Printable View
I'm sure a few of you have been through this one before, either on the forums or just arguing with your friends. it seems like just yesterday i was wtaching at least one of these guys put up 40 plus points on a nightly basis it seemed like.
Jordan or Bird?
Which one is better in your guys opinions, both of them made incredible contributions and put up some nice numbers.
Better Athelete-Jordan
Better Basketball Player-Bird
Ole Pole Bridge Swamprat will say - Ervin Magic Johnson
I have almost physically fought my best friends over this. Jasons gym almost became the UFC ring because all my brainwashed friends think Jordan is the be all end all.
Lebron and Kobe will both exceed all accomplishments of both Bird and Jordan. Its simply the evolution of the game.
In my mind, Bird.
Not because he was the best, but because he put more into it than the others.
You watch Magic, it looked effortless. You watch MJ, same thing. You watch Bird, and it was a guy who was giving 120%, digging every scrap, every trick, every advantage he could out of his body.
I remember him scrapping with Jabar, which nobody would do.
Like I said, he gave everything he had.
If you have 2 people who are the top 2 for something, anything, be it a job, whatever. One seems like he just is there, had it handed to him, doesn't have to work at things, it just is smooth. While the other busts his hump, worked from the bottom to get what he got, etc, who would you view as better?
Me I want the guy who worked hard to get what he had, not the guy who just seemed to glide.
I can't say either Bird or MJ or Magic were better. If someone wants to say MJ was a better scorer, I won't argue. If someone wants to say Magic was a better court general, I won't argue, but if there was a play that was needed on pure guts, or will, I'd argue it. I don't ever really recall Magic or Jordan diving for a lose ball. Not saying they didn't, but nearly every game, Bird would.
It's Larry Legend. He was everything a basketball player was supposed to be. If not for injury, who knows how many more titles he could've won.
I agree with yankeebaseball though, I'm sure
Pole Bridge Swamprat "7teen" will have something to say about this later today.
larry bird was a better basketball player. however, jordan changed the game. i may be a little biased though because i have always liked bird.
Lets see.... Jordan 6'6" could handle the ball like a point gaurd. Made everybody on his teams better. Could take anyone to the basket at will. Could post up and play the inside game. Could shoot from anywhere on the floor. Human highlight film with his dunks. Defensive player of the year multiple times. I guess I'll take Jordan.
I look at it a lil differently. I ask--if I could play on the court with any of the 3, who would I want as a teammate? To me...Magic. The guy could play ANY position on the court, and that's not just offensively but defensively as well. He routinely played against the other team's best player, whether he was a C or a PG. He had enough game to post someone up and be rugged, or to take them outside and either hit the trey over them or beat them off the dribble to the bucket or creating his own shot. As a distributor with the basketball, he was impeccable for a man his size. He rebounded on both ends, blocked shots, got steals, created for himself and others...just played a complete game at all times.
I remember listening to people talk about other players when I was younger, and if a guy was tough and had great touch from outside, he was like Larry Bird. If he played great defense and was a grade-A scorer, he played like Michael Jordan. If he played a great all around game and led his team to victory doing it ALL on the floor for the entire game, he played like Magic Johnson.
I've gained a lot more respect for Larry Bird over the years, but no one can touch Michael Jordan. He didn't have any weaknesses on the court. His focus and determination were unequalled when it came to playing the game. I was a huge Lakers fan growing up and watched a lot of Lakers-Celtics games, but neither Magic or Bird were the player Michael was. They were both great in their own areas, but Jordan will probably be the best player I will ever see.
Magic and Bird changed the game. I'll see if I can't locate the article I've posted before.
The NBA finals were tape delayed until Magic and Bird came along.
Monday, January 3
From coast to coast, a magical pair
By Andy Katz
ESPN.com
Michael Jordan may be one of the top five athletes of the century, but he's not responsible for changing the NBA, or to some extent, the NCAA's Final Four.
Larry Bird and Magic Johnson can close the century knowing they resuscitated the pro game and gave new life to the college tournament.
Bird, the fair-haired white shooter from the sticks of Indiana, led an undefeated Indiana State to the national title game in 1979. Magic Johnson, the flashy, gregarious African-American point guard from urban Michigan, brought a taste of showtime to Michigan State.
Larry Bird
Larry Bird and Magic Johnson revived the NBA in the 1980s.
