Do some people actually believe that it s better to lose before the finals than to...

[nba_55]

Do some people actually believe that it s better to lose before the finals than to lose in the finals?
If yes, i d like to hear their arguments on that.

[aboss4real24]

[COLOR="Magenta"]Losing in the finals hurts your legacy

Hell no losing in finals is better


losing b4 doesnt really hurt your legacy

u get no trophy 4 2nd place
[/COLOR]

[fpliii]

The argument is that if you make the Finals, you (you being the franchise player, here) had a supporting cast good enough to get that far (especially considering ECF/WCF are approximately as good as Finals opponents, since you're facing the best team in your conference, and the best team in the other conference), so the loss is on you. Not your supporting cast.

[nba_55]

[COLOR="Magenta"]Losing in the finals hurts your legacy

Hell no losing in finals is better


losing b4 doesnt really hurt your legacy

u get no trophy 4 2nd place
[/COLOR]

explain why losing the finals hurt you legacy and losing before it doesnt hurt it?

[nba_55]

The argument is that if you make the Finals, you (you being the franchise player, here) had a supporting cast good enough to get that far (especially considering ECF/WCF are approximately as good as Finals opponents, since you're facing the best team in your conference, and the best team in the other conference), so the loss is on you. Not your supporting cast.

If you make the 1st round, you had a supporting cast good enough to get that far... If you make the 2nd round, you had a supporting cast good to get that far....

The same logic could work for each round.

[fpliii]

This isn't to say I necessarily agree (though I don't necessarily disagree, either). There are some other factors coming into play:

[Roundball_Rock]

The argument is that if you make the Finals, you (you being the franchise player, here) had a supporting cast good enough to get that far (especially considering ECF/WCF are approximately as good as Finals opponents, since you're facing the best team in your conference, and the best team in the other conference), so the loss is on you. Not your supporting cast.

That is the argument but it is specious. One, what if someone's player helped a team overachieve to get to the Finals, like the 07' Cavs did? Would it be better for Lebron's legacy in bizarro world if they lost in the ECF as expected? Moreover, what about numerous instances of teams that were title contenders that failed to reach the Finals? Every year there are 4-6 legitimate title contenders; only 2 can make the Finals. Under the bizarre argument that you mentioned, LeBron losing in the Finals is worse than Durant losing in the WCF even though both had title contenders (and OKC actually had the better record) and the same seed. That is why that argument makes no sense. Another example:according to this it was better for Magic to lose in the WCSF in the first post-KAJ year despite having the league's best record than Kareem losing in Game 7 of the Finals in 74'.

[fpliii]

If you make the 1st round, you had a supporting cast good enough to get that far... If you make the 2nd round, you had a supporting cast good to get that far....

The same logic could work for each round.

Nope, because those team were not the best in their conference (unless you're a very low seed and upset a 1-2 seed early on, and face a weaker opponent in the Finals). Teams are seeded within their conferences, so you'll face two quality opponents at a minimum (ECF/WCF and Finals).

[fpliii]

That is the argument but it is specious. One, what if someone's player helped a team overachieve to get to the Finals, like the 07' Cavs did? Would it be better for Lebron's legacy in bizarro world if they lost in the ECF as expected? Moreover, what about numerous instances of teams that were title contenders that failed to reach the Finals? Every year there are 4-6 legitimate title contenders; only 2 can make the Finals. Under the bizarre argument that you mentioned, LeBron losing in the Finals is worse than Durant losing in the WCF even though both had title contenders (and OKC actually had the better record) and the same seed. That is why that argument makes no sense. Another example:according to this it was better for Magic to lose in the WCSF in the first post-KAJ year despite having the league's best record than Kareem losing in Game 7 of the Finals in 74'.

As I said in my second post, I don't necessarily agree. Just wanted to state the argument.

[nba_55]

That is the argument but it is specious. One, what if someone's player helped a team overachieve to get to the Finals, like the 07' Cavs did? Would it be better for Lebron's legacy in bizarro world if they lost in the ECF as expected? Moreover, what about numerous instances of teams that were title contenders that failed to reach the Finals? Every year there are 4-6 legitimate title contenders; only 2 can make the Finals. Under the bizarre argument that you mentioned, LeBron losing in the Finals is worse than Durant losing in the WCF even though both had title contenders (and OKC actually had the better record) and the same seed. That is why that argument makes no sense.

That argument is really dumb. The ''you had a good enough supporting cast to reach the finals'' logic could be used for each round. You could also say he had a good enough supporting cast to reach the 1st round, then, you should have gotten to the 2nd round.

[nba_55]

Nope, because those team were not the best in their conference (unless you're a very low seed and upset a 1-2 seed early on, and face a weaker opponent in the Finals). Teams are seeded within their conferences, so you'll face two quality opponents at a minimum (ECF/WCF and Finals).

So, it hurts your legacy to lose against the best teams, but it doesnt hurt it if you lose against weaker teams
Unless this is not what you meant...

[coin24]

Damage control bran bout to go 2/5 in the finals

No just getting there is the main thing, good job good effort

[nba_55]

Damage control bran bout to go 2/5 in the finals

No just getting there is the main thing, good job good effort

I knew someone would mention Jordan, Lebron or Kobe.
We cant have a thread without them.

[diamenz]

Do some people actually believe that it s better to lose before the finals than to lose in the finals?
If yes, i d like to hear their arguments on that.

hi livinglegend. your typing gave it away. ;)

[fpliii]

So, it hurts your legacy to lose against the best teams, but it doesnt hurt it if you lose against weaker teams
Unless this is not what you meant...

Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. See my second post in the thread:
[QUOTE=fpliii]This isn't to say I necessarily agree (though I don't necessarily disagree, either). There are some other factors coming into play: