Magic Johnson Appreciation Thread

[Sriracha]

Lebron James is a better playoff performer!!!

[Biddy77]

As a Laker fan I was a little surprised that the Lakers had even beaten the Trailblazers to make the Finals that season & don't believe they would have beaten the Bulls (nor the Pistons in '89) had they been healthy. Magic was very fustrated after that series & even openly contemplated retirement(although Magic would have never ever retired that young & was only fustrated immediately following a tough loss)

James Worthy was a great pure athlete ,but compared to the new 'tweener' type versatile forwards like Pippen he was a dinosaur of sorts(Worthy ,still healthy,abruptly retired less than two seasons later). And the 6'3 jump shooting guard like Scott was not really a match for neither Jordan nor Pippen either.

No matter how unpopular the decisions, the Lakers needed to address this if they would have wanted to compete with the Bulls dynasty had Magic not retired. A Mitch Richmond or an increasingly unhappy Drexler who was traded several seasons later would have been better more versatile running mates to Magic against the Bulls than Scott.

great post. repped.

[32jazz]

Excellent answer. I feel the same way. I was just talking to my buddy about this a while ago. We were lucky to win Game 1 with that 3 from Perkins. Otherwise it would've been a sweep. Mike was just too much for the aging Lakers. i do think we shoulda re-uped with our roster after Kareem retired. That would've been a good time to bring in some fresh legs.

That is the reason why the Bulls were so obssessed with retooling the Jordan/Pippen Bulls(although they should have waited until they proved they were no longer able to win before they broke it down) as they had seen what happened to the Lakers , Celtics & Pistons & how they held on to their aging/injury prone roster a bit too long.

It may seem cruel & disloyal to even think of trading Scott(which the lakers eventually did to the pacers I think) & especially a champion like Worthy ,but the more versatile/athletic Bulls & Trailblazers were proof that the Old Showtime Lakers were done as far back as 89. Magic knew it after the Bulls series, but I agree in hindsight that they should have rebuilt around Magic & Divac(big men are hard to find) with a 'tweener' like Drexler ,Richmond, Ron Harper, etc.......

[GOBB]

I dont know if this was mentioned but...

1. Magic, that nickname alone is awesome. So much how dare anything call him Ervin? Thats blasphemy unless you gave birth to him. Then I'll kindly hand his mother the shoe to whack me upside the head.

2. The one highlight that sticks out in my head whenever Magic is mentioned? The Latrell Spreewell owning when Magic came back. From that point on Magic didnt need to do anything else to convince me he still had it. That was vintage Magic and I think i celebrated and imitated that move the entire week. Me and my best friend screamed like school girls. And so did his stepfather.

[Psileas]

It may seem cruel & disloyal to even think of trading Scott(which the lakers eventually did to the pacers I think) & especially a champion like Worthy ,but the more versatile/athletic Bulls & Trailblazers were proof that the Old Showtime Lakers were done as far back as 89.

I disagree however on the season. '90 or '91 maybe, since vital players like Kareem, Cooper, Rambis, also Pat Riley, all left, while Worthy and Scott quickly fell off their primes. But I still think that the Lakers could have beaten the Pistons in '89 if they were 100% healthy. After all, they swept their W.Conf. opposition 11-0 (and don't anyone tell me that they had weak opponents-they won 39, 47, 55 games respectively, while the opponents of the Pistons won 42, 49, and 47), which isn't an indicator of a team done. Those were the healthy Lakers. The Finals' Lakers played all their games without Byron Scott and only a little more than 1.5 game with Magic.

[OldSchoolBBall]

A truly great player, no worse than #5 all time. I've been watching some videos of him recently, and dude threw up junk all the time that somehow went in. I used to be like "you've gotta be kidding me," because it was so ugly (semi-hooks and ugly off-balance runners, wild layups etc.), but the more I watch him, the more I realize that he had tremendous concentration as a shot maker. There's no other explanation for so many ugly, awkward, well-defended shots to go in.

