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

[CitySushi]

Serious answer, top 10. He won't ever crack top 5 in the media's eyes because of "lack of championships".

Everyone likes to compare generations, but you simply can't. Wilt and Russell dominated in an era with overall really unskilled players (as compared to today). Then you had the evolution of the game to then include a 3 point line. Then no hand-checking. Now zone defense is allowable. The game has evolved and it's impossible to compare players across generations.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

He's 2nd best all time in my eyes, but the lack of titles wont have him there when viewed by the general public

The first Cleveland Cavaliers team he carried to the finals was a roster i dont believe any player in history gets to the Finals.....Thats a roster that got the Cavs the #1 pick the following season once Lebron departed

And last seasons' roster, once Kyrie and Love went down, wasnt much better

He will be seen in the scope of history as "losing" those finals, when in reality, these were teams that had no business being in the finals to begin with

 

[HurricaneDij39]

If anyone played in a weak generation, it was MJ. MJ was at his best just after the league expanded and the talent level hadn't caught up. By the time Kobe was in his prime, the overall talent level was starting to catch back up and it has gotten even better since Lebron entered his prime.

What talent level are you referring to? Is it the Big Three of the Boston Celtics? Because those guys only played hard when they felt like it and didn't take the regular season seriously after 2008.

The NBA before the Pacers-Pistons brawl was considerably more physical. Even if you tried to play physical in today's league you'd be called for a cheap flagrant foul.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Duncan? He's part of the same weak generation.

Very true, but there's something to be said for doing all his damage with the same team, similar supporting casts, and never complaining about it.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Duncan is one of the best to ever play his position

But ive never seen him as a player that could carry a team to the Finals, completely on his shoulders, as Lebron has done a couple of times with Cleveland

So I guess its all how you look at how you measure "Greatest Players"

 

[lakersrule]

Very true, but there's something to be said for doing all his damage with the same team, similar supporting casts, and never complaining about it.

So you simply have some negative bias towards Kobe.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

So you simply have some negative bias towards Kobe.

Do I? Oh well...

 

[lakersrule]

What talent level are you referring to? Is it the Big Three of the Boston Celtics? Because those guys only played hard when they felt like it and didn't take the regular season seriously after 2008.

The NBA before the Pacers-Pistons brawl was considerably more physical. Even if you tried to play physical in today's league you'd be called for a cheap flagrant foul.

Rule changes to make the league less physical is not an indictment on talent levels. That's out of the players control.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Duncan is one of the best to ever play his position

But ive never seen him as a player that could carry a team to the Finals, completely on his shoulders, as Lebron has done a couple of times with Cleveland

So I guess its all how you look at how you measure "Greatest Players"

"Making players better" - Something even Steph Curry does better than LeBron.

 

[lakersrule]

Do I? Oh well...

Which is fine. Just keeping the haters honest.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Rule changes to make the league less physical is not an indictment on talent levels. That's out of the players control.

Out of players control? Cry me a river. When you faced more physical competition (and teams that don't tank) you should get more notoriety. And I'm only 27. The Jordan Era with the Bulls was just ending when I first started following the NBA.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

"Making players better" - Something even Steph Curry does better than LeBron.

Oh i dont know about that at all...Lebron has been criticized in the past for being "too unselfish"

I think the 2 Cavs teams he carried to the Finals is a pretty good indicator he was making scrubs like Delonte West and Matthew Delavadova better

His presence alone and the attention he draws defensively makes players around him better by default

 

[trojanfan12]

What talent level are you referring to? Is it the Big Three of the Boston Celtics? Because those guys only played hard when they felt like it and didn't take the regular season seriously after 2008.

The NBA before the Pacers-Pistons brawl was considerably more physical. Even if you tried to play physical in today's league you'd be called for a cheap flagrant foul.

The overall talent level in the league has nothing to do with how physical the game used to be. It's about how many true NBA caliber players are in the league and how those players are distributed throughout the league. Heck, you made a thread that made that very point when you spoke of the parity in the league.

Right now, there are 3 truly terrible teams in the league, the Lakers, 76ers and Nets. Of those 3, only the Nets appear to not be in a position to rebound fairly quickly because they screwed themselves cap wise trying to grab a quick title. That doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers and 76ers will rebound fairly quickly, just that they are in position to do so. The FO's still need to make the right moves.

During MJ's time, there were usually as many as 8-10 truly terrible teams because the overall talent level hadn't caught up to the number of teams in an expanded league. Teams didn't have to tank back then, they were already terrible.

 

[lakersrule]

Out of players control? Cry me a river. When you faced more physical competition (and teams that don't tank) you should get more notoriety. And I'm only 27. The Jordan Era with the Bulls was just ending when I first started following the NBA.

Notoriety? I thought you were talking about talent levels? The players don't make the rules.

And teams did tank. Why do you think they created the lottery system?

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Notoriety? I thought you were talking about talent levels? The players don't make the rules.

And teams did tank. Why do you think they created the lottery system?

Trojan was the one talking about "talent level". I'm still waiting to know what "talent" you guys were referring to.

 

[trojanfan12]

I wouldn't put he or Kobe in the top 10 simply because of the weak generation they played in...

If anyone played in a weak generation, it was MJ. MJ was at his best just after the league expanded and the talent level hadn't caught up. By the time Kobe was in his prime, the overall talent level was starting to catch back up and it has gotten even better since Lebron entered his prime.

What talent level are you referring to? Is it the Big Three of the Boston Celtics? Because those guys only played hard when they felt like it and didn't take the regular season seriously after 2008.

The NBA before the Pacers-Pistons brawl was considerably more physical. Even if you tried to play physical in today's league you'd be called for a cheap flagrant foul.

Rule changes to make the league less physical is not an indictment on talent levels. That's out of the players control.

The overall talent level in the league has nothing to do with how physical the game used to be. It's about how many true NBA caliber players are in the league and how those players are distributed throughout the league. Heck, you made a thread that made that very point when you spoke of the parity in the league.

Right now, there are 3 truly terrible teams in the league, the Lakers, 76ers and Nets. Of those 3, only the Nets appear to not be in a position to rebound fairly quickly because they screwed themselves cap wise trying to grab a quick title. That doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers and 76ers will rebound fairly quickly, just that they are in position to do so. The FO's still need to make the right moves.

During MJ's time, there were usually as many as 8-10 truly terrible teams because the overall talent level hadn't caught up to the number of teams in an expanded league. Teams didn't have to tank back then, they were already terrible.

Trojan was the one talking about "talent level". I'm still waiting to know what "talent" you guys were referring to.

Not sure where you got lost. You said that Kobe and Lebron played in a weak generation. Generally speaking, that means they faced less talented teams. I pointed out that there was less talent league wide during MJ's time and why. Even pointed out one of your own threads where you said essentially the same thing.

 

[RobToxin]

John Elway.

That would be his legacy.

Cause he still does have two rings, no matter how many Finals he loses.

 

[Rex Racer]

Dewshebag, just like it is now

 

[gordontrue]

Random thoughts... I think as we current fans get older and more and more new fans come up... LeBron is going to become the #1 mentioned former player. Jordan will continue to be considered GOAT... but as the fanbase transitions into people that never saw him play... he's going to become less and less interesting for people to talk about.

Due to the lack of popularity of the league before the 80's.... I think Jordan and LeBron stand alone in terms of attention and moving the needle.

If Curry remains on his trajectory he could join them. That's a HUGE if, though, given the very short amount of time he's played at this level.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

1 more title for Curry and everyone will forget about LeBron.