RealGM

Which hybrid of best qualities at their peak would you take?

A 6'6 Steph with defense is insane, but I can't imagine how lethal a player with Magic's playmaking and Bird's jumper would be. There'd be no way to guard him at all. I pick Magic Bird.

mmm, I actually think it should be Kobe Curry and it wouldn't be that close.
not sure how to make it work physically, but 6-6 with that shooting, off ball movement, improved finishing, pick and roll and kobe's midrange is just impossible to stop.
and both had enough vision to create incredible advantages

___
Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

Bird Magic overlap to much with Bird already doing most of what Magic brings. Whereas Kobe/Curry are so different a hybrid offers big chances to upgrade.

I think, as much as I like Magic and Bird, that they overlap a lot as SNPA said. Magic DID develop a pretty good jumper in his career, had a post game, wasn't gaining anything from Bird as a passer. I'm not sure that he gains a lot by crossing with Larry.

Steph and Kobe... less overlap. Very, VERY different approaches to the game, so squaring that away becomes an interesting exercise. But giving Steph a little extra size is helpful in a bunch of ways for him. He doesn't gain too much of relevance from Kobe in terms of scoring. Bryant shot a lot and he was a very skilled iso player with a nice mid-range game, but Steph has an excellent under-arc game to begin with, so there's some level of diminishing returns there. But the size, and the athleticism help. And Kobe's post game was something you don't see a ton from Steph, so having an extra bag of tricks didn't hurt. The help the size might bring on D, not that Steph is bad, is also useful. Ultimately, I think blending Kobe with Steph gives more than Magic with Bird. I wonder how the diametrically opposed mentalities would work inside the new player, but strictly from the physical and skill standpoints, it seems a better pairing.

I do think adding Larry's off-ball stuff to Magic's existing game would be a significant improvement. That's the biggest area where I think the two don't overlap so much. Having the by-far best passing point guard in league history who can also provide elite off-ball scoring and floor spacing is an incredibly potent combination in terms of juicing offense

On the other hand Kobe Curry is probably the best scorer in the history of the league by a substantial amount

So it's a tough one

Dooley wrote:I do think adding Larry's off-ball stuff to Magic's existing game would be a significant improvement. That's the biggest area where I think the two don't overlap so much. Having the by-far best passing point guard in league history who can also provide elite off-ball scoring and floor spacing is an incredibly potent combination in terms of juicing offense

Seems a little off to me, though, because Magic was just fine at moving without the ball to get post position when required, and giving it up from the post to be worked around the perimeter and such. He didn't need to be Reggie. Magic didn't really have sticky iso hands. He often gave the ball up and then did something else, so moving around for catch-and-shoots wasn't really going to make a huuuuuge difference in his game.

tsherkin wrote:

Dooley wrote:I do think adding Larry's off-ball stuff to Magic's existing game would be a significant improvement. That's the biggest area where I think the two don't overlap so much. Having the by-far best passing point guard in league history who can also provide elite off-ball scoring and floor spacing is an incredibly potent combination in terms of juicing offense

Seems a little off to me, though, because Magic was just fine at moving without the ball to get post position when required, and giving it up from the post to be worked around the perimeter and such. He didn't need to be Reggie. Magic didn't really have sticky iso hands. He often gave the ball up and then did something else, so moving around for catch-and-shoots wasn't really going to make a huuuuuge difference in his game.

Not saying that Magic was a super ball dominant iso guy or anything, I don't view it as a huge flaw in his game as it actually existed necessarily. More so that Bird was a historically good off-ball guy and I think that does add something valuable to the combined player.

I think Bird's off-ball game was more valuable than Magic's, and I think having the option of off-ball shooting does add a huge amount in addition to having the ability to post up and work the ball around and whatnot. In general I think off-ball scoring and spacing are quite multiplicative when they're part of a larger offensive package.

Dooley wrote:Not saying that Magic was a super ball dominant iso guy or anything, I don't view it as a huge flaw in his game as it actually existed necessarily. More so that Bird was a historically good off-ball guy and I think that does add something valuable to the combined player.

Does it? Or does it more take away from the brilliance which defined Magic's game as an on-ball guy?

I think Bird's off-ball game was more valuable than Magic's, and I think having the option of off-ball shooting does add a huge amount in addition to having the ability to post up and work the ball around and whatnot. In general I think off-ball scoring and spacing are quite multiplicative when they're part of a larger offensive package.

I see what you're saying, but Magic could hit off of kick-outs well enough. I don't think merging him with Bird makes a huge difference in his game in that regard at all. I think, if anything, if Magic was suddenly 2 inches taller while still as mobile as he was at 6'8, then we have a different conversation about how he might have been able to play, you know?

Kinda can't go wrong either way, but boy Kobe Curry would be incredible to watch. Don't know how you could even hope to guard him

tsherkin wrote:Does it? Or does it more take away from the brilliance which defined Magic's game as an on-ball guy?

I don't see why it would

tsherkin wrote:I see what you're saying, but Magic could hit off of kick-outs well enough. I don't think merging him with Bird makes a huge difference in his game in that regard at all.

I think there's a big difference between Bird's level of off-ball shooting, and hitting off of kickouts. And in general, I think Magic representing a huge potent threat off the ball the way that Bird was, and adding the kind of spacing that a great jump shot would give him, does make a huge difference in his game. More scoring, more gravity, more pressure on the defense creating more opportunities that Magic Bird can exploit with his passing.

