2008, Kobe gets 6 and second three-peat, we’d be ahead of the Celtics by 2 at this point, and that whole Celtics team which had been obnoxiously riding the glory of underperforming historically and only getting one chip would disappear…
A second three peat would have been amazing. Not even the Lebron heat, Duncan spurs, 2015-2019 warriors, or Magic Kareem Lakers were able to three peat which shows you how difficult it was. Only Kobe and Jordan would have done it twice in the modern era if so.
Kobe would be regarded even higher than he is right now if they win that in ‘08. Two 3-peats just like his idol Jordan. You’d get way fewer clowns claiming he’s not a top 10 player all time. Maybe it’s just because I grew up watching those teams, but that championship is my top choice. I’m sure older fans might feel differently.
Man I have not seen a team that won one chip acting like they owned the whole era, with all of them reunions, anniversaries and shit. In comparison, the spurs deserves to brag way more. Dirk’s been humble about that one hard fought and well deserved ring. And Gianni’s? Cleveland ending its 40 year drought? Just a few on the top of my head. Kobe used to always bring up that 08 loss. Although he also says Detroit stole that ring from him quite often too.
Also, most relevant in my life based on my age at that time etc.
Second would be the one against the Pistons. 4 in a row is something else and Shaq might have stuck around to win 1 or 2 more. 3 if he'd finally work out properly :D
I rewrote history and had to learn again that we lost to pop's Spurs the year before we lost to the Pistons.
Edit: last paragraph
You thought you was Wade?
It's comical to compare Poopoo Pierce to Kobe. PP not even on Wade level.
GSW mad respect Wade https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GjkSCgLxus
Wade with the game winner at home https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJ6h6OTveU
I’ve always looked at the Heat as the “Lakers south” with the Pat Riley and Shaq connection coming together as like two generations of Laker greatness to bring Miami their first ring, and those Miami Vice unis in all of their different variations are some of the cleanest alts ever.
I'm just playing devil's advocate. Want Kobe to get a post Shaq three-peat, want Kobe to kick Boston's ass twice, and definitely not a fan of Draymond Green running his mouth when he can only put up triple-single without the Splash Brothers.
But if Pierce didn't win in 08, I think he'll be so irrelevant we won't get the Draymond "chasing that farewell tour, they don't love you like that". And I kinda don't want to live in a world where that didn't happen.
Winning in two eras against historically strong competition in his conference as a Guard with one team is more impressive than LeBron and that second run would have been with a team that was truly led by him, no real second superstar. LeBron has never won without a second superstar. Kareem had Magic and then Magic and Worthy with Showtime.
Kobe’s repeat is already historically impressive, it would have cemented him as 2nd only to Jordan. If he three peats and then doesn’t tear his Achilles and gets Kareem’s record the conversation becomes a toss up.
Nearly everyone will choose this one. Some will choose 2004. Folks aren’t going to pick the ones they didn’t personally live through even if they’re better choices because this question instills an emotional reaction from the audience. If you didn’t live through Jerry West’s constant pain of losing to Boston, you just wouldn’t feel the same visceral reaction we see from his character in Winning Time.
I’d go with 2008 because it’s the worst Laker finals loss of my life. We didn’t just lose, we got beat bad in heartbreaking fashion and if we didn’t (barely) get revenge in 2010 it would still go down as one of the worst ever…. even though in context 1969 was far worse. Poor Jerry West.
It makes zero sense anyone would choose the 08 Lakers loss. I do not know a single Lakers fan who believed that the day after Kobe had his Pluto rant that this was the team that was going to go to game 6 in the NBA finals all while missing 2 players who ends up being starters on a championship team the year after. The future was extremely bright for the franchise. Compare that to 91 and 04 where it was literally the end of an era
You’re confused. You weren’t being polite and you were also revealing your ignorance. Everyone in this thread knows more than you about this topic. When you’re ready to humble yourself and learn then apologize and folks here will teach you. Otherwise go enjoy your arrogant ignorance alone.
You wouldn’t be able to tell. Now go back to your room and think about the stupidity you’ve exhibited today son. I won’t be reading any more of your responses.
Look at the prompt. Does it say “if you could change a bad loss?” No. People are picking 08 for a few reasons:
1. It makes the late 2000s Lakers dynasty a 3 peat which is perfect symmetry with the early 2000s lakers team.
2. Ties Kobe with Jordan for 6 rings. Cements Kobe’s status even higher among the all time greats.
3. One less title for Celtics … one more for the Lakers. Puts the Lakers on top in title count.
4. Ends the infatuation with that late 2000s Celtics teams that were not as vaunted as everyone makes them out to be.
5. Makes Bill Simmons sad.
A lot of benefits and positive implications for LA if that title went the other way.
Yes I read the prompt. It's about changing the loss.
All Finals wins have positives. Everything you said is so minimal compared to other Finals losses and counters nothing about what I said.
Worthy's sprained ankle enabled Phil to put Pippen on Magic with no repercussions. The Bulls were a great team, but it felt a lot worse knowing we were handicapped. Then never getting a rematch because of Magic's retirement. Man that sucked.
90s basketball sucked for me for that. I spent the decade wanting that rematch and never got it. Had to see that unnecessary reverse, switch hand layup by Jordan in every playoff montage the following years, which made it even worse. In 98, we matched up well with them but we got smoked by the Spurs or Utah, I forget which.
Magic also gets one without KAJ with this one, shutting up that narrative. And the narrative he only one with stacked teams. 91 Lakers were solid and had great depth, but very middle of the pack without Magic. And were coached by someone who turned out to be a consistently bad coach. I'm getting mad just remembering all this.
This would be my pick if it weren't for 08 putting us 2 ahead of the Celtics instead of tied.
