What if Magic wasn't injured in 1989 NBA Finals?

[Odinn]

What was the chance of winning title for the Lakers?

And if the Lakers had won the title, how would that affect Magic's position in the goat list?

He would be the first player who threepeated as the man in the modern era. (one of three players along side Jordan and Shaq.)
6x NBA Champion
4x NBA Finals MVP
3x undisputed the best player on a championship team

???

[Nevaeh]

What was the chance of winning title for the Lakers?

And if the Lakers had won the title, how would that affect Magic's position in the goat list?

He would be the first player who threepeated as the man in the modern era. (one of three players along side Jordan and Shaq.)
6x NBA Champion
4x NBA Finals MVP
3x undisputed the best player on a championship team

???

Assuming Jordan did exactly what he did the same way (win 3, retire, win another 3), Magic would be no lower than top 3 based on his efficiency and leadership. Wilt would drop a spot IMO.

MJ
Magic
Russell
Wilt

[Bernie Nips]

There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.

[Swaggin916]

There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.

Yea I mean Bill walton being out a few games definitely swung the series...

[Collie]

Yea I mean Bill walton being out a few games definitely swung the series...

McHale was playing with a BROKEN foot. Bird was also beginning to have back problems. Not to mention Len Bias died.

[get these NETS]

think they still would have lost


Pistons got better.....

Aguirre fit their system better than AD

and the previous year....Lakers got bailed out in game 6 by a phantom call against Laimbeer and won in 7

[jlauber]

The Lakers came into the '89 Finals 11-0 in the playoffs, BUT, they had lost Byron Scott and his near 20 ppg in the last game of the WCF's.

Magic was injured mid-way thru game two of the Finals, with the score tied, and on the road.

Clearly we are dealing with hypotheticals, but had Magic not been injured, there is a possibility that the Lakers would have won game two. Given the fact that they lost game three, without BOTH Magic and Scott, by FOUR points, AND, given the fact that they lost game four, by eight points, by being outscored by ten points in the lasy quarter, and again, without BOTH Magic and Scott...well, they could easily have been up 3-1 (and probably doing so without Scott at all.)

There's no point with this "wasn't injured" stuff, cos then you have to ask about every single superstar who was injured and then didn't win. Look at the Celtics in 87... what if almost their entire squad wasn't injured? Then the Celtics would be 2-1 against the Lakers, while both being 4-4 in the 80s for wins.

The Lakers routed Boston in the first two games. They had 20+ point leads early in the 4th quarters of both games. In game three, Boston eked out a six point win, in a game that was decided in the last minute. True, Magic won game four with his"mini-hook", and Boston easily won game five. Then, in the clinching game six win, the Lakers blew the game open mid-way in the 4th quarter. Clearly, though, the Lakers were MUCH better than Boston in that series.

If we are going to say that Boston MIGHT have won in '87, then I could easily argue that the Lakers SHOULD have SWEPT Boston in '84. In fact, even Larry Bird, himself, claimed as much. The Lakers BLEW games two and four, while cruising to an easy win in game one, and just annihilating the Celtics in game three.

And, after Boston massacred LA in game one of the '85 Finals, the Lakers took complete control of that series, winning four of the last five games, including a blowout win in game three.

So, in reality, the Lakers were a couple of missed FTs away from going 3-0 against Boston in the 80's.

Furthermore, had Magic not been injured in '81, and playing at nowhere near 100%, the Lakers probably would have beaten the 40-42 Rockets in round one, and, given the fact that LA easily wiped out Philly in '80 and '82 (my god, they won the clinching game six in '80, on the road, and without Kareem), and that Boston had to win three straight games by the narrowest of margins against that same Philly team to get to the Finals in '81...well, hypothetically, the BEST team did NOT win the title in '81.

The Lakers were CLEARLY the best team of the 80's. EIGHT Finals, and FIVE titles,...and a couple of points away from winning SIX...and injuries to Magic in '81, from winning number SEVEN,...and injuries to BOTH Magic and Scott from probably winning number EIGHT.


As for Magic's place in the GOAT conversation...I have him in my top-4. Aside from Russell, he was the greatest "winner" in NBA history. In his 12 seasons (and I am not counting his very productive part-time season in '96), he went to NINE Finals, and won FIVE rings. His WORST team record was 54-28, and he averaged 59 wins per season in those 12 years. And, without Kareem, he took his last two teams, to a league best 63-19 record, and then to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals (and that team was already on a severe decline, and then battered by injuries in the post-season.)

And Magic was just BRILLIANT in his post-season career. He shot .516 in his NINE Finals, including two Finals of .560 and .541. He usually LED his Lakers in rebounding in the playoffs and Finals. And he had Finals of 13.0 apg and 13.6 apg. His '87 Finals, in which he averaged 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, shot .541 from the field, .500 from the arc, and .960 from the line, is one of the greatest Finals in NBA history. And, of course, his game six in the '80 Finals, in his ROOKIE season, in which he scored 42 points, on 14-23 shooting (and 14-14 from the line), with a HUGE lead in rebounds, at 15, along with seven assists, AND, withOUT Kareem, has to rank among the greatest "close-out" games in Finals history.

