What is LeBron's legacy if he loses 5 times in the finals?

[trojanfan12]

Let's say MJ had made the NBA finals 3 times ... let's say from 1988-1990 ... and lost. (instead of losing earlier in the playoffs)

Would we think less of MJ if his finals record was 6-3 ? (I don't think we should.)

Yes we would. He wouldn't be the clear cut GOAT anymore and the aura of invincibility that he has to this day would be gone.

If he were 6-3 in the finals, he'd be 1 game better than Magic at 5-4 and would be tied with Kareem at 6-3. Suddenly Kareem and Magic would have much stronger GOAT arguments and Kareem might even have a better argument.

 

[ChrisGar15]

Yes we would. He wouldn't be the clear cut GOAT anymore and the aura of invincibility that he has to this day would be gone.

If he were 6-3 in the finals, he'd be 1 game better than Magic at 5-4 and would be tied with Kareem at 6-3. Suddenly Kareem and Magic would have much stronger GOAT arguments and Kareem might even have a better argument.

So he is viewed as a better player because he lost earlier in the playoffs those three years?

And Jerry West is viewed as a better player because he was chosen as logo ? It seems like he had the same career as a player regardless of some choice from the NBA office a number of years after he retired ?

Doesn't make sense.

 

[trojanfan12]

So he is viewed as a better player because he lost earlier in the playoffs those three years?

And Jerry West is viewed as a better player because he was chosen as logo ? It seems like he had the same career as a player regardless of some choice from the NBA office a number of years after he retired ?

Doesn't make sense.

No, he's viewed as better because he was 6-0 in the finals. That's his trump card. He got there and he got the job done...every. single. time. Not sure what's so hard to understand.

Jerry West is considered a great player because he was a great player. But the first thing most people think of when he comes up in a conversation is that he's the logo. I was pretty clear. Not sure how you didn't grasp that.

 

[Kold]

Let's say MJ had made the NBA finals 3 times ... let's say from 1988-1990 ... and lost. (instead of losing earlier in the playoffs)

Would we think less of MJ if his finals record was 6-3 ? (I don't think we should.)

I don't like doing hypotheticals, but it's hard for me to say how it would of been looked at at the time, but looking back on it now, I think we would definitely look a little less on it, because 6 for 6 just has a certain mystique to it. There's atleast something to be said about a person getting there, and never losing.
Moving on, those years bring me back to my earlier point. We look back at that point in time and say, the pistons dominated Jordan and the Bulls, and Jordan just wasn't good enough yet to overcome them.
However, what we don't say is "Pippen had a migraine in game 7, so that doesn't really count". We don't say "Jordan didn't have a good enough team in those early battles with the pistons". We also don't mention that those Piston teams was one of, if not the best(atleast by those rules back then) defenses of all time(or atleast that era) as a an excuse for Jordan.
Whereas for Lebron, there is always a rush to defense to explain why certain things don't necessarily count against his legacy. The Pippen migraine excuse holds just as much weight as the Kyrie/Love injury excuse, but I never hear anyone harp on that in Jordan's case. Also the pistons having an all time defense is also like saying "well the Spurs just pulled off one of the greatest offensive performances in history, so there's nothing the heat could of done". And to take the comparison another step, after his rookie year, a young Jordan lost to those all-time great Celtic teams twice, but once again that's never looked at as a reason to scratch it off from Jordan's legacy.
Now, I respect Lebron, and I'm really not trying to discredit Lebron(as opposed to just getting a point across), as he may go down as the most physically, and uniquely(with his size) gifted player to ever play in the NBA

 

[ChrisGar15]