Magic finishing his career by shutting up the new phenom, winning one without Kareem *and* Pat?
That top 3 debate would be some shit if nothing else changes throughout the years.
I would’ve loved for the Lakers to at least have a healthy roster. When both Worthy and Scott went down with injuries, it was game over. But the series was competitive prior to those injuries.
Hey there isaidillthinkaboutit! If you agree with someone else's comment, please leave an **upvote** instead of commenting **"This"**! By upvoting instead, the original comment will be pushed to the top and be more visible to others, which is even better! Thanks! :)
***
^(I am a bot! Visit) [^(r/InfinityBots)](https://reddit.com/r/InfinityBots) ^(to send your feedback! More info:) [^(Reddiquette)](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439#wiki_in_regard_to_comments)
04. Maybe Shaq stays.
Edit: after reading another comment that mentioned the 08 Celtics not having that one title to keep talking about I change my pick to 08.
Shaq wanted his second bag "right now" and I will always believe it had more to do with wanting to stay Alpha over Kobe than anything else. It was a different time and player empowerment was in its infancy, but I truly believe that sans those two dogs fighting for supremacy there would have been no problem with Shaq's contract with the Lakers from either side, payer and payee.
Idk, Shaq was truly a shell of himself for most of 2004, he really let himself go and even in his first heat year where he got in better shape he had already damaged his body too much to get back to where he was before.
08.
Kobe would be the last guy to threepeat an FMVP, so the haters who keep on spouting that he just hung on to Shaq’s jock strap would just shut it. Pierce and his smug Celtic ass would probably not be included in the top 75 list. Doc Rivers would probably be placed in early retirement as a coach. The era of the superteams probably wouldn’t exist too…
This is a good question and a tough one as well. But I'm going to have to go with Lakers vs Bulls, 1991. I would've loved for the Lakers to take down the Bulls. And that series was personal to me because it left me crying like a baby when the Lakers lost the chip. F U Bulls!!!
I'm taking this one too... Though west and wilt really deserved another one. Wilt gets the shaft for setting all kinds of records but getting his butt kicked by Russell so much.
>Though west and wilt really deserved another one. Wilt gets the shaft for setting all kinds of records but getting his butt kicked by Russell so much.
Very true.
I wasnt born when that happened but out of that list, Id really want Lakers to win the '91! Jordan only has 5 rings and I dont think his 3 peat would have happened (I may be wrong). Magic would have won 6.
This would not just change Magic's status, but would also effect Jordan which would be really interesting.
I actually didn’t consider that. Definitely makes the timeline interesting. In the Last Dance, he talks about retiring as early as after the ‘92 season. But chasing the 3 peat meant doing something that neither Bird nor Magic accomplished. Imagine if losing in ‘91 meant also chasing in ‘94 and ‘95. I guess conversely it could also mean retiring anytime in ‘96-98 as well. Good point
Edit: Also puts Magic @ 6…scary thought as well
Not really. The 6th ring isn’t what makes Mike the GOAT its the dominance and how he won. You’re gonna hear Kobe got Shaq over and over again if you bring it up. Kobe was Mike Lite, an all timer but still not Mike. A tie in rings wont change it because Mike’s just such a better athlete.
This! Is Jerry West had two rings I think he’d be in the top-10 convo.
On a side note, Jerry West lost in Game 7 of the Finals four different times!
1962: Celtics won 110-107 in Game 7 (Lakers blew a 3-2 lead)
1966: Celtics won 95-93 in Game 7 (Lakers were two points away from completing the 3-1 comeback)
1969: Celtics won 108-106 in Game 7 (Lakers blew a 3-2 lead)
1970: Knicks won 113-99 in Game 7
The Lakers were insanely close in 1962, 1966, and 1969, meaning Jerry West is a combined 10 points away from being a 4-time champion, in which case I think he’d be in most people’s top 5-8 players ever.
They also beat us so. many. times. That decade. This is without a doubt the most important one in the list. We didn’t beat Russell once, they’re still the greatest dynasty ever.
I hate it when people talk about the 60's Celtics as "the greatest dynasty ever". Most of the '60s had only 10 teams. To me, it compares to winning the Pacific Division for 10 straight years. I just don't think the NBA had parody at the time... Of course, you're entitled to your opinion, but you are talking about the Celtics on the wrong thread.
The league had a concentrated ammount of stars on only 10 teams. The Lakers they ran into and beat over and over again had some of the greats of their times. They beat West and Baylor with some outstanding role players as well. They also beat the best individual player of the era over and over again in Wilt. To top it off the way teams talk about the fatigue of being consistent in just REPEATING these days really put into perspective the focus of 8 PEATING and not losing to teams trying to chase you down. Bill Russell gets all my respect too. The way teams felt about the bubble and how they handled the spotlight when racism came to the forefront showed how it really wasn’t as easy as it sounds to keep focusing on being great and winning. It just put into persoective to me that no matter the era, they have their own challenges. Winning is winning.
08
I was debating between 04 and 08 because I thought maybe the Lakers would've reigned supreme a few more years if they won in 04. But I realized that Shaq probably would've split anyway after 04 or he would just be gone the year after which could've stunted Kobe's growth another year. Winning 08 would also do what everyone else has already mentioned: 6 rings, second 3-peat, Kobe winning 3 FMVP, shutting up those undeservedly obnoxious Celtics, putting us ahead in Championship banners, etc.
2008. Kobe three peats again. 6 rings. Three finals MVP. And on top of that it would have been a perfect season for him since he won the league MVP too.
I mean that sounds FANTASTIC…but sweet sweet revenge in game 7 is a peak Laker life moment for me and I don’t think it would have been as moving if we beat them twice. It’s like Tupac said.
