Best Celtics Place in NBA History

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,480
Melrose, MA
Simmons puts Bird at #6.
  1. Michael Jordan
  2. LeBron James
  3. Bill Russell
  4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
  5. Magic Johnson
  6. Larry Bird
  7. Tim Duncan
  8. Wilt Chamberlain
  9. Kobe Bryant
  10. Steph Curry
I think the top 6 are basically right, including Magic over Bird.
Magic had essentially a 12 year career with 9 Finals appearances, during which he went 5-4. His teams went 2-1 in the Finals against Bird's Celtics. Bird, too, had essentially a 12 year career, and he made 5 Finals appearances and went 3-2, both losses vs Magic's teams.

I don't see the non-Boston-homer case that puts Bird above Magic.
Some of that Finals gap was opportunity. Western Conference was markedly weaker than the East during that era. The Celtics were seriously hampered by injury in both 1985 (Maxwell) and 1987 when KC Jones drove the starters into the ground and McHale was playing on a broken foot. Bird was by far the better scorer; Magic was superior at running the offense. Magic was a better individual defender later in his career, but Bird's defense often gets overlooked some.

Magic's peak was perhaps; he had an outstanding rookie season (finished 2nd to Bird in RoY voting) and unbelievable Finals against the Sixers. He performed at a high level for 12 seasons, with only one of those, his second, shortened by injury. Bird's peak was 9 years, and he was never the same after he missed his 10th season after undergoing major heel surgery. Another fun fact is that Magic overaged 38 or more minutes twice; Bird averaged more than 38 minutes per game 9 seasons, leading the league in minutes per game twice.
If you want to discount Magic's 4 additional Finals appearances based on the West being an easier conference, that's reasonable. But I don't think we can discount the 1985 loss based on an injury to Cedric Maxwell. 1987 and Walton/McHale, sure. But Maxwell had clearly been surpassed by McHale at that point. If someone is to blame for that series loss, it has to be the player who injured his hand in a barfight before the series, which might have affected his performance. That would be Larry Bird. Also, if we're taking injuries into account, I think Magic needs to get some credit for playing center in the finals in his rookie year when Kareem was out.

I think the Celtic Rushmore has to be Russell, Havlicek, Bird, and Pierce. And the Celtics should already be seeking resumes to hire the guy who will carve Tatum in next to them.
 

Attachments

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Were they really all “Magic’s” teams when he was playing next to the #4 guy on the list for all of those championships??
 

Anthologos

New Member
Jun 4, 2017
111
Clyde Drexler above Magic would be a lousy argument… I don’t see how one could say there is ‘no argument’ for Bird above Magic. That seems like one of the most compelling arguments to have, as well as the most fun. Homers or not. :)
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,849
NYC
Clyde Drexler above Magic would be a lousy argument… I don’t see how one could say there is ‘no argument’ for Bird above Magic. That seems like one of the most compelling arguments to have, as well as the most fun. Homers or not. :)
There’s no argument for there being no argument for Bird over Magic.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,021
Imaginationland
Fair or not, I think Bird vs Magic leaned more towards the former 20 years ago. One of the easiest arguments for Magic over Bird (now) is that Magic is (pretty much without question) the best point guard of all-time. When Bird was (again pretty much without question) the best small forward of all time, it was a big point in his favor. Now that Lebron has clearly passed Bird in that regard, it's strangely an argument in favor of Magic over Bird, too.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
Bird’s 1984-1986 MVP 3-peat scoots him above Magic for me. His peak was a good bit higher and more dominant.
+1

From 1980-1986 it wasn’t close. Bird went ROY then 2-2-2-1-1-1 in MVP voting. The next five years Bird was hurt a lot and Magic won some MVPs (not clear how many he SHOULD have won) and the Lakers won a couple titles.

The Magic>Bird narrative is about some recency bias (last we saw, Magic seemed better) and more titles for Magic.

I love love love Magic Johnson as a player, and won’t say a bad word about his skill, but peak and healthy Bird was better than any version of Magic.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,480
Melrose, MA
Bird was much better than Magic athis peak. I flip those two. Magic came into t5he league with Kareem, Bird with cooked Cowens.
Interesting point.

The Celtics improved by 32 wins in Bird's rookie year. By Win Shares, the top 6 Celtics in 1978-79 were Maxwell (11.7), Cowens (4.8), Ford (3.6), Judkins (3.0), Robey (1.8), and Archibald (1.6). The rest of the team totaled 5.1 Win Shares.

