Rings are completely meaningsless to evaluate an NBA Legend's legacy

[MavsDirk41]

No, you post with an agenda in general, very obviously, and attempt to switch from the general to the specific when caught out yourself. And I have never claimed to be objective at all, but rather biased like everyone else on an internet fan sports forum, including you as well as me. Your entire schtick is to diminish Jordan and promote LeBron, mainly by presenting statistics/metrics (which you don’t appear to understand btw) which largely rely on longevity.

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?

And if you caught me out on a late night post LeBron still joined a top 5 player twice as you couldn’t dispute, despite declaring victory for yourself as is your wont when losing an argument.

Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.

As I said in a further pos, on the other occasion when he rejoined the Cavs he joined a guy who had been a number one draft pick, who was already seen as a franchise level player and who had already been a dual all star without him as well as MVP of a FIBA world championship, and of an all star game for that matter which I said I considered less relevant, at a time when the Cavs just happened to have another number 1 pick who could be traded for another franchise player. It was also when LeBron had become a Free Agent so I had no problem with that, just with his partisans such as you claiming he somehow took a hard path.

We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.

I don’t see his intent as different than KD’s

And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...

You do btw like proving the points of your opponents, resorting to argumentum ad hominem again when challenged as another poster noted.

I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

[bledredwine]

Imagine someone used this argument in other sports?

World Cups not important in soccer.
Superbowls not important in football.
Grand Slams not important in tennis.
World Series not important in baseball.
Stanley Cups not important in hockey.
Olympic Gold medals not important in track and field.

Etc.

Athletes are LITERALLY measured by winning. Of course there is context but to say it's meaningless... The title of this thread has to be one of the worst I've ever read on a sports forum.

When I saw the title, I laughed immediately and knew it would be a Lebron fan.
It's the perfect summary of his career.

#ringchasers

[Iwasawitness]

No, you post with an agenda in general, very obviously, and attempt to switch from the general to the specific when caught out yourself. And I have never claimed to be objective at all, but rather biased like everyone else on an internet fan sports forum, including you as well as me. Your entire schtick is to diminish Jordan and promote LeBron, mainly by presenting statistics/metrics (which you don’t appear to understand btw) which largely rely on longevity.

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?

And if you caught me out on a late night post LeBron still joined a top 5 player twice as you couldn’t dispute, despite declaring victory for yourself as is your wont when losing an argument.

Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.

As I said in a further pos, on the other occasion when he rejoined the Cavs he joined a guy who had been a number one draft pick, who was already seen as a franchise level player and who had already been a dual all star without him as well as MVP of a FIBA world championship, and of an all star game for that matter which I said I considered less relevant, at a time when the Cavs just happened to have another number 1 pick who could be traded for another franchise player. It was also when LeBron had become a Free Agent so I had no problem with that, just with his partisans such as you claiming he somehow took a hard path.

We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.

I don’t see his intent as different than KD’s

And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...

You do btw like proving the points of your opponents, resorting to argumentum ad hominem again when challenged as another poster noted.

I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

Sure, but unlike Irving, he’s proven he can lead a team.

[Bush4Ever]

What should matter is how much you moved the needle towards your team winning, taking your environment into account.

Sometimes a given level of performance is enough to push a team over-the-hump to a title. Sometimes that same level of performance might move a bottom-feeder to a "good but not title contender" status. Or (rarely) be somewhat surplus to a team that is basically good enough to win a title anyway (ala Durant in GS).

I think you simply have to drill down to going over combinations of performance and environment year over year if you want to intelligently analyze a player's legacy.

[michaelm]

Deleted.

[michaelm]

What should matter is how much you moved the needle towards your team winning, taking your environment into account.

Sometimes a given level of performance is enough to push a team over-the-hump to a title. Sometimes that same level of performance might move a bottom-feeder to a "good but not title contender" status. Or (rarely) be somewhat surplus to a team that is basically good enough to win a title anyway (ala Durant in GS).

I think you simply have to drill down to going over combinations of performance and environment year over year if you want to intelligently analyze a player's legacy.

Deleted.

[MavsDirk41]

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?





Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.



We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.



And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...



I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

Woe is me, how will I ever recover ?.

I will make it simpler for you.

Did LeBron or did he not join up with a top 5 player twice, one of them Dwayne Wade who had already won a title when he had not ?.

Do you or do you not support your case with what I am told are mainly longevity statistics as far as metrics go ?, which you have not disputed, as if the longevity vs peak issue is a settled argument, and in this case relies partly on LeBron starting before it was possible for Jordan to start, and on statistics generated after the age of 35 when neither player took his team anywhere near contention. Jordan didn’t even play for two of those years, following leading a team to 3 titles as FMVP at the ages of 33, 34, and 35, one of those seasons not very arguably the best season ever for any team, which you conveniently ignore while posting longevity statistics for LeBron.

Did you or did you not ridicule a poster on this or the concurrent thread for posting that current players did not experience Jordan in his time, claiming absurdly that they could make unbiased assessments of the two players from having watched 25 year old footage of Jordan (tens of thousands of hours perhaps) ?.

