LeBron James to the Lakers 4 Years/$154M

[CWood21]

3 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said:

Can’t punish him for being better at forming a super team than Lebron. 

Did LeBron's legacy not take a hit for teaming up in Miami?  LeBron will be more known for bringing a championship to Cleveland than any of his championships with Miami.

[J-ALL-DAY]

That's a myth that the legacy takes a hit for forming a super team. End of the day you rather have as many rings as possible. Years from now the discussion isn't going to be how you got the rings, but how many did you get. The ring he got for Cleveland may have meant more to him, but for his legacy they don't count more than the other two. Now, if he goes elsewhere with the Lakers and wins? One of his strongest arguments to being the GOAT will be he won with three different teams as the alpha dog. 

[bigbadbuff23835]

31 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

That's a myth that the legacy takes a hit for forming a super team. End of the day you rather have as many rings as possible. Years from now the discussion isn't going to be how you got the rings, but how many did you get. The ring he got for Cleveland may have meant more to him, but for his legacy they don't count more than the other two. Now, if he goes elsewhere with the Lakers and wins? One of his strongest arguments to being the GOAT will be he won with three different teams as the alpha dog. 

The Cleveland championship might not mathematically be worth more, but it’s definitely worth more in terms of public perception. Bringing a championship to Cleveland, Buffalo, Chi Cubs, cities/teams like that is always worth more in my eyes. The stress to overcome droughts in places where things always seem to go wrong has got to be next to impossible to deal with.

[J-ALL-DAY]

Again, when talking about his legacy in 10 years from now, how relevant is that going to be? Will he better than Jordan because he ended Cleveland's drought? That cship was important for his legacy in Cleveland, but overall that ring isn't counting more than other rings. 

[Raves]

8 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Again, when talking about his legacy in 10 years from now, how relevant is that going to be? Will he better than Jordan because he ended Cleveland's drought? That cship was important for his legacy in Cleveland, but overall that ring isn't counting more than other rings. 

There will always be talk.  I think it's Wilt or might've been someone else, where they dismiss some of their accomplishments because they were playing against grocery baggers back then and that the team they were on was stacked.

People do bring up the teams they were on and they situation they were in.  10 years it will still be fresh.  Now if you said 30 years, then yeah, that might be different.

[champ11]

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Again, when talking about his legacy in 10 years from now, how relevant is that going to be? Will he better than Jordan because he ended Cleveland's drought? That cship was important for his legacy in Cleveland, but overall that ring isn't counting more than other rings. 

Very relative. There are receipts for everything with technology. I don't think the narratives around LeBron's rings and Durant's rings will go away. Totally disagree with you tbh

[l3lind golfer]

bros lebron going to the Lakers symbolizes that he no longer cares about winning and He is content with continuing to lose.  Come off the Bench of Draymond green and get carried to rings by durant.

[J-ALL-DAY]

14 minutes ago, Raves said:

There will always be talk.  I think it's Wilt or might've been someone else, where they dismiss some of their accomplishments because they were playing against grocery baggers back then and that the team they were on was stacked.

People do bring up the teams they were on and they situation they were in.  10 years it will still be fresh.  Now if you said 30 years, then yeah, that might be different.

Okay, 15 years or 20 years from now or whenever it stops being fresh. When people talk about his legacy, do they count his ring in Cleveland as counting as two rings? So does he have four rings now? It was a great moment in Cleveland sports history, but you don't get brownie points for being a terrible sports town. 

 

16 minutes ago, champ11 said:

Very relative. There are receipts for everything with technology. I don't think the narratives around LeBron's rings and Durant's rings will go away. Totally disagree with you tbh

We will look at the total body of work but him having three rings isn't going to change. Those Miami titles aren't counted as any less than the Cleveland ring. 

But of course you disagree. Coming from a man who has to face the reality of his team choking in the last.………… 

[Raves]

4 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Okay, 15 years or 20 years from now or whenever it stops being fresh. When people talk about his legacy, do they count his ring in Cleveland as counting as two rings? So does he have four rings now? It was a great moment in Cleveland sports history, but you don't get brownie points for being a terrible sports town. 

 

We will look at the total body of work but him having three rings isn't going to change. Those Miami titles aren't counted as any less than the Cleveland ring. 

But of course you disagree. Coming from a man who has to face the reality of his team choking in the last.………… 

Cleveland isn't a terrible sports town, they've just had some bad teams/luck.  Cleveland loves their sports and shows up to support them, their teams however have been hit or miss over the years with stretches of being good, outside of the Browns, and stretches of being bad, like most franchises.  I would consider a bad sports town as one where even when they have a good team it's hard to get fans to show up, which does happen.

