Lebron's chance at GOAT ended in 2011

[StrongLurk]

After those finals. We know Lebron is a top 3-5 player of all time who HAD the talent to be GOAT. But his performance in 2011 ended that convo.

What he did 2012-2018 solidified his top 3-5 stature, but 2011 cannot be understated for someone with GOAT standards. Hell, even if the Heat won in 2011 because Wade and Bosh somehow averaged 30-40ppg each, it would not have a been ANY boon to Lebron's legacy because of his level of play.

Just like the 2000 finals do NOTHING for Kobe's all-time legacy due to him not playing at an all-time level.

[Ben Simmons 25]

Nope. It officially ended July 4th or July 7th, 2016. Depending on how you look at it.

He was never going to pass Russell, anyways.

[StrongLurk]

Nope. It officially ended July 4th or July 7th, 2016. Depending on how you look at it.

This is a low-IQ take. Level of play is all that matters.

A player who loses, but puts up 30/5/5 on great efficiency with good defense is better than a player who wins, but only put up 15/8/3 on good efficiency with good defense.

MJ is not GOAT because of 6 rings...he is GOAT because he had that highest, most consistent level of play.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Obviously. And it was buried in 2014. Grave was pissed on in 2017. And maggots have been eating the memory of that chance this entire season. Along with his move to yet another franchise, LA. The guy is a mercenary. Top 10 all-time, but he needs far too much help to be successful.

[ImKobe]

You're comparing prime Lebron to 21 y.o Kobe playing on one good leg?

[Ben Simmons 25]

Level of play isn't all that matters.

Awards and titles play a huge ****ing part in legacy.

You really think, to use an obvious example, that Kobe Bryant was 20-30+ spots on the all time list better than Tracy McGrady if you strip away all accomplishments and titles and just look at level of play? **** out of here with that bullshit. They were back and forth, neck and neck, as players at their peaks for multiple years.

You have to take everything into account. There is no simple answer. But I will tell you, accomplishments and titles matter a hell of a lot when we start evaluating hair splitting at the top.

If McGrady gets drafted by the Lakers and Kobe stays with Charlotte, you think their all time rankings are so drastically different in favor of Kobe still? Please eh, **** outta here with that bullshit.

[FKAri]

Level of play isn't all that matters.

Awards and titles play a huge ****ing part in legacy.

You really think, to use an obvious example, that Kobe Bryant was 20-30+ spots on the all time list better than Tracy McGrady? **** out of here with that bullshit. They were back and forth, neck and neck, as players at their peak for multiple years.

You have to take everything into account. There is no simple answer. But I will tell you, accomplishments and titles matter a hell of a lot when we start evaluating hair splitting at the top.

If McGrady gets drafted by the Lakers and Kobe stays with Charlotte, you think their all time rankings are so drastically different in favor of Kobe still? Please eh, **** outta here with that bullshit.

That's cool and I know people care about it but **** that shit. Give me the better player. I'll take Chris Paul. You can take Sam Jones.

[Ben Simmons 25]

That's cool and I know people care about it but **** that shit. Give me the better player. I'll take Chris Paul. You can take Sam Jones.

Terrible example. McGrady and Kobe were far closer in peak skill and effectiveness than Paul & Jones.

I didn't say titles/accomplishments are the only thing that matters. I said they matter a hell of a lot when considering all time ranking. And they do. And there's context to these things. There isn't a simple formula you can follow to tell you who deserves to be ranked where. You have to take everything into consideration about their level of play, circumstances, careers, etc...

But let's say that Kobe spends his career with a bum ass franchise and walks away with 0 titles, you really think he ends up much further ahead on the all time list of McGrady? Hell ****ing no. The only reason he'd even be further up would be longevity and that's literally it.

[StrongLurk]

Level of play isn't all that matters.

Awards and titles play a huge ****ing part in legacy.

You really think, to use an obvious example, that Kobe Bryant was 20-30+ spots on the all time list better than Tracy McGrady if you strip away all accomplishments and titles and just look at level of play? **** out of here with that bullshit. They were back and forth, neck and neck, as players at their peaks for multiple years.

You have to take everything into account. There is no simple answer. But I will tell you, accomplishments and titles matter a hell of a lot when we start evaluating hair splitting at the top.

If McGrady gets drafted by the Lakers and Kobe stays with Charlotte, you think their all time rankings are so drastically different in favor of Kobe still? Please eh, **** outta here with that bullshit.

Bro, T-Mac has 7 elite seasons...Kobe has 13. Over that span, T-Mac played 491 games while Kobe played 973.

That's why T-Mac isn't better than Kobe.

Longevity plays a role as well. I can't help if casuals rank Kobe highly because of 5 "rangz". For me, Kobe is the same guy if he had 2 rings or 4 rings. He's in the bottom half of the top 10 all time.

[SamuraiSWISH]

That's cool and I know people care about it but **** that shit. Give me the better player. I'll take Chris Paul. You can take Sam Jones.

Because that’s an apples to apples comparison.

What about comparing Chris Paul to Isaiah Thomas? Very comparable players and games. Who are you taking?

[Ben Simmons 25]

Bro, T-Mac has seven elite seasons...Kobe has 13. That's why T-Mac isn't better than Kobe.

Longevity plays a role as well. I can't help if casuals rank Kobe highly because of 5 "rangz". For me, Kobe is the same guy if he had 2 rings or 4 rings. He's in the bottom half of the top 10 all time.

Of course longevity matters.

Everything has to be taken into consideration. I'm done repeating myself. You guys literally just read what the **** you want to read and that's it. Oh well. I'll try again tomorrow.

[SouBeachTalents]

Bro, T-Mac has seven elite seasons...Kobe has 13. That's why T-Mac isn't better than Kobe.

Longevity plays a role as well. I can't help if casuals rank Kobe highly because of 5 "rangz". For me, Kobe is the same guy if he had 2 rings or 4 rings. He's in the bottom half of the top 10 all time.

Say what you want, if Kobe went ringless post Shaq, or hell, even if he had won once and had lost the 6/24 game I seriously doubt you'd have him in your top 10.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Say what you want, if Kobe went ringless post Shaq, or hell, even if he had one and lost the 6/24 game I seriously doubt you'd have him in your top 10.

I don

[StrongLurk]

Of course longevity matters.

Everything has to be taken into consideration. I'm done repeating myself. You guys literally just read what the **** you want to read and that's it. Oh well. I'll try again tomorrow.

You said awards/titles matter for a person's legacy...but also alluded to the fact the nba players don't have a ton of control over how good their team/franchise is...so why do you give awards/titles a ton of weight?

If we are judging individuals...then shouldn't we mostly ignore "team accomplishments"? If we are judging who the best team is...then you look at wins/losses.

[StrongLurk]

I don’t know bro, he would still have four rings.

And multiple MVP caliber seasons. 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.

I do wonder how his legacy would be defined if Kevin Garnett never got hurt in 2009, and the Lakers faced that Celtics team three years in a row. Or if as you said, he lost that 6 for 24 game seven.

I've used Kobe a lot before for these types of discussions because of his unique career arc. He had the least amount of help during his peak (2006 and 2007), but had a ton of help early on in his career and at the end of his prime.

So his winning years are overrated to me but his losing years (peak) are a little underrated for me.