[32jazz]

I disagree however on the season. '90 or '91 maybe, since vital players like Kareem, Cooper, Rambis, also Pat Riley, all left, while Worthy and Scott quickly fell off their primes. But I still think that the Lakers could have beaten the Pistons in '89 if they were 100% healthy. After all, they swept their W.Conf. opposition 11-0 (and don't anyone tell me that they had weak opponents-they won 39, 47, 55 games respectively, while the opponents of the Pistons won 42, 49, and 47), which isn't an indicator of a team done. Those were the healthy Lakers. The Finals' Lakers played all their games without Byron Scott and only a little more than 1.5 game with Magic.

Point well taken. Saying the word "Done' for the '89 lakers is a bit of an over statement perhaps , but they were certainly on their lasts legs. I feel like the Lakers were fortunate to get out of the 88 Finals with the ring. I saw in the improved Pistons in '89, the same thing I saw in the 87 Lakers who were on a mission after a disapointing finish the prevous season. Maybe my fear of the Pistons rematch in '89 has persuaded me over time that they 'probably' wouldn't win heathly or not.

I concede that 89 was not as much of a foregone conclusion that the Lakers would lose (with a healthy team) as opposed to the 91 Lakers vs the Bulls.
(11-0 in the Western Conference playoffs is amazing. People don't realize how much the Lakers absolutely dominated the West in the 80's.
Magic played twelve(12) seasons & made nine(9) NBA Finals Domination of a conference unseen since the days of the Celtics/Russell).

Maybe not with 100% certainty in '89 ,but around '90 or '91 the Lakers didn't matchup as well with the Blazers nor the Bulls(although they did upset the Blazers in 91)

I do assume you agree that the Lakers would have been justified in moving Scott & Worthy(or both) for a 'tweener' like Richmond ,Drexler, Ron Harper,etc... or similiar type versatile player of the era after '90 or '91 seasons?
What could the 91 Lakers have done to retool that team after the '91 Finals loss?

[crisoner]

I dont know if this was mentioned but...

1. Magic, that nickname alone is awesome. So much how dare anything call him Ervin? Thats blasphemy unless you gave birth to him. Then I'll kindly hand his mother the shoe to whack me upside the head.

Sir Charles and Divas call him Erv.

But good call...Magic.....got to give daps on that. His nickname is so good everyone refers to him as simply Magic.

Thanks to the OP on this thread. Magic is the single person who got me in to basketball. My favorite player of all time.


Question....do you think Magic has anything to do with Orlando naming their team Magic? Or is that just the whole Disney thing?

[Psileas]

I do assume you agree that the Lakers would have been justified in moving Scott & Worthy(or both) for a 'tweener' like Richmond ,Drexler, Ron Harper,etc... or similiar type versatile player of the era after '90 or '91 seasons?
What could the 91 Lakers have done to retool that team after the '91 Finals loss?

Yes, I agree that they needed more than a little polishing. Signing Divac, during an era when Europeans weren't widely trusted, and with Kareem gone, was a very good move, but they should also have been alarmed at least with Scott's downfall in '90. It's sometimes a risk, because it's definitely plausible for a 28-29 year old player to make a comeback, but I think if they took it, they could easily fool a few teams for an exchange with a more promising talent. Scott, unfortunately for them, didn't make a comeback. Worthy was still good, but after '91, with Magic gone, he fell hard.

Oh, and hiring Dunleavy after 1990, an inexperienced and more conservative coach, wasn't a great move, either. I think it was Dunleavy in '91 the one who told Magic to play more slowly and according to the playbook, and Magic responded by taking the playbook and throwing it in the sea.

[The Magic Man]

What could the 91 Lakers have done to retool that team after the '91 Finals loss?

Honestly, nothing. Magic's abrupt retirement set the team back a decade. Upgrading the team is one thing but when your main core is on thier last legs as it is and your number one, greatest franchise player ever retires out of nowhere? They were lucky to not be a lottery team for the next 5 seasons. But again, it's a testament to the great Laker front office. Nicky V, Eddie Jones, Ceballos, Shaq, Kobe? Awesome. If they could've somehow swung a deal for Clyde or Richmond do you think they would've had the same impact without Magic?

[Bush4Ever]

One of the smartest players ever.

I have never seen a player create more high percentage shots (shooting and passing) than Magic did.

Truly one of a kind.

[andgar923]

He used to be my fav player growing up. He's still my 2nd fav player to watch play.

Easily a top 5 player of all time.