In 1979-80, the top 6 Celtics by Win Shares were: Maxwell (12.2), Bird (11.2), Archibald (8.9), Ford (5.6), Robey (5.5), and Cowens (5.4). Outside of Bird the only new players of note were ML Carr (5.2) and Gerland Henderson (1.7). Nobody except Judkins, a JAG who lost playing time, saw his win shares decline.

The Lakers only improved by 13 wins in Magic's rookie year.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,480
Melrose, MA
+1

From 1980-1986 it wasn’t close. Bird went ROY then 2-2-2-1-1-1 in MVP voting. The next five years Bird was hurt a lot and Magic won some MVPs (not clear how many he SHOULD have won) and the Lakers won a couple titles.

The Magic>Bird narrative is about some recency bias (last we saw, Magic seemed better) and more titles for Magic.

I love love love Magic Johnson as a player, and won’t say a bad word about his skill, but peak and healthy Bird was better than any version of Magic.
Also... Bird was (and looked) cooked when he retired. Magic was still going strong when he was forced to retire. And he was so not cooked that he was able to return to the game after 4.5 seasons off, at age 36, as a power forward, and play damned well for 32 games.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,213
Were they really all “Magic’s” teams when he was playing next to the #4 guy on the list for all of those championships??
I’ve made the point in other threads, but this reality—that magic wasn’t even the lead guy on his own team until 1987–is why no one at the time thought this was all that close. Bird’s peak was higher and he was an alpha much faster; that’s largely the end of this story. And I say that acknowledging Magic remains the greatest PG ever.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,101
If you want to discount Magic's 4 additional Finals appearances based on the West being an easier conference, that's reasonable. But I don't think we can discount the 1985 loss based on an injury to Cedric Maxwell. 1987 and Walton/McHale, sure. But Maxwell had clearly been surpassed by McHale at that point. If someone is to blame for that series loss, it has to be the player who injured his hand in a barfight before the series, which might have affected his performance. That would be Larry Bird. Also, if we're taking injuries into account, I think Magic needs to get some credit for playing center in the finals in his rookie year when Kareem was out.

I think the Celtic Rushmore has to be Russell, Havlicek, Bird, and Pierce. And the Celtics should already be seeking resumes to hire the guy who will carve Tatum in next to them.
I think you may be understating the impact of Maxwell's injury. True, Maxwell was definitely #4 the Celtics Big3 frontcourt. However, until he got hurt, he was starting and was a key part of the Celtics rotation, averaging nearly 29 minutes per game. After he went down with a knee/foot injury, McHale's minutes jumped from 30 mpg to 39! While Maxwell did return in time for the playoffs, he was a shell of what he was in the first half of that season. In the series against the Lakers, 3 Celtics starters averaged over 40 minutes per game, and Chief averaged over 37. Meanwhile, the Lakers had 7 players average at least 20 minutes.

Finally, the Bird-Magic Finals record would have almost certainly been tied at 2-2 had the Lakers met the Celtics in the 1986 Finals; but Magic's Lakers were not good enough to beat the Rockets.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,948
NH
This is a different point, but I find it legitimately crazy that people put Kobe in the top 10. Like absolutely insane. It can't be supported with MVP shares, with stats, or really with anything other than a revisionist history of his career that started right around the time they fleeced the Grizzlies out of Gasol. It's like the people who argue Elway is a top 3 QB.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
This is a different point, but I find it legitimately crazy that people put Kobe in the top 10. Like absolutely insane. It can't be supported with MVP shares, with stats, or really with anything other than a revisionist history of his career that started right around the time they fleeced the Grizzlies out of Gasol. It's like the people who argue Elway is a top 3 QB.
I think it’s a cultural impact thing (and also the early death). For whatever reason the people in that era and the era after absolutely REVERE Kobe. I don’t understand it at all (I played basketball in the same way Bill Simmons did, but I would absolutely hateplaying with Kobe. Not only was he a jackass but he’s the type of player who would blame the 5tj player on the floor as he threw up multiple bricks)
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,021
Imaginationland
I think it’s a cultural impact thing (and also the early death). For whatever reason the people in that era and the era after absolutely REVERE Kobe. I don’t understand it at all (I played basketball in the same way Bill Simmons did, but I would absolutely hateplaying with Kobe. Not only was he a jackass but he’s the type of player who would blame the 5tj player on the floor as he threw up multiple bricks)
Players love "skill" above almost everything. Impressive dribbling and shotmaking are more impressive than clean shooting and brute strength (and forget reliable defense and durability), regardless of the actual results. This is why players almost universally consider Kyrie one of the best players in the league, and why everyone born in the 90s and 00s has Kobe as their favorite player over Lebron. It's also why some players (harden) get away with saying Giannis isn't skilled. Kobe made difficult shots, doesn't matter that he wasn't particularly efficient even for his era (Pierce's career covered almost the exact same years, but Paul had solidly higher TS numbers). It's also ridiculous that he basically gave himself his own nickname (that's not how it's supposed to work), but whatever.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,021
Imaginationland
This is a different point, but I find it legitimately crazy that people put Kobe in the top 10. Like absolutely insane. It can't be supported with MVP shares, with stats, or really with anything other than a revisionist history of his career that started right around the time they fleeced the Grizzlies out of Gasol. It's like the people who argue Elway is a top 3 QB.
He's 10th all-time in MVP shares (just behind Duncan, just behind Wilt), so I suppose an argument of him as a top 10 guy could include MVP shares. Giannis and Jokic will surely pass him in that regard before they're done (and Curry has an outside chance), but for now, he's top 10.