[nycelt84]

The Pistons win in 6 instead of 4. They were the league's best team all year and were clearly a team of destiny.

[Kiddlovesnets]

lol this... Had the Refs not ripped Kings and sent the Lakers to 2002 NBA Finals, the Nets would've got their championship 10 years ago.

[Odinn]

lol this... Had the Refs not ripped Kings and sent the Lakers to 2002 NBA Finals, the Nets would've got their championship 10 years ago.

Claiming the Nets would defeat the Kings in 2002?

Actual belong to this.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Claiming the Nets would defeat the Kings in 2002?

Actual belong to this.

Well I believe they could, Nets in 6.

But thats not really the point of my post though...

[Sarcastic]

For me, it wouldn't change his rank at all. I have him as the third best ever.

[Owl]

Assuming that Byron Scott was still out it wouldn't have made a huge difference, certainly not enough to turn a sweep into a Lakers victory.

The Lakers were killed in the backcourt without those two though, and shot poorly by their standards which one imagines was in significant part due to the absence of Magic. The Lakers top 7 for those finals (by minutes and points) featured no (non tweener) guards. They had guard-forward Michael Cooper, and were playing Tony Campbell (a small forward) alongside him. The Lakers were thin at the guard position.

Then again Kareem was falling off badly and Michael Cooper was no longer what he once was either.

And the Magic's legacy probably isn't affected much at all for the following reasons
1) The Laker's performance in the finals indicates how crucial he was to their success.
2) Most people don't judge individuals on team titles won.
3) Even those who do tend use it only against non-title winners, or those who supposedly should have won more (e.g. Wilt, David Robinson). With 5 titles Magic is probably safe.

Although if you are talking about missed opportunites for Magic the bigger what if pertains to his premature retirement. Without HIV Magic would have rejoined an NBA finalist having just turned 32. He never guarded the jets on the perimeter anyway so I don't know how much aging hurts his game. Not that I fancy his chances of any more titles against those Bulls teams.

[Da_Realist]

Clearly we are dealing with hypotheticals, but had Magic not been injured, there is a possibility that the Lakers would have won game two. Given the fact that they lost game three, without BOTH Magic and Scott, by FOUR points, AND, given the fact that they lost game four, by eight points, by being outscored by ten points in the lasy quarter, and again, without BOTH Magic and Scott...well, they could easily have been up 3-1 (and probably doing so without Scott at all.)

I hate this point of view. The Pistons won EVERY game by 3 points. They didn't win by dominating the scoreboard, they won by wearing down their opponent. They did just enough to outlast you. That was just how they played. It was said back then that a 5 point Pistons lead felt like 20.

The Pistons win in 6 instead of 4. They were the league's best team all year and were clearly a team of destiny.

Exactly

[32jazz]

I generally agree with JLauber, but on this one I tend to agree with those who believe the Pistons would have won that series in '89 no matter what.

As much as I love Magic/Lakers I think they were running on fumes in 88 and were basically done by 89. It was time for a 'retooling'(not rebuilding) to that Lakers squad around Magic & younger players like Divac.


The Lakers were swept in 88, in 89 they lost in 5 to the Suns(semis) & 5 in 90 to the Bulls(Finals).

The Lakers were making the same mistakes as the Celtics who after 1986 were futilely trying to win for the next 6 seasons with the same aging/injured/tired team. As well as the the Pistons who didn't age gracefully neither.

Danny Ainge remembers those Lakers,Celtics & Pistons teams and that's exactly the reason he is willing to get something of value for aging veterans. Nor did he have an issue trading the over valued Perkins.

Dr Buss also remembers the pitfalls of hanging on too long & had no problem trading an out of shape aging Shaq(who was demanding huge money) to retool with Kobe . And also willing to part with every one not named Kobe on this last championship squad(Gasol/Odom in particular & even Bynum). Dr Buss/Lakers had learned the lessons of an aging Showtime just as Ainge with the Celtics.

Worthy & Scott were becoming Dinosaurs(style of play) by 1990 & the Lakers should have considered trading them by 90 or 91 when they still had some value.

Scott was becoming a dinosaur in a emerging era of big Versatile SG's ushered in by Drexler/ MJ who dominated the 80's Sg's who were Scott prototypes.

6'2/6'3 jumpshooters like Scott, Ainge, Fat Lever, Dumars, Andrew Toney,A Robertson,Lucas,Battle, Sleepy Floyd,etc...... Were the norm in the 80's ,but becoming a thing of the past by the early 90's.


Worthy was a throw back to the less versatile scoring small forwards like English,Aguire, Dantley,Wilkins, King,Woolridge,etc.... Worthy was less effective for 2 seasons without Magic. Worthy spent his last season as a backup to the younger more versatile Doug Christie & abruptly retired at age 33.

In short I think the Lakers were done & should have thought about moving Worthy/Scott while they had value or anyone not named Magic. Hard as that may have been.