And ignoring the ad hominem in this post did you not question whether I understood the words I used ?, an example of the ad hominem other posters have noted that you habitually employ.

I don’t need to point it out since others have already done so but this thread was a rather blatant example of an agenda thread ab initio (means from the getgo btw) and while not the OP you have largely supported the OP while calling out those who disagree for having agendas themselves.
(EDIT I was correct anyway, he has indeed joined up with three top 5 players, the second of whom seems to rather regret having done so).

Lol was this meant for me? For saying Pippen didnt peak to the level of Curry and Wade?

[michaelm]

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

Woe is me, how will I ever recover ?.

I will make it simpler for you.

Did LeBron or did he not join up with a top 5 player twice, one of them Dwayne Wade who had already won a title when he had not ?.

Do you or do you not support your case with what I am told are mainly longevity statistics as far as metrics go ?, which you have not disputed, as if the longevity vs peak issue is a settled argument, and in this case relies partly on LeBron starting before it was possible for Jordan to start, and on statistics generated after the age of 35 when neither player took his team anywhere near contention. Jordan didn’t even play for two of those years, following leading a team to 3 titles as FMVP at the ages of 33, 34, and 35, one of those seasons not very arguably the best season ever for any team, which you conveniently ignore while posting longevity statistics for LeBron.

Did you or did you not ridicule a poster on this or the concurrent thread for posting that current players did not experience Jordan in his time, claiming absurdly that they could make unbiased assessments of the two players from having watched 25 year old footage of Jordan (tens of thousands of hours perhaps) ?.

And ignoring the ad hominem in this post did you not question whether I understood the words I used ?, an example of the ad hominem other posters have noted that you habitually employ.

I don’t need to point it out since others have already done so but this thread was a rather blatant example of an agenda thread ab initio (means from the getgo btw) and while not the OP you have largely supported the OP while calling out those who disagree for having agendas themselves.
(EDIT I was correct anyway, he has indeed joined up with three top 5 players, the second of whom seems to rather regret having done so).

Lol was this meant for me? For saying Pippen didnt peak to the level of Curry and Wade?

No, sorry, for I was a witness who reveals himself to be one of the MJ had more help crowd because of Pippen as well. I might rate Pippen a little higher than you but he wasn’t Dwayne Wade I agree.

Posting on my phone at an airport.

[Blame Rasho]

It is funny seeing Stans going back and forth with each other.

[michaelm]

No, you post with an agenda in general, very obviously, and attempt to switch from the general to the specific when caught out yourself. And I have never claimed to be objective at all, but rather biased like everyone else on an internet fan sports forum, including you as well as me. Your entire schtick is to diminish Jordan and promote LeBron, mainly by presenting statistics/metrics (which you don’t appear to understand btw) which largely rely on longevity.

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?

And if you caught me out on a late night post LeBron still joined a top 5 player twice as you couldn’t dispute, despite declaring victory for yourself as is your wont when losing an argument.

Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.

As I said in a further pos, on the other occasion when he rejoined the Cavs he joined a guy who had been a number one draft pick, who was already seen as a franchise level player and who had already been a dual all star without him as well as MVP of a FIBA world championship, and of an all star game for that matter which I said I considered less relevant, at a time when the Cavs just happened to have another number 1 pick who could be traded for another franchise player. It was also when LeBron had become a Free Agent so I had no problem with that, just with his partisans such as you claiming he somehow took a hard path.

We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.

I don’t see his intent as different than KD’s

And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...

You do btw like proving the points of your opponents, resorting to argumentum ad hominem again when challenged as another poster noted.

I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

So he joined a top 5 player twice rather than three times . Your point is ?.

As has been pointed out this is an archetypal agenda thread, on which you have been agreeing with the OP and taking those to task who disagree.

[Iwasawitness]

No, you post with an agenda in general, very obviously, and attempt to switch from the general to the specific when caught out yourself. And I have never claimed to be objective at all, but rather biased like everyone else on an internet fan sports forum, including you as well as me. Your entire schtick is to diminish Jordan and promote LeBron, mainly by presenting statistics/metrics (which you don’t appear to understand btw) which largely rely on longevity.

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?

And if you caught me out on a late night post LeBron still joined a top 5 player twice as you couldn’t dispute, despite declaring victory for yourself as is your wont when losing an argument.

Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.

As I said in a further pos, on the other occasion when he rejoined the Cavs he joined a guy who had been a number one draft pick, who was already seen as a franchise level player and who had already been a dual all star without him as well as MVP of a FIBA world championship, and of an all star game for that matter which I said I considered less relevant, at a time when the Cavs just happened to have another number 1 pick who could be traded for another franchise player. It was also when LeBron had become a Free Agent so I had no problem with that, just with his partisans such as you claiming he somehow took a hard path.

We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.

I don’t see his intent as different than KD’s

And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...

You do btw like proving the points of your opponents, resorting to argumentum ad hominem again when challenged as another poster noted.

I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

So he joined a top 5 player twice rather than three times . Your point is ?.

As has been pointed out this is an archetypal agenda thread, on which you have been agreeing with the OP and taking those to task who disagree.

