Page 1 of 2

Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 5:26 am
by ceiling raiser
Who is your pick each year?

1980 Magic vs 1985 Jordan
1981 Magic vs 1986 Jordan
1982 Magic vs 1987 Jordan
1983 Magic vs 1988 Jordan
1984 Magic vs 1989 Jordan
1985 Magic vs 1990 Jordan
1986 Magic vs 1991 Jordan
1987 Magic vs 1992 Jordan
1988 Magic vs 1993 Jordan
1989 Magic vs 1996 Jordan
1990 Magic vs 1997 Jordan
1991 Magic vs 1998 Jordan

Could also remove 86 MJ and add his 95 version if you want.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:00 am
by Dutchball97
I'm expecting to be one of the people leaning most heavily towards Jordan in this comparison (surprising, right?). Magic is known for his consistency in the play-offs but Jordan is one of the few who have an argument to be even more consistent. I don't think there is any post-season where you can look at Jordan and view his offensive performance as particularly disappointing, while for the regular season Jordan's edge is even clearer imo.

1981 is Magic's clearest win. Sure 86 MJ was great in the play-offs but he missed too much time to get serious consideration here. Like I said I'm sure there'll be plenty of people who are going to look at this comparison the opposite way due to valuations of playmaking but I'm not sure if both fully healthy I'd take any Magic season over Jordan on offense. 1990 and 1991 for Magic over 97 and 98 for MJ seems logical as Magic kept getting better offrnsively, while Jordan was on a slow but steady decline. Similarly to 87 vs 92 I mostly look at these 3 season comparisons as toss ups, so I view Magic in his peak seasons as equal to Jordan in his prime but not quite top seasons like 92, 97 and 98.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:06 am
by 70sFan
1980 Magic vs 1985 Jordan
1981 Magic vs 1986 Jordan
1982 Magic vs 1987 Jordan
1983 Magic vs 1988 Jordan
1984 Magic vs 1989 Jordan
1985 Magic vs 1990 Jordan
1986 Magic vs 1991 Jordan
1987 Magic vs 1992 Jordan
1988 Magic vs 1993 Jordan
1989 Magic vs 1996 Jordan
1990 Magic vs 1997 Jordan
1991 Magic vs 1998 Jordan

Something like this. The closest ones are 1985 vs 1990 and 1986 vs 1991. In general, I don't love young Magic offense due to unrefined scoring game and limited halfcourt offense, but once he reached another level in 1985, I like his offense more than Jordan's.

The only thing I am very comfortable with is that 1985-87 Jordan is above 1980-82 and that 1988-90 Magic is above 1996-98 Jordan.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:08 am
by 70sFan
Dutchball97 wrote: 1981 is Magic's clearest win. Sure 86 MJ was great in the play-offs but he missed too much time to get serious consideration here.

Magic missed a lot of time as well though and he was quite bad in the playoffs. I think healthy 1986 Jordan was more capable offensive player than healthy 1981 Magic.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 9:15 am
by Dutchball97
70sFan wrote:
Dutchball97 wrote: 1981 is Magic's clearest win. Sure 86 MJ was great in the play-offs but he missed too much time to get serious consideration here.

Magic missed a lot of time as well though and he was quite bad in the playoffs. I think healthy 1986 Jordan was more capable offensive player than healthy 1981 Magic.


Healthy Jordan was better but Magic still played twice as many games as Jordan.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 8:47 pm
by ceiling raiser
So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 9:49 pm
by rk2023
ceiling raiser wrote:Who is your pick each year?

1980 Magic vs 1985 Jordan
1981 Magic vs 1986 Jordan (by default, due to Jordan ultimately playing less.. but Magic missed his fair share of time so idm)
1982 Magic vs 1987 Jordan
1983 Magic vs 1988 Jordan
1984 Magic vs 1989 Jordan
1985 Magic vs 1990 Jordan
1986 Magic vs 1991 Jordan
1987 Magic vs 1992 Jordan
1988 Magic vs 1993 Jordan
1989 Magic vs 1996 Jordan
1990 Magic vs 1997 Jordan
1991 Magic vs 1998 Jordan

Could also remove 86 MJ and add his 95 version if you want.


