1984-88 Larry Bird vs 1986-90 Magic Johnson

[70sFan]

This thread is only asking about Bird from 84-88..you could make a strong argument that was the best 4 year stretch any player ever had. I don't think you can say that about Magic from 86-90.

I don't think you could to be honest, at least not any more compeling argument that for Magic.

Let’s set defense aside for a moment. For every great Magic pass you can show me I can show you a great Bird pass. Magic is higher volume but he was a PG so he had damn well better be. Outside of a pass Bird can crush a team anywhere on the floor with his shooting and he can get second chance points through boards. He was always and everywhere a danger, he was great and didn’t even need the ball. LeBron needs the ball, Magic needs the ball, Jordan -to a lesser extant but more than Bird- needed the ball. Bird is the lone non-Center that was top ten great and didn’t even need the ball to do it. That’s next level IMO. I find it more impressive to dominate the game that way. I wish Dallas would use Luka off ball more to grow his skills.

Well, that's basketball philosophy - what is better? To be good, resiliant on-ball player or to work more without the ball? I think the answer isn't clear and you'll find compeling argument for both sides.

[SNPA]

I don't think you could to be honest, at least not any more compeling argument that for Magic.

Let’s set defense aside for a moment. For every great Magic pass you can show me I can show you a great Bird pass. Magic is higher volume but he was a PG so he had damn well better be. Outside of a pass Bird can crush a team anywhere on the floor with his shooting and he can get second chance points through boards. He was always and everywhere a danger, he was great and didn’t even need the ball. LeBron needs the ball, Magic needs the ball, Jordan -to a lesser extant but more than Bird- needed the ball. Bird is the lone non-Center that was top ten great and didn’t even need the ball to do it. That’s next level IMO. I find it more impressive to dominate the game that way. I wish Dallas would use Luka off ball more to grow his skills.

Well, that's basketball philosophy - what is better? To be good, resiliant on-ball player or to work more without the ball? I think the answer isn't clear and you'll find compeling argument for both sides.

The compelling reason for on ball players is that they can make their teammates better (otherwise they are just a ball hog). But, as is the case with Bird, if a player can make his teammates better and not even need the ball...well...that’s next level.

[mailmp]

Taking this from reddit:

Bird and Magic faced a common postseason opponent five times (1980-82, 1986, and 1988), and they went head-to-head three times (1984-85, 1987). Wonder how that went?

In 1980 (against the 76ers) Magic put up 21.5/11.6/8.7 on 57.3 field goal percentage, versus Bird’s 22.2/13.8/3.2 on 44.0 field goal percentage / 48.2% true shooting;

In 1981 (against that 40-42 Rockets team), Magic (in three games) put up 17.0/13.7/7.0 on 38.8 field goal percentage, versus Bird’s aforementioned 15.3/15.3/7.0 on 41.9 field goal percentage;

In 1982 (again against the 76ers), Magic put up 16.2/10.8/8 on 53.3 field goal percentage, versus Bird’s 18.3/14.1/7.3 on 41.2 field goal percentage / 44.9% true shooting;

In 1984 (against each other), Magic put up 18.0/7.7/13.6 on 61.2% true shooting, versus Bird’s 27.4/14.0/3.6 on 59.5% true shooting;

In 1985 (again against each other), Magic put up on 18.3/6.8/14.0 on 56.9% true shooting, versus Bird’s 23.8/8.8/5.0 on 52.7% true shooting;

In 1986 (against the new Rockets), Magic put up 22.2/6.8/16.2(!!) on 60.2% true shooting, versus Bird’s 24.0/9.7/9.5 on 57.8% true shooting;

In 1987 (once more against each other), Magic put up 26.2/8.0/13.0 on 59.0% true shooting, versus Bird’s 24.2/10.0/5.5 on 53.4% true shooting;

And in 1988 (against the Pistons), Magic put up 21.1/5.7/13.0 on 67.6% true shooting, versus Bird’s 19.8/12.2/6.8 on 44.8% true shooting.