MVP shares is as useful a stat as any in creating a list of the all-time greats (at least for the top 20, even though there are a few hiccups like Malone in 8th, or Harden in 12th).
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
670
All of the above there with Kobe. Recency bias, the tragedy, and especially the Rings. It blows my mind so many younger people view Kobe>Lebron, but it does all come down to winning. Kobe's 5 still bests Lebron's 4, in a way it's a modern day Wilt vs Russell.

The rings feed the cultural impact as well. Kobe has the cult of personality that Lebron severely lacks i.e. being a psychopath, ice cold, killer type of competitor, like Mike in a way that Lebron will never be.
 

dhellers

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2005
4,209
Silver Spring, Maryland
This is a different point, but I find it legitimately crazy that people put Kobe in the top 10. Like absolutely insane. It can't be supported with MVP shares, with stats, or really with anything other than a revisionist history of his career that started right around the time they fleeced the Grizzlies out of Gasol. It's like the people who argue Elway is a top 3 QB.
Kobe was a great volume scorer... but was more or less neutralized by HOF (but not super great) Ray Allen.
So top 10??? I am not even sure I would take Kobe over PPierce (esp. given what a massive dickhead Kobe was).

But the bigger WTF is placing Bill#6 behind Lebron. Has Simmons let the LA vibe mess up what it means to WIN at all levels.
How could Russell not be the default #1 (so that MJ has to have a case made).
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,958
Saskatoon Canada
Kobe is the only guy close to Jeter level overrated. Dimaggio (never even had a 9 WAR (Mantle, Mays, Trout all did 10 3+ times) as greatest CF is close.

Incredible the stuff that was swept under the rug with Kobe:

He blew up a team that had a chance to challenge Russell's run win maybe 7 rings with Shaq.
His assault
Guy who had good careers elsewhere could not get along with him.
His last year he may have been the worst player ever considering how much he played and shot. 7 3s a game at 28% had the ball all game and 2 assists a game because nobody ever even helped on him the best play for the other team was to give him the ball.
He held the Lakers hostage for 5 years not allowing a rebuild, while he was either not playing or a bad player
It was always only about him. Even his leadership was about how much harder he worked and how much better he was.
 
Last edited:

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,155
Kobe was a great volume scorer... but was more or less neutralized by HOF (but not super great) Ray Allen.
So top 10??? I am not even sure I would take Kobe over PPierce (esp. given what a massive dickhead Kobe was).

But the bigger WTF is placing Bill#6 behind Lebron. Has Simmons let the LA vibe mess up what it means to WIN at all levels.
How could Russell not be the default #1 (so that MJ has to have a case made).
Amen brother!
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,052
As per the thread title, I’m going with the old Garden. Is it as nice? No; even the press box was a mess, although the preparation room prepared great brunch. Did the floor sometimes get wet from the ice underneath? Of course. Did the ice sometimes melt during Bruins games. Sure. Where there mice? There were mice. But the place had charm.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
As per the thread title, I’m going with the old Garden. Is it as nice? No; even the press box was a mess, although the preparation room prepared great brunch. Did the floor sometimes get wet from the ice underneath? Of course. Did the ice sometimes melt during Bruins games. Sure. Where there mice? There were mice. But the place had charm.
I'll take the Old Garden over the new, generic one all day long.