I don't like doing hypotheticals, but it's hard for me to say how it would of been looked at at the time, but looking back on it now, I think we would definitely look a little less on it, because 6 for 6 just has a certain mystique to it. There's atleast something to be said about a person getting there, and never losing.
Moving on, those years bring me back to my earlier point. We look back at that point in time and say, the pistons dominated Jordan and the Bulls, and Jordan just wasn't good enough yet to overcome them.
However, what we don't say is "Pippen had a migraine in game 7, so that doesn't really count". We don't say "Jordan didn't have a good enough team in those early battles with the pistons". We also don't mention that those Piston teams was one of, if not the best(atleast by those rules back then) defenses of all time(or atleast that era) as a an excuse for Jordan.
Whereas for Lebron, there is always a rush to defense to explain why certain things don't necessarily count against his legacy. The Pippen migraine excuse holds just as much weight as the Kyrie/Love injury excuse, but I never hear anyone harp on that in Jordan's case. Also the pistons having an all time defense is also like saying "well the Spurs just pulled off one of the greatest offensive performances in history, so there's nothing the heat could of done". And to take the comparison another step, after his rookie year, a young Jordan lost to those all-time great Celtic teams twice, but once again that's never looked at as a reason to scratch it off from Jordan's legacy.
Now, I respect Lebron, and I'm really not trying to discredit Lebron(as opposed to just getting a point across), as he may go down as the most physically, and uniquely(with his size) gifted player to ever play in the NBA

STOP ... RIGHT NOW. Go change your team picture/affiliation. (maybe to something like the Raptors or Grizzlies) No Laker fan can write such an objective, well-thought-out, intelligent post.

 

[omarsrevenge]

A LOSER

 

[tlance]

Yes we would. He wouldn't be the clear cut GOAT anymore and the aura of invincibility that he has to this day would be gone.

If he were 6-3 in the finals, he'd be 1 game better than Magic at 5-4 and would be tied with Kareem at 6-3. Suddenly Kareem and Magic would have much stronger GOAT arguments and Kareem might even have a better argument.

That is ridiculous.

The other thing to consider is that throughout the duration of LeBron's career, the West has been hands down the better conference. That simply was not true during the Jordan era. Those battles with the Knicks, Pistons and Pacers were every bit as tough, and arguably more so than the Finals series.

Somehow, you are suggesting that if Jordan had navigated his team past the Pistons in 1990 and they had lost in the Finals it would have diminished his legacy? That is proposterous.

Now, you can make the claim that LeBron's Finals trips are not worth as much because the East is weak, but it is not fair to say he is less of a player because of when they lost. He has won 2 titles and failed to win 10 times. Every year he gets close, however, and that does count for something. Getting close is not a negative thing. 2 of the 4 losses came against clearly better teams and the two Miami losses came against teams playing out of their mind well.

By the way, the extension of your argument would be to say that LeBron's legacy would be better served if he loses to the Raptors or Heat this season than it would if he loses to the Warriors or Spurs. That is just plain wrong.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

STOP ... RIGHT NOW. Go change your team picture/affiliation. (maybe to something like the Raptors or Grizzlies) No Laker fan can write such an objective, well-thought-out, intelligent post.

Yeah great points... I was a HUGE Jordan fan in that time and actually there was a LOT of reasons/excuses of why he wasn't winning, and actually they were really similar to Lebron's (basically he can't do it all even if he is the best guy on the court).

They did disappear into history when he got his 3peat though. And I think the news coverage/social media isn't what it is today. I mean how many remember Jordan saying "Winning a championship is not something I need to justify my place in history"? Yes. That Jordan.

It's like Peyton his first 6-7 years always talking about how he thought the Non-SB winning group of him and Marino and Barry and Kelly was a pretty great group. And at the pro-bowl right after his first SB said the truth, that it's so much better not being in that group.

Imagine if Lebron was down 0-2 in a series and the story was him kicking chairs and bashing his teammates at halftime for not hitting shots off of his assists and staring them down after misses on the court, and then after the game not sticking around with the team in the locker room but just bolting to the team bus on his own? That would utter insanity in the media today.

So you are right, it isn't anything today, but it was then.



But I do fully agree, 9 Conference Finals wins and 6 championships is better than 6 conference title wins and 6 championships.

 

[Gooch1034]

Consistently losing in a memorable way is going to have an effect on a players "image". The Finals are when the best are supposed to shine. LeBron unfortunately will be linked to coming up short in most of the most important games of his career. Especially since he will be compared to other all-time greats that elevated their game when it mattered most with successful results.