Highlighting my personal selections in bold. I feel confident about most of my selections.. but could be interested to hear why people may vote for 1985 and 86 over 90 and 91 in this particular assortment / line-up.

Generally, I think younger Jordan starts out the better player respectively in their careers, then from 89-91 hits the apex of his career on offense before witnessing a slight downtick heading into retirement.. then playing out his "second three-peat" as more of an MVP level guy than GOAT-calibre on that end.

Magic o.t.o.h. comes in with a very unique build and skill-set for his position, gets gradually better year over year (sans 1981 due to health) leading to a decent up-tick in 1985/86 and an ultimate plateau at a level he nearly/essentially maintained from 1987-91 up until his diagnosis.

1988-92 Jordan vs. 87-91 Magic on offense would be a very cool comparison, as I view those 5 year spans as close but lean Magic.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 9:58 pm
by OhayoKD
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

Longetivity plays a big part I imagine. Many people may also view Jordan as a truly dpoy level defender and even him simply being on par with a lebron/pippen defensively would make a big difference. Box-aggregates also look better and many people defer to those. If you go by name-value Kareem also will stand-out more than Pippen and Jordan has 2 x fmvps.

Otoh Magic is probably the "impact king" of the 80's/90's but the margin isn't large(well not large outside of WOWYR which I would hope people aren't putting much weight in) and the lack of "other" data increases uncertainty significantly.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2023 11:06 pm
by ceiling raiser
OhayoKD wrote:
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

Longetivity plays a big part I imagine. Many people may also view Jordan as a truly dpoy level defender and even him simply being on par with a lebron/pippen defensively would make a big difference. Box-aggregates also look better and many people defer to those. If you go by name-value Kareem also will stand-out more than Pippen and Jordan has 2 x fmvps.

Otoh Magic is probably the "impact king" of the 80's/90's but the margin isn't large(well not large outside of WOWYR which I would hope people aren't putting much weight in) and the lack of "other" data increases uncertainty significantly.

They had basically identical longevity though in real life. In terms of theoretical, unless someone assumes Magic would’ve had to retire from HIV for health reasons, don’t see it.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:02 am
by MyUniBroDavis
ceiling raiser wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

Longetivity plays a big part I imagine. Many people may also view Jordan as a truly dpoy level defender and even him simply being on par with a lebron/pippen defensively would make a big difference. Box-aggregates also look better and many people defer to those. If you go by name-value Kareem also will stand-out more than Pippen and Jordan has 2 x fmvps.

Otoh Magic is probably the "impact king" of the 80's/90's but the margin isn't large(well not large outside of WOWYR which I would hope people aren't putting much weight in) and the lack of "other" data increases uncertainty significantly.

They had basically identical longevity though in real life. In terms of theoretical, unless someone assumes Magic would’ve had to retire from HIV for health reasons, don’t see it.



FYM assumes lmao :lol:

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 7:31 am
by 70sFan
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

I shared my opinion, so I will respond. Keep in mind that for now, I have Jordan 4th on my list while Magic is 9th or 10th, so it's around 5 spots difference.

The key advantages Jordan has over Magic are:

1. Defensive value
2. Higher early career value

I don't consider Jordan a DPOY level player really, but it doesn't change the fact that the difference on defense is massive. On contrary to what many say here, I think that strong all-defensive guard makes a huge difference in comparison to someone like Magic, who was quite decent in some years and quite bad in others.

You also have to keep in mind that such list doesn't show the value difference. For example, I think that Jordan was considerably better in 1988 than 1983 Magic, while the difference between 1988 Magic and 1993 Jordan isn't that big.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 7:48 am
by LukaTheGOAT
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?


The defensive gap between them is massive.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:07 am
by OhayoKD
70sFan wrote:
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?

I shared my opinion, so I will respond. Keep in mind that for now, I have Jordan 4th on my list while Magic is 9th or 10th, so it's around 5 spots difference.

