Magic and Bird Plus Minus Numbers

[Djoker]

Some observations:

1. 1986 seems like a clear peak for Bird though 1984 might be interesting if we had numbers. His On court clearly stands out this year. I did some tracking a few years back and stopped in Bird-Walton numbers which looked really good in limited minutes. I wonder if Squared has Walton-Bird pairings.

2. Celtics’ offense craters without Bird. There has been much discussion on this board about in ball vs. off ball, how much that affects ORtg drops, i.e., teams get too dependent on on ball creators so when they’re off, the offense craters, etc., but a lot of the numbers are showing is that offenses crater when ATG offensive players are not on.

Bird, off ball
Magic, on ball
LeBron, on ball
Jordan, off ball (playoffs offense cratering in 1997-1998)
Nash, on ball
Shaq, off ball
Jokic, off ball/on ball DHO
Curry, off ball with some on ball

3. Late ‘80s and early 1990’s Magic needs more credit for what was in the past labeled as “Showtime” which for many people melded Kareem and non-Kareem (or very old Kareem) years as a continuous offensive juggernaut, but in reality Magic was creating offense with not so great offensive casts by the end

1.

Walton doesn't look super impactful on the 1986 Celtics at a glance:

Walton ON: +8.1
Walton OFF: +6.1
Walton ON-OFF: +2.0

But when you pull up his pairings with Bird, there is definitely synergy:

Bird ON Walton ON: +14.9
Bird ON Walton OFF: +9.2
Bird OFF Walton ON: -8.6
Bird OFF Walton OFF: -19.3

3.

Those Lakers casts certainly weren't as stacked as in the 1982-1989 period but it was still a good cast in 1990. Worthy was All-NBA 3rd Team and a guy who generally stepped up in the playoffs and Scott was a borderline all-star as an offensive player. In 1991, Scott and Mychal fell off a bit (though Divac improved) but I wouldn't even call the results elite at that point. +4.2 (5th) in the RS and +5.6 in the PS are solid numbers but nothing insane.

[DraymondGold]

Some observations:

1. 1986 seems like a clear peak for Bird though 1984 might be interesting if we had numbers. His On court clearly stands out this year. I did some tracking a few years back and stopped in Bird-Walton numbers which looked really good in limited minutes. I wonder if Squared has Walton-Bird pairings.

2. Celtics’ offense craters without Bird. There has been much discussion on this board about in ball vs. off ball, how much that affects ORtg drops, i.e., teams get too dependent on on ball creators so when they’re off, the offense craters, etc., but a lot of the numbers are showing is that offenses crater when ATG offensive players are not on.

Bird, off ball
Magic, on ball
LeBron, on ball
Jordan, off ball (playoffs offense cratering in 1997-1998)
Nash, on ball
Shaq, off ball
Jokic, off ball/on ball DHO
Curry, off ball with some on ball

3. Late ‘80s and early 1990’s Magic needs more credit for what was in the past labeled as “Showtime” which for many people melded Kareem and non-Kareem (or very old Kareem) years as a continuous offensive juggernaut, but in reality Magic was creating offense with not so great offensive casts by the end

1.

Walton doesn't look super impactful on the 1986 Celtics at a glance:

Walton ON: +8.1
Walton OFF: +6.1
Walton ON-OFF: +2.0

But when you pull up his pairings with Bird, there is definitely synergy:

Bird ON Walton ON: +14.9
Bird ON Walton OFF: +9.2
Bird OFF Walton ON: -8.6
Bird OFF Walton OFF: -19.3

3.

Those Lakers casts certainly weren't as stacked as in the 1982-1989 period but it was still a good cast in 1990. Worthy was All-NBA 3rd Team and a guy who generally stepped up in the playoffs and Scott was a borderline all-star as an offensive player. In 1991, Scott and Mychal fell off a bit (though Divac improved) but I wouldn't even call the results elite at that point. +4.2 (5th) in the RS and +5.6 in the PS are solid numbers but nothing insane.