Jim Kelly of the Buffalo Bills. Great player. Lost 4 consecutive Super Bowls. If he wins those 4, automatically one of the best QBs ever but not in the top 5 discussion without those 4 crucial wins.

Right or wrong, fair or not, this is just my opinion on how people in general might see things when ranking LeBron against other all-time greats.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Consistently losing in a memorable way is going to have an effect on a players "image". The Finals are when the best are supposed to shine. LeBron unfortunately will be linked to coming up short in most of the most important games of his career. Especially since he will be compared to other all-time greats that elevated their game when it mattered most with successful results.

Jim Kelly of the Buffalo Bills. Great player. Lost 4 consecutive Super Bowls. If he wins those 4, automatically one of the best QBs ever but not in the top 5 discussion without those 4 crucial wins.

Right or wrong, fair or not, this is just my opinion on how people in general might see things when ranking LeBron against other all-time greats.

But this isn't Jim Kelly who NEVER won a SB and was just putrid in all but one where he was ok at best.



That is true, the team results do matter.

but I think it's hard to find when anyone elevated their game in a finals with an overmatched team more than last year. 36-13-9 and the only thing that looked good other than TT on the offensive boards. Honestly, I can't think of a player who could do that outside of him.

The year before 28-8 on 57% shooting. On a team with two HOFers he basically equaled them combined in production. Led his team in points, 3pters, Offensive boards, Free throws, defensive boards, assists, steals, FG%, 3pt%, minutes, and 1 block away from leading them there as well. And did that while being checked by what is arguably the best perimeter defender of our era.

Finals before, again checked by Leonard, won finals MVP, 25-11-7 line, and in game 7 when Wade/Bosh/Allen score 23 combined points he has 37 and 12 boards to win the title.

Finals before, 29-10-7 and wins MVP of the finals...

Yup the Dallas one you can throw at him, not good on his part at all, the first Cleveland one reminded me a LOT of Jordan vs. the Pistons. Facing a much better team/coach/system. The two games they were close only Lebron dominating the fourth but came up short.


Really it's hard to say anyone has been better in any of the last 4 finals series than Lebron. Who is the last player you can say that about 4 in a row?



I don't agree with the Kelly comparison, Closer to Elway, not sure there is a dead on one, but I do agree with your point. Right or wrong he will be judged on being the best winner in the finals. And I am fully fine with that one, I think when talking the best of the best of the best, I am 100% ok with going with those who did something (best player on finals winning team) over those that did not.

 

[Gooch1034]

But this isn't Jim Kelly who NEVER won a SB and was just putrid in all but one where he was ok at best.



That is true, the team results do matter.

but I think it's hard to find when anyone elevated their game in a finals with an overmatched team more than last year. 36-13-9 and the only thing that looked good other than TT on the offensive boards. Honestly, I can't think of a player who could do that outside of him.

The year before 28-8 on 57% shooting. On a team with two HOFers he basically equaled them combined in production. Led his team in points, 3pters, Offensive boards, Free throws, defensive boards, assists, steals, FG%, 3pt%, minutes, and 1 block away from leading them there as well. And did that while being checked by what is arguably the best perimeter defender of our era.

Finals before, again checked by Leonard, won finals MVP, 25-11-7 line, and in game 7 when Wade/Bosh/Allen score 23 combined points he has 37 and 12 boards to win the title.

Finals before, 29-10-7 and wins MVP of the finals...

Yup the Dallas one you can throw at him, not good on his part at all, the first Cleveland one reminded me a LOT of Jordan vs. the Pistons. Facing a much better team/coach/system. The two games they were close only Lebron dominating the fourth but came up short.


Really it's hard to say anyone has been better in any of the last 4 finals series than Lebron. Who is the last player you can say that about 4 in a row?



I don't agree with the Kelly comparison, Closer to Elway, not sure there is a dead on one, but I do agree with your point. Right or wrong he will be judged on being the best winner in the finals. And I am fully fine with that one, I think when talking the best of the best of the best, I am 100% ok with going with those who did something (best player on finals winning team) over those that did not.