The key advantages Jordan has over Magic are:

1. Defensive value
2. Higher early career value

I don't consider Jordan a DPOY level player really, but it doesn't change the fact that the difference on defense is massive. On contrary to what many say here, I think that strong all-defensive guard makes a huge difference in comparison to someone like Magic, who was quite decent in some years and quite bad in others.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:
ceiling raiser wrote:So given the responses in this thread so far, it seems pretty close.

Unless the defensive gap is massive, or the seasons in which Jordan was better are greater by a larger margin than the seasons in which Magic is better, or the Wizards years and 95 make a big difference, why are these guys usually 5-10 spots apart on the GOAT list?


The defensive gap between them is massive.

So what do we actually think a "massive" gap in guard play looks like when we stop comparing between players of the same position and put it on a general scale. As i'm sure you're aware, the biggest defensive swings we see for guards aren't all that(and this includes Jordan). As it is, I'm not sure "strong all defensive" holds once we enter the first-three-peat though I'd probably give 88/89 that(Oakley doesn't seem like a good enough paint-protector to be getting that much of the credit).

Not sure I buy magic as clearly better than Jordan on o(granted, "impact" disagrees), so a defensive edge is enough. But presenting it as more than an "edge" seems off, even if on a guard-only scale Magic is average and Jordan's near the top. Jordan's granulars falling didn't prevent the Bulls from becoming the best defense in the league, and his complete absence, didn't significantly affect their performance on that end.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
ceiling raiser wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:Longetivity plays a big part I imagine. Many people may also view Jordan as a truly dpoy level defender and even him simply being on par with a lebron/pippen defensively would make a big difference. Box-aggregates also look better and many people defer to those. If you go by name-value Kareem also will stand-out more than Pippen and Jordan has 2 x fmvps.

Otoh Magic is probably the "impact king" of the 80's/90's but the margin isn't large(well not large outside of WOWYR which I would hope people aren't putting much weight in) and the lack of "other" data increases uncertainty significantly.

They had basically identical longevity though in real life. In terms of theoretical, unless someone assumes Magic would’ve had to retire from HIV for health reasons, don’t see it.



FYM assumes lmao :lol:

Yeah, could you clarify? Are you saying Magic's actual longevity is comparable, or his "if-he-wasn't-forced-to-retire" longevity. Depending on how you weigh things, Jordan was already a superstar in year two. I imagine you'd have to negatively weigh the wizard years(not unreasonable ig)for them to stack up career for career assuming an equal prime.

Granted post 91 extrapolation probably swings that the other way.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 11:53 am
by 70sFan
OhayoKD wrote:So what do we actually think a "massive" gap in guard play looks like when we stop comparing between players of the same position and put it on a general scale. As i'm sure you're aware, the biggest defensive swings we see for guards aren't all that(and this includes Jordan). As it is, I'm not sure "strong all defensive" holds once we enter the first-three-peat though I'd probably give 88/89 that(Oakley doesn't seem like a good enough paint-protector to be getting that much of the credit).

Not sure I buy magic as clearly better than Jordan on o(granted, "impact" disagrees), so a defensive edge is enough. But presenting it as more than an "edge" seems off, even if on a guard-only scale Magic is average and Jordan's near the top. Jordan's granulars falling didn't prevent the Bulls from becoming the best defense in the league, and his complete absence, didn't significantly affect their performance on that end.

Yeah, as I said previously - I strongly disagree with the idea that guards defense is unimportant on a bigger scale. Guards don't have the same impact on defense as bigs, but it doesn't mean their impact is irrelevant. Maybe Jordan didn't lift his team, but his team being good without him doesn't mean that Jordan has no impact at all. Not to mention things like postseason resiliency and versatility against various matchups. You couldn't hunt Jordan on defense, while you certainly could do that with Magic in some favorable matchups.

You can disagree with me, that's fine.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 12:40 pm
by Dutchball97
In PI RAPM the top defensive guard peaks are about +3 to +4, I wouldn't consider that as minimal impact even if it can't touch the defensive impact bigs are able to produce. Meanwhile we have nothing for Magic at all and only the final couple of years for Jordan. In 97 and 98 Jordan is coming towards the end of his prime and his defensive effort is generally seen as less than what he had at his peak. Yet Jordan still sat between a +1.5 and +2 impact on defense.

