"Legacy"

[kylio27]

Because, when you are that rich, that famous, that revered, its human nature to strive for something more. And "legacy" is the next step.

I am really just getting at this generation's drooling over individual legacy, with an almost complete loss of the respect for a "team" game.

If Lebron was to win a championship in Cleveland, not only would his individual legacy be greatly increased, so would his team legacy for having taken a lot of role players and made champions out of them. Just because people talk about a player's individual legacy doesn't mean they are disregarding their team play.

I see where you're coming from, although I would rather see people these days comparing great teams as they do players.

[Googjob]

Great teams are defined by great players. It is a team sport, but not as much as other sports. One star can change and control a game. While we like to give a Robert Horry credit, he is a role player who didn't have nearly the impact the stars did on the run.

So I understand the team argument, but those teams are defined by their players, by their legacies, and by the journey. While I'm sure Boston loves their recent Championship team, it can't hold a candle to their 80's teams that had homegrown talent that were with the team for many years. A team of mercenaries diminishes the Championship because it eliminates the journey to get there.

[kylio27]

I am not saying it doesn't matter at all, I am just saying it is overrated. Team legacies should be what is remembered.

And I agree, individual awards do not matter to myself, and they shouldn't for anyone.

I usually "compare" players based off style and play, rather than just hardware. Lebron is not similar to MJ AT ALL, he is more similar to an oscar robertson

It may be overrated to you, but to most people it's not at all. What teams do people want to see win championships? The ultimate "team" such as the 2004 Pistons, or a team lead by an all time great player such as the Bulls? My point is that a teams' legacy can be directly related to the individual legacies that make up the team. This may still not make a difference in your eyes, but it certainly does in most.

To me, the individual legacy is more appealing and valuable than the team, because the individual is the one that has to look in the mirror at night and reflect on who they are, and how much they loved the game and wanted to win. MJ can look in the mirror and say, all the hard work that he, the individual, put in paid off because at the end of the day he overcame so many obstacles in his NBA career and still won multiple championships. He challenged himself at the highest level, and won. The Bulls legacy of the 90s rests heavily on his shoulders, and that's primarily what we remember. LeBron on the other hand will look in the mirror and say that he wanted to win, on a great team, while becoming one of the greats of all time. However, there's no way that he can convince himself that it was the ultimate challenge, or that he overcame any obstacles at all, because up to this point in career he hasn't.

I also see where you are coming from. I like anyone, loves to look into the individual accolades and legendary persona that has been given to these players, such as MJ, KOBE, or even MAGIC. Although I think people put too much emphasis on individual success today than they should. I just don't think an individual "legacy" should define the success of a player's career.

If Lebron goes on to win 3 or 4 titles with the heat or some other team, he will have a legacy, one which involved a team. Comparisons to other players that were "the guy" like MJ, just seems childish to me.

I get what you are saying, but you have to admit...people are overplaying this whole "Lebron's legacy is tarnished, cuz he is not the guy", it is just silly, is it not?

[kylio27]

What teams do people want to see win championships? The ultimate "team" such as the 2004 Pistons, or a team lead by an all time great player such as the Bulls? My point is that a teams' legacy can be directly related to the individual legacies that make up the team.

And, in all honesty. Most fans see the 90's bulls as "Michael Jordan and 11 other guys"

Personally I would rather see a team like the 2004 pistons win, because that is how the ywill be rememebred as, "the 2004 pistons TEAM"

[LeHeatDynasty]

exactly. legacy who gives a fudgenuck

[VTi]

He will make is own, and probably remembered as one of the greats if he averages close to a tripple double and bring multiple championships to the Heat.

But still, he won't to me be part of the GOAT discussions.

[kylio27]

He will make is own, and probably remembered as one of the greats if he averages close to a tripple double and bring multiple championships to the Heat.

But still, he won't to me be part of the GOAT discussions.

I'm not big on the whole GOAT discussion. It is almost impossible for me to decide which player can be considered the GOAT, and it is silly even discussing it.

I usually compare players based on play style, that is why I found it silly when all these years people were comparing lebron to MJ. Not because I didn't think Lebron could mirror MJ's success, but because he was a COMPLETELY different player. Lebron plays very much like Oscar Robertson.

[whysoserious]

If you don't think Legacy matters, think about the status of Michael Jordan and what it's meant to his brand and to Nike.

Fans will give the Heat credit for winning but they won't be talked about in the same breath as the Lakers, Bulls, Celtics and Spurs teams that built winners.

Also, James, Wade and Bosh will not be talked about in the same breath as Jordan, Bird, Magic, Russell.

I don't blame Bosh for going, he was in a losing situation and decided to join up with Wade. I have a problem with Lebron because he was already on a contender, an organization that did everything to placate to him and put pieces around him to contend and walked out on them. If he wanted to play with his friends so be it but he could have had something special in Cleveland.