I mentioned Kelly mainly because he is a simple example of how important it is to win those big games. Not comparing him to LeBron really. With it all coming down to opinion in the end, I think it will be a big factor. Its is more my guess on what people in general will consider more than my personal opinion.

 

[trojanfan12]

That is ridiculous.

The other thing to consider is that throughout the duration of LeBron's career, the West has been hands down the better conference. That simply was not true during the Jordan era. Those battles with the Knicks, Pistons and Pacers were every bit as tough, and arguably more so than the Finals series.

Somehow, you are suggesting that if Jordan had navigated his team past the Pistons in 1990 and they had lost in the Finals it would have diminished his legacy? That is proposterous.

Now, you can make the claim that LeBron's Finals trips are not worth as much because the East is weak, but it is not fair to say he is less of a player because of when they lost. He has won 2 titles and failed to win 10 times. Every year he gets close, however, and that does count for something. Getting close is not a negative thing. 2 of the 4 losses came against clearly better teams and the two Miami losses came against teams playing out of their mind well.

By the way, the extension of your argument would be to say that LeBron's legacy would be better served if he loses to the Raptors or Heat this season than it would if he loses to the Warriors or Spurs. That is just plain wrong.

No it isn't. During Magic and Kareem's careers the East by far the better conference. Back then. people used to talk about how easy the Lakers path to the finals was.

No, the extension of my argument doesn't make it better if Lebron loses in earlier rounds. The discusiion is about finals appearances. And MJ being diminished if he had lost in the finals isn't preposterous at all.

Kareem is the all-time leading scorer in NBA history. He ranks at or near the top in many statistical categories, had a loner career than MJ and has just as many rings. Yet, MJ is the GOAT because he's unbeaten in the finals.

Bottom line in finals:

MJ: 6-0
Kareem: 6-3
Magic: 5-4
Kobe: 5-2
Bird: 3-2
Lebron 2-4

Lebron doesn't measure up. No matter how many participation trophies you want to give him.

 

[starbigd]

You guys can say stuff like this all you want. When he retires, the ONLY thing people will discuss will be the rings he DID win.

People aren't going to denigrate his accomplishments......just like Kobe, they'll convienently forget the failures and only remember the good times, because an all time great is leaving the game.

His legacy will always be secure, it doesn't matter if he won once and loses 10 finals.....he still has 2 rings, and no matter WHAT you say about it, you can't take it from him.

People will argue where he sits all time......but nobody is going to care how many times he lost when discussing his overall greatness.

 

[Flauge]

Fans overrate finals record. MJ got swept twice in the first round. LeBron never has. Getting swept in the first round isn't a stain on Jordan's record... but going to the finals and losing is a stain on LeBron's...okay. I disagree with it, but that's the way it is for the vast majority of basketball fans. So, with that said.. LeBron better win 6-8 titles if he wants to pass Jordan... otherwise he will forever be behind him in those all time debates.

 

[johnson]

It's still a great accomplishment to get to the finals five times straight and the guy did that with three different teams on with Cleveland the first time, Miami and Cleveland the second time but I do believe he will be criticized if he can't win at least one more or two more.

Probably true. I think everyone will think he came up a little short if he doesn't win one with Cleveland. I think of Jordan and he did it with a pretty good cast of characters, but he made all those guys better. Lebron certainly does the same to some extent...but if all his wins came only when he compiled a super team (something Jordan couldn't have done back then), his legacy will have a dent or two for some.

 

[trojanfan12]

Fans overrate finals record.

Uh, no they don't. It's the all-time greats that put the emphasis on finals records. That part of the narrative comes from them. It's how they separate themselves from each other. Who is anyone on here to tell them they're wrong?

When the other all-time greats are asked about the GOAT, they all say MJ and it always comes down to "MJ is 6-0 in the finals." It's why Kareem is ranked below him despite having the same number of rings and just as many, if not more, individual accomplishments and records. It's why Magic is ranked below him despite being a better all-around player. It's also why guys like Bird and Kobe are ranked below him.