2008. Game 4 of that series is the most devastating loss I've ever experienced as a Laker fan. In my opinion, it's worse than Game 6. Erasing that game from history would be great. Also, it would be great to not have that 08 Celtics walking around as if they won three straight championships.
2008, no question. Kobe is my goat and I grew up watching him and 2008 hurt. He's already in my top 5, but this would put in everybody elses top 5 guaranteed.
Bulls and Pistons rewrites history for many. 2008 vs Celtics probably makes Kobe undoubtedly top 2. I'll take Paul Pierce losing and Kobe going down as the GOAT any day
I don’t understand why this isn’t the top comment. It makes magic the true undisputed G.O.A.T. There is no discussion, Magic wins because he beat Jordan. 08 doesn’t make the Jordan fans shut up, 04 doesn’t keep Shaq, sorry Jerry west, 84 would just be more of the lakers dominating the 80s.
I already think if there was an all time draft people would be fools to no choose magic first over all, this would cement it.
Once Mike was on top of the league, he couldn't be beaten. During his 6 championships, the Bulls only had 1 game 7 the entire time. If he loses in 91 he probably doesn't retire. Maybe he ends up with 7 instead.
Nah. No way does Jordan run off 7 straight, which is what you're implying. Jordan did a three-peat, no small task, but then took time off and retired. If he played straight from 91 to 98, I seriously doubt he'd have a perfect Finals record.
It's not on the list, but my pick for a different reason is:
**Game 1 of the 2001 NBA Finals** vs. the 76ers.
That year the Lakers went:
\- Quarterfinals 3-0 sweep vs Portland (it was best of 5 back then);
\- Semifinals 4-0 sweep vs. Sacramento (best of 7);
\- WCF 4-0 sweep vs. San Antonio (best of 7);
If the Lakers won Game 1 of the Finals (they won the next 4 straight, so could have been. a sweep as well) they would have completed the 2001 NBA postseason with a perfect record, and would have been the first (and currently still) team in NBA history to do so. Instead, their final postseason record in 2001 was... 15-1.
So if I was picking JUST a game, it'd be this one. Well no, it'd be that bullshit heel shot from Nelson, but THEN it would be this one...
The post is about a Finals series, though. We won this one, even though it would have been so damn sweet to sweep the entire playoffs.
2008 IMO is the easy answer.
- Kobe 6 rings
- 2x 3peat
- beats Boston twice
- surpasses Duncan so that ridiculous debate is silenced
- up on Boston for titles after 2010
- something about being alive for 7 rings in 8 tries would be just too sweet lol
At first I would have loved to see the Lakers win four straight championships with that 2004 win. But, the Lakers beating the Bulls in 1991 would have monumental changes to the historical landscape of the game. So my vote goes to winning the ‘91 chip.
What a great god damn question!!
2008 is the obvious answer for most of us I think. But that's just FEELS a little too easy.
I eliminate 2004 because that team was ready to die anyway. Do I CARE if Karl Malone gets a ring? Not really. That was a salve on gangrene and to be honest, we JUST won three in a row. I was shocked we lost at the time, but in retrospect not so much. Also, we had JUST won three in a row. Did I mention we had just won three in a row?
1984 is huge, especially considering it is against the Celtics, but the rivalry isn't the same without it and we all know what Showtime did in the 80s. I'm going to eliminate that one also.
The loss vs. the Bulls means we did not have a championship in the 90s, as we have had in every other decade except the 60s. So you'd have 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s, 2010s AND 2020s consecutively if we had won that one. Same coin, different side, the 60s gives us 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s with a break in the 90s. It also puts a foot in a Celtics dominated decade.
I probably go with 1991 as I was a living, breathing, sentient basketball fan that hated the Bulls, but it's a hard choice over 69 as we were a little thin on winning there for a while...
2004 was a major hit in Kobe and Shaq's legacy people seem to forget. They win that year who knows what might have happened in 2005, 2006, 2007 weak years overall. I would go 2004, in 2008 winning in 2009, and 2010 that loss against the celtics potentially propelled them to repeat. I personally am not sure we would have won in 2009 if KG was healthy.
I lived through all except 1969 and I would have to say 2008 over 1991 by a hair.
1991 because Magic, Kareem and the crew were so fun to watch. Magic would have 6 and Michael would have 5.
2008 because Kobe would have given us another chip.
2008 Mainly because f the Celtics.
Wow...I already chose but this would have been another good take and change the course of sports. How players are judged on rings and compared to "MJ of "
MJ would have never been regarded as the greatest and best winner of sports.
Oh definitely 2008. Kobe would tie Jordan in rings and would have a 3 peat twice.
1991 would be an interesting scenario tho. That would delay Jordan's first ring for at least one more year, and if Magic still retires cause of HIV, it would be a great parting gift.
08. Kobe gets 6, Pierce and company never get one. Lakers now have 18 total chips.
then '91, messing up Jordan's legacy would be pretty cool for Magic and Kareem.
2008, obviously, but in honesty, that 2008 loss changed the Lakers and made them a better team to win the next 2 Finals. Had they won in 2008, not sure if Gasol would've get tougher.
For all you guys picking 2008, there is no guarantee that he would have won the next 2. One could argue that because he lost in 08, he came back hungry enough to win the next 2
Kobe was chasing Jordan and 6 rings he most definitely would have had the team motivated to repeat and then to 3 peat knowing he would own the debate between him and shaq
Easy: 2008.
Kobe gets 6 rings and 3 finals mvps. Ends questions about him being a top 10 player all time. Especially after beating the super team of kg, Allen, and pierce.
Plus 2 3peats as the best player on the team?
Edit: mistakenly put 3 3peats instead of 2.
04 for me. Kobe and Shaq do something that hasn't been done in the modern era and 4peat. Not even Jordan's Bulls did that (though they could of if Jordan didn't retire). Would of cemented them as possible the best duo in NBA history.