And as much as it pains me, I think the top 6 order is correct. Magic's 5-3 over Bird in the most important category is hard to dispute, as is the 2-1 head to head. It's not the only factor, but it does have a lot to do with the distinction between two truly neck and neck players.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
As per the thread title, I’m going with the old Garden. Is it as nice? No; even the press box was a mess, although the preparation room prepared great brunch. Did the floor sometimes get wet from the ice underneath? Of course. Did the ice sometimes melt during Bruins games. Sure. Where there mice? There were mice. But the place had charm.
Those were rats.
if you ever stood in standing room behind the loge seats, you’d see rats on the pipes and conduits on the underside of the balcony.

The pressbox *was* great. You were basically suspended over the edge of the court, and if the game sucked, you could change the TVs to Jeopardy.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
There was also a monkey. It apparently had escaped from a circus and lived in the rafters until the place was torn down.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
Love this Magic-Bird discussion.

Magic's 5 best teams:

1986-87 - 65-17, won NBA finals, Magic #1 on team with 15.9 WS (beat Boston in finals)
1984-85 - 62-20, won NBA finals, Magic #1 on team with 12.7 WS (beat Boston in finals)
1987-88 - 62-20, won NBA finals, Magic #1 on team with 10.9 WS
1979-80 - 60-22, won NBA finals, Kareem #1 on team with 14.8 WS
1981-82 - 57-25, won NBA finals, Magic #1 on team with 12.9 WS

Bird's 5 best teams:

1985-86 - 67-15, won NBA finals, Bird #1 on team with 15.8 WS (beat LA in finals)
1983-84 - 62-20, won NBA finals, Bird #1 on team with 13.6 WS
1980-81 - 62-20, won NBA finals, Maxwell #1 on team with 11.0 WS
1984-85 - 63-19, lost NBA finals, Bird #1 on team with 15.7 WS
1981-82 - 63-19, lost Eastern finals, Bird #1 on team with 12.5 WS

It would have been awesome to see the 86-87 Lakers square off against the 85-86 Celtics. We *almost* got that, but McHale was hurt in that 86-87 season, and Walton was injured and only played 10 games.

I'd argue that the Eastern Conference was more difficult than the West was at that time in the NBA. Boston had to contend with Philadelphia, Milwaukee (underrated but always terrific), the blossoming Pistons juggernaut, and even early Michael Jordan (plus, lest we forget, Dominique and the Hawks, who were also really good). The Lakers didn't have the same caliber of opponents, though Houston was always tough.

But LA did beat Boston 2 out of 3 times in the finals, though 86-87, again, was hugely impacted by Boston injuries. C'est la vie.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
All of the above there with Kobe. Recency bias, the tragedy, and especially the Rings. It blows my mind so many younger people view Kobe>Lebron, but it does all come down to winning. Kobe's 5 still bests Lebron's 4, in a way it's a modern day Wilt vs Russell.

The rings feed the cultural impact as well. Kobe has the cult of personality that Lebron severely lacks i.e. being a psychopath, ice cold, killer type of competitor, like Mike in a way that Lebron will never be.
The "Mamba mentality" is something that people point to that elevates Kobe. We've had enough discussions here and many people here know why I'm as anti-Kobe as it gets, so seeing people fawn over him really, really bothers me.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,926
Wayne, NJ
Fuck this

No analytics here. Larry at his peak was better than Magic. Best offensive player I’ve ever seen. Best passer I’ve ever seen. Best non-jumping rebounder on the team. Best leader I’ve ever seen.

Only stat I look at is he turned a team pre-Parrish & McHale team from bums to a team on the way to multiple championships. They sucked. Bird joined as a rookie and they were great. RIGHT away from day one.

Yes I was 20 in his rookie year and highly impressionable and he’s still by far my favorite basketball player of all time.

But even without green colored glasses, everyone at the time during the peak knew Bird was the greatest. Many thought the greatest ever during those 6 years.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,662
where I was last at
Peak Bird was a far better player than Magic.

He just was.