That title game became one of the most documented finals in history -- it remains the highest-rated college basketball game ever, a contest that captivated the nation. It helped that neither program had a history of reaching the Final Four. UCLA had dominated most of the previous 15 years, but the '79 final gave us a taste of two programs that were led by stars. Bird and Magic helped set the tone for a 20-year period where players actually grabbed equal billing with the head coaches (does anyone remember who coached Indiana State?).
Also, the Bird-Magic showdown was a turning point for the NCAA Tournament, which became one of sports hottest properties. In November, CBS extended its current deal with the NCAA with an 11-year, $6 billion deal -- about $545 million per year to televise the tournament.
But that '79 title game has grown in importance in part because the Bird-Magic continued in the NBA. No other individual rivalry has moved from one level to the next without a time gap. Bird simply traded his light blue Sycamores' jersey for the Celtic green. Magic went from Spartan green and white to Laker yellow and purple.
The NBA has always been about one-on-one duels. Bird, the forward, and Magic, the point guard, didn't guard each other. But the rivalry continued as the Lakers and Celtics battled for NBA supremacy throughout the 1980s.
Magic vs. Bird
Tale of the tape:
Championships
Lakers: 1980, '82, '85, '87, '88
Celtics: 1981, '84, '86
MVPs
Magic: 1987, '89, '90
Bird: 1984, '85, '86
Head-to-head
1984: Celtics 4, Lakers 3
1985: Lakers 4, Celtics 2
1987: Lakers 4, Celtics 2
Bird represented Boston, a blue-collar city. Magic's GQ persona was the right fit in Hollywood. It didn't hurt that Bird was white, playing in Boston, a city with a history of racial intolerance. It certainly helped that Magic was in Los Angeles, one of the most diverse cities in the nation.
Acknowledging the race issue isn't being racist. Certainly, the Celtics had African-American fans. But a healthy, respected rivalry between two players of different races was good for both cities and for the nation that followed the sport.
Playing seven-game series in Boston and Los Angeles brought the coasts closer together. Magic and Bird were the best competitors in the game -- the best players -- and their teams battled in three riveting championships in 1984, 1985 and 1987. In every year of the decade, either the Lakers or Celtics played for the title.
Remember this as well: When Magic and Bird entered the league in 1979, the NBA Finals were broadcast on a tape-delayed basis. You had to say up until 11:30 p.m. to watch Brent Musberger call the play-by-game. The league was riddled with drug problems and attendance was sagging.
Many like to credit David Stern with reviving the league. But where would David Stern be without Magic Johnson and Larry Bird?
With the NBA struggling for an identity (Julius Erving was viewed as a novelty), Bird and Magic gave the NBA star power. Jordan was still in college when Bird and Magic played in their first NBA Finals. The rivalry allowed the NBA to become a form of entertainment. The media loved the rivalry and the pair seemed to flourish in it, as well. They were loyal to their cities and their organizations, which played well across the nation. Neither player ever considered being traded and that allowed fans to root for teams they knew would mostly remain intact. Today, Scottie Pippen is trying for another NBA title with his third team in three years.
Jordan won six NBA titles, the last two against the Utah Jazz. He didn't have a rivalry with Karl Malone or John Stockton. For one thing, you can't have a rivalry if only one team wins. Bird and Magic were both winners, sometimes against each other. They helped create the interest in the Final Four and they made today's NBA.
Andy Katz is a staff writer for ESPN.com.
I rarely like Andy Katz or anything that comes out of his mouth, but that was a good article. Great find 7teen.
bird and magic may have changed the game...but jordan changed how players play the game.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: yankeebaseball</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Lebron and Kobe will both exceed all accomplishments of both Bird and Jordan. Its simply the evolution of the game.</div></div>
Lebron and Kobe didn't have to spend any time playing college ball either. They'll play more seasons as a pro so of course they will accomplish more.
Back to the topic. I'd go with Jordan. He was well rounded as a player.
No Bird/Magic=No NBA=No Jordan
It is also noted that Jordan entered the league in '84-'85 and didn't win a title until '91 (that was over an aging Magic). During that time period Bird/Magic won multiple titles.
What I'm trying to say is that M.J. didn't win his first until Bird/Magic were ready to retire. I personally would never rank him ahead of those two. Even the playoff game where he scored 63 points, he lost, to Larry Legend.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Glory_Days</div><div class="ubbcode-body">bird and magic may have changed the game...but jordan changed how players play the game. </div></div>
Yes, and not for the better.