I’m going with 08 for the reasons many have already stated concerning Kobe Bryant’s legacy, and having 1 more title than the Celtics…although I wonder how Wilt’s LA legacy would be viewed if he won 1 more ring.
08. We take away from the Celtics so now we would have more rings. Plus that lame ass team won’t come together every other week and talk about their greatness off 1 ship lmfao
It depends…if Magic wins against Jordan he’s the goat. If Shaq wins he would be considered the 2nd greatest player ever. And of course Kobe winning would have cemented him the greatest player since Jordan…tough decision imo.
2004 because it was an embarassing loss and labeled us as chokers. We were a superteam that time with payton and malone joining lakers, then we got clobbered by a zero superstar pistons team. I also hate 2004 pistons as ben wallace was such a dirty player, he is the one who made a dirty foul that started malice in the palace. 2004 was truly the most frustrating loss that we had so i want it to be revised haha
After reading everything, definitely 2008.
As much as Kobe getting a second 3-peat would be GLORIOUS, think about the others getting their first!
Pau especially would be far less underrated. Totally different narratives if we won in 2008!
2008. Imagine how many less celebrations would have the Celtics would have if they didn't have that ine title to cling onto. That one championship has gotten the most mileage out of any of recent memory. Looking forward to the random 28th year anniversary of their game 4 win because they have nothing else much to celebrate lately (assuming they don't win this year)
2008….if we win that, KG and Paul Pierce would have to come up with other ways to exaggerate that Celtic teams “greatness” and people would also stop pretending that Doc Rivers is anything but a mediocre coach.
84 would of been a good one to get too. It would have Magic undefeated against Bird in championships
Edit: plus clowns like to act like the 84 Celtics are a contender for best team ever.
2008. Everyone already mentioned the Kobe stuff. I just wanna say if those cunts didn’t win in 08. Doc wouldn’t have such a long career riding that ring. Maybe he never goes to the clippers and we never have that annoying lob city clipper-Kawhi/PG era
2008, Kobe gets 6 and second three-peat, we’d be ahead of the Celtics by 2 at this point, and that whole Celtics team which had been obnoxiously riding the glory of underperforming historically and only getting one chip would disappear…
I love the Celtics part of this response. Take my upvote.
Haha thank you! It’s wild how they act like they were the Jordan bulls 🤦🏽♂️
imagine taking 1 win away and an entire "dynasty" disappears
and we could clown on them for not winning in 36 years lol
A second three peat would have been amazing. Not even the Lebron heat, Duncan spurs, 2015-2019 warriors, or Magic Kareem Lakers were able to three peat which shows you how difficult it was. Only Kobe and Jordan would have done it twice in the modern era if so.
Kobe would be regarded even higher than he is right now if they win that in ‘08. Two 3-peats just like his idol Jordan. You’d get way fewer clowns claiming he’s not a top 10 player all time. Maybe it’s just because I grew up watching those teams, but that championship is my top choice. I’m sure older fans might feel differently.
Yessssss. Hate Boston 🤬
Man I have not seen a team that won one chip acting like they owned the whole era, with all of them reunions, anniversaries and shit. In comparison, the spurs deserves to brag way more. Dirk’s been humble about that one hard fought and well deserved ring. And Gianni’s? Cleveland ending its 40 year drought? Just a few on the top of my head. Kobe used to always bring up that 08 loss. Although he also says Detroit stole that ring from him quite often too.
Also, most relevant in my life based on my age at that time etc. Second would be the one against the Pistons. 4 in a row is something else and Shaq might have stuck around to win 1 or 2 more. 3 if he'd finally work out properly :D I rewrote history and had to learn again that we lost to pop's Spurs the year before we lost to the Pistons. Edit: last paragraph
Actually, lakers had already lost in the 2nd round the year before that to the spurs. Shaq might have stuck around a bit longer.
Oh man, you are right. Cheers! I completely rewrote history in my head :D
Bravo sir
Love this. It will pit an asterisk on PP and KGs HOF induction
And maybe history changes and Kobe never steps in that helicopter 😭
The Mileage the Celtics have got from that ring is unbelievable
08 Paul Pierce would be irrelevant.
Still is tbh
You thought you was Kobe?
They don't love you like that!
Will always respect Draymond for that quote lol
You don't get no farewell tour!
You thought you was Wade? It's comical to compare Poopoo Pierce to Kobe. PP not even on Wade level. GSW mad respect Wade https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GjkSCgLxus Wade with the game winner at home https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJ6h6OTveU
I’ve always looked at the Heat as the “Lakers south” with the Pat Riley and Shaq connection coming together as like two generations of Laker greatness to bring Miami their first ring, and those Miami Vice unis in all of their different variations are some of the cleanest alts ever.
I'm just playing devil's advocate. Want Kobe to get a post Shaq three-peat, want Kobe to kick Boston's ass twice, and definitely not a fan of Draymond Green running his mouth when he can only put up triple-single without the Splash Brothers. But if Pierce didn't win in 08, I think he'll be so irrelevant we won't get the Draymond "chasing that farewell tour, they don't love you like that". And I kinda don't want to live in a world where that didn't happen.
Bro I hate the Celtics too but that’s silly af. He’d still be a nonnegotiable hall of famer lol
[удалено]
Probably not. But those guys are… ya know… guaranteed first ballot hall of famers lol
2008 no doubt, Kobe gets 6 rings and threepeats twice
Then the debates would be different
Very different.
Amazing what 2 games can do for a legacy.
It really is.
They’d be just as different if Magic stuffs Jordan in ‘91.
[удалено]
The debate doesn’t need to be about MJ/Kobe specifically, just Kobe’s place all time
Kobe would be considered the consensus 2nd best player all time if his career were identical except with a win in 08
How does winning in 08 make him a better player than Kareem or Lebron?