So on the previous page, I predicted that Walton would continue to not look super individually impactful, but that his fit with Bird would be one of the key parts of the 1986 Celtics’ dominance. Great to see my prediction supported by the data

Walton’s a +2.0 overall on-off, but +5.7 on-off with Bird on.
Meanwhile McHale’s a +6.2 overall on-off, but a +1.3 on-off with Bird on.

Birds a +23.6 overall, but a +17.4 on-off with McHale on, and +23.5 on-off with Walton on.

Of course there’s uncertainty with this, given the different minutes, opponents, and surrounding lineups. But it does support my prediction that Walton had better chemistry with and got more out of Bird than McHale did in 86.

I wonder how many player pairings ever had a +14.9 On rating when both were on. That’s a pretty phenomenal number for Bird and Walton. Wouldn’t shock me if Jordan and Pippen or Curry and Draymond did. Did Magic and Kareem ever? Any other star pairings?

[Djoker]

Some observations:

1. 1986 seems like a clear peak for Bird though 1984 might be interesting if we had numbers. His On court clearly stands out this year. I did some tracking a few years back and stopped in Bird-Walton numbers which looked really good in limited minutes. I wonder if Squared has Walton-Bird pairings.

2. Celtics’ offense craters without Bird. There has been much discussion on this board about in ball vs. off ball, how much that affects ORtg drops, i.e., teams get too dependent on on ball creators so when they’re off, the offense craters, etc., but a lot of the numbers are showing is that offenses crater when ATG offensive players are not on.

Bird, off ball
Magic, on ball
LeBron, on ball
Jordan, off ball (playoffs offense cratering in 1997-1998)
Nash, on ball
Shaq, off ball
Jokic, off ball/on ball DHO
Curry, off ball with some on ball

3. Late ‘80s and early 1990’s Magic needs more credit for what was in the past labeled as “Showtime” which for many people melded Kareem and non-Kareem (or very old Kareem) years as a continuous offensive juggernaut, but in reality Magic was creating offense with not so great offensive casts by the end

1.

Walton doesn't look super impactful on the 1986 Celtics at a glance:

Walton ON: +8.1
Walton OFF: +6.1
Walton ON-OFF: +2.0

But when you pull up his pairings with Bird, there is definitely synergy:

Bird ON Walton ON: +14.9
Bird ON Walton OFF: +9.2
Bird OFF Walton ON: -8.6
Bird OFF Walton OFF: -19.3

3.

Those Lakers casts certainly weren't as stacked as in the 1982-1989 period but it was still a good cast in 1990. Worthy was All-NBA 3rd Team and a guy who generally stepped up in the playoffs and Scott was a borderline all-star as an offensive player. In 1991, Scott and Mychal fell off a bit (though Divac improved) but I wouldn't even call the results elite at that point. +4.2 (5th) in the RS and +5.6 in the PS are solid numbers but nothing insane.

So on the previous page, I predicted that Walton would continue to not look super individually impactful, but that his fit with Bird would be one of the key parts of the 1986 Celtics’ dominance. Great to see my prediction supported by the data

Walton’s a +2.0 overall on-off, but +5.7 on-off with Bird on.
Meanwhile McHale’s a +6.2 overall on-off, but a +1.3 on-off with Bird on.

Birds a +23.6 overall, but a +17.4 on-off with McHale on, and +23.5 on-off with Walton on.

Of course there’s uncertainty with this, given the different minutes, opponents, and surrounding lineups. But it does support my prediction that Walton had better chemistry with and got more out of Bird than McHale did in 86.

I wonder how many player pairings ever had a +14.9 On rating when both were on. That’s a pretty phenomenal number for Bird and Walton. Wouldn’t shock me if Jordan and Pippen or Curry and Draymond did. Did Magic and Kareem ever? Any other star pairings?

Hey are you still doing the plus minus for the 1986 Finals?

I'm considering to do a detour and cover 1986 ECSF if no one else is doing it just so we have the whole peak year for Bird.