People tend to confuse "legacies" with talent and stats. When you compare Lebron to the all-time greats. His talent level and all around skill set is better than any of the other all-time greats. The only one's in the conversation from a skill set perspective are Magic and Bird and Lebron is bigger, stronger and faster than either of them.

But when you talk about "legacies," which is what is used to rank these players, MJ gets ranked above them all because of his 6-0 record in the finals. Lebron will be ranked lower because of his losing record in the finals.

 

[Flauge]

Uh, no they don't. It's the all-time greats that put the emphasis on finals records. That part of the narrative comes from them. It's how they separate themselves from each other. Who is anyone on here to tell them they're wrong?

When the other all-time greats are asked about the GOAT, they all say MJ and it always comes down to "MJ is 6-0 in the finals." It's why Kareem is ranked below him despite having the same number of rings and just as many, if not more, individual accomplishments and records. It's why Magic is ranked below him despite being a better all-around player. It's also why guys like Bird and Kobe are ranked below him.

People tend to confuse "legacies" with talent and stats. When you compare Lebron to the all-time greats. His talent level and all around skill set is better than any of the other all-time greats. The only one's in the conversation from a skill set perspective are Magic and Bird and Lebron is bigger, stronger and faster than either of them.

But when you talk about "legacies," which is what is used to rank these players, MJ gets ranked above them all because of his 6-0 record in the finals. Lebron will be ranked lower because of his losing record in the finals.

I don't care who says it. It's not like every all time great go together and said only finals record should be counted. This is a fan thing. If you want to ignore Jordan got SWEPT in the first round multiple times go ahead. Going to the ECF and losing is somehow more noble than winning that series and losing in the next round... if you want to go along with that thinking... go ahead. I won't. If you're the greatest of all time in basketball you do need rings. But if you went to the finals 11 times and finished 5-6, I consider that more impressive than Jordan's 6-0. I get I'm probably in the minority.... But I remember Jordan losing in the playoffs. Nike's Jordan hype machine hasn't cleansed my memory.. yet. Jordan still is the goat...but not just because of 6 finals. 6 finals MVPs as well.

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't care who says it. It's not like every all time great go together and said only finals record should be counted. This is a fan thing.

It's not a fan thing. They may not have all gotten together and decided, but it's what they all use to separate themselves.

Also, unless you are an all-time great, I'm pretty sure they don't care what you think is more impressive. I find it hilarious that fans try to say that the all-time greats are wrong about how they separate themselves from one another. I hate that it's done that way. I'm a Lakers fan and would love nothing more than for Kareem or Magic to be considered GOAT. But it's not going to happen for them, just like it's not going to happen for Lebron.

And again, this is about legacies, not talent or overall play. MJ's legacy will always be 6-0 in the finals and Lebron's will always be having a losing record in the finals. Everyone else's legacy will fall somewhere in between those 2.

 

[Wamu]

It's not a fan thing. They may not have all gotten together and decided, but it's what they all use to separate themselves.

Also, unless you are an all-time great, I'm pretty sure they don't care what you think is more impressive. I find it hilarious that fans try to say that the all-time greats are wrong about how they separate themselves from one another. I hate that it's done that way. I'm a Lakers fan and would love nothing more than for Kareem or Magic to be considered GOAT. But it's not going to happen for them, just like it's not going to happen for Lebron.

And again, this is about legacies, not talent or overall play. MJ's legacy will always be 6-0 in the finals and Lebron's will always be having a losing record in the finals. Everyone else's legacy will fall somewhere in between those 2.

Magic should have had a losing record in the Finals but his Lakers cheated their way to titles in '85 & '87. Same w/ 2010. They cheated 3 times in the Finals & each time they robbed the Celtics!

 

[trojanfan12]

Magic should have had a losing record in the Finals but his Lakers cheated their way to titles in '85 & '87. Same w/ 2010. They cheated 3 times in the Finals & each time they robbed the Celtics!

That was payback for the Celtics cheating their way to 9 championships at the Lakers expense.