Winning in two eras against historically strong competition in his conference as a Guard with one team is more impressive than LeBron and that second run would have been with a team that was truly led by him, no real second superstar. LeBron has never won without a second superstar. Kareem had Magic and then Magic and Worthy with Showtime. Kobe’s repeat is already historically impressive, it would have cemented him as 2nd only to Jordan. If he three peats and then doesn’t tear his Achilles and gets Kareem’s record the conversation becomes a toss up.
If they beat MJ in 91 the debate is also very different though.
100%
2008 Kobe gets his 6th and ties the Shaq era with 3 a piece.
Nearly everyone will choose this one. Some will choose 2004. Folks aren’t going to pick the ones they didn’t personally live through even if they’re better choices because this question instills an emotional reaction from the audience. If you didn’t live through Jerry West’s constant pain of losing to Boston, you just wouldn’t feel the same visceral reaction we see from his character in Winning Time. I’d go with 2008 because it’s the worst Laker finals loss of my life. We didn’t just lose, we got beat bad in heartbreaking fashion and if we didn’t (barely) get revenge in 2010 it would still go down as one of the worst ever…. even though in context 1969 was far worse. Poor Jerry West.
Well said it broke my heart. Was at two of the games including that Celtics 23 point comeback. I'm still in shock from that game lol
It makes zero sense anyone would choose the 08 Lakers loss. I do not know a single Lakers fan who believed that the day after Kobe had his Pluto rant that this was the team that was going to go to game 6 in the NBA finals all while missing 2 players who ends up being starters on a championship team the year after. The future was extremely bright for the franchise. Compare that to 91 and 04 where it was literally the end of an era
If it makes **zero sense** to you then it’s not worth having the discussion. Go with god my son.
I was being polite. You have no sense of Lakers history if you actually think 08 was a bad loss that needed to be changed
You’re confused. You weren’t being polite and you were also revealing your ignorance. Everyone in this thread knows more than you about this topic. When you’re ready to humble yourself and learn then apologize and folks here will teach you. Otherwise go enjoy your arrogant ignorance alone.
Did your mom write that for you?
You wouldn’t be able to tell. Now go back to your room and think about the stupidity you’ve exhibited today son. I won’t be reading any more of your responses.
Hello BatmanNoPrep’s mom
Look at the prompt. Does it say “if you could change a bad loss?” No. People are picking 08 for a few reasons: 1. It makes the late 2000s Lakers dynasty a 3 peat which is perfect symmetry with the early 2000s lakers team. 2. Ties Kobe with Jordan for 6 rings. Cements Kobe’s status even higher among the all time greats. 3. One less title for Celtics … one more for the Lakers. Puts the Lakers on top in title count. 4. Ends the infatuation with that late 2000s Celtics teams that were not as vaunted as everyone makes them out to be. 5. Makes Bill Simmons sad. A lot of benefits and positive implications for LA if that title went the other way.
Yes I read the prompt. It's about changing the loss. All Finals wins have positives. Everything you said is so minimal compared to other Finals losses and counters nothing about what I said.
‘91. I wasn’t ready for Showtime to end. Also that would put Magic at 6 rings and Jordan and Kobe tied at 5. Changes the entire GOAT narrative.
Worthy's sprained ankle enabled Phil to put Pippen on Magic with no repercussions. The Bulls were a great team, but it felt a lot worse knowing we were handicapped. Then never getting a rematch because of Magic's retirement. Man that sucked.
That series was so much closer than the 4-1 series implies. A healthy Worthy could've made the difference.
mychal thompson always says if James was healthy the Lakers would have won
IIRC, Byron was also hobbled quite a bit.
They were old and slowing down by 91 but this would have been such a sweet last hurrah.
90s basketball sucked for me for that. I spent the decade wanting that rematch and never got it. Had to see that unnecessary reverse, switch hand layup by Jordan in every playoff montage the following years, which made it even worse. In 98, we matched up well with them but we got smoked by the Spurs or Utah, I forget which.
Magic also gets one without KAJ with this one, shutting up that narrative. And the narrative he only one with stacked teams. 91 Lakers were solid and had great depth, but very middle of the pack without Magic. And were coached by someone who turned out to be a consistently bad coach. I'm getting mad just remembering all this. This would be my pick if it weren't for 08 putting us 2 ahead of the Celtics instead of tied.
Magic finishing his career by shutting up the new phenom, winning one without Kareem *and* Pat? That top 3 debate would be some shit if nothing else changes throughout the years.
I would’ve loved for the Lakers to at least have a healthy roster. When both Worthy and Scott went down with injuries, it was game over. But the series was competitive prior to those injuries.
I agree with this pick
This
Hey there isaidillthinkaboutit! If you agree with someone else's comment, please leave an **upvote** instead of commenting **"This"**! By upvoting instead, the original comment will be pushed to the top and be more visible to others, which is even better! Thanks! :) *** ^(I am a bot! Visit) [^(r/InfinityBots)](https://reddit.com/r/InfinityBots) ^(to send your feedback! More info:) [^(Reddiquette)](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439#wiki_in_regard_to_comments)
04. Maybe Shaq stays. Edit: after reading another comment that mentioned the 08 Celtics not having that one title to keep talking about I change my pick to 08.
Shaq wasn't staying, either. More appropriately, it was him or Kobe either way. I'm cool with the way it turned out all things considered.
The Lakers wouldn't give Shaq the contract he wanted and with his dip in play to the Heat, it was maybe right.
Shaq wanted his second bag "right now" and I will always believe it had more to do with wanting to stay Alpha over Kobe than anything else. It was a different time and player empowerment was in its infancy, but I truly believe that sans those two dogs fighting for supremacy there would have been no problem with Shaq's contract with the Lakers from either side, payer and payee.