[32jazz]

Honestly, nothing. Magic's abrupt retirement set the team back a decade. Upgrading the team is one thing but when your main core is on thier last legs as it is and your number one, greatest franchise player ever retires out of nowhere? They were lucky to not be a lottery team for the next 5 seasons. But again, it's a testament to the great Laker front office. Nicky V, Eddie Jones, Ceballos, Shaq, Kobe? Awesome. If they could've somehow swung a deal for Clyde or Richmond do you think they would've had the same impact without Magic?

Sorry Magicman. I didn't make myself clear. I guess I was making the assumption that the Lakers needed to retool after the '90 season & especially '91( before HIV results) when it was obvious they weren't athletic /versatile enough to compete with the Bulls/Blazers as constructed( the brilliant but limited game of Worthy & a 6'3 jump shooting guard in Scott)

Magic needed more versatile players to run with I feel & even he was frustrated after the Bulls loss & was prophetically speaking of retirement

I was speaking of a rebuild assuming Magic isn't forced to retire(no HIV). I felt at the time that SHOWTIME was over ,but the Lakers were holding on too long just as the Pistons & Celtics.

I was meaning rebuild around Magic/Divac & dangling Worthy(who faded fast) & Scott (whom they eventually traded)for a more versatile swing player like Richmond/Drexler to play alongside Magic. Otherwise the Lakers could never beat the Bulls as constructed. Did you think it was reasonable/plausible for the Lakers to make such a move?(hypothetical) I agree with you about how the Lakers admirably kept it together during those years before Shaq & they were actually a fun team to watch.

West did a solid job cosidering he always had lower round picks because of the Lakers success. (Divac/Elden Campbell/Van Exel in the 2nd rd)

The only glaring mistake he made was in '92(?) when he passed up Sprewell for Anthony Peeler.

[The Magic Man]

Sorry Magicman. I didn't make myself clear. I guess I was making the assumption that the Lakers needed to retool after the '90 season & especially '91( before HIV results) when it was obvious they weren't athletic /versatile enough to compete with the Bulls/Blazers as constructed( the brilliant but limited game of Worthy & a 6'3 jump shooting guard in Scott)

Magic needed more versatile players to run with I feel & even he was frustrated after the Bulls loss & was prophetically speaking of retirement

I was speaking of a rebuild assuming Magic isn't forced to retire(no HIV). I felt at the time that SHOWTIME was over ,but the Lakers were holding on too long just as the Pistons & Celtics.

I was meaning rebuild around Magic/Divac & dangling Worthy(who faded fast) & Scott (whom they eventually traded)for a more versatile swing player like Richmond/Drexler to play alongside Magic. Otherwise the Lakers could never beat the Bulls as constructed. Did you think it was reasonable/plausible for the Lakers to make such a move?(hypothetical) I agree with you about how the Lakers admirably kept it together during those years before Shaq & they were actually a fun team to watch.

West did a solid job cosidering he always had lower round picks because of the Lakers success. (Divac/Elden Campbell/Van Exel in the 2nd rd)

The only glaring mistake he made was in '92(?) when he passed up Sprewell for Anthony Peeler.

Agreed. If Magic hadn't retired and we picked up a guy like Drexler? Wow. I think he would've suited LA better than Mitch, but Mitch would have brought us much more than the aging B Scott. Lol, sorry, Big Game was my man. I just can't invision trading that guy. (Lakers Trivia: How did the Lakers aquire James Worthy? Anyone know the suprising answer?) Anyway, you bring up a great point of one of West's only mistakes. Can you imagine Spree running with LA. Back when that dude was like Vince Carter (not as much hops, but basically running and dunking at will)?

[momo]

The only glaring mistake he made was in '92(?) when he passed up Sprewell for Anthony Peeler.

I really liked peeler but I never knew we could have had spree. I think the team was morphing from an aging fast break/pressure D squad to a more half court squad and I do not how it would have played out had Mag not retired... it is tough to say.

They did do a remarkable job getting back to respectability after 1 year in the lottery. I still o_O at that. 1 year in the lotto and one later after they get rid of shaq. Amazing.


~~~

Great thread. Magic made the game so fun and classy. I loved how he seemed to be able to compete at a high level with fierce rivals and still be smiling and friendly with them after.