Bigger legacy boost #2

[Joao Saraiva]

1. Kobe plays more unselfish vs Pistons in 04 and the Lakers win the championship. Assume Shaq still gets FMVP. Kobe gets 6 rings and equals MJ on that ring count. Does it change a lot the perception of him?

2. Orlando doesn't blow the game at the FT line vs Houston in the finals, and goes on to win it. Shaq gets FMVP. Everything remains the same after that. Big legacy boost for Shaq?

3. Vince Carter goes trough Iverson in 01 and gets Toronto in the finals vs the Bucks. How is he seen now? A lot better than nowadays? The 01 run made wonders for Iverson legacy wise. Assume Toronto lose 4-1 to the Lakers and Carter has a great game 1 too.

[Doctor MJ]

2. Orlando doesn't blow the game at the FT line vs Houston in the finals, and goes on to win it. Shaq gets FMVP. Everything remains the same after that. Big legacy boost for Shaq?

You want us to assume that instead of getting swept Orlando wins the series because they don't blow one game? I'm afraid I can't do that.

Shaq's tendency to get swept is as much a part of his legacy as his tendency to eventually turn all important relationships toxic.

If we could ignore all of that, then Shaq would be the GOAT.

[liamliam1234]

Yeah, I do not like the idea of just flipping sweeps / almost sweeps. May as well say, “What if Lebron beat the Spurs in 2007?” Those teams were simply outmatched, and neither can be blamed off Kobe not passing enough or the Magic not closing out game 1.

The Carter case is interesting, and it would matter a lot for casuals (R.I.P. Iverson — probably the larger effect there), but I think it would matter much more in other ways than in terms of Carter’s legacy. I mean, would it put him above Howard? No. So he gains a better argument as a top sixty all-time player? Eh, I find it hard to care. But as a Toronto fan, I do think about it every so often, how McGrady could have seen more cause to stay, and how that duo could have been well-positioned to make the next two Finals (were Kidd’s Nets scaring anyone?). 2003 would have been especially fascinating, and although I doubt they beat god-mode Duncan, they could have made that a real battle. And of course the effect on Toronto’s sports perception would have been immense.

[An Unbiased Fan]

1. Kobe plays more unselfish vs Pistons in 04 and the Lakers win the championship. Assume Shaq still gets FMVP. Kobe gets 6 rings and equals MJ on that ring count. Does it change a lot the perception of him?

2. Orlando doesn't blow the game at the FT line vs Houston in the finals, and goes on to win it. Shaq gets FMVP. Everything remains the same after that. Big legacy boost for Shaq?

3. Vince Carter goes trough Iverson in 01 and gets Toronto in the finals vs the Bucks. How is he seen now? A lot better than nowadays? The 01 run made wonders for Iverson legacy wise. Assume Toronto lose 4-1 to the Lakers and Carter has a great game 1 too.

1) Kobe shooting alot in 2004 had eveyrthing to do with injuries and the fact LA had no bench against a better team. Even if they were healthy and won, I don't think Kobe detractors would really care.

2) Again, Rockets were better, but if they don't win in 94, Hakeem is ranked towards the bottom of the Top 20. Shaq would be Top 5

3) Vince was plagued by injuries. A trip to the FInals in 2001 wouldn't have done much since they would ahve been swept by that 2001 team. Conversely, Kobe gets the FMVP is the ooponent was the Raps sicne LA featured the best mismatchup in the playoffs. AI's legacy tanks

[70sFan]

Kobe playing much better than he actually did would be very important for his legacy.

I also disagree that one game would change 1995 finals outcome.

[SHAQ32]

Not sure how much Carter getting passed Philly in 2001 does for his legacy. I remember at the time fans were pretty high on him going into the following season. I'd say removing the 'injuries' (including the 'jumper's knee') from his resume sans 2002-04 does more for him.