So by my count that is four years where Magic is clearly better (1980, 1982, 1987, and 1988), one where Bird is better (incredibly, somehow 1981 Magic fell short of the dirt-low standards of 1981 Bird), and three all at Bird’s peak where they are comparable (if we are splitting hairs, I would take Bird’s performance in 1984, Magic’s in 1986, and less assuredly Magic in 1985). Add in the total lack of discussion when it comes to 1989-91 Magic versus Bird, and Bird’s abysmal flameout in 1983, and their general playoff averages, I do not really see a case that Bird was better than Magic when it mattered, even if he was indeed a better regular season player for the first seven years.

“Scalability” and the defensive advantages of middle-career Bird does not overwrite that.

[TurinTurambar]

So there are a couple of myths I want to dispel right off the bat. The most annoying one by far right now is this idea that Magic was some ball dominant guy while Bird wasn't.

Here's what their career usage rates look like:

Magic: 22.3%
Bird: 26.5%

Magic's whole thing was how he would get rid of the ball. Calling him ball dominant in any context is absolutely ridiculous, and certainly no less so when compared to Bird.

I tend to think defense is vastly overrated on RealGM, and particularly individual defense from perimeter players. As far as defense is concerned, Magic and Larry are more or less the same, and I don't recall ever seeing any truly compelling evidence in Bird's favor here. It's kind of become one of those things that's commonly accepted and oft repeated, despite its shaky validity.

And I mean, yeah, I'm going to hold it against a guy when he destroys his back paving his own driveway when no other NBA player would do that, or when he gets into a bar fight and breaks his hand in the middle of the postseason, or brags to the media that he's in the best shape of his career because he gave up beer for a summer. I'm sorry, but Larry wasn't unlucky. Larry didn't take care of himself, and it cost him and his team.

Oh, and this idea that Larry was at all on the same level as Magic as a passer is just silly. Yes, you give a huge edge to Magic simply because his ball handling gave him more opportunities to make more passes from different angles. That's how this works.

Really, the only edge that Larry has ever had here is his shooting.

I very firmly believe Magic is the greatest basketball player ever, so this comparison has always been an easy choice to me.

[SNPA]

Bird and Magic were not co-equal defenders. Bird is the superior defensive player, by a sizable margin and is better compared to more high end defenders.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/hardwoodhoudini.com/2016/08/28/nba-legends-larry-bird-vs-lebron-james/amp/4/

From a pure defensive rating standpoint, Bird gets the slight edge over James, with a career rating of 101 to his 102. Of course, it should also be taken into consideration that Bird played in a front court that had both Kevin McHale and Robert Parish, the kind of dominant big men that James never had in his career.

The other statistics that demonstrate exactly how close these two are on the defensive end is a matching 1.7 steals per game throughout their careers, and 0.8 blocks per game for their careers. Rebounding actually favours Bird quite significantly, his career 10 rebounds per game are a solid jump form James’ 7.2 rebounds per game. Bird had a slight height advantage, but with James’ unparalleled athleticism it is a bit surprising to see Bird with such an advantage in that area. Bird’s rebounding percentages tell the same story as his overall mark of 14.5% is a significant upgrade from James’ 10.8%.

Bird’s defensive dominance was something that existed league wide when he played. James does not have single season where he lead the league in defensive win shares. Bird, on the other hand, had the most defensive win shares four different times, including the first two seasons of his career.

More advanced statistics reveal what kind of defensive force Bird was. Not to take anything away from James, who has proven to be one of the true defensive forces this league has ever seen, but Bird’s defensive box plus minus of 2.5 easily takes down James’ mark of 1.9.

————————

I’m not a big advanced stats tell the whole story guy but Birds show a top end defensive player.

When you look at the whole player across the whole court in prime and peak it’s Bird. How anyone can doubt Bird sits along with Magic at the top of the court vision and passing charts is beyond me. Pick any random Bird passing highlight video, it’s always the same...jaw dropping other worldly absurdly great.

[TurinTurambar]

Bird and Magic were not co-equal defenders. Bird is the superior defensive player, by a sizable margin and is better compared to more high end defenders.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/hardwoodhoudini.com/2016/08/28/nba-legends-larry-bird-vs-lebron-james/amp/4/

From a pure defensive rating standpoint, Bird gets the slight edge over James, with a career rating of 101 to his 102. Of course, it should also be taken into consideration that Bird played in a front court that had both Kevin McHale and Robert Parish, the kind of dominant big men that James never had in his career.

