JAYxSF415
formerly chillainvillain
- Mar 2, 2009
- 2,989
- 30
-
Last edited:
delete
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by JAYxSF415,
- Start date
- Feb 7, 2008
- 67,698
- 37,747
You apologize to your friend for wasting his time supporting such a stupid side of that specific argument.
Talent ≠ Rings
Talent ≠ Rings
- Nov 1, 2005
- 26,898
- 383
Rings has nothing to do with comparing players & how good they are. If we're talking legacys, that's a whole different story.
- Dec 19, 2007
- 8,002
- 2,422
i know how the mods will respond to this thread. . .
ohdannyboy
Banned
- Apr 5, 2010
- 5,465
- 12
in the end, rings DO count...whenever mj is brought up you always here about his 6 rings...if jordan had never won a championship would he be considered the 2nd greatest of all time (*cough* kobe *cough*)??? NO!
when two players are comparable, then yes you can bring rings into the conversation...derrick fisher and lebron are no where near on the same level, so you cannot compare the two AT ALL...however, you can compare derrick fisher to mark jackson and you can say that derrick fisher is better because he has more rings
seven years into his career, kobe had 3 rings...lebron has 0 seven years in...and for all you guys that are gonna say that kobe got his 3 rings thanks to shaq, please be quiet...because if you think shaq would've won any of those without kobe then your
only players without rings say that rings don't matter
when two players are comparable, then yes you can bring rings into the conversation...derrick fisher and lebron are no where near on the same level, so you cannot compare the two AT ALL...however, you can compare derrick fisher to mark jackson and you can say that derrick fisher is better because he has more rings
seven years into his career, kobe had 3 rings...lebron has 0 seven years in...and for all you guys that are gonna say that kobe got his 3 rings thanks to shaq, please be quiet...because if you think shaq would've won any of those without kobe then your
only players without rings say that rings don't matter
- Oct 13, 2000
- 22,885
- 2,318
It is all about the role that one has in getting the ring. If you are the first option, the leader of the team, then the rings mean much more than a role player that hits a few big shots but is in the position due to the "best" player on the team
- Sep 12, 2007
- 4,325
- 10
Slap yourself for using that lame logic. Say he is a better leader, a better closer, whatever. Saying he is better based on rings alone is asinine.
roc boy jada
Banned
- Dec 16, 2007
- 5,287
- 300
It's amazing to see how frequently I see that logic used on here.
I don't think your friend necessarily wants an opposing response, but is moreso just showing you how flawed your logic is.
yeeupp
Banned
- Sep 3, 2009
- 5,697
- 166
You can compare players to each other, but if you're gonna compare them to rings, then you gotta bring the whole team in.
Who's the best players Kobe played with? - Shaq-Gasol-Odom-Fisher
Who's the best players Bron played with? - Williams-Jamison-Varejao-Shaq (34 yr old)
It's no comparison.
Jordan won rings, but where does Kerr rank in 3's?
Where does Rodman rank in rebounds?
How defensive/ all around was Pippen?
How good was Kukoc?
It takes a team to win rings. Boston sucked, but Pierce got a ring the next year after he got some help
Who's the best players Kobe played with? - Shaq-Gasol-Odom-Fisher
Who's the best players Bron played with? - Williams-Jamison-Varejao-Shaq (34 yr old)
It's no comparison.
Jordan won rings, but where does Kerr rank in 3's?
Where does Rodman rank in rebounds?
How defensive/ all around was Pippen?
How good was Kukoc?
It takes a team to win rings. Boston sucked, but Pierce got a ring the next year after he got some help
JAYxSF415
formerly chillainvillain
- Mar 2, 2009
- 2,989
- 30
I don't necessarily mean that he is better skill wise because of the rings. Im just saying that if Lebron was as great as he was saying, he would have had a ring by now.
- Feb 7, 2008
- 67,698
- 37,747
^ Michael Jordan didn't win a ring until his 7th year (1991). Lebron just finished his 7th year. So you're logic is flawed again...
JAYxSF415
formerly chillainvillain
- Mar 2, 2009
- 2,989
- 30
Originally Posted by JPZx
^ Michael Jordan didn't win a ring until his 7th year (1991). Lebron just finished his 7th year. So you're logic is flawed again...
I guess. I'm a total mess today.
- Oct 6, 2009
- 3,938
- 11
Exactly skill/talent/ability= better player. Key example shaq has more rings then Akeem, but in no fashion is he a better overall player. Rip has more rings the Reggie but he isnt a better player. Rondo barring win this series will have more rings then stockton,jkidd,nash but he isnt a better player then any of those players.
- Nov 11, 2007
- 18,285
- 26,983
- Sep 21, 2008
- 9,937
- 75
word op you just dont need to argue just say i love the taste of kobe nuts and let that be that
- Mar 8, 2004
- 190
- 10
Rings = team accomplishments. Robert Horry would be considered better than Scottie Pippen, Malone, Barkley, and many other forwards if that were the case...
notorious 858
Banned
- Jun 11, 2009
- 1,743
- 10
edit
wrong thread
Don't know how I ended up in this thread.
wrong thread
Don't know how I ended up in this thread.
- Jun 2, 2010
- 3,949
- 13
Kobe>>>>Lebron
i dont care what anyone says.
i dont care what anyone says.
- May 11, 2004
- 4,524
- 218
- Sep 21, 2008
- 9,937
- 75
wrong thread
- Mar 19, 2006
- 4,788
- 359
i agree that kobe is better then lebron, but not because he has more rings. kobe has had help winning, lebron hasn't.
- Sep 7, 2006
- 7,322
- 112
This is what I dont understand...people want to compare two individuals, Kobe and LeBron. But then people use TEAM accomplishments (Kobe's 4 rings) to argue that he is a better player than LeBron. Shouldn't we compare individual attributes such as shooting, passing, defending, clutchness rather than compare the Lakers and the Cavs?
Another thing is, this debate is all about who is better right now. Why would you bring up Kobe's championships when 3 of them were won 8-10 years ago? It'd be like saying Chauncey Billups is better than Chris Paul right now because Billups won a title 6-years ago.
The Kobe vs. LeBron debate is situated in the short run...who is the better player RIGHT NOW? Not who had a better career (obviously Kobe has had the better career so far).
Another thing is, this debate is all about who is better right now. Why would you bring up Kobe's championships when 3 of them were won 8-10 years ago? It'd be like saying Chauncey Billups is better than Chris Paul right now because Billups won a title 6-years ago.
The Kobe vs. LeBron debate is situated in the short run...who is the better player RIGHT NOW? Not who had a better career (obviously Kobe has had the better career so far).
- May 19, 2004
- 17,246
- 73
Kobe wouldn't have those rings without Shaq. Shaq wouldn't have had them without Kobe.Originally Posted by ohdannyboy
in the end, rings DO count...whenever mj is brought up you always here about his 6 rings...if jordan had never won a championship would he be considered the 2nd greatest of all time (*cough* kobe *cough*)??? NO!
when two players are comparable, then yes you can bring rings into the conversation...derrick fisher and lebron are no where near on the same level, so you cannot compare the two AT ALL...however, you can compare derrick fisher to mark jackson and you can say that derrick fisher is better because he has more rings
seven years into his career, kobe had 3 rings...lebron has 0 seven years in...and for all you guys that are gonna say that kobe got his 3 rings thanks to shaq, please be quiet...because if you think shaq would've won any of those without kobe then your
only players without rings say that rings don't matter
He's had a lot more help than LeBron in his career; just look at the teams Kobe has now and during the Shaq years. LeBron still has a long way to go so it's yet to be seen.
- Aug 1, 2005
- 2,699
- 10
Right now Lebron is that dude.
He's so good that he created a facade in the Cavaliers by getting people to believe they were contenders.
He's so good that he created a facade in the Cavaliers by getting people to believe they were contenders.