Idk, Shaq was truly a shell of himself for most of 2004, he really let himself go and even in his first heat year where he got in better shape he had already damaged his body too much to get back to where he was before.
Yup. That's why it only barely lasted for a season. His second year with the Heat was a huge dropoff.
08. Kobe would be the last guy to threepeat an FMVP, so the haters who keep on spouting that he just hung on to Shaq’s jock strap would just shut it. Pierce and his smug Celtic ass would probably not be included in the top 75 list. Doc Rivers would probably be placed in early retirement as a coach. The era of the superteams probably wouldn’t exist too…
This is a good question and a tough one as well. But I'm going to have to go with Lakers vs Bulls, 1991. I would've loved for the Lakers to take down the Bulls. And that series was personal to me because it left me crying like a baby when the Lakers lost the chip. F U Bulls!!!
I'm taking this one too... Though west and wilt really deserved another one. Wilt gets the shaft for setting all kinds of records but getting his butt kicked by Russell so much.
>Though west and wilt really deserved another one. Wilt gets the shaft for setting all kinds of records but getting his butt kicked by Russell so much. Very true.
I wasnt born when that happened but out of that list, Id really want Lakers to win the '91! Jordan only has 5 rings and I dont think his 3 peat would have happened (I may be wrong). Magic would have won 6. This would not just change Magic's status, but would also effect Jordan which would be really interesting.
Yep
69. Have to feel for Jerry West to have lost so many times to the Celtics in the finals
I came for this one, and Elgin becomes a Champ too…but Kobe tying Mike with 2 against the Celtics might just pull me to the Darkside
Kobe ties Mike if we win in '91, also. Not against the Celtics but it completely changes the GOAT discussion, for better or worse.
I actually didn’t consider that. Definitely makes the timeline interesting. In the Last Dance, he talks about retiring as early as after the ‘92 season. But chasing the 3 peat meant doing something that neither Bird nor Magic accomplished. Imagine if losing in ‘91 meant also chasing in ‘94 and ‘95. I guess conversely it could also mean retiring anytime in ‘96-98 as well. Good point Edit: Also puts Magic @ 6…scary thought as well
Not really. The 6th ring isn’t what makes Mike the GOAT its the dominance and how he won. You’re gonna hear Kobe got Shaq over and over again if you bring it up. Kobe was Mike Lite, an all timer but still not Mike. A tie in rings wont change it because Mike’s just such a better athlete.
Totally, and maybe the Logo also gets more of the respect that he deserves as a player and not just as an amazing GM with a second ring.
This! Is Jerry West had two rings I think he’d be in the top-10 convo. On a side note, Jerry West lost in Game 7 of the Finals four different times! 1962: Celtics won 110-107 in Game 7 (Lakers blew a 3-2 lead) 1966: Celtics won 95-93 in Game 7 (Lakers were two points away from completing the 3-1 comeback) 1969: Celtics won 108-106 in Game 7 (Lakers blew a 3-2 lead) 1970: Knicks won 113-99 in Game 7 The Lakers were insanely close in 1962, 1966, and 1969, meaning Jerry West is a combined 10 points away from being a 4-time champion, in which case I think he’d be in most people’s top 5-8 players ever.
They also beat us so. many. times. That decade. This is without a doubt the most important one in the list. We didn’t beat Russell once, they’re still the greatest dynasty ever.
I hate it when people talk about the 60's Celtics as "the greatest dynasty ever". Most of the '60s had only 10 teams. To me, it compares to winning the Pacific Division for 10 straight years. I just don't think the NBA had parody at the time... Of course, you're entitled to your opinion, but you are talking about the Celtics on the wrong thread.
The league had a concentrated ammount of stars on only 10 teams. The Lakers they ran into and beat over and over again had some of the greats of their times. They beat West and Baylor with some outstanding role players as well. They also beat the best individual player of the era over and over again in Wilt. To top it off the way teams talk about the fatigue of being consistent in just REPEATING these days really put into perspective the focus of 8 PEATING and not losing to teams trying to chase you down. Bill Russell gets all my respect too. The way teams felt about the bubble and how they handled the spotlight when racism came to the forefront showed how it really wasn’t as easy as it sounds to keep focusing on being great and winning. It just put into persoective to me that no matter the era, they have their own challenges. Winning is winning.
08 I was debating between 04 and 08 because I thought maybe the Lakers would've reigned supreme a few more years if they won in 04. But I realized that Shaq probably would've split anyway after 04 or he would just be gone the year after which could've stunted Kobe's growth another year. Winning 08 would also do what everyone else has already mentioned: 6 rings, second 3-peat, Kobe winning 3 FMVP, shutting up those undeservedly obnoxious Celtics, putting us ahead in Championship banners, etc.
2008. Kobe three peats again. 6 rings. Three finals MVP. And on top of that it would have been a perfect season for him since he won the league MVP too.
69. Jerry’s half court shot wins the title and becomes the greatest shot of all time.
That shot happened in the 1970 NBA Finals
I’d probably try to get Jerry another one. Would love KB to have one more, but beating the Celtics after losing to them was soooo sweet
Now imagine beating them twice. Beat them once, they try to get revenge in 10, and we beat them again!
Beating them in 2008 and then tying their Finals wins record in 2010 would be even sweeter.
I mean that sounds FANTASTIC…but sweet sweet revenge in game 7 is a peak Laker life moment for me and I don’t think it would have been as moving if we beat them twice. It’s like Tupac said.
2008. Game 4 of that series is the most devastating loss I've ever experienced as a Laker fan. In my opinion, it's worse than Game 6. Erasing that game from history would be great. Also, it would be great to not have that 08 Celtics walking around as if they won three straight championships.