As for pairs and their ON ratings, Magic and Kareem are +15.8 in 1985, and Jordan and Pippen are +17.8 with a full season of data in 1996.

[DraymondGold]

Hey are you still doing the plus minus for the 1986 Finals?

I'm considering to do a detour and cover 1986 ECSF if no one else is doing it just so we have the whole peak year for Bird.

As for pairs and their ON ratings, Magic and Kareem are +15.8 in 1985, and Jordan and Pippen are +17.8 with a full season of data in 1996.

Feel free to detour if you want! I’m hoping to do the 86 finals at some point / if no one else will, but also am not sure how long it’ll take me to get through it and would be fine if you or others wanted to do a few games.

Thanks for Magic and Jordan ratings.
On Pbpstats (which might count possessions for net ratings differently than you), Curry and Draymond are +19.3 in 2016 and +17.9 in 2017 (Curry and KD are +19.2 in 2017). So elite company for Bird, consistent with all time ceiling raising, although not quite the best in available data.

[Djoker]

Hey are you still doing the plus minus for the 1986 Finals?

I'm considering to do a detour and cover 1986 ECSF if no one else is doing it just so we have the whole peak year for Bird.

As for pairs and their ON ratings, Magic and Kareem are +15.8 in 1985, and Jordan and Pippen are +17.8 with a full season of data in 1996.

Feel free to detour if you want! I’m hoping to do the 86 finals at some point / if no one else will, but also am not sure how long it’ll take me to get through it and would be fine if you or others wanted to do a few games.

Thanks for Magic and Jordan ratings.
On Pbpstats (which might count possessions for net ratings differently than you), Curry and Draymond are +19.3 in 2016 and +17.9 in 2017 (Curry and KD are +19.2 in 2017). So elite company for Bird, consistent with all time ceiling raising, although not quite the best in available data.

Well you already did Game 1 & 2 of the 1986 Finals so there ain't nobody stopping you at this point!

Yea.. possession counts are different. Squared2020's possessions are inflated by 4-5 per game on average. So both Magic/Kareem and Jordan/Pippen duos are a bit better if using B-Ref/PBP pace estimates. Still Steph/Dray are probably the GOAT duo as far as that goes.

[DraymondGold]

1986 Celtics Game 4.3 Plus Minus

Watch on YouTube

Bird #33 45 mins, Hakeem #34 43. McHale #32 44, Walton #5 20
(Bird out 3 minutes; Hakeem 5; McHale 4; Walton 24)

Overview: tough video quality at points, but otherwise great game to watch. Bird’s devastating effectiveness off-ball was on clear display, with a variety of cuts and curls leading to shots or layup passes to teammates. Bird’s passing was great. He also displayed some nice positioning for rebounding, along with some active help defense. Clear best player on the floor this game. Walton played similar to his performance in games 1-2 (good defense; nice passing and IQ to grease the wheels of the Celtics’ motion), but with a larger minute load due to Parish’ foul trouble. Many players were in foul trouble this game, including Walton and Hakeem. Dennis Johnson got his knee hurt in the middle of the game, but played through it.

Olajuwon had a slow game scoring wise in the first half, with Sampson picking up some of the offensive slack (having a better performance than in games 1 and 2). Both of their defense defense (Hakeem especially) was a key part of the Rockets weathering the Celtics’ 3rd quarter scoring. During the 4th quarter come back, both Hakeem and Sampson were also more aggressive in their scoring and rebounding.

Close end to the game, although hurt by an inadvertent whistle with 7 seconds left (oof!) to a jump ball. Hakeem makes 1/2 free throws. Odd resulting out-of-timeout play by Celtics at the end of the game, with both Parish and Bird running to get the inbound, colliding, then Parish falling out of bounds for the turnover. Presumably it was called for Bird, so it looks like Parish thought mid-play they couldn’t get it to Bird successfully (it would have been close with the 5 second timer, but Bird had gotten around his man)... so I think it was Parish ended up mucking up the play. Turnover, and the Rockets win by 2.