The other statistics that demonstrate exactly how close these two are on the defensive end is a matching 1.7 steals per game throughout their careers, and 0.8 blocks per game for their careers. Rebounding actually favours Bird quite significantly, his career 10 rebounds per game are a solid jump form James’ 7.2 rebounds per game. Bird had a slight height advantage, but with James’ unparalleled athleticism it is a bit surprising to see Bird with such an advantage in that area. Bird’s rebounding percentages tell the same story as his overall mark of 14.5% is a significant upgrade from James’ 10.8%.

Bird’s defensive dominance was something that existed league wide when he played. James does not have single season where he lead the league in defensive win shares. Bird, on the other hand, had the most defensive win shares four different times, including the first two seasons of his career.

More advanced statistics reveal what kind of defensive force Bird was. Not to take anything away from James, who has proven to be one of the true defensive forces this league has ever seen, but Bird’s defensive box plus minus of 2.5 easily takes down James’ mark of 1.9.

————————

I’m not a big advanced stats tell the whole story guy but Birds show a top end defensive player.

When you look at the whole player across the whole court in prime and peak it’s Bird. How anyone can doubt Bird sits along with Magic at the top of the court vision and passing charts is beyond me. Pick any random Bird passing highlight video, it’s always the same...jaw dropping other worldly absurdly great.

Advanced statistics for defense are particularly problematic. Daryl Morey himself has said that the stuff that's publicly available is practically useless to him, so I don't see why I should see them as useful to me.

And there's a reason why whenever "Who is the best passer in NBA history?" comes up, the answer is overwhelmingly "Magic, then daylight, then the next guy." It's never close. Nobody denies Larry was a wonderful passer, he just wasn't Magic.

[SNPA]

Bird and Magic were not co-equal defenders. Bird is the superior defensive player, by a sizable margin and is better compared to more high end defenders.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/hardwoodhoudini.com/2016/08/28/nba-legends-larry-bird-vs-lebron-james/amp/4/

From a pure defensive rating standpoint, Bird gets the slight edge over James, with a career rating of 101 to his 102. Of course, it should also be taken into consideration that Bird played in a front court that had both Kevin McHale and Robert Parish, the kind of dominant big men that James never had in his career.

The other statistics that demonstrate exactly how close these two are on the defensive end is a matching 1.7 steals per game throughout their careers, and 0.8 blocks per game for their careers. Rebounding actually favours Bird quite significantly, his career 10 rebounds per game are a solid jump form James’ 7.2 rebounds per game. Bird had a slight height advantage, but with James’ unparalleled athleticism it is a bit surprising to see Bird with such an advantage in that area. Bird’s rebounding percentages tell the same story as his overall mark of 14.5% is a significant upgrade from James’ 10.8%.

Bird’s defensive dominance was something that existed league wide when he played. James does not have single season where he lead the league in defensive win shares. Bird, on the other hand, had the most defensive win shares four different times, including the first two seasons of his career.

More advanced statistics reveal what kind of defensive force Bird was. Not to take anything away from James, who has proven to be one of the true defensive forces this league has ever seen, but Bird’s defensive box plus minus of 2.5 easily takes down James’ mark of 1.9.

————————

I’m not a big advanced stats tell the whole story guy but Birds show a top end defensive player.

When you look at the whole player across the whole court in prime and peak it’s Bird. How anyone can doubt Bird sits along with Magic at the top of the court vision and passing charts is beyond me. Pick any random Bird passing highlight video, it’s always the same...jaw dropping other worldly absurdly great.

Advanced statistics for defense are particularly problematic. Daryl Morey himself has said that the stuff that's publicly available is practically useless to him, so I don't see why I should see them as useful to me.

And there's a reason why whenever "Who is the best passer in NBA history?" comes up, the answer is overwhelmingly "Magic, then daylight, then the next guy." It's never close. Nobody denies Larry was a wonderful passer, he just wasn't Magic.

Magic is the greatest on ball passer. Bird is the greatest off ball passer.

On defense it’s really revisionist to try and claim these guys wash out. Bird made 3 all d teams and was a brilliant team defender in his early career and prime. Magic was solid in some ways but he just wasn’t on the same level. That whole side of the floor belongs to Bird in a Magic/Bird debate. That puts Magic in a hole where you have to show he was so significantly better on offense than Bird, and there isn’t much of a case for that. You can argue better, but not a lot better.