I mean - is the position here really that Magic Johnson would basically not be a better player if he could shoot and come off screens like Reggie Miller?

Dooley wrote:I don't see why it would

Well, you can't be both on-ball and off-ball at the same time. Magic's playmaking would be necessarily limited by him spending more time away from the ball.

I think there's a big difference between Bird's level of off-ball shooting, and hitting off of kickouts. And in general, I think Magic representing a huge potent threat off the ball the way that Bird was, and adding the kind of spacing that a great jump shot would give him, does make a huge difference in his game. More scoring, more gravity, more pressure on the defense creating more opportunities that Magic Bird can exploit with his passing.

I mean - is the position here really that Magic Johnson would basically not be a better player if he could shoot and come off screens like Reggie Miller?

I see what you're saying. I just don't think it matters much because taking him off-ball takes away from the primary thing that made him worthwhile. Yeah, maybe make him a little more versatile earlier in his career such that he could hit a three as required as he could later, and you start to see more of his late-80s and very early 90s excellence earlier on in his career. Awesome, that's really nice, I just don't think it matters that much. I think that at some point, you're not ADDING value, you're just trading it around.

tsherkin wrote:Well, you can't be both on-ball and off-ball at the same time. Magic's playmaking would be necessarily limited by him spending more time away from the ball.

Just upthread you're talking about how Magic wasn't a ball-dominant iso monster, how he was willing to let the ball leave his hands and hunt for post position and use that to either score or rotate the ball. So I have a hard time buying this idea that Magic Bird being an elite off-ball scorer would diminish his on-ball offensive contributions and thereby not improve his overall offensive game. Magic adding more value through off-ball scoring does not necessarily require diminishing his overall playmaking. Magic was already doing stuff off-ball!

And more generally, I think we've seen players who are able to combine both on-ball and off-ball offensive creation extremely successfully - for instance IMO this is one of the major things that makes Curry so valuable. So I don't agree with the general theory of the case that if you're great at on-ball offensive creation (whether through scoring or playmaking) there's minimal value in also being able to contribute off-ball.

tsherkin wrote:I just don't think it matters much because taking him off-ball takes away from the primary thing that made him worthwhile. Yeah, maybe make him a little more versatile earlier in his career such that he could hit a three as required as he could later, and you start to see more of his late-80s and very early 90s excellence earlier on in his career. Awesome, that's really nice, I just don't think it matters that much. I think that at some point, you're not ADDING value, you're just trading it around.

I'm not sure I fully grasp the point you're making here. But I definitely don't think that Magic Johnson's offensive game was impossible to improve in any way, or add value to with a different skillset.

Dooley wrote:Just upthread you're talking about how Magic wasn't a ball-dominant iso monster, how he was willing to let the ball leave his hands and hunt for post position and use that to either score or rotate the ball. So I have a hard time buying this idea that Magic Bird being an elite off-ball scorer would diminish his on-ball offensive contributions and thereby not improve his overall offensive game.

Sure. I just don't think the gap is large enough to be meaningful relative to how he actually played the game. He didn't need more scoring ability. He had it. He didn't need more off-ball play, he had it. Yeah, he might have shot the three a little more earlier on in his career... but I don't know that it would have mattered that much, because he had his post play and he had transition, and he was a pretty good dribble isolation guy when he did that. Like, pre-85 or so, would he have benefited from a better J? Absolutely, which is why he developed it. I suppose we're getting ourselves into the need to look at a specific version of these players in order to parse this out, as I reflect.

And more generally, I think we've seen players who are able to combine both on-ball and off-ball offensive creation extremely successfully - for instance IMO this is one of the major things that makes Curry so valuable. So I don't agree with the general theory of the case that if you're great at on-ball offensive creation (whether through scoring or playmaking) there's minimal value in also being able to contribute off-ball.

I don't consider it a 'general theory,' I consider it specific to Magic, whose primary value extended out of his playmaking. This is different from Curry, whose primary value extends out of his 3pt shooting and off-ball movement. That he is also quite proficient at scoring under the arc and a solid conventional playmaker helps him be an ATG offensive package in a different way from what worked for Magic.

I'm not sure I fully grasp the point you're making here. But I definitely don't think that Magic Johnson's offensive game was impossible to improve in any way, or add value to with a different skillset.

I absolutely agree that he had areas where he could improve. My contention is more that Bird's specific strengths (focusing specifically on the off-ball stuff you've been discussing) would matter only so much to his game. It's more a matter of fit than some notion that Magic was lacking in the ability to improve.

I think you'd be better off pairing him with someone who had a nicer first step and more bounce than anything else. He was reasonably mobile, but he certainly was not an ATG athletic specimen. If you put him in Lebron's body, then that would be very interesting. Or even just gave him Grant Hill's first step. I don't ever recall watching Magic and wishing he'd move around screens more. He was more of a POA guy. First half, he did a lot of post/re-post with Kareem and was a passing hub up at the top, or he'd move to the elbow and work from there, and obviously grabbing DRBs and racing out in transition, pulling his wizardry on the break. More and more post as he got older, and of course he worked his jumper more as he developed that, which gets back to which version of Magic we're talking about.