1st
17:30. 15-19 Houston. Walton in (Parish out 3 fouls)

2nd
31:45. 29-33 Houston. McHale out (Parish in).
42:15. 37-43 Houston. McHale in.
49:15. 41-48 Houston. Bird out.
51:20. 41-48 Houston. Hakeem out (3 fouls). Bird in.
54:08. 46-48 Houston. Walton out.
1:10:30 59-62 Houston. End of quarter.

3rd.
1:17:00. 59-62 Houston. Hakeem in.
1:24:48. 72-64 Boston. Walton in (Parish out)
1:37:50. 82-74 Boston. Bird out.
1:40:48. 84-80 Boston. End of quarter

4th.
1:42:10. 84-80 Boston. Bird in. Walton out. (video cuts out, but radio broadcast thankfully makes the lineups/substitutions clear)
2:10:43. 104-106 Rockets. End of game.

Final score: 104-106 (-2 Celtics)

Bird: Out: +0 -4 = -4. In: -2 - -4 = +2
McHale: Out: -2 = -2. In: -2 - -2 = 0.
Walton: In: +2 -4 = -2. Out: -2 - -2 = 0.
Hakeem: Out: -4 = -4. In: +2 - -4 = +6.

Edit:
1986 Celtics Game 4.4 Plus Minus

Watch on YouTube

Bird #33 47 mins, Hakeem #34 39. McHale #32 39, Walton #5 19
(Bird out 1 minutes; Hakeem 8; McHale 8; Walton 29)

Notes: Didn't have as much time to watch the game was closely -- mostly just followed the plus minus of the stars, with occasional stints where I payed more attention.

An odd stint — Bird played shooting guard at 52:00, with three big men at the forwards and center. The size mismatch led to a lot of stress on the Rockets’ defense, but doubling just allowed Bird’s layup passing to shine. Crazy size from the Celtics and some nice flexibility from Bird… on offense. Ironically despite the size, the Celtics struggled on defense. In particular, non-Bird bigs struggled against the Hakeem-less Rockets on defense, with Sampson scoring well despite the packed paint, and with a few defensive mistakes in such a short stint. It’s a short stint, small sample size, but it’s not too common to see a triple tower strategy.

My high level impression was this was more of a team win by the Celtics, with Bird being less of a standout than in the last game… though playing an impressive 47 minutes might have left him a little more tired. It was a close end, winnable by both sides, with the Rockets up 2 and with possession with ~3 minutes left. Dennis Johnson gets a fast break pass from Bird and a foul to tie the game. Walton subs in for Parish for the final 3 minutes, and although Parish had better scoring game this time, he’s been having a rough series. Bird gets a pass from Walton at the perimeter to put the Celtics up 3… which they’ll end up winning by. Walton has a good box out against Hakeem at one point, then later a putback. McHale gets 2 steals. Less dominant game for the Celtics, with the Rockets getting a lot of rebounds, but they end up winning off good team effort.

1st
29:15. 26-22 Celtics. Walton in (Parish out)
34:55. 30-30 tie. End of quarter.

2nd
37:20. 30-30 tie.
43:14. 35-36 Houston. McHale out (Parish in).
48:08. 41-42 Houston. Hakeem out
52:00. 45-47 Houston. McHale in.
56:00. 51-54 Houston. Hakeem back. Walton out.
1:03:40. 59-62 Houston. McHale out.
1:07:00. 63-64 Houston. End of quarter.

3rd.
1:24:00. 63-64 Houston. McHale in.
1:44:06. 82-80 Boston. Hakeem out (foul trouble).
1:47:36. 86–85 Boston. End of quarter.

4th.
1:50:15. 86-85 Boston. Walton in. McHale out.
1:58:28. 95-93 Boston. Bird out. McHale in. Hakeem in. (three big lineup with Bird out)
2:02:07. 97-95 Boston. Bird in. Walton out.
2:07:27. 101-101 tie. Walton in (for Parish)
2:15:00. 106-103 Boston. End of game.