That’s all you have to say to that entire post? A still factually incorrect statement and an outright lie about me agreeing with the OP? When did I ever once agree with the OP?

[GeorgeMarcus]

I didn't read the OP nor did I read a single comment. Based on the title though, there's a healthy middle ground between "completely meaningless" and "end all be all"

[HighFlyer23]

Leading your team to a ring as the best player is the most important item in the list of criteria to determine player ranking and legacy

Well thats exactly what KD did, twice.

He never did that he was never the leader that would be curry

[MrPainfulTruth]

Leading your team to a ring as the best player is the most important item in the list of criteria to determine player ranking and legacy

Well thats exactly what KD did, twice.

He never did that he was never the leader that would be curry

There we go with the hater take. Nah it was KD, and Steph was the first to admit it. He had zero problem with KD being FMVP. You just use a completely irrational fanboy/hater perspective.

[knicksfan974]

Didn't read the all thread, but after watching the NBA for 30+ years, I've witnessed a great deal of great NBA players who didn't win rings and still have my absolute respect. In this sense, yes, the rings are completely meaningless when evaluating an NBA players' legacy. It's still a team sport and it just happens that not some of the greatest players just didn't end up in a situation where they would have a chance to win the title, and it's fine. They are still great to me.

[Lalouie]

you're just setting up for parity

[Big J]

Didn't read the all thread, but after watching the NBA for 30+ years, I've witnessed a great deal of great NBA players who didn't win rings and still have my absolute respect. In this sense, yes, the rings are completely meaningless when evaluating an NBA players' legacy. It's still a team sport and it just happens that not some of the greatest players just didn't end up in a situation where they would have a chance to win the title, and it's fine. They are still great to me.

They are great, but not in the top 10. Big difference. Rings are what separate the top guys.

[NZB2323]

And where, pray tell me, are these examples of me diminishing Jordan for the sake of propping up LeBron? Because I've never had a problem admitting that Jordan is in fact the consensus GOAT, that he holds some of the greatest finals series performances of all time, and that he is the greatest two way player in the history of the game (yes, better than LeBron). I just have no problem acknowledging that he also had weaknesses, played on stacked teams, and didn't have to deal with superior competition in the finals like LeBron did. Yeah, I think LeBron is greater, but that's not going to stop me from acknowledging how great Jordan is. I know this is hard to imagine... but both things can be true.

Also, presenting statistics and metrics which rely on longevity? You don't even have the basic crux of my pro LeBron arguments right. In fact, are you confusing me with someone else?





Now you're trying to justify your "LeBron joined up with three top five players" blunder by claiming it was late when you posted that? And even then, that isn't even the original reason you gave me.

Not to mention, even if we go along with you moving your goal posts and changing it to two players, you'd still be wrong. LeBron didn't join up with AD, AD was traded to his team. Again, living in reality will help you.



We're going to stop here before we continue just so I can point out how irrelevant all of this is. Irving was in fact considered a franchise player and this isn't really up for debate, but he also was seen as being unable to function as the number one option on a team. He led Cleveland to three straight seasons with less than 30 seasons, including the third one which was considered well below expectations for the team considering the talent going into it. Now, unlike most people who try to hold this against the Heat, this isn't all Irving's fault. Bynum did not pan out the way Cleveland had hoped, people unfairly blamed Irving for Waiters not living up to his draft potential (which, if I'm being fair here, was 50/50 at best, but there's a reason Waiters didn't last long in the league), and Jarrett Jack did not turn out the way the Cavaliers had hoped. And don't even get me started on the injuries. And then of course, there's bringing back Mike Brown to coach the team, who I have always said was an overrated coach even after his time in Sacramento.

As I just said before, Irving deserves some blame but I will say this... Irving was not meant to be your main piece. He was always best as a supporting player and that will always be the role he is best meant for. I don't think you can say that about Curry, Pippen, or Wade.



And this right here is why I stopped bothering with you. Multiple people apart from me did everything we could to explain it to you. We stopped trying because we realized we were wasting our time. Which leads me into the next part I'm going to address because I'm not bothering with the rest...



I don't do this when challenged, I do it when I realize proving you wrong isn't going to cut it. As mentioned before, even when clearly explaining the clear differences in two situations, you resorted to just repeating yourself. What other choice do I have at that point? I guess I could just walk away... oh wait, I did, after it became clear I was wasting my time. I guess that's the issue at hand here, right? I'm not being a nice guy in this situation, which I won't really have any issue acknowledging. I won't have any problem acknowledging that I'm a pro LeBron guy either. But don't dare try to claim I have an agenda here... or, if you do, try to at least describe my arguments correctly next time.

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

Sure, but unlike Irving, he’s proven he can lead a team.

Pippen and Irving both won 1 series as the number 1. Pippen did better in the 2nd round, but he refused to stay in the game as Phil called for Kukoc to hit the game winning shot, Kukoc hit the shot with Pippen on the bench, Horace Grant ended the series with a higher GmSc, and ultimately the Bulls lost the series. The following year the Bulls were 34-31 before Jordan came back. Kyrie managed to make it to the Finals with