That the early 80s Celts had to deal with wars against the 76ers and the mid-late 80s Celts had to deal with wars against the Pistons, and sometimes they lost those wars, factors pretty significantly into the perceptions of Showtime and Magic versus Larry and the Green. And even when they won the East battles, the toll was too high (maybe the same but to a lesser degree about thr 76ers) against a team as great as the West's almost always, but always less challenged, annual champ.

IMO if the Lakers played in the East there is NFW they survive to get to 9 Finals and win 5. Magic and the Lakers danced into the Finals and the Rockets stepped on their toes twice. Then they got crushed.

The Celts and 76ers, and Pistons and Bulls brought knives and chains in street fights. .

Also Magic's Michigan St team hung one on Larry and Indy State that I think colored head to head perceptions, but are pretty irrelevant to their comps as pros.

And yes I wear Green glasses and my perception is colored.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
Bird vs. Magic (more)

Top 5 seasons (win shares)
Bird: 15.8 (85-86), 15.7 (84-85), 15.2 (86-87), 15.0 (87-88), 14.0 (82-83) - AVG: 15.14
Magic: 16.5 (89-90), 16.1 (88-89), 15.9 (86-87), 15.4 (90-91), 12.9 (81-82) - AVG: 15.36

Top 5 seasons (VORP)
Bird: 8.7 (84-85), 8.6 (86-87), 8.4 (85-86), 8.1 (87-88), 7.3 (83-84) - AVG: 8.22
Magic: 8.9 (89-90), 8.3 (88-89), 8.1 (90-91), 8.0 (86-87), 7.0 (81-82) - AVG: 8.06

Top 5 seasons (PER)
Bird: 27.8 (87-88), 26.5 (84-85), 26.4 (86-87), 25.6 (85-86), 24.2 (83-84) - AVG: 26.10
Magic: 27.0 (86-87), 26.9 (88-89), 26.6 (89-90), 25.7 (80-81), 25.1 (90-91) - AVG: 26.26

So by WS and PER, Magic's peak 5 years were a tick better than Bird's. But by VORP, Bird's peak 5 years were a tick better than Magic's.

This is, honestly, about as close as it gets comparing two players.

(Who, BTW, were almost exactly the same size: Bird 6'9", 220 lbs; Magic 6'9", 215 lbs - crazy)
 

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
30,976
Geneva, Switzerland
I find the Kobe thing utterly perplexing. He's probably the most selfish all time player. He practically threw games out of spite. He blew up an awesome team--it's as if Magic had chased Kareem out of town. And yet NBA greats--including Bird--seem to love him. I guess there's stuff I just don't understand, not having that kind of personality.

I'd also say that in this player empowerment age, I think you have to start thinking about players being their own de facto GM's in how you evaluate their careers. Just like being a great teammate or leader is a factor, when you demand your front office make stupid signings (LeBron!) that's a ding.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
I think Magic vs Bird is razor close and people speaking on it with such certainty are lying to themselves or just being homers. It's a pretty easy argument of would you rather have Bird at a higher peak, but for a shorter period of time, or Magic at a slightly lower peak, but for a longer period of time. Magic also has his career cut short due to HIV, which I think people view as more tragic than Bird's career being cut short due to injury (even though the former is probably more preventable than the latter) in part because we never really saw Magic struggle on the court, with Bird it was obvious he wasn't the same player and needed to retire.

I don't really understand the Kareem argument against Magic. Sure, Kareem was a Top 5 player himself and certainly early on during their run he was the best player on the Lakers. But at the end of the day, both of these guys played on absolutely loaded teams with great supporting casts. At some point, the Parrish/McHale combo becomes superior to Kareem. Lakers had Worthy, Celtics had DJ, Lakers had Norm Nixon, Celtics had Tiny, etc. Both of these teams were star studded lineups, so it's weird to argue that one of these guys had more help in winning than the other. Put Magic on the Celtics and Bird on the Lakers and the teams probably mimic the same success the franchises actually had.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,926
Wayne, NJ
Bird vs. Magic (more)

Top 5 seasons (win shares)
Bird: 15.8 (85-86), 15.7 (84-85), 15.2 (86-87), 15.0 (87-88), 14.0 (82-83) - AVG: 15.14
Magic: 16.5 (89-90), 16.1 (88-89), 15.9 (86-87), 15.4 (90-91), 12.9 (81-82) - AVG: 15.36

