How will LeBron be remembered 20 years from now?

[Demitri98]

He'll never get past #4 all time for me unless he rattles off 4 or 5 more chips and has GOAT-level longevity.

[DCL]

you're just a troll.

and a pretty weak one.

[Knoe Itawl]

at worst, even if he doesn't win another one, he's already in the top 10.

can he still turn around and be candidate for GOAT?? i don't think so. that's pretty much out of the question. you can't compete for goat if you ever go MIA in the finals. that's the f--king standard of perfection set by the bald guy. you CANNOT ever go MIA in ANY finals. Only A++++ games or you ain't GOAT. no excuses.

but right now, top 5 is still debatable, i think. one side might argue that he is kinda there for all the achievements he's made, and the other side might argue that he ain't even there for all his f--k ups he's shown.

but i think top 5 security is what he's playing for now. which ain't bad because he's already firmly secured in top 10.

so 20 years from now, he's still gonna be remembered as a legend cuz if you're top 10, you're already a legend in the game.

only question is if he's top 10 or top 5-ish, maybe 4-ish if he goes crazy in the last part of his career...

but no GOAT. that discussion is over.

Exactly. And no amount of troll garbage will stop it.

[Rake2204]

I think it depends upon who is doing the remembering, as well as how James' career wraps up.

From my end, he's the second greatest basketball player I've been able to watch live (the other being Michael Jordan). So on the surface, I believe the general memory will be, "LeBron James was one of the greatest players of all-time."

My hope is, in 20 years, the flat "how many rings he got?" logic is finally collectively accepted to be but a part of evaluating one's ability as opposed to being a primary basis of individual evaluation within a team game.

[COnDEMnED]

A) A coward
B) A ringchaser
C) A Top 15 player of all-time
D) A quitter
E) A player who dominated solely for his physical gifts/natural talent. He was one of the least skilled players ever, made his teammates worse, colluded but all in all he should finish top 25 still.
F) Other (state your opinion)

G) A weird combination of Ebonics and French. Le'Bron...Leeeeeee' Bron.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Assuming no more MVPs, or Rings? Not as fondly as you'd think. Silver's crack down on PEDs following Stern's tenure is the beginning of his down fall. But obviously he's still a top ten caliber player.

[ralph_i_el]

F) First Gay President

[stalkerforlife]

Dominique Wilkins.

Only difference...

Dominique didn't leave the Hawks to form super teams in his prime.

[pauk]

I think it depends upon who is doing the remembering, as well as how James' career wraps up.

From my end, he's the second greatest basketball player I've been able to watch live (the other being Michael Jordan). So on the surface, I believe the general memory will be, "LeBron James was one of the greatest players of all-time."

My hope is, in 20 years, the flat "how many rings he got?" logic is finally collectively accepted to be but a part of evaluating one's ability as opposed to being a primary basis of individual evaluation within a team game.

I think it never will my friend.... how else will people now try to rank a LESSER individual player over a BETTER individual player? :P

[Dragonyeuw]

Why would he need to win 4-5 titles to match Wilt if Wilt never won 4-5?

Because Wilt is the most statistically dominant force in NBA history?

As I said, * perception-wise* in terms of how history will view him, he's not going to be part of the group I mentioned.