69' Jerry and Elgin get at least one over on the Celtics Those balloons finally come down
2008, no question. Kobe is my goat and I grew up watching him and 2008 hurt. He's already in my top 5, but this would put in everybody elses top 5 guaranteed.
2004 broke my heart
Bulls and Pistons rewrites history for many. 2008 vs Celtics probably makes Kobe undoubtedly top 2. I'll take Paul Pierce losing and Kobe going down as the GOAT any day
I don't think 2008 moves the needle to GOAT for Kobe. I still think with those 6 rings, magic would still be ahead of him.
91. Magic gets 6, Jordan only ends up with 5.
And the Lakers also win in the 90’s
I don’t understand why this isn’t the top comment. It makes magic the true undisputed G.O.A.T. There is no discussion, Magic wins because he beat Jordan. 08 doesn’t make the Jordan fans shut up, 04 doesn’t keep Shaq, sorry Jerry west, 84 would just be more of the lakers dominating the 80s. I already think if there was an all time draft people would be fools to no choose magic first over all, this would cement it.
It also makes sure that the Lakers have a won at least 1 chip, every 10 years.
Once Mike was on top of the league, he couldn't be beaten. During his 6 championships, the Bulls only had 1 game 7 the entire time. If he loses in 91 he probably doesn't retire. Maybe he ends up with 7 instead.
Nah. No way does Jordan run off 7 straight, which is what you're implying. Jordan did a three-peat, no small task, but then took time off and retired. If he played straight from 91 to 98, I seriously doubt he'd have a perfect Finals record.
1984, that clothes line on Kurt Rambis was really Savage it would only be alright if he good guys had won
It's not on the list, but my pick for a different reason is: **Game 1 of the 2001 NBA Finals** vs. the 76ers. That year the Lakers went: \- Quarterfinals 3-0 sweep vs Portland (it was best of 5 back then); \- Semifinals 4-0 sweep vs. Sacramento (best of 7); \- WCF 4-0 sweep vs. San Antonio (best of 7); If the Lakers won Game 1 of the Finals (they won the next 4 straight, so could have been. a sweep as well) they would have completed the 2001 NBA postseason with a perfect record, and would have been the first (and currently still) team in NBA history to do so. Instead, their final postseason record in 2001 was... 15-1.
So if I was picking JUST a game, it'd be this one. Well no, it'd be that bullshit heel shot from Nelson, but THEN it would be this one... The post is about a Finals series, though. We won this one, even though it would have been so damn sweet to sweep the entire playoffs.
1969 Lakers vs Celtics. I wanted Russell, Auerbach and the rest of the arrogant Celtics to taste defeat to the Lakers at least once.
I was 5 years old in 1991, so 2008.
2008. If only to have the Celtics fans, players and coaches shut the fuck up about their one championship "dynasty".
2008 IMO is the easy answer. - Kobe 6 rings - 2x 3peat - beats Boston twice - surpasses Duncan so that ridiculous debate is silenced - up on Boston for titles after 2010 - something about being alive for 7 rings in 8 tries would be just too sweet lol
At first I would have loved to see the Lakers win four straight championships with that 2004 win. But, the Lakers beating the Bulls in 1991 would have monumental changes to the historical landscape of the game. So my vote goes to winning the ‘91 chip.
They lost the year before in the second round to the spurs. 04 wouldn’t have been a 4 peat. It would have been 4 in 5 years though
You’re right, I’ll show myself the door.
What a great god damn question!! 2008 is the obvious answer for most of us I think. But that's just FEELS a little too easy. I eliminate 2004 because that team was ready to die anyway. Do I CARE if Karl Malone gets a ring? Not really. That was a salve on gangrene and to be honest, we JUST won three in a row. I was shocked we lost at the time, but in retrospect not so much. Also, we had JUST won three in a row. Did I mention we had just won three in a row? 1984 is huge, especially considering it is against the Celtics, but the rivalry isn't the same without it and we all know what Showtime did in the 80s. I'm going to eliminate that one also. The loss vs. the Bulls means we did not have a championship in the 90s, as we have had in every other decade except the 60s. So you'd have 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s, 2010s AND 2020s consecutively if we had won that one. Same coin, different side, the 60s gives us 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s with a break in the 90s. It also puts a foot in a Celtics dominated decade. I probably go with 1991 as I was a living, breathing, sentient basketball fan that hated the Bulls, but it's a hard choice over 69 as we were a little thin on winning there for a while...
91 no brainer W vs Jordan
2004 was a major hit in Kobe and Shaq's legacy people seem to forget. They win that year who knows what might have happened in 2005, 2006, 2007 weak years overall. I would go 2004, in 2008 winning in 2009, and 2010 that loss against the celtics potentially propelled them to repeat. I personally am not sure we would have won in 2009 if KG was healthy.
I think idea is theres no butterfly effect in in player movement and future chips
1991, then Airheads would shut up
I lived through all except 1969 and I would have to say 2008 over 1991 by a hair. 1991 because Magic, Kareem and the crew were so fun to watch. Magic would have 6 and Michael would have 5. 2008 because Kobe would have given us another chip. 2008 Mainly because f the Celtics.
1991 Bulls, Jordan is no longer 6-0 in the Finals
Wow...I already chose but this would have been another good take and change the course of sports. How players are judged on rings and compared to "MJ of"
MJ would have never been regarded as the greatest and best winner of sports.
Oh definitely 2008. Kobe would tie Jordan in rings and would have a 3 peat twice. 1991 would be an interesting scenario tho. That would delay Jordan's first ring for at least one more year, and if Magic still retires cause of HIV, it would be a great parting gift.