Final score: 106-103 (+3 Celtics)

Bird: Out: +0 = 0. In: +3 - 0 = +3
McHale: Out: -1 +2 +1 = +2. In: +3 - 2 = 01
Walton: In: -7 +2 + 3 = -2. Out: +3 - -2 = +5.
Hakeem: Out: +2 +0 = +2. In: -3 -2 = -5.

Edit 2:
Game 4.5

Watch on YouTube

Bird #33 43 mins, Hakeem #34 47. McHale #32 34, Walton #5 28
(Bird out 5 minutes; Hakeem 1; McHale 4; Walton 20)

Notes
High intensity physical game, with a fight and a variety of technicals. The Rockets crowd and team both rally after the fight to go on a run. Highly aggressive and physical. Rockets continue to be scrappy in the 3rd quarter, and are good on the glass. The commentator has noted several times that doubling Hakeem can open rebounding opportunities for other Rocket players. The rebounding also initiate some fast break offense for the Rockets too. A few foul calls go in the Rockets’ favor towards the middle and end of the thirDd, which helped cement the lead and make a comeback less feasible — the commentators start getting more and more annoyed about the calls which feels familiar to today’s discourse.

Another tough game for Parish. Matching up with Hakeem and Sampson on the other end presumably does him no favors. Speaking of which, great game for Hakeem — heavy scoring load, impactful rebounding, impactful defense, in very high minutes. Worse game for Bird.

1st
28:25. 20-16 Boston. Walton in (for Parish)
37:10. 26-24 Boston. McHale out (for Parish)

2nd
side note: commentator says Danny Ainge is sick.
Then fight and Sampson’s ejected
50:45. 33-34 Houston. McHale in.
58:53. 33–39 Houston. Walton out (for Parish)
1:05:30. 35-43 Houston. Walton in (for Parish)

3rd
1:38:05. 47–58 Houston. Walton out (for Parish)
1:40:05. 47-60 Houston. Walton in (triple tower)
1:46:20. 55-69 Houston. Walton out.
1:51:50. 57–73 Houston. Walton in (for Parish).
2:03:50 65-82 Houston. Walton out (for Parish).
2:04:30 65-83 Houston. McHale out

4th.
2:08:35. 65-86 Houston. McHale in. Bird out.
2:13:07. 71-92 Houston. Walton in (Parish out), Bird in.
2:30:30. 85-101 Houston. Bird out. Walton out.
2:33:40. 91-105 Hakeem out.
2:37:00. 96-111 Houston. End of game. (I don’t think McHale was subbed out… Celtics only have 4 people on court for the last 2 points of the Rockets, and we spot McHale moseying away from the free throw line right a few in-game-seconds before the Rockets get their last 2 points, but nobody comes in for him. I think he was just leaving early without an official substitution... though if someone was supposed to come in for him but weren't visible, that would change his on ad off totals by 2 points)

Final score: 96-111 (-15 Celtics)

Bird: Out: +0 +1 = 1. In: -15 - 1 = -16
McHale: Out: -3 -3 = -6. In: -15 - -6 = -9
Walton: In: -10 -3 -1 -4 +5 = -13. Out: -15 - -13 = -2
Hakeem: Out: +1 = +1. In: +15 - 1= +14.

[Djoker]

^ Draymond I didn't see your post for some reason. Fantastic stuff!

By the way, Squared2020 also shared the Kareem and Bird game logs for the 1985 playoffs. I added those to the spreadsheet.

Read on Twitter

And he also shared the lineup data for the 1985 playoffs for both the Lakers and Celtics.





As is evident in the spreadsheet, the Lakers data is missing 1st Round Game 3. The Celtics data includes all games in the postseason.

[70sFan]

^ Draymond I didn't see your post for some reason. Fantastic stuff!

By the way, Squared2020 also shared the Kareem and Bird game logs for the 1985 playoffs. I added those to the spreadsheet.