Top 5 seasons (VORP)
Bird: 8.7 (84-85), 8.6 (86-87), 8.4 (85-86), 8.1 (87-88), 7.3 (83-84) - AVG: 8.22
Magic: 8.9 (89-90), 8.3 (88-89), 8.1 (90-91), 8.0 (86-87), 7.0 (81-82) - AVG: 8.06

Top 5 seasons (PER)
Bird: 27.8 (87-88), 26.5 (84-85), 26.4 (86-87), 25.6 (85-86), 24.2 (83-84) - AVG: 26.10
Magic: 27.0 (86-87), 26.9 (88-89), 26.6 (89-90), 25.7 (80-81), 25.1 (90-91) - AVG: 26.26

So by WS and PER, Magic's peak 5 years were a tick better than Bird's. But by VORP, Bird's peak 5 years were a tick better than Magic's.

This is, honestly, about as close as it gets comparing two players.

(Who, BTW, were almost exactly the same size: Bird 6'9", 220 lbs; Magic 6'9", 215 lbs - crazy)
I saw all the Celtics playoff games and many of the Lakers. It wasn’t really close.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
I saw all the Celtics playoff games and many of the Lakers. It wasn’t really close.
I did too. Yes it was close. Both were incredible, all-time great, players. The stats and the metrics and the MVPs and the championships all point to the two of them being basically as close as you can get when comparing players. Magic's actually got higher advanced metrics than Bird in their best seasons, whether you put any value on that at all. I'm not saying Magic was better. I'm saying it's incredibly close.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
I think Magic vs Bird is razor close and people speaking on it with such certainty are lying to themselves or just being homers. It's a pretty easy argument of would you rather have Bird at a higher peak, but for a shorter period of time, or Magic at a slightly lower peak, but for a longer period of time. Magic also has his career cut short due to HIV, which I think people view as more tragic than Bird's career being cut short due to injury (even though the former is probably more preventable than the latter) in part because we never really saw Magic struggle on the court, with Bird it was obvious he wasn't the same player and needed to retire.

I don't really understand the Kareem argument against Magic. Sure, Kareem was a Top 5 player himself and certainly early on during their run he was the best player on the Lakers. But at the end of the day, both of these guys played on absolutely loaded teams with great supporting casts. At some point, the Parrish/McHale combo becomes superior to Kareem. Lakers had Worthy, Celtics had DJ, Lakers had Norm Nixon, Celtics had Tiny, etc. Both of these teams were star studded lineups, so it's weird to argue that one of these guys had more help in winning than the other. Put Magic on the Celtics and Bird on the Lakers and the teams probably mimic the same success the franchises actually had.
Agreed. I mean, on the '86 Celtics, there were five hall of famers: Bird, McHale, Parish, Walton, and DJ, all of whom were still playing GREAT. Walton's minutes were down as he was a backup at that point but he was still tremendous that year.

The '87 Lakers had three hall of famers: Magic, Kareem, and Worthy. Kareem, though, by that point wasn't even close to his peak, averaging 17.5 points and 6.7 rebounds. But still a good player at age 39.

When you have a team that for years had four hall of famers (the five above minus Walton), you've got an absolutely loaded roster. The Lakers had fewer hall of famers, but still, great, great players - Cooper, AC Green, Byron Scott, Nixon, etc.

There's a lot of reasons besides Bird and Magic that those two teams won 8 titles in a 9-year stretch (from 1980-1988; only the 83 Sixers got in there.

1980 - Lakers
1981 - Celtics
1982 - Lakers
1983 - Sixers
1984 - Celtics
1985 - Lakers
1986 - Celtics
1987 - Lakers
1988 - Lakers

I mean, that's pretty amazing.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
The "Mamba mentality" is something that people point to that elevates Kobe. We've had enough discussions here and many people here know why I'm as anti-Kobe as it gets, so seeing people fawn over him really, really bothers me.
Yeah, the Mamba Mentality and the cult of personality that PRG referenced earlier are very real and really matter to some people. I don’t know why these same people consider it some sort of badge of honor or accomplishment to be a complete dickhead to your teammates but to each their own.

There’s also definitely something to the idea that MJ was so popular that a store brand rip off MJ (which is basically what Kobe was) would be popular.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
I find the Kobe thing utterly perplexing. He's probably the most selfish all time player. He practically threw games out of spite. He blew up an awesome team--it's as if Magic had chased Kareem out of town. And yet NBA greats--including Bird--seem to love him. I guess there's stuff I just don't understand, not having that kind of personality.

