Bigger legacy boost

[Joao Saraiva]

In these scenarios, what would be the bigger legacy boost?

1. Jordan misses the shot in 98 and the Jazz go on to win game 7 at home. Imagine Malone plays to his averages in the 98 finals but goes out with the W. Everything else remains the same for everyone. How big is the legacy boost for Karl Malone? Top 10 ever?

2. LeBron has no meltdown vs Dallas in 11. Everything else remains the same. He wins FMVP and the Heat go on to 3-peat, and then he still goes to Cleveland. Assume he plays as well as he did vs the Bulls in the ECF.

3. Spurs win in 13. Tim Duncan wins 6 championships and they win against the Heat B2B in the finals. Remember he had a tremendous game 6.

[70sFan]

People don't care about Duncan, so most would say he was just a roleplayer in 2013 (even though he was at worst top 10 in the league).

I'd say that Malone would be much higher for most fans. He played really well in 1998 and with a ring people would talk how amazing he was and how he's the only one who beat Chicago dynasty. I'd say this scenario would help legacy the most and I can see some people having him in top 10 ever after that.

[Joao Saraiva]

People don't care about Duncan, so most would say he was just a roleplayer in 2013 (even though he was at worst top 10 in the league).

I'd say that Malone would be much higher for most fans. He played really well in 1998 and with a ring people would talk how amazing he was and how he's the only one who beat Chicago dynasty. I'd say this scenario would help legacy the most and I can see some people having him in top 10 ever after that.

I think people care a lot about Duncan in this forum. He was voted as a top 5 player ever in 2017. So winning one more would certainly do something for his legacy.

With that said I can see your point about Karl Malone.

[No-more-rings]

Karl Malone for sure. There’s diminishing returns on championships once you get your first one. In Lebron’s case he’d still have a losing finals record, a few of the finals not being really close. Not saying it’s fair or unfair but many here already have him as goat so what would it change? Would he be super goat? I don’t think so, and his haters would still exist.

Duncan’s would probably be the least effected, his performance wouldn’t have been different and he was past prime anyhow. Not saying the 13 title wouldn’t matter, but he wasn’t playing close to his 05/07 level.

[Owly]

In these scenarios, what would be the bigger legacy boost?

1. Jordan misses the shot in 98 and the Jazz go on to win game 7 at home. Imagine Malone plays to his averages in the 98 finals but goes out with the W. Everything else remains the same for everyone. How big is the legacy boost for Karl Malone? Top 10 ever?

2. LeBron has no meltdown vs Dallas in 11. Everything else remains the same. He wins FMVP and the Heat go on to 3-peat, and then he still goes to Cleveland. Assume he plays as well as he did vs the Bulls in the ECF.

3. Spurs win in 13. Tim Duncan wins 6 championships and they win against the Heat B2B in the finals. Remember he had a tremendous game 6.

To the responder or in the popular imagination?

To me: LeBron, because you're improving his play. Popular imagination: Malone, because you're giving a ringless player (with some playoff falloff)
1) A title
2) A probable FMVP
2) A finals victory over a Jordan team (does MJ still retire on a loss?)

That's a big narrative win.

[cecilthesheep]

People don't care about Duncan, so most would say he was just a roleplayer in 2013 (even though he was at worst top 10 in the league).

I'd say that Malone would be much higher for most fans. He played really well in 1998 and with a ring people would talk how amazing he was and how he's the only one who beat Chicago dynasty. I'd say this scenario would help legacy the most and I can see some people having him in top 10 ever after that.

I think people care about Duncan, and I think most people after a short conversation would recognize/admit he was still the best player on both the '13 and '14 teams.

However, I agree that winning in '13 wouldn't do much for his legacy, because I don't think the loss is really hurting him. He made up for it and more in '14. I don't know if '14 even happens without '13, but I think that's beside the point - sure, a repeat title might boost him a few spots up some all-time lists, but given the almost universally positive perspective most have on Duncan, it wouldn't be anything major compared to what we're talking about with LeBron and Malone.

[cecilthesheep]

Karl Malone for sure. There’s diminishing returns on championships once you get your first one. In Lebron’s case he’d still have a losing finals record, a few of the finals not being really close. Not saying it’s fair or unfair but many here already have him as goat so what would it change? Would he be super goat? I don’t think so, and his haters would still exist.

Duncan’s would probably be the least effected, his performance wouldn’t have been different and he was past prime anyhow. Not saying the 13 title wouldn’t matter, but he wasn’t playing close to his 05/07 level.

Agreed on the ranking, for basically the same reasons. I do think LeBron might be more of a consensus GOAT right now if he'd won in '11. Winning three titles and then losing a few to the most stacked team ever just leaves a different impression than starting off your superteam career by collapsing on the biggest stage. I know that series is probably the biggest single factor holding him behind Jordan for me personally.

[70sFan]

People don't care about Duncan, so most would say he was just a roleplayer in 2013 (even though he was at worst top 10 in the league).

I'd say that Malone would be much higher for most fans. He played really well in 1998 and with a ring people would talk how amazing he was and how he's the only one who beat Chicago dynasty. I'd say this scenario would help legacy the most and I can see some people having him in top 10 ever after that.

I think people care about Duncan, and I think most people after a short conversation would recognize/admit he was still the best player on both the '13 and '14 teams.