There's some guess work going on but since we look at Magic as an average to slightly above average defender at his best and MJ is one of the top defenders at the 2 we've seen in NBA history, I'd argue that defensive gap could definitely be a reason for people to have Jordan several spots higher than Magic on their all-time lists. All that is of course assuming you view Magic and Jordan as near equals on offense (something which I personally don't).

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 1:59 pm
by AEnigma
That assumes far too much.

First off, RAPM is noisy in small samples like that, and longer samples tend to smooth everything out. You do not really see perimetre players at “+4” over longer samples, save for maybe prime Tony Allen. Most of the best are more likely to fall between 2.5 and 3.5 (with the stipulation that no range is truly consistent) over longer samples, even if year to year results might paint them as a brief top five to ten defender outright (Prior Impact calculations help with this to a point, but longer samples are still better).

Second, essential to note to know that specific RAPM values are not remotely consistent and depend largely on how they are calculated. You say Jordan “sat between” +1.5 and +2. By what? Because I have multiple different values depending on the source: +1.4 and +1.2, or +1.9 and +0.7, or +1.9 and +1.7… and I am not saying your numbers are wrong, and the latter is probably the most consistent and almost certainly what you are referencing, but if we look relative to his league, he can variably trail numerous guards like Ron Harper (his teammate), Charlie Ward, Jaren Jackson, Aaron McKie, Jason Kidd, Gary Payton (very much not a consistent DRAPM guy), variably Scottie Pippen (depends on the calculation), John Stockton, Rick Fox, Eddie Johnson, Nate McMillan, Mookie Blaylock, Grant Hill, Brevin Knight… I agree, Magic is likely not getting up to that scale, but it is tough to contend Jordan as this top tier wing defender while simultaneously trumpeting a metric that thinks he, Grant Hill, and Brevin Knight are all a tossup.

Third, similarly important to note that the division of values also stabilises over larger samples. Here you say you do not see Jordan and Magic as near offensive equals, and without guessing exactly waht you mean by that, late career Jordan is not even at the top of his pack in ORAPM, let alone at that Nash or (semi-hypothetical) Magic level. He does well enough in overall RAPM that you could conceivably argue for a reapportionment, of either him or of others (the split between guards and bigs who share a lot of minutes routinely seems to bleed some defensive value away from the bigs and offensive value away from the guards), but at that point Jordan would fall even further down those defensive guard ranks.

Fourth, you speculate that Jordan must be significantly better in his “defensive prime”, but many of us disagree with that assessment. Old Jordan was stronger, smarter, and less error-prone. Save for an 1988 outlier, I might prefer his post-retirement defence over his “prime” defence (no question above 1993 and 1987), and in any case I think they are generally comparable. I am continually annoyed by people citing those incomplete pre-1997 RAPM datasets (which, again, are just one possible calculation), but they hardly have Jordan as any sort of all-time wing defender either. And that is before getting into how his first retirement almost solely affected the Bulls’ offence and not their defence.

There is always this urge to extrapolate numbers for Jordan giving him every benefit of the doubt, but we have no real evidentiary reason to do that. Jordan was a good defensive guard, and that can be a valid reason to take him over Magic, but calling him a potential +3 defender (on this nebulous idea of a set impact scale) is utter fanfiction by both the eye test and by the data we do have.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 2:10 pm
by homecourtloss
AEnigma wrote:That assumes far too much.

First off, RAPM is noisy in small samples like that, and longer samples tend to smooth everything out. You do not really see perimetre players at “+4” over longer samples, save for maybe prime Tony Allen. Most of the best are more likely to fall between 2.5 and 3.5 (with the stipulation that no range is truly consistent) over longer samples, even if year to year results might paint them as a brief top five to ten defender outright (Prior Impact calculations help with this to a point, but longer samples are still better).