I'd also say that in this player empowerment age, I think you have to start thinking about players being their own de facto GM's in how you evaluate their careers. Just like being a great teammate or leader is a factor, when you demand your front office make stupid signings (LeBron!) that's a ding.
I am 100% on your team here. I think the greats love him because he was maniacal about perfecting the little things of the craft (footwork etc.) and was also known as an incredibly hard worker.
But that also conveniently forgets the selfishness, the pouting during games, just outright quitting during some important playoff games and how destructive he was as a locker room presence for most of his career. The player that Kobe imparted the most of his wisdom/ideas on being a leader and how to act in locker rooms is Kyrie Irving. Just think about that and I think you get a pretty clear idea of how warped Kobe’s ideas were on personal/professional relationships
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
An aside: think about those 76ers teams of the early 80s.

Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Lost to Boston in the EC finals (after holding a 3-1 lead).
Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Won NBA finals.
Lost in first round.
Lost to Boston in EC finals.

Tough sledding for Dr J, who, as great as he was, wasn’t in the Bird/Magic class, nor did he have quite the same level of supporting cast. Moses was an all time great and Barkley arrived at the end but as great as those teams were, they just didn’t quite have enough to get past Boston and LA.
 

Preacher

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
6,412
Pyeongtaek, South Korea
Yeah, the Mamba Mentality and the cult of personality that PRG referenced earlier are very real and really matter to some people. I don’t know why these same people consider it some sort of badge of honor or accomplishment to be a complete dickhead to your teammates but to each their own.

There’s also definitely something to the idea that MJ was so popular that a store brand rip off MJ (which is basically what Kobe was) would be popular.
Didn’t the whole Mamba thing start right after the rape accusation? He embraced the whole bad boy persona of being a rapist and launched a brand. I think that’s what I find most annoying about the Kobe legacy. We shouldn’t reward that behavior.
 

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
30,976
Geneva, Switzerland
An aside: think about those 76ers teams of the early 80s.

Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Lost to Boston in the EC finals (after holding a 3-1 lead).
Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Won NBA finals.
Lost in first round.
Lost to Boston in EC finals.

Tough sledding for Dr J, who, as great as he was, wasn’t in the Bird/Magic class, nor did he have quite the same level of supporting cast. Moses was an all time great and Barkley arrived at the end but as great as those teams were, they just didn’t quite have enough to get past Boston and LA.
Thinking about how good those Lakers, Celitcs, Sixers, and Pistons teams were, it makes me wonder about the Jordan Bulls.

They were obviously a historically great team, and there was a ton of talent in that Era, but the talent wasn't that concentrated. Who were their greatest rivals? The one star Knicks? The two star and not much else JAzz?

It's a shame they never met the Rockets in the finals. The Rockets weren't even close to as good as the Bulls, but 94-95 Hakeem would have been a huge problem for those Bulls teams.
 

Anthologos

New Member
Jun 4, 2017
111
An aside: think about those 76ers teams of the early 80s.

Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Lost to Boston in the EC finals (after holding a 3-1 lead).
Lost to LA in the NBA finals.
Won NBA finals.
Lost in first round.
Lost to Boston in EC finals.

Tough sledding for Dr J, who, as great as he was, wasn’t in the Bird/Magic class, nor did he have quite the same level of supporting cast. Moses was an all time great and Barkley arrived at the end but as great as those teams were, they just didn’t quite have enough to get past Boston and LA.
Those teams were talented and tough as hell. I hated them, of course, but I was a kid who lived and died with the Celtics.
It would have been cool if Dr J, a sensational player who seems to have been largely forgotten since the Bird/Magic era, had been in his prime. By 1981 he was not the stick of dynamite he had been in his 70s heyday, much of which was in the ABA…the last few photos I have seen of him as a Sixer are from the Bird fight, which is sad. When I was really young he was often considered the most exciting player in the game.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,884
Magic also has his career cut short due to HIV, which I think people view as more tragic than Bird's career being cut short due to injury (even though the former is probably more preventable than the latter)
Eh, all Bird had to do was hire a contractor.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,393
Didn’t the whole Mamba thing start right after the rape accusation? He embraced the whole bad boy persona of being a rapist and launched a brand. I think that’s what I find most annoying about the Kobe legacy. We shouldn’t reward that behavior.
That’s it. And his entire handling of that case is exactly why it’s so hard for women to come forward and actually press charges. Angers me to no end.