sentient wrote:So the argument for Bird is that he had tougher competition in his conference, and the argument against Magic is that he had better teammates early on and played longer?

Bird losing didn't have anything to do with his numbers typically falling off in the playoffs and getting upset, which happened in 1980, 1982, 1983, and 1985?

Anyway, Bird had no business getting votes above Magic in 1982-83. The Lakers had the better record, superior offense (which is where these two impact the game), and Magic was better in the playoffs, plain and simple. The Lakers got swept in the Finals against a team widely regarded as one of the GOAT teams, while Bird got swept (upset) in the 2nd round by the Bucks. Criticizing one over the other for getting swept is kind of shady, and the truth of the matter is that it wasn't either guys fault for coming up short. Kareem got owned by Moses and Bird was sick I believe (missed a game).

Bird deserved it in 1983-84, without question, and no matter how you slice it you have to knock Magic for his choking on the biggest stage. He was directly responsible for some of those losses.

What about 1984-85? Celtics have a better record by a single game in the RS, but gets beaten by Magic and the Lakers in the Finals. Bird has the better RS, and Magic has a better post-season run. Magic was considerably better in the Finals when their teams met. The Lakers are again the top offense in the league, but somehow Bird is the POY despite losing in Finals with HCA, all while not living up to his RS standards (again)?

1985-86 is easily Bird, just like 1986-87 is easily Magic.

After that, it's Magic and there was no looking back at all. Bird was not going to be getting any younger, so even had he not gotten injured there would have been little reason for him to be considered better. Magic was tearing it up in the RS, PS, and especially NBA Finals, year after year, so I'm not sure why those years wouldn't matter in the Magic vs. Bird debate. They absolutely should, and do.

Shot Clock wrote:It also ignores how much tougher the East was. LA could cakewalk to the Finals to face a beat up Celts.

Bird's Celtics got upset 4 times, so what difference does it make? The Lakers were mostly beating the teams they were supposed to beat.

^^^Yeah, I think that's a simplistic view. I think Bird was the best player in basketball in 1983. His backcourt being depleted and him having a virus in the middle of the Bucks series -- against a really good team -- wasn't enough to change that. Conversely, Magic wasn't "Magic" at that point in terms of his role, so that wasn't really close to me in the regular season. Harping on upsets and down shooting is overly simplistic to me as well, especially considering the nature of some these matchups in the 80s and the different roles the players played throughout the decade. (C'mon, 1985 is an "upset?")

Unless you place an enormous emphasis on the final few playoff games (??), Bird was a monster in 1985. 29-11-7 (59% TS/11% TO) with 73 of the 78 first place MVP votes. With two injuries in the postseason, I'm not seeing how losing to an LA team that closed 31-4 in the FInals in 6 good games is some sort of large failure. (26-9-6 54% TS/10% TO in the postseason) It's not like Kareem went absolutely bonkers in the Finals and changed that series...oh wait, he did. Furthermore, I don't even really see where Bird has a "bad" game in the Finals -- on tape, or in the box. Game 6 when he goes down swinging (and missing), I guess?? Wasn't that mostly in the 4th quarter? I can't remember right now...

1982 is the one year I thought Bird really flubbed it up in the playoffs. Of course, Magic had 1981 and "Tragic Johnson" in 1984...similarly, I don't find those to be damning arguments to the greatness of his play, either in 1984 OR for his career.

ElGee wrote:Now, I think Magic ran the GOAT fastbreak, but I don't think it's right to be overly impressed by his scoring/efficiency because he picks up a few extra layups in those spots.

Come on. Isn't the whole point to get easy buckets instead of taking more difficult shots? That's like critizing LeBron for getting easier scores than Kobe because he's the superior athlete and playing in an era that benefits his playing style.

Magic always pushed the ball, so he is largely responsible for his own efficient scoring and that of his teammates. There's no question that Bird was more skilled as a scorer, but the gap in scoring efficiency between Bird and Magic is too large to just ignore, at least in the early years noting that this came from your comments in 1980.

What blows me away about the early perceptions was that Bird was being praised heavily for making his teammates better instead of for his volume scoring/efficiency (which was not great at all), but Magic was just as good at making his own teammates better by getting them easier shots and a bit more versatile. I do think that Bird has an early advantage over Magic despite what the numbers say, but there the gap isn't big at all, especially when you consider that Magic had to play a variety of positions and did an exceptional job regardless of what he was being asked to do. IMO, Magic gets knocked because he had a lot more to work with compared to Bird, but he delivered results so what more was he supposed to do? CLEARLY he had the ability to put up even bigger numbers, but that wasn't what the Lakers needed on a full time basis, and quite frankly they weren't using him to the best of his abilities (yet he was still one of the best in the game).