Read on Twitter

And he also shared the lineup data for the 1985 playoffs for both the Lakers and Celtics.





As is evident in the spreadsheet, the Lakers data is missing 1st Round Game 3. The Celtics data includes all games in the postseason.

Man, these numbers are unbelievable for Kareem. I know it's a tiny sample and all, but he looks extremely impactful on both ends of the floor.

It's also interesting that the Lakers offense tanked in any case when the duo wasn't on the floor.

[tsherkin]

It's also interesting that the Lakers offense tanked in any case when the duo wasn't on the floor.

Do you mean when there was only one on the floor, or when both were off?

[LA Bird]

As for pairs and their ON ratings, Magic and Kareem are +15.8 in 1985, and Jordan and Pippen are +17.8 with a full season of data in 1996.

Thanks for Magic and Jordan ratings.
On Pbpstats (which might count possessions for net ratings differently than you), Curry and Draymond are +19.3 in 2016 and +17.9 in 2017 (Curry and KD are +19.2 in 2017). So elite company for Bird, consistent with all time ceiling raising, although not quite the best in available data.

I think 05 Duncan/Ginobili at +20.4 has the highest recorded on-court net for a star duo.

But if we widen the search, you can also find some unexpected duos such as 21 Gobert/Conley (+17.8) and 09 Odom/Pau (+17.4).

[70sFan]

It's also interesting that the Lakers offense tanked in any case when the duo wasn't on the floor.

Do you mean when there was only one on the floor, or when both were off?

When the duo wasn't on the floor, so none of them or only one.

[tsherkin]

It's also interesting that the Lakers offense tanked in any case when the duo wasn't on the floor.

Do you mean when there was only one on the floor, or when both were off?

When the duo wasn't on the floor, so none of them or only one.

Oh.

Why is that interesting? You took their primary playmaker and their leading playoff scorer (and their 3rd-leading playoff scorer) off the floor. You were left with James Worthy and Byron Scott at best.

How could they not have seen a massive drop-off?

[70sFan]

Do you mean when there was only one on the floor, or when both were off?

When the duo wasn't on the floor, so none of them or only one.

Oh.

Why is that interesting? You took their primary playmaker and their leading playoff scorer (and their 3rd-leading playoff scorer) off the floor. You were left with James Worthy and Byron Scott at best.

How could they not have seen a massive drop-off?

No, I mean without DUO - so one of them is still in.

[tsherkin]

When the duo wasn't on the floor, so none of them or only one.

Oh.

Why is that interesting? You took their primary playmaker and their leading playoff scorer (and their 3rd-leading playoff scorer) off the floor. You were left with James Worthy and Byron Scott at best.

How could they not have seen a massive drop-off?

No, I mean without DUO - so one of them is still in.

Well, you initially said "none of them or only one."

So yeah, again I say, that isn't surprising.

But then again, even with only one on the floor, is it really surprising? You're either removing their best playmaker, who is also just shy of a 60% scorer.... or you're removing the 22 ppg, 60% scorer who was their most reliable halfcourt weapon. Worthy had a post game and a bit of a jumper, but he was at his most dangerous when he was running with Magic in transition. Cooper was a C+S guy mostly. B Scott had some game, but again did his best building off Magic. All of them did better when the D was focusing on Kareem.

So I guess I'm just wondering where in there you're surprised that their offense tanked when even just one of those guys was out, you know? Is it the magnitude of the drop-off that's bothering you? Like, does it look a lot larger than what you see from other top squads in similar scenarios?

[70sFan]

Oh.

Why is that interesting? You took their primary playmaker and their leading playoff scorer (and their 3rd-leading playoff scorer) off the floor. You were left with James Worthy and Byron Scott at best.

How could they not have seen a massive drop-off?

No, I mean without DUO - so one of them is still in.

Well, you initially said "none of them or only one."

So yeah, again I say, that isn't surprising.