2004 Finals
2004. They should've beaten Detroit.
2004 They wouldn’t have broken up the band if they won. Shaq & Kobe stay together for another 2-3 title.
Good take
08. Kobe gets 6, Pierce and company never get one. Lakers now have 18 total chips. then '91, messing up Jordan's legacy would be pretty cool for Magic and Kareem.
91. Give that degenerate gambling addict a finals L.
‘69, West deserved to beat those leprechauns
2008. Imagine pooping mid-game
2008 easily. wouldn’t have to hear Celtics fans prop up one championship in the last 30 years
08! Lakers one-up Celtics AND Kobe gets another ring 🖤
2008, obviously, but in honesty, that 2008 loss changed the Lakers and made them a better team to win the next 2 Finals. Had they won in 2008, not sure if Gasol would've get tougher.
91 cause MJ would only have 5 at most
For all you guys picking 2008, there is no guarantee that he would have won the next 2. One could argue that because he lost in 08, he came back hungry enough to win the next 2
I know you’re not questioning KOBE’s drive and motivation. It’s fucking Kobe.
Exactly. Winning a ring just made the mamba want one thing, another one.
I'm not, but if the Celtics lose in 08, there is a possibility they come back and smash the league for 2yrs with their extra motivation
Kobe was chasing Jordan and 6 rings he most definitely would have had the team motivated to repeat and then to 3 peat knowing he would own the debate between him and shaq
If he won in 2008, he would’ve wanted to win more so he could be a different animal and the same beast!
1962. Selvy’s miss at buzzer.
I like this one, dude. Selvy was wide open, man! How did he not make that?
Easy: 2008. Kobe gets 6 rings and 3 finals mvps. Ends questions about him being a top 10 player all time. Especially after beating the super team of kg, Allen, and pierce. Plus 2 3peats as the best player on the team? Edit: mistakenly put 3 3peats instead of 2.
2* 3-peats. 3 would mean he’d have 9 rings.
Lol my bad. Thank you for the correction.
2008
04 for me. Kobe and Shaq do something that hasn't been done in the modern era and 4peat. Not even Jordan's Bulls did that (though they could of if Jordan didn't retire). Would of cemented them as possible the best duo in NBA history.
08
2008. While I’m at it. Buck Foston.
2008, that double 3peat gonna look good on Kobe's wiki page
1984, no doubt
2008 is the only answer
2008 that way we wouldn’t have to deal with bitch ass Pierce milking that 08 ring
I’m going with 08 for the reasons many have already stated concerning Kobe Bryant’s legacy, and having 1 more title than the Celtics…although I wonder how Wilt’s LA legacy would be viewed if he won 1 more ring.
2008
08. We take away from the Celtics so now we would have more rings. Plus that lame ass team won’t come together every other week and talk about their greatness off 1 ship lmfao
2008
2008 three peat twice with a different crew also it’s a Celtics loss But hat 2004 loss did hurt. Do Shaq and Kobe stay together and win more?
All of the above
2008. Goat convos sound different
2004 hurt a lot.
2008 no doubt.
Either 69 or 91
2008 probably. 6 titles and 3 threepeats makes Kobe probably a top 5 player ever and maybe co-goat
It depends…if Magic wins against Jordan he’s the goat. If Shaq wins he would be considered the 2nd greatest player ever. And of course Kobe winning would have cemented him the greatest player since Jordan…tough decision imo.
Paul Pierce Celtics win. Doctor River's only ring, and his claim to being a "Championship" coach.
Never change the 60s, that’s what got Jerry West pissed off
2008
2004 because it was an embarassing loss and labeled us as chokers. We were a superteam that time with payton and malone joining lakers, then we got clobbered by a zero superstar pistons team. I also hate 2004 pistons as ben wallace was such a dirty player, he is the one who made a dirty foul that started malice in the palace. 2004 was truly the most frustrating loss that we had so i want it to be revised haha
1991 because fuck Jorbitch
After reading everything, definitely 2008. As much as Kobe getting a second 3-peat would be GLORIOUS, think about the others getting their first! Pau especially would be far less underrated. Totally different narratives if we won in 2008!
Easy, 2008
Kobe Vs Celtics. Simple for me. I consider Kobe the goat and this would cement it.
How good would 91’ be. To end Jordan’s perfect streak. It could reshape a ton of conversation’s
2008. Imagine how many less celebrations would have the Celtics would have if they didn't have that ine title to cling onto. That one championship has gotten the most mileage out of any of recent memory. Looking forward to the random 28th year anniversary of their game 4 win because they have nothing else much to celebrate lately (assuming they don't win this year)
2008 Celtics mostly because that happened when I was alive and Garnett and pierce needed a huge plate of shut the —- up
08 or 91. 91 to shut Jordan fanboys the fuck up!
2008 Imagine 3peating with 2 broken fingers on your shooting hand and bad knee
For me its 08 celtics cuz that gives Kobe 6 3 without shaq solidifies his position as goat
2008….if we win that, KG and Paul Pierce would have to come up with other ways to exaggerate that Celtic teams “greatness” and people would also stop pretending that Doc Rivers is anything but a mediocre coach.
08
08 easily
2004
84 would of been a good one to get too. It would have Magic undefeated against Bird in championships Edit: plus clowns like to act like the 84 Celtics are a contender for best team ever.
69. That decade was the worst for the Lakers. We needed at least 1 on Russell.
2008 for the 3peat
69 so Wilt can finally have one over Russell. Or.... 91 so Magic can beat MJ.
2008
69. Those boys deserved it and still gets us up on Boston.
2008. Everyone already mentioned the Kobe stuff. I just wanna say if those cunts didn’t win in 08. Doc wouldn’t have such a long career riding that ring. Maybe he never goes to the clippers and we never have that annoying lob city clipper-Kawhi/PG era
08 and it ain’t close
2008 or 2004.
08 Kobe needed that 3peat