Second, essential to note to know that specific RAPM values are not remotely consistent and depend largely on how they are calculated. You say Jordan “sat between” +1.5 and +2. By what? Because I have multiple different values depending on the source: +1.4 and +1.2, or +1.9 and +0.7, or +1.9 and +1.7… and I am not saying your numbers are wrong, and the latter is probably the most consistent and almost certainly what you are referencing, but if we look relative to his league, he can variably trail numerous guards like Ron Harper (his teammate), Charlie Ward, Jaren Jackson, Aaron McKie, Jason Kidd, Gary Payton (very much not a consistent DRAPM guy), variably Scottie Pippen (depends on the calculation), John Stockton, Rick Fox, Eddie Johnson, Nate McMillan, Mookie Blaylock, Grant Hill, Brevin Knight… I agree, Magic is likely not getting up to that scale, but it is tough to contend Jordan as this top tier wing defender while simultaneously trumpeting a metric that thinks he, Grant Hill, and Brevin Knight are all a tossup.

Third, similarly important to note that the division of values also stabilises over larger samples. Here you say you do not see Jordan and Magic as near offensive equals, and without guessing exactly waht you mean by that, late career Jordan is not even at the top of his pack in ORAPM, let alone at that Nash or (semi-hypothetical) Magic level. He does well enough in overall RAPM that you could conceivably argue for a reapportionment, of either him or of others (the split between guards and bigs who share a lot of minutes routinely seems to bleed some defensive value away from the bigs and offensive value away from the guards), but at that point Jordan would fall even further down those defensive guard ranks.

Fourth, you speculate that Jordan must be significantly better in his “defensive prime”, but many of us disagree with that assessment. Old Jordan was stronger, smarter, and less error-prone. Save for an 1988 outlier, I might prefer his post-retirement defence over his “prime” defence (no question above 1993 and 1987), and in any case I think they are generally comparable. I am continually annoyed by people citing those incomplete pre-1997 RAPM datasets (which, again, are just one possible calculation), but they hardly have Jordan as any sort of all-time wing defender either. And that is before getting into how his first retirement almost solely affected the Bulls’ offence and not their defence.

There is always this urge to extrapolate numbers for Jordan giving him every benefit of the doubt, but we have no real evidentiary reason to do that. Jordan was a good defensive guard, and that can be a valid reason to take him over Magic, but calling him a potential +3 defender (on this nebulous idea of a set impact scale) is utter fanfiction.


Great post all-around. The bolded is interesting because in the incomplete RAPM datasets sauared2020 posted, Jordan is a slight negative in 1985, a slight negative in 1988, and a slight positive in 1991. As you said, Jordan’s retirement affected the offense and not the defense. There’s basically no evidentiary reason to think that prime Jordan was a more impactful defender than older Jordan who grades out much better, and certainly nothing at all that suggests a +3 type of defender.

84-85 RAPM
87-88 RAPM
90-91 RAPM

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 4:20 pm
by OhayoKD
70sFan wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:So what do we actually think a "massive" gap in guard play looks like when we stop comparing between players of the same position and put it on a general scale. As i'm sure you're aware, the biggest defensive swings we see for guards aren't all that(and this includes Jordan). As it is, I'm not sure "strong all defensive" holds once we enter the first-three-peat though I'd probably give 88/89 that(Oakley doesn't seem like a good enough paint-protector to be getting that much of the credit).

Not sure I buy magic as clearly better than Jordan on o(granted, "impact" disagrees), so a defensive edge is enough. But presenting it as more than an "edge" seems off, even if on a guard-only scale Magic is average and Jordan's near the top. Jordan's granulars falling didn't prevent the Bulls from becoming the best defense in the league, and his complete absence, didn't significantly affect their performance on that end.

Yeah, as I said previously - I strongly disagree with the idea that guards defense is unimportant on a bigger scale. Guards don't have the same impact on defense as bigs, but it doesn't mean their impact is irrelevant. Maybe Jordan didn't lift his team, but his team being good without him doesn't mean that Jordan has no impact at all. Not to mention things like postseason resiliency and versatility against various matchups. You couldn't hunt Jordan on defense, while you certainly could do that with Magic in some favorable matchups.