But then again, even with only one on the floor, is it really surprising? You're either removing their best playmaker, who is also just shy of a 60% scorer.... or you're removing the 22 ppg, 60% scorer who was their most reliable halfcourt weapon. Worthy had a post game and a bit of a jumper, but he was at his most dangerous when he was running with Magic in transition. Cooper was a C+S guy mostly. B Scott had some game, but again did his best building off Magic. All of them did better when the D was focusing on Kareem.

So I guess I'm just wondering where in there you're surprised that their offense tanked when even just one of those guys was out, you know? Is it the magnitude of the drop-off that's bothering you? Like, does it look a lot larger than what you see from other top squads in similar scenarios?

Sorry for misunderstanding, that's on my part - I was answering quickly.

I don't know, it is surprising that Magic didn't do better without Kareem. It's extremely small sample, so I don't put much value in that piece of data, sometimes wonky things happen in the playoffs.

I do think that people don't get Kareem enough credit for his mid-80s seasons though. Some people argued in the past that he was just an all-star level player who did nothing outside of scoring, but all the data we have now (mostly with much thanks to Squared) shows that old Kareem was still a monster.

[DraymondGold]

Added game 5 to my post above on this page. One game left for the 86 finals!

Re: the new data, great stuff from Squared to give us another Bird playoff plus minus to look at! +6.68 On/off per 48 is ok, but not great. The small off sample always leads to some noise in single-playoff plus minus -- for example, LeBron has lower single-playoff on/off in 2011 (-12.04), 2013 (+1.97), 2015 (+4.54), and 2018 (+4.19). Jordan has lower single-playoff on/off in 1988 (+4.33), 1992 (+3.95), and 1995 (-19.32). So it's not damning to have a lower playoffs.

At the same time, once we incorporate the regular season data we have, then 1986 starts looking pretty singular in the 85-92 stretch for Bird, and older Bird overall seems less impactful than his reputation. More accurately, 87-88 Bird looks especially less impactful than his reputation, and specifically on the defensive end... while 90-92 is about in line with his reputation and box stats -- perhaps a few ranks off depending on the box stat, but consistent with an all-star who's probably sub-all NBA, which is also consistent with his reputation in those years. Looking at the website, 1985 regular season data underrates the Celtics by 10 wins compared to their full-season truth, so it'll be interesting to see if Bird's regular season numbers go up in 85 as the sample gets closer to average. If so, maybe this is a case where peak Bird dropped off (at least in plus minus based impact) as he aged more quickly than previously thought. If not, 86 will indeed look pretty singular (at least in available years, since we don't have much in 80–84)... which will lead to some continued discussions on what exactly it was that unlocked Bird's all-time impact that year.

No, I mean without DUO - so one of them is still in.

Well, you initially said "none of them or only one."

So yeah, again I say, that isn't surprising.

But then again, even with only one on the floor, is it really surprising? You're either removing their best playmaker, who is also just shy of a 60% scorer.... or you're removing the 22 ppg, 60% scorer who was their most reliable halfcourt weapon. Worthy had a post game and a bit of a jumper, but he was at his most dangerous when he was running with Magic in transition. Cooper was a C+S guy mostly. B Scott had some game, but again did his best building off Magic. All of them did better when the D was focusing on Kareem.

So I guess I'm just wondering where in there you're surprised that their offense tanked when even just one of those guys was out, you know? Is it the magnitude of the drop-off that's bothering you? Like, does it look a lot larger than what you see from other top squads in similar scenarios?

Sorry for misunderstanding, that's on my part - I was answering quickly.

I don't know, it is surprising that Magic didn't do better without Kareem. It's extremely small sample, so I don't put much value in that piece of data, sometimes wonky things happen in the playoffs.

I do think that people don't get Kareem enough credit for his mid-80s seasons though. Some people argued in the past that he was just an all-star level player who did nothing outside of scoring, but all the data we have now (mostly with much thanks to Squared) shows that old Kareem was still a monster.

