Quote:
Originally Posted by avantegardestyle
So what about the years Jordan played where he NEVER GOT TO THE FINALS?
people are acting as if Jordan played in the NBA only for 6 years, got the the final and won and he didnt play any other year.
it took Jordan 7 or 8 years before he played in the NBA before playing in a Finals.
After winning 3 rings he retired, when he came back in 95, he was beaten in the playoffs by Shaq, Penny and the Magic............its as if people want to sweep that under the rug.
Its a part of his record, and just as much a part as his 6 rings.
Also a part of his record is his misguided ego boost of coming back to play for the Wizards for 2 years where he didnt even make the playoffs.
the Number of rings argument is Rubbish because
1. BILL Russel has 11 rings in 13 years, the two he doesn't have are years where he was injured. so if it were purely rings, Russel would be the GOAT.
Kareem, whom I regard as the best ever, has just as much rings, and one more MVP than Jordan has.
I wont rank Lebron yet, Ill wait till his career is over. it had seemed unlikely, but is AD stays healthy and there is no shard decline, is possibly for Lebron to get to 5 or 6 rings.
If he has 5, i'm putting him ahead of Jordan - For this reason:
there is no other player in the history of the League to have Led four different teams to the Finals and three Franchises to the championship as its FRANCHISE PLAYER
Robert Horry and John Salley has rings with 3 different franchises, but they were role players. If Lakers win, which they will, Danny Green will join Salley and Horry
|
Its this way with any sport. There will always be different opinions about who is best, what era is better, etc. What I said is not inaccurate, nor is what you say. These are all great players. I was going to bring Russel and Jabbar into it but I was just responding to a post comparing Jordan and James.
You highlighted points about my post and then get all worked up with your post. The first point I made that you bolded is simply a fact. The second point was simply my opinion. The hint on that one was the two words "For me" at the beginning of the sentence.
Personally, I don't think that rings argument is rubbish as you call it. This is what they all play for. This is what James moves from team to team to achieve. It is THE goal. For me, it is a factor for deciding comparative levels of greatness. It's not the only factor, but certainly an important part.
If you think James is the greatest, fine by me. A lot of people agree with you.