You can disagree with me, that's fine.

Yeah, I don't think this is true. I was actually rewatching some 90/91 footage(mostly to see how the Pistons defended the triangle: how early/late defenses were reacting to Jordan or Pippen drives, how strongly or weakly shots were contested, ect) and there were various points(in 30 possessions of tracking) where attackers were able to exploit him via brute force...
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1836
(this is one of three-times Jordan was just bodied, two of them resulted in points, and I didn't count the one that didn't)
or waiting for him to over-extend
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1524
(no clue why he cheats left)

Ben said Magic "torched" Jordan in the finals. Blocked has dumars and hawkins doing damage man to man with speed, foul-baiting, or just turning in on over-extensions like this:
https://youtu.be/p5aNUS762wM?t=1094

Don't think it's accurate to say you couldn't exploit Jordan defensively. It's more that Jordan was able to off-set these weaknesses with stuff like:
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=54

Jordan(at least during the first-three peat) being a matchup-impervious isn't really accurate(remember, he was at the top of the league in error-rate). The question is how much value is lost in the negative stuff vs the good stuff. Using Blocked's approach, for those 30-possessions(first 10, and then 20 from the 24 minuite mark to see what happened when grant went out) I counted 2 great plays, 6 good plays, 2 major breakdowns, and 6 minor breakdowns.

You might note that while that block was counted as "great", a later block is simply counted as "good" because Jordan only makes it after Pippen(a wing, rather than a big) holds off someone too strong for jordan for several seconds. Jordan makes plays with positive, but alot of it is situationally tied to the supporting cast(as we would expect for any guard). When Jordan makes a behind the back steal on Karl Malone in ben's video above, cool! But rodman is doing most of the work.

Is the combination of risk/reward "massively" more valuable than Magic being relatively sound but not being able to do big positive plays like the possession above? Well, maybe in a scale restricted to guards, but neither raw or(as enigma/hcl outlined) lineup-adjusted stuff seems to suggest that translates to a general scale(at least when his offense peaked). And it's interesting the defensive stuff seems to go up when Jordan was smarter despite being less capable. Eyes can totally capture/describe events, but they're not very good at being precise at how they weigh those occurrences, and nothing in the film(fair bit of breakdowns, fair bit of positive contributions, the occasional highlight you see more frequently with wings) makes me assume we should ignore the holistics entirely.

Overall, the gap is marginal, and there's relatively high uncertainity, so I'm fine giving Jordan an edge based on convention. But assuming a "massive" gap of any sort just doesn't seem justifiable, and I don't think "you can't matchup-hunt" Jordan really holds up. Maybe Jordan's value increases as he focuses in for the playoffs, or maybe defenses exploit his weaknesses better as they scheme up. My guess is it would be a bit of both but I don't think we should assume it goes all the way in one direction as your last sentence implies.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:15 pm
by capfan33
OhayoKD wrote:
70sFan wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:So what do we actually think a "massive" gap in guard play looks like when we stop comparing between players of the same position and put it on a general scale. As i'm sure you're aware, the biggest defensive swings we see for guards aren't all that(and this includes Jordan). As it is, I'm not sure "strong all defensive" holds once we enter the first-three-peat though I'd probably give 88/89 that(Oakley doesn't seem like a good enough paint-protector to be getting that much of the credit).

Not sure I buy magic as clearly better than Jordan on o(granted, "impact" disagrees), so a defensive edge is enough. But presenting it as more than an "edge" seems off, even if on a guard-only scale Magic is average and Jordan's near the top. Jordan's granulars falling didn't prevent the Bulls from becoming the best defense in the league, and his complete absence, didn't significantly affect their performance on that end.

Yeah, as I said previously - I strongly disagree with the idea that guards defense is unimportant on a bigger scale. Guards don't have the same impact on defense as bigs, but it doesn't mean their impact is irrelevant. Maybe Jordan didn't lift his team, but his team being good without him doesn't mean that Jordan has no impact at all. Not to mention things like postseason resiliency and versatility against various matchups. You couldn't hunt Jordan on defense, while you certainly could do that with Magic in some favorable matchups.