Agreed, Kareem is out there looking like an absolute monster. Much more consistent with his GOAT level reputation than WOWY data for instance, which is quite a bit lower on Kareem than the other usual GOAT / Mount Rushmore candidates. Great stuff to see out of him!

I will note 1985 is supposed to be a slightly higher year for Kareem than his average in the 80s. In Backpicks BPM for instance, 1985 Kareem has his best regular season since 1981 and his best playoffs since 1980. In full-season PIPM, 1985 is Kareem's best season since 1981. That said, even if the other years are a touch lower, they are extremely complimentary to Kareem's impact.

Re: the 85 specific pair numbers, I do think it's a tiny bit surprising that there isn't much difference in the offense with Magic-only, Kareem-only, and neither. Small sample sizes, so I wouldn't weight his too heavily -- best to look at multi years or include regular season data -- and we don't know what's happening with the rest of the lineups (e.g. the 350 possessions without either of them on could just be garbage time against bench lineups, so against easier opponent defenses). But I would naively expect solo-Magic and solo-Kareem to have *some* offensive lift over the full bench lineup. Instead it seems like it's the pair working together that provide the incredible heights of the 85 Lakers' playoff offense (with Kareem having a bit more defensive lift in the Kareem-only lineups than Magic in the Magic-only lineups). At least in this single-playoff sample.

[lessthanjake]

Regarding the Magic-ON/Kareem-OFF and Kareem-ON/Magic-OFF numbers, we should keep in mind that the samples there are quite small, as we might expect from snippets of lineup data from a single playoffs. 343 possessions and 165 possessions are really small amounts—at the pace the Lakers played in those playoffs, that’s probably about 150 mins of Magic-ON/Kareem-OFF and about 75 mins of Kareem-ON/Magic-OFF. Of course, it’s definitely better to have this info than to not have it, but I wouldn’t draw any concrete conclusions from it about Magic or Kareem. Hopefully we can eventually get even more info, to make the sample here larger!

[homecourtloss]

^ Draymond I didn't see your post for some reason.  Fantastic stuff!  :D

By the way, Squared2020 also shared the Kareem and Bird game logs for the 1985 playoffs.  I added those to the spreadsheet.  

Read on Twitter

And he also shared the lineup data for the 1985 playoffs for both the Lakers and Celtics.  





As is evident in the spreadsheet, the Lakers data is missing 1st Round Game 3.  The Celtics data includes all games in the postseason.

Man, these numbers are unbelievable for Kareem. I know it's a tiny sample and all, but he looks extremely impactful on both ends of the floor.

It's also interesting that the Lakers offense tanked in any case when the duo wasn't on the floor.

would love to get more data but from what we have here along with the 1985 to 1996 data samples that squared has, Kareem becomes more and more solidified in my top two GOATs (along with lebron) due to extreme longevity of high and impact, high peaks, high extended primes.

[Djoker]

One caveat regarding Kareem's numbers is that he is playing lower minutes (possessions) than Magic. Still, I'd definitely say that his impact looks comparable based on this data. Even the larger regular season samples paint Kareem as a 1b) to Magic. Definitely great at his age to have similar impact to an all time great in his prime.

[tsherkin]

Sorry for misunderstanding, that's on my part - I was answering quickly.

Ah, we've all done it. I figured it was something like that.

I don't know, it is surprising that Magic didn't do better without Kareem. It's extremely small sample, so I don't put much value in that piece of data, sometimes wonky things happen in the playoffs.

Right.

I do think that people don't get Kareem enough credit for his mid-80s seasons though. Some people argued in the past that he was just an all-star level player who did nothing outside of scoring, but all the data we have now (mostly with much thanks to Squared) shows that old Kareem was still a monster.

Also true. Kareem was amazing. He didn't do several things at the same level at which he had in earlier years, and he couldn't handle the same kind of minutes... but he was a reliable bucket and a willing passer. And that bald old man ran HARD in transition, which is not how his reputation was going circa Airplane, that's for sure. Magic and Showtime helped breathe some life and joy back into him, which was awesome to see.