However, I agree that winning in '13 wouldn't do much for his legacy, because I don't think the loss is really hurting him. He made up for it and more in '14. I don't know if '14 even happens without '13, but I think that's beside the point - sure, a repeat title might boost him a few spots up some all-time lists, but given the almost universally positive perspective most have on Duncan, it wouldn't be anything major compared to what we're talking about with LeBron and Malone.

In this forum, yeah sure. Keep in mind that this forum contains basketball fans that on average are far more knowledgeable than average fan outside of PC Board. Most people think that Kawhi is the best player in 2014 which is not true and in 2013 Duncan was all-nba level player, probably the best bigman in the league.

[Joao Saraiva]

Karl Malone for sure. There’s diminishing returns on championships once you get your first one. In Lebron’s case he’d still have a losing finals record, a few of the finals not being really close. Not saying it’s fair or unfair but many here already have him as goat so what would it change? Would he be super goat? I don’t think so, and his haters would still exist.

Duncan’s would probably be the least effected, his performance wouldn’t have been different and he was past prime anyhow. Not saying the 13 title wouldn’t matter, but he wasn’t playing close to his 05/07 level.

The 11 finals are kind of the only black mark on LeBron's career. I think it has tremendous upside on his legacy. Would put him in a much better position to challange for the GOAT spot.

With Duncan... does that make him have more of a case for a top 3 player ever? You're also taking away something from LeBron and Tim would be 3-0 against him.

[HBK_Kliq_33]

Duncan 2013 - It was post prime years so it would be a small boost but not significant. Similar boost that Shaq 06 and Kawhi 2014 rings get. Pre or post prime years.

LeBron 2011 - This would help him have a better case over Jordan, Shaq, Duncan. I don't think those guys ever had as bad of a playoff year as this.

Malone 98 - It would be a good boost and cement him as a top 15/20 guy like Dirk. Right now I would have him comfortably top 25/30 because he chokes in big games/moments and had Stockton enhance his PPG. So Malone would be looked at as more Dirk level instead of James Harden, Barkley or Chris Paul level. If Dirk didn't have that 2011 year, he would be right there with all those guys. Might not be fair but that's how legacy works.

[Mrakar]

1. Lebron
1a. Malone
3. Duncan

For me this is the worst mark on Lebrons career and its reason he will not be GOAT on my list even if he wins championship with Lakers for example. If he won that one he would arguably already be the GOAT, if not one chip with lakers would for sure put him in front. However that's the difference between GOAT and ATG.

For Malone, just look what a good championship run did for Dirks career. It would be very big boost for his career.

[bledredwine]

It has to be Malone

First of all, we must recall positive psychology- we tend to forget more negative events from the past and stress the positive. Thus, it’d affect Lebron’s career a lot less, despite how big of a failure 2011 was. We also get nostalgic and spin negative events, remembering them more positively. This can glorify success and diminish failures such as the Celtics series. 2011 was just so large that it hasn’t gone away. But most of us seem to have forgiven the teaming up, for example. Humans are naturally optimistic about the past, though not the present so much.

Second, the legacy growth between 0 and 1 is significantly larger than 5 and 6. Duncan has already solidified himself as a top 10-15 player. The only thing that changes this is Kobe having five and Jordan having six. Still, I don’t consider that valid enough reason.

Finally, Hakeem was known as the next best player in the Jordan generation. The championships only solidified this. If Malone had won, and especially in defeating Jordan’s Bulls, that’d be a hell of an accomplishment. We all know that when they clicked as a team, they won the championships and were never taken to game seven until they split apart. It would be quite an accomplishment.

[giberish]

Pretty obviously Malone would be the biggest change. The difference between 0 and 1 titles is bigger then adding additional titles. Look at how Dirk was viewed before 2011 vs now.

LeBron probably 2nd as he would have had to play differently for a different outcome. SA can win in 2013 with Duncan playing exactly the same with one different bounce.

[Ambrose]

Taking away the biggest black mark of LeBron's career is obviously a huge. However, he's already so high on most lists that his all time standing wouldn't be altered much. People who have him #1 still would. People who don't likely still wouldn't. Duncan is largely unaffected. Malone definitely increases the most slots. I think he'd jump 3-5 spots on a lot of lists.

[henshao]

Going from Champion of X caliber to Champion of Y caliber is not nearly so big a leap as from all-time-great to NBA Champion

[No-more-rings]

One other thing, i think Duncan winning in 2013 would’ve had a bigger negative impact on Lebron’s career than a positive on Duncan’s. He definitely underperformed prior to late in game 6, and i think hardly anyone would have had Lebron over Duncan in that scenario. Again, I won’t say it’s fair or unfair but that’s how it would be.

[Franco]

I’m surprised nobody else mentioned this yet, but the Jazz would’ve been the first team to comeback from a 3-1 deficit in the Finals, and dethrone the Bulls who were in their way to a 3peat, after getting blown out by 40+ in game 3.

I don’t see how this doesn’t make Malone’s ranking skyrocket in most lists.

[Ainosterhaspie]

It's LeBron. His play in that series is heavily used against him in the ATG discussion. It is probably the primary thing holding him back for many people. How often do people say he can never be GOAT because of 2011?

I don't see Malone moving up the list much with that win, same with Duncan. For both its an extra positive that doesn't really move the needle much given their overall career. For LeBron though, it's not just adding a nice positive, it's removing a huge weight that's dragging him down.

[Dr Positivity]

Karl Malone. The Jordan fans would still use the more rings argument against Lebron. Malone's validates his career

[Sark]

Malone. Going from 0 to 1 championship is more valuable than increasing your total by another.