You can disagree with me, that's fine.

Yeah, I don't think this is true. I was actually rewatching some 90/91 footage(mostly to see how the Pistons defended the triangle: how early/late defenses were reacting to Jordan or Pippen drives, how strongly or weakly shots were contested, ect) and there were various points(in 30 possessions of tracking) where attackers were able to exploit him via brute force...
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1836
(this is one of three-times Jordan was just bodied, two of them resulted in points, and I didn't count the one that didn't)
or waiting for him to over-extend
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1524
(no clue why he cheats left)

Ben said Magic "torched" Jordan in the finals. Blocked has dumars and hawkins doing damage man to man with speed, foul-baiting, or just turning in on over-extensions like this:
https://youtu.be/p5aNUS762wM?t=1094

Don't think it's accurate to say you couldn't exploit Jordan defensively. It's more that Jordan was able to off-set these weaknesses with stuff like:
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=54

Jordan(at least during the first-three peat) being a matchup-impervious isn't really accurate(remember, he was at the top of the league in error-rate). The question is how much value is lost in the negative stuff vs the good stuff. Using Blocked's approach, for those 30-possessions(first 10, and then 20 from the 24 minuite mark to see what happened when grant went out) I counted 2 great plays, 6 good plays, 2 major breakdowns, and 6 minor breakdowns.

You might note that while that block was counted as "great", a later block is simply counted as "good" because Jordan only makes it after Pippen(a wing, rather than a big) holds off someone too strong for jordan for several seconds. Jordan makes plays with positive, but alot of it is situationally tied to the supporting cast(as we would expect for any guard). When Jordan makes a behind the back steal on Karl Malone in ben's video above, cool! But rodman is doing most of the work.

Is the combination of risk/reward "massively" more valuable than Magic being relatively sound but not being able to do big positive plays like the possession above? Well, maybe in a scale restricted to guards, but neither raw or(as enigma/hcl outlined) lineup-adjusted stuff seems to suggest that translates to a general scale(at least when his offense peaked). And it's interesting the defensive stuff seems to go up when Jordan was smarter despite being less capable. Eyes can totally capture/describe events, but they're not very good at being precise at how they weigh those occurrences, and nothing in the film(fair bit of breakdowns, fair bit of positive contributions, the occasional highlight you see more frequently with wings) makes me assume we should ignore the holistics entirely.

Overall, the gap is marginal, and there's relatively high uncertainity, so I'm fine giving Jordan an edge based on convention. But assuming a "massive" gap of any sort just doesn't seem justifiable, and I don't think "you can't matchup-hunt" Jordan really holds up. Maybe Jordan's value increases as he focuses in for the playoffs, or maybe defenses exploit his weaknesses better as they scheme up. My guess is it would be a bit of both but I don't think we should assume it goes all the way in one direction as your last sentence implies.


If I remember correctly, Colts18 did some tracking of Jordan's defense during the 92 finals against Clyde Drexler, and Drexler shot better against MJ than he did against everyone else by a decent margin. He shot 41% overall, but against Jordan specifically shot 44% while he shot 38% against everyone else.

I also watched some of Drexler's highlights during the series and honestly wasn't especially impressed with MJ's defense. I would be curious to see a more in-depth dive into this if anyone wants to or has already done so.

Re: Better Offensively By Year: Magic vs Jordan

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 6:17 pm
by 70sFan
OhayoKD wrote:Yeah, I don't think this is true. I was actually rewatching some 90/91 footage(mostly to see how the Pistons defended the triangle: how early/late defenses were reacting to Jordan or Pippen drives, how strongly or weakly shots were contested, ect) and there were various points(in 30 possessions of tracking) where attackers were able to exploit him via brute force...
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1836
(this is one of three-times Jordan was just bodied, two of them resulted in points, and I didn't count the one that didn't)

Is this what you count as "hunting" Jordan? All I see is Jordan trying to draw a weak charge and not succeeding, nobody tried to exploit him here.

or waiting for him to over-extend
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=1524
(no clue why he cheats left)

This is a broken play out of offensive rebound, Bulls wanted to double the ball-handler, but they didn't communicate and both attacked the same side. It is a mistake from Jordan, but it's not something you can cheat on.