[Prez]

So there are a couple of myths I want to dispel right off the bat. The most annoying one by far right now is this idea that Magic was some ball dominant guy while Bird wasn't.

Here's what their career usage rates look like:

Magic: 22.3%
Bird: 26.5%

Magic's whole thing was how he would get rid of the ball. Calling him ball dominant in any context is absolutely ridiculous, and certainly no less so when compared to Bird.

Usage says nothing about ball dominance, has nothing to do with time of possession, touches, dribbles, how much you have the ball. It's a measure of possessions that you end (shot attempt, FTA, turnover), not how much you dominate the ball.

[mailmp]

I’m not a big advanced stats tell the whole story guy but Birds show a top end defensive player.

When you look at the whole player across the whole court in prime and peak it’s Bird. How anyone can doubt Bird sits along with Magic at the top of the court vision and passing charts is beyond me. Pick any random Bird passing highlight video, it’s always the same...Magic is the greatest on ball passer. Bird is the greatest off ball passer.

On defense it’s really revisionist to try and claim these guys wash out. Bird made 3 all d teams and was a brilliant team defender in his early career and prime. Magic was solid in some ways but he just wasn’t on the same level. That whole side of the floor belongs to Bird in a Magic/Bird debate. That puts Magic in a hole where you have to show he was so significantly better on offense than Bird, and there isn’t much of a case for that. You can argue better, but not a lot better.

This is the same logic that makes people say Stockton was better than Nash. “Oh eyeballing this I feel like Player A was a 9/10 on offence and a 7/10 on defence, so obviously they were better than that 10/10 and 4/10 player, no real analysis or impact consideration needed.”

[D.Brasco]

I think peak Bird is quite a bit better than peak Magic and I doubt it'd be as much of a discussion if Bird's career wasn't cut short by injury.

Well, I think that peak Magic was better and it wouldn't be any doubts without AIDS retirement...

HIV not AIDS. He'd be long dead by now if his HIV developed into full blown AIDS.

Leaving that aside, what if Bird didn't have the back issues? I think his game would have been quite well suited for older age. He could have been like a Dirk or TD into his later years.

[TurinTurambar]

On defense it’s really revisionist to try and claim these guys wash out. Bird made 3 all d teams and was a brilliant team defender in his early career and prime. Magic was solid in some ways but he just wasn’t on the same level. That whole side of the floor belongs to Bird in a Magic/Bird debate. That puts Magic in a hole where you have to show he was so significantly better on offense than Bird, and there isn’t much of a case for that. You can argue better, but not a lot better.

Kobe made a lot of All-Defense teams that he probably didn't actually deserve. I'm not sure that's a great indicator of anything, particularly considering the preferential treatment Bird absolutely got from the media during his career.

And Magic is on the very short list of candidates for greatest offensive player ever, so I think that covers whatever miniscule gap there is between the two defensively. Probably not for you, because it's clear Larry is your favorite player, so I'm not going to be surprised when you respond "Well Larry is on that list too."

Usage says nothing about ball dominance, has nothing to do with time of possession, touches, dribbles, how much you have the ball. It's a measure of possessions that you end (shot attempt, FTA, turnover), not how much you dominate the ball.

Usage absolutely is a good indicator of a player's ball dominance, since it's hard to shoot or draw fouls or turn the ball over if they don't have the ball in their hands.

This is why everyone always brings it up whenever the subject of ball-dominance comes around.

Considering we don't have data like Time of Possession for players from the Magic/Bird era, Usage is about as good as we can do at the moment.

[SNPA]

I’m not a big advanced stats tell the whole story guy but Birds show a top end defensive player.

When you look at the whole player across the whole court in prime and peak it’s Bird. How anyone can doubt Bird sits along with Magic at the top of the court vision and passing charts is beyond me. Pick any random Bird passing highlight video, it’s always the same...Magic is the greatest on ball passer. Bird is the greatest off ball passer.

On defense it’s really revisionist to try and claim these guys wash out. Bird made 3 all d teams and was a brilliant team defender in his early career and prime. Magic was solid in some ways but he just wasn’t on the same level. That whole side of the floor belongs to Bird in a Magic/Bird debate. That puts Magic in a hole where you have to show he was so significantly better on offense than Bird, and there isn’t much of a case for that. You can argue better, but not a lot better.

