Magic vs Kobe is a large debate. Here's the answer on how to differentiate. IMPACT ON WINNING GAMES. Magic Johnson had a higher impact on winning games than Kobe Bryant. Here's why (thread)

In the three years before Magic and Kobe played parts for the Lakers (in Magic's case 77, 78, 79, and Kobe (95, 96, 97) the Lakers had good success. In the pre-Magic years, the Lakers had an average winning percentage of 59% and the pre-Kobe years they had a 64%.

Both teams didn't make significant progress, with the furthest the Lakers going pre-Magic was being swept in the Western Conference Final, and the furthest the Lakers got pre-Kobe was a 4-2 second round loss.

With the introduction of the two all time greats, both Laker sides had a large increase in success. In Magic's first three years, the average winning percentage was one of 69%, compared to Kobe's one of 70%.

Magic brought a 10% increase in win rate for the Lakers, and Kobe brought a 6% increase in winning. They also both won two titles, but the difference was that Magic won finals mvp twice, compared to Kobe winning none.

Magic had a higher impact on the winning percentage, and was also the most important player on two Championship teams, making it clear that Magic had the higher immediate impact upon winning for the Lakers.

As we all know, both of the star big men which accompanied the Laker greats would eventually depart. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar would retire in 1989 and Shaquille O'Neal would be traded to Miami in 2004. What was achieved by Magic and Kobe in the time without their star big men?

In the final three years with the superstar duo, the Lakers with Magic and Kareem had a 75% win rate to go along with two titles and a third finals appearance. The third was being swept by the Detroit Pistons. Magic got another finals mvp in this run, making it three for him.

Kobe and Shaq brought the Lakers less in their final three years together. They had a 67% win rate and one title. In the title Shaq got the fmvp. The Lakers also reached another finals, losing to the Pistons in 5. The 3rd year was a loss to the Spurs in the Conference Final.

As is easy to tell, the Magic/Kareem duo brought more to the Lakers in their final three years than the Kobe/Shaq duo. Think this was a near prime Kobe and peak Shaq, compared to a peak Magic but old Kareem. Now let's look at Magic and Kobe without their running mate.

Magic only had two years without Kareem, but these two years brought a 74% win rate and a NINTH finals run in 11 years. He lost in the finals in 5 games to Jordan's Bulls, but it was still a successful two years without his running mate. He also won an MVP.

Kobe on the other hand, had a wretched time without his running mate. He had a 49% win rate, with his best playoff run being a 3-1 lead in the first round to the Suns. One year he didn't even qualify for the playoffs. The highpoint was a playoff buzzer beater against Phoenix.

As shown above, Magic had far more success than Kobe without his star big. He experienced only a 1% drop in win rate compared 18% for Kobe. He also reached the finals once, compared to a first round exit for Kobe, and didn't miss the playoffs in these two years either.

Overall, you can see Magic had a greater impact on winning for the Lakers than Kobe with and without his star big. The difference is large. Add to the fact he has more iconic moments and that he was better in the playoffs for LA, it's clear to me that Magic was better than Kobe.

I say this with all the respect for Kobe. He is one of the (at worst) six best players of all time, and one of the three best scorers ever. But to me, Magic was better - that's no slight. After all, he's the greatest point guard ever. Magic Johnson was better than Kobe Bryant.

End of thread. x