If that's all you found, that's quite weak.

Ben said Magic "torched" Jordan in the finals.

That's true, but Magic torched all players for his whole career. If you want to use this logic, then I guess Luka "hunted" Kawhi because Leonard couldn't stop him either.

Blocked has dumars and hawkins doing damage man to man with speed, foul-baiting, or just turning in on over-extensions like this:
https://youtu.be/p5aNUS762wM?t=1094

Don't think it's accurate to say you couldn't exploit Jordan defensively. It's more that Jordan was able to off-set these weaknesses with stuff like:
https://youtu.be/8f55MC1UR7A?t=54

I mean, maybe I should have said "hunt successfully". You can hunt anyone you want, but Jordan isn't someone you can built your offense around to exploit his defense. He has weaknesses and I certainly find him overrated by many, but let's not exaggarate.

Jordan(at least during the first-three peat) being a matchup-impervious isn't really accurate(remember, he was at the top of the league in error-rate).

How can you know that he was at the top of the league in error-rate? We don't even have most of the games from the early 1990s.

The question is how much value is lost in the negative stuff vs the good stuff. Using Blocked's approach, for those 30-possessions(first 10, and then 20 from the 24 minuite mark to see what happened when grant went out) I counted 2 great plays, 6 good plays, 2 major breakdowns, and 6 minor breakdowns.

I don't know what "Blocked's approach" means. What I can say, based on my trakcing experience, is that affecting 16 out of 30 possessions is a lot, which suggests high activity.

You might note that while that block was counted as "great", a later block is simply counted as "good" because Jordan only makes it after Pippen(a wing, rather than a big) holds off someone too strong for jordan for several seconds. Jordan makes plays with positive, but alot of it is situationally tied to the supporting cast(as we would expect for any guard). When Jordan makes a behind the back steal on Karl Malone in ben's video above, cool! But rodman is doing most of the work.

That's irrelevant to my point, which is that Jordan wasn't easy to exploit on defense.

Is the combination of risk/reward "massively" more valuable than Magic being relatively sound but not being able to do big positive plays like the possession above?

Magic wasn't a "relatively sound" defender though, he was a big gambler himself - with worse results in general.

Well, maybe in a scale restricted to guards, but neither raw or(as enigma/hcl outlined) lineup-adjusted stuff seems to suggest that translates to a general scale(at least when his offense peaked). And it's interesting the defensive stuff seems to go up when Jordan was smarter despite being less capable. Eyes can totally capture/describe events, but they're not very good at being precise at how they weigh those occurrences, and nothing in the film(fair bit of breakdowns, fair bit of positive contributions, the occasional highlight you see more frequently with wings) makes me assume we should ignore the holistics entirely.

No, just because Jordan didn't have a very clear defensive impact on his extremely stacked defensive team doesn't mean he has no value. That's not how basketball works.

Overall, the gap is marginal, and there's relatively high uncertainity, so I'm fine giving Jordan an edge based on convention. But assuming a "massive" gap of any sort just doesn't seem justifiable,

I wonder, how many guards have you scouted defensively in your life? Have you ever did comparable thing to an average or weak defender? Focusing on the best of the best often gives us a very bad picture overall.

and I don't think "you can't matchup-hunt" Jordan really holds up.

Well, you have provided any example of Pistons doing that.

Maybe Jordan's value increases as he focuses in for the playoffs, or maybe defenses exploit his weaknesses better as they scheme up. My guess is it would be a bit of both but I don't think we should assume it goes all the way in one direction as your last sentence implies.

I don't imply anything, I say that it's much harder to exploit Jordan weaknesses on defense than Magic. Magic could be and was hunted on defense at various moments of his career. Not always with the best success, as he wasn't usually a bad defender, but it happened. That's just not the case with Jordan, at least outside of his first few seasons.