How many people care about the NBA anymore?
Jordan elevated players to be more sizzle, less steak. That's not saying Jordan himself wasn't steak, but how many people equate Jordan with defense? You think Jordan, you think dunk. You don't think skillset, you think athletic ability.
Bird/Jordan helped inspire the generation with Jordan
Jordan helped inspire ...a bunch of foreign players, because thats what most of your NBA players are now. Bigger guys who can handle the ball, post up, pass, shoot inside or outside. Bird/Magic either one could do that, Bird could play the inside game, could play the outside game, many times was the point guard, or whatever. Same with Magic.
Jordan is/was great, and probably was the most athletic player ever, but I don't think he was the best player. I mean the phrase "Jordan rules" didn't come about because he was treated quite equal [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif[/img]
In response to twentyseven, your statement is true. Jordan did not win a title until Magic and Bird were on the decline. However, that has a lot to do with Jordan only being in the league for 5 years, being drafted to a bad team, and having to learn how to become the dominate player he eventually was. Jordan in his first few years was nowhere near the player he was in the late 90's.
I would not expect anyone to enter the league on a bad team and lead them to a championship right away. Not going to happen. In his later years however, Jordan along with the team he helped build, such as the late 90's Bulls, would have competed and possibly won a fair share of championships against Bird and Magic's teams.
In response to Rocketer, it is true Jordan was extremely athletic and had "sizzle". However, if someone told me they thought Jordan was more about the "sizzle" than the "steak", I would question if they know anything about basketball. A true student of the game would clearly see how much "steak" Jordan had in his game. Just because Bird made it look hard and Jordan made it look easy, is insignificant. True, Jordan was MUCH more athletic than Bird, but that doesn't mean he did not have to work as hard to get to the top. Remember, he was cut from the j.v. team as a sophmore at a high school that is not exactly a basketball powerhouse. To say Jordan did bust his butt everyday is comical.
I will say however, that all of these players deserve their right to be called one of the greatest. Bird was the ultimate competitor and perhaps the most skilled. He indeed had to work very hard for everything he earned. Magic was a complete player with hardly any weaknesses. He was one of the most unselfish players the game has seen and a natural leader. I personally can see arguments for all three as being the best. However, I give my vote to Jordan. I do not look very deep into statistics because they can be very misleading, but one stat of Jordan's I will throw out to you guys is 72 wins in a season. Absolutely amazing! You can say he played on a great team, which is true. But, how great would they have been without Jordan? Decent, at best. He refused to lose. He did EVERYTHING and ANYTHING it took to win whether it be scoring 50 or holding the oppossing teams best player to 10. The game is about winning, and although all three of these guys were definately winners, Jordan was the best winner the game has seen.
I'm gonna go to the Big Mac shots for this one.
I can contradict your 72 wins theory. There were 4 new teams added to the NBA by the 90s that were not around in the 80s. Watered down league helped the Bulls achieve those 72 wins.
The Bulls of the late 80s with Jordan were lucky to be the 3rd best team in the East. It took the aging and retiring of the Celtic greats and Piston greats for the Bulls to get out of the East.
Jordan ranks #3 on my list. Behind Magic and Bird.
Agreed 7teen.
My rank would be Magic, Bird, Jordan. All 3 are great even though I never liked Jordan because in the 90s he got away with everything. Like CoeburnCane said, I want Magic on my team. He could guard anyone, and play any possession. Nash is the only person I have seen who comes close to taking the ball and creating more for his opponents like Magic did.
Just a tidbit to your Jordan being on a bad team.
In 1977-78 the Celtics had compiled a 32-50 record, their worst since 1949-50. When Bird elected to return to Indiana State for one more year the Celtics dipped to 29-53, but Bird finally came to Boston for the 1979-80 campaign and sparked one of the greatest single-season turnarounds in NBA history.
The 1979-80 Celtics improved by 32 games to 61-21 and returned to the top of their division
Magic's affect
Despite the early ouster, the pieces were beginning to settle into place for the Lakers. During the 1978-79 season the team got a sneak preview of the future with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Jamaal Wilkes, and Norm Nixon all turning in fine performances. The club posted a 47-35 record.
The 1979-80 season was one of intense drama for the Lakers. With the team at 10-4, Head Coach Jack McKinney suffered a serious injury in a bicycle accident and was replaced by Paul Westhead. The Lakers rallied to finish the season at 60-22, tops in the Pacific Division.