Also the ring in Cleveland will definitely be considered bigger than KD's rings in Golden State.  Even when things are fresh, unless the Cavs go on to win some more championships in the next 15-20 years, it'll be something that's considered.  I mean if the number of rings really mattered then Robert Horry would be talked about as one of the best to ever play the game, but the fact is, he was a good player on some great teams.  KD is a great player that joined an already great team to and won championships.  I don't think Steph/Klay/Draymond/Iggy will have their championships be diminished like KD will have his as they were on the team already and won before KD.  I mean the Warriors probably could've still won the last 2 championships with Barnes and the rest of the team before bringing in KD, KD just made it easier for them.

[J-ALL-DAY]

Let's not move the goal posts now. Don't bring up Horry in this discussion. When did I say rings is the end all or be all? I just said it's a myth for a player to ruin his legacy joining or creating a Super team. LeBron's legacy didn't take a hit going to Miami. I said his rings in Miami don't count any less than the one he won in Cleveland just because one team had never won a championship before. 

You're right, Cleveland isn't a terrible sports town, just have no winning history. Point still stands. 

[champ11]

14 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Let's not move the goal posts now. Don't bring up Horry in this discussion. When did I say rings is the end all or be all? I just said it's a myth for a player to ruin his legacy joining or creating a Super team. LeBron's legacy didn't take a hit going to Miami. I said his rings in Miami don't count any less than the one he won in Cleveland just because one team had never won a championship before. 

You're right, Cleveland isn't a terrible sports town, just have no winning history. Point still stands. 

Coming back from a 3-1 deficit (not sure if u remember who it was against, but they won 73 games in the regular season) and having his signature moment (the block against some bench player) make that title more significant in discussion than his two with Miami. He beat the team with the most regular season wins in history. That will always be a piece of the discussion around LeBron. But yeah the Cleveland angle isn't as significant as that to me so I agree on that.

I don't think LeBron's legacy will be hurt by the Miami superteams. But Durant's will be. Is that fair? Probably not totally, but that's the vibe I'm seeing as of now. 

[OhioG]

Quote

Marla Ridenour of the Akron Beacon Journal on ESPNLA:

I heard this from his own lips when we were in Houston this season. He does not like Houston as a city. So, that would require him moving to a place that he’s not crazy about

https://sports.yahoo.com/report-lebron-james-says-doesn-164417709.html

Hopefully thats 1 down.

[J-ALL-DAY]

Bron tripping, Houston is nice. Loved it when I went there a few years back. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

7 minutes ago, champ11 said:

Coming back from a 3-1 deficit (not sure if u remember who it was against, but they won 73 games in the regular season) and having his signature moment (the block against some bench player) make that title more significant in discussion than his two with Miami. He beat the team with the most regular season wins in history. That will always be a piece of the discussion around LeBron. But yeah the Cleveland angle isn't as significant as that to me so I agree on that.

I don't think LeBron's legacy will be hurt by the Miami superteams. But Durant's will be. Is that fair? Probably not totally, but that's the vibe I'm seeing as of now. 

Once again, you are talking about something totally different. You are describing the type of team he beat and how he did it. THAT will always be his biggest moment in his career. But doesn't mean winning in Cleveland counts more than winning in Miami. So if he swept a team like the Rockets in the finals instead of beating that Warriors team, it would still count for more? And it's not like he went to a super team in Miami to winning with a bunch of bums in Cleveland. Dude created another super team with Kyrie and Love. The pieces didn't mesh as well but lets not use revisionist history here. 

Durant's legacy will be hurt so much that he will crack damn near everyone's top 10-15 list something that may not have happened if he stayed in OKC. Winning zero or one ring in OKC will ultimately will be better than winning three or four rings in GS while being the finals MVP three or four times as well? Nope. I mean after every finals you now have people anointing him as the best in the world for out playing or playing even with LeBron. Trust me, it is ALWAYS better to win no matter how than doing it the honorable way and losing. 

If LeBron stayed in Cleveland his entire career and ended up with one ring, he would never be in the MJ discussion despite his gaudy stats. He's in that discussion because of his gaudy stats and the two rings he won in MIami. 

[l3lind golfer]

okay i need to drop some knowledge.

1.  lebron won't be negatively judged by his miami superteam, but durant will be?  Boy if you don't....  so many things here.  first, LeBron had his signature biggest meltdown ever on said superteam.  secondly, leBron is and will always be the guy who people consider the 'starter' of these superteams.  third, leBron is considered the best player since jordan so he's judged different than Durant.

also

2.  If you actually watch basketball, you can tell the Warriors needed Kevin durant.  people so hung up on the 73 wins.... SO WHAT THEY DIDN'T WIN THE CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!! they lost to the cavs who brought the same team back.  without Durant how do we know the warriors win the title last year?  Maybe the Cavs with irving win their second straight ring.  also, if You watched the Houston series this year... they win that without Durant?  child Please.  Durant was needed for them to win these two straight championships, it's obvious.  

3.  LeBron lost in the finals TWICE with the superteam heat.  TWICE.  got blown off the floor in a finals record margin by the Spurs and then the biggest meltdown in the history of human history against the mavs.  durant has won 2 straight rings with the Warriors.  

end of discussion.