This is the same logic that makes people say Stockton was better than Nash. “Oh eyeballing this I feel like Player A was a 9/10 on offence and a 7/10 on defence, so obviously they were better than that 10/10 and 4/10 player, no real analysis or impact consideration needed.”

Lol. Yeah, you cut the entire section with stats
and smashed parts two posts together.

[mailmp]

Oh sorry I did not keep a redundant and needlessly lengthy total log of every point you made across multiple old comments. I am sure some extra rebound analysis prior to the primary quotation totally changes the analogy.

[Prez]

Usage says nothing about ball dominance, has nothing to do with time of possession, touches, dribbles, how much you have the ball. It's a measure of possessions that you end (shot attempt, FTA, turnover), not how much you dominate the ball.

Usage absolutely is a good indicator of a player's ball dominance, since it's hard to shoot or draw fouls or turn the ball over if they don't have the ball in their hands.

This is why everyone always brings it up whenever the subject of ball-dominance comes around.

Considering we don't have data like Time of Possession for players from the Magic/Bird era, Usage is about as good as we can do at the moment.

It isn't though, people bring it up when the subject of ball dominance comes around because it's a commonly misused stat.

Klay Thompson is one of the least ball dominant offensive stars you'll find and he has had some comparable USG% seasons to John Wall, who (when healthy) is one of the most ball dominant stars in basketball. Usage has nothing to do with ball dominance, we have the formula for it and it factors in none of the things that look at who is actually dominating the ball possession to possession.

I would agree that it's difficult to quantify ball dominance for past eras as we just don't have that data, but USG% isn't a good alternative at all.

[SNPA]

Oh sorry I did not keep a redundant and needlessly lengthy total log of every point you made across multiple old comments. I am sure some extra rebound analysis prior to the primary quotation totally changes the analogy.

Cuts stats section, quotes narrative sections, accuse of being all narrative. Some technic you got there.

For the other parts of the thread...

Bird made 3 all d teams. Response - That doesn’t matter

Bird had high end defensive stats. Response - That doesn’t matter.

Ok. What would matter?

[mailmp]

So if I cite BPM showing Stockton as substantially better than Nash, that is good statistical analysis and not narrative? Again, how dare I cut the oh-so-important rebound counting.

What would matter is being better in the playoffs, and Bird patently was not.

[SNPA]

So if I cite BPM showing Stockton as substantially better than Nash, that is good statistical analysis and not narrative? Again, how dare I cut the oh-so-important rebound counting.

What would matter is being better in the playoffs, and Bird patently was not.

I refer you to the end of the fourth post in this thread.

Bird was in a blood bath in the East and Magic had a relative cakewalk in the West. The most recent analogy was LeBron in that pathetic East for all those years. Context. It do matter.

[mailmp]

And I refer you to how they performed against common opponents lol.

[SNPA]

And I refer you to how they performed against common opponents lol.

Yes because they play the same position and have the same role and supporting cast. Apples to apples, right?

[TurinTurambar]

It isn't though, people bring it up when the subject of ball dominance comes around because it's a commonly misused stat.

Klay Thompson is one of the least ball dominant offensive stars you'll find and he has had some comparable USG% seasons to John Wall, who (when healthy) is one of the most ball dominant stars in basketball.

I mean, not really. They have like one year where they're even within a point of each other, and other than that it breaks out about the way you would expect it to.

Usage has nothing to do with ball dominance, we have the formula for it and it factors in none of the things that look at who is actually dominating the ball possession to possession.

So you're saying that you don't think measuring the number of shots taken, fouls drawn, and turnovers committed by a player is not a good indicator of how much that player has the ball in their hands?

Yeah we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

I would agree that it's difficult to quantify ball dominance for past eras as we just don't have that data, but USG% isn't a good alternative at all.

If you have a better one, I'm all ears. Otherwise, I clearly don't agree with your thoughts on Usage with relation to the topic of the thread at all, and I fail to see the point you're trying to make here, considering I just said that it isn't perfect, or even as good as the more granular stuff available today, just that it's the best we have for the era we're looking at in this thread.