Jordan
Bulls were 27-55 the year before him. 38-44 with him.
Now if I was going to say who improved their team.
Jordan's Bulls +11
Magic's Lakers +13
Bird's Celtics +32
I realize other factors weigh in, other talent that arrived, etc but to say that Jordan had so much less talent, seems a bit of a stretch since the pre-Bird Celtics won exactly 2 more games than the pre-MJ Bulls did. Both went to bad teams, and I'll agree that Jordan later in his career was a different player, and better player, than he was at first. You said you wouldn't expect someone to enter the league on a bad team and lead them to the championship right away. Well Bird led the Celtics to the Eastern Conference Finals, and Magic lead the Lakers (who weren't a bad team going by their previous year record) to the championship.
So maybe don't know the game, but I know that you hear people called "the next Jordan" not because of their all around game but because of their dunking and air...see Harold Minor aka Baby Jordan, which to me is a lot more sizzle than steak.
72 wins is not a theory. The league may have been watered down, but the Bulls were still beating very good teams. Regardless of this, the Bulls were one of the best teams in NBA history, that cannot be disputed.
Also, you keep referring to the late 80's Bulls, thus a very young Jordan. The late 90's Jordan is who you need compare to Bird and Magic.
Rocketer, your post confused me. The Celtics were MUCH better once they got Bird, beggining with the first year, however that had a lot to do with other talent arriving as you said. Still yet, they did not win a championship, which is what I was talking about because many people were explaining how Jordan never won a championship in the 80's. To compare Jordan as a young player to Bird and Magic as veterans is useless because at that point in time, there is no question as to Bird and Magic being better players.
What makes Jordan the best to me is how he did more with what he had than any other player has ever done.
Jordan had arguably the second best player in the league with Scotty Pippen, great rebounder in Horace Grant and Dennis Rodman. He had outside threats he could always turn to as well, in Paxson and Kerr. He didint need anything else, thas why teams like the Lakers, with SHAQ, KOBE, Malone and Payton do not work, you have to have some roles to be played. Also, Toni K. wasnt bad.
The thing is that the Celtics didn't gain that much that outside of Bird that first year. They also lost several other players. I'm not comparing a young Jordan to a veteran Bird, I'm saying from day one Bird made the Celtics a completely different and better team. Comparing from point A of Bird's career to point A of Jordan's. By the same token, you admitted that Jordan at first wasn't the player he was later. To say someone is the best, shouldn't you compare their whole body of work?
I mean if you want to say that for 5 years, Jordan was the greatest player ever, you might something, but those other 5 years where he was just an offensive player should count against him, just as much as Bird's lesser numbers as he got beat up.
To call someone the greatest ever, their entire career should count, the first couple years where they were all about them, the later years where they lost a step due to injury or whatever.
I don't see how you can say that Jordan did more with what we had, when you yourself that he was more athletic than Bird.
I guess we can't really debate it, the closest thing I can give is that with Bird and Magic both in their prime, Bird won 3 MVPs. Magic won 3 later, as Bird was beginning to delince due to his back (which began being a problem earlier than most knew).
Good debate topic though.
You used 72 wins as a "theory" that Jordan was better because of that. A team winning 72 games against weaker opponents does not make a guy better. Yes, there were still some quality teams in the NBA when the Bulls broke the record, but there were also some considerably weaker teams when the Bulls broke the record than in the 80s when there were 4 fewer teams and each team was a little more talented. Playing expansion teams 6-8 times a year will help boost a win total.
And you can't really use the 6 titles argument. Yes, that is 1 more than Magic won. But Magic also played in 9 NBA Finals. That is 3 more than Jordan.
The 4 titles the Lakers lost with Magic were to the 76ers who had Dr. J and Moses Malone, The Celtics in 84, the Pistons in '89, and the '91 Bulls.
Any one of those 4 teams that beat the Lakers were better than any one of the teams the Bulls beat. (In '91 the Bulls were better considering Magic was in his 12 season)
No.
I used 72 wins as a STATISTIC, one that gives Jordan credibility. The statistic itself does not automatically make Jordan the greatest ever. I just stated it because it shows what type of winner he really was. Regardless of who he was playing he won on most occassions. Obviously so did Bird and Magic. That same Bulls team however, would have possibly been just as if not more successful than the Celtics and Lakers of the 80's. Obviously I cannot prove that, but I believe they likely would have.