ElGee wrote:1981 -- Magic missed must of the season, clashed with coaching/management, was described as a cancer...

Sports Illustrated wrote:For Earvin (Magic) Johnson the One Hundred Days of Solitude were over. The long period of frustration and uselessness—the only such time in the 21 years of his blessed life—ended last Friday night. Johnson trotted onto the court at Los Angeles' sold-out Forum and brought 17,505 Laker fans to their feet. They remained standing and roaring, as it turned out, for 45 seconds, one second for each of the games Johnson had missed since he tore cartilage on the inside of his left knee on Nov. 18.

Johnson waved nervously to the crowd, then broke into that grin—the one that belongs in the Guinness Book of World Records for size and luminescence—and, as the noise grew, he spread his arms, palms up, as if to say, "Why are you people treating me this way? I'm just a basketball player and this is just another game. Against the New Jersey Nets, yet."

His teammates, including Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, six times the NBA's Most Valuable Player, joined in the ovation, and Laker Coach Paul Westhead seemed to be choking back tears. What was going on here? Just one more magical moment in the phenomenal career of Magic Johnson.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... z15C1Bw1Q6

Later in the same article...

Sports Illustrated wrote:Johnson rejoined the team for practice on Feb. 2 and accompanied the Lakers on three road trips. His presence lifted everyone's spirits immediately. "I was pleased with the way we carried on without him," says Westhead. "But when Magic wasn't with us our performance—in practices, games, trips—was surgical: neat, clean, minimal talking, no nonsense. But when Magic returned it was like Looney Tunes. He created havoc. Everybody started laughing again. It was unreal."

...

"The thing about Magic that amazes me," says Jamaal Wilkes, "is his timing. He's always at the right place at the right time—in high school, college and the pros. Look at the last playoff game. Everybody remembers it as 'Magic's Game' [Johnson had 42 points, 15 rebounds, seven assists and three steals as the Lakers beat Philadelphia for the championship while Abdul-Jabbar was out with an injury]. And look at him now, coming back as he is. a month before the playoffs. The spotlight's all his. And nobody on the team resents him at all. We love him. The only athlete I've ever seen who is like him is Ali."

So, who considered Magic a cancer? I think you are mistaken. I think there were times where Kareem and Norm might have been jealous (which is their problem, not Magic's) at all the media attention that he was getting (due to the injury), but that's a far cry from him being a cancer. The fans and everyone on the team, coaching staff included, absolutely loved the guy. I'm beginning to wonder if people were even reading those articles in the RPOY project.

Hell, Magic himself was clearly annoyed by all the media attention, so I'm not sure how anyone could call him a cancer due to something that is completely beyond his control. About the only thing that I can think of was Norm Nixon complaining about having to move back to the 2, which is completely absurd considering that Magic was already a much better player and considerably better at running the offense.

Anyway, in 1981 Magic -- who played only 37 games as you pointed out -- was scoring more than Bird (in less minutes) and on much higher efficiency, not to mention he led all guards in rebounds and was leading the entire league in assists and steals. The only knock on him is that he got injured, but from a performance standpoint, he was right there with Bird, if not better.

ElGee wrote: and was the goat of the playoff upset against Houston.

It's worth mentioning that the Lakers lost to the Rockets (in a best of 3, which makes it more flukey than anything) not because of Magic, but because of Lakers FC getting outplayed/rebounded. That was a concern going into the series because the Rockets matched-up up extremely well with the Lakers. Technically it was an upset, but it's not much different than the Cavs losing to the Magic last year when it was clear as day that match-ups favored the Magic (team record/seeding was completely irrelevant). The Lakers actually had to move Magic to the 3 to help out on the boards, which is why he ended up averaging 13.7 per game. I believe Cooper was playing PF as well.

I may be biased as a Laker fan, but looking only at numbers and playoff results I have 6-3 advantage for Magic, with 3 seasons even


80 Magic

81 Bird

82 Magic

83 wash

84 Bird

85 wash

86 Bird

87 Magic

88 wash

89 Magic

90 Magic

91 Magic