RealGM

Most consider these guys the 2 greatest offensive point guards ever. Most of their value comes from the offensive side, so what about defense? I assume Magic’s size gives him the advantage, but i hope this is a reasonable comparison.

No preference. Grade out the same for me.

Neither guy is a major positive on that end but I find Magic's defense to be less exploitable. He brings more to the defensive side than Curry such as rebounding, size/strength and IIRC was about as solid as Curry was (in terms of not making defensive mistakes). I also feel Magic's size to be underrated when evaluating his defense because he doesn't give up size on switches, doesn't get outmuscled by other guards or even forwards, and doesn't get burned as much from taller guys going for offensive boards in traffic. Not that it makes him a great or even good defender, just small defensive positives that Curry lacks.

The kinds of players that could burn Magic (your small, speedy, aggressively scoring PGs) would also burn Curry if that's what the desired strategy was. A player such as Kevin Johnson would probably do just as well vs Curry as Kyrie Irving did, so I don't believe there's any separation there.

At a first glance, without diving too deep ...

I think that there's at least a degree to which this depends on the teammates. The preferred defensive position for Magic was often Forward, but that means shunting down at least your SF and SG (perhaps sometimes PF) one position. If you're okay to do this, as LA broadly were, the "cost" of this might be considered quite small, but this will not be universal.

I suppose too, based on impact stats Curry has been at very least, not an impediment, to a strong defense. How much people interpret this as contextual versus Curry as a good defender is perhaps up for debate.

Oh and definitions will matter too (is defensive rebounding part of defense).

Magic defense is more impactful and he was good early in his career as long as he didn't have to defend PGs. He could guard forwards fairly well and he's great rebounder for his size. Didn't provide any rim protection but it doesn't matter in this comparison. He's not worse at passing lanes either.

Curry is good in doubling post and has quick hands but he's not good man defender and he doesn't have size to bother anyone. He doesn't have any bonus in rebounding either.

Even though neither are great, give me Magic on defense all the way. Both Oscar and Paul are better defenders among the best offensive PGs. Nash is definitely worse than Magic and Curry.

I'll take Magic. He's stronger and more versatile. Lacks lateral quickness, but his presence on the court even as a forward if you have to can create a ton of mismatches for the other team.

Magic is also a better rebounder, and that's good for your defense.

Not sure if Magic actually has a bigger impact on team rebounding than Curry. If we think of them both as 1's then yes, but really Magic was a 3 on defense who ran the offense like a 1 (similar to LeBron) and he's maybe above average rebounding even for a 3, but not elite. Curry's a pretty good rebounding 1.

eminence wrote:Not sure if Magic actually has a bigger impact on team rebounding than Curry. If we think of them both as 1's then yes, but really Magic was a 3 on defense who ran the offense like a 1 (similar to LeBron) and he's maybe above average rebounding even for a 3, but not elite. Curry's a pretty good rebounding 1.

Rebounds are rebounds, what difference does it make what position it comes from?

mischievous wrote:

eminence wrote:Not sure if Magic actually has a bigger impact on team rebounding than Curry. If we think of them both as 1's then yes, but really Magic was a 3 on defense who ran the offense like a 1 (similar to LeBron) and he's maybe above average rebounding even for a 3, but not elite. Curry's a pretty good rebounding 1.

Rebounds are rebounds, what difference does it make what position it comes from?

Skills/stats whatever are only useful by providing advantages to your team. As an example Klay is a equal or better shooter than Dirk, but Dirk's shooting provides far more value.

eminence wrote:Not sure if Magic actually has a bigger impact on team rebounding than Curry. If we think of them both as 1's then yes, but really Magic was a 3 on defense who ran the offense like a 1 (similar to LeBron) and he's maybe above average rebounding even for a 3, but not elite. Curry's a pretty good rebounding 1.

I'm not really sure if there's a way to measure Magic's impact on team rebounding without watching the games, particularly since LA became a weaker rebounding team as the decade went on. Kareem got older, Worthy and Scott weren't particularly good rebounders, and their best rebounders such as AC Green, Thompson and Rambis tended to not play that many minutes. They tended to lose rebounding battles against strong rebounding frontlines such as Twin Towers Houston, Detroit, and Boston (though not as badly as the other two), although I'm not sure how much that has to do with LA's superior EFG% giving them less chances at an OREB.

Magic was a better rebounder when he was younger particularly as he looked to ignite Showtime by grabbing the defensive rebound - LA crushed Philly in the pre-Moses Finals on the boards when Kareem could still get into the double-digit rebound range. Magic himself was grabbing 11 from 80-82 in the playoffs and around 8-9 in 83. Of course, it depends which years you consider as prime years, but Magic's size isn't really an advantage that goes away in this comparison.

Still, after all that, I believe Magic's size to be the deciding factor in this comparison, particularly as Magic's primary weakness (inability to stick with smaller, faster guards) applies to Curry as well. Curry's obviously better at handling those guys than Magic but not by a decisive amount.

Curry has never been what Magic was to his team's defense in 1982. Magic was legit one of the keys to L.A.'s strong second-half-of-the-regular-season and playoff trapping defense. He basically played the Scottie Pippen role as a trapper - obviously not as well as Scottie, but he used his length, smarts, and athletic ability to trap ball-handlers and contest passes. Forced turnovers and ended possessions via defensive rebounds.

The 1982 Lakers might be the best iteration of Showtime. Magic, at his swiss-army knife best, played a big part of that with his defense.

Do think the best (early 80's) versions of Magic were better defensively. But that's not what I generally think of as prime Magic, '87-'90 are probably the years I'm highest on him. And he'd lost a step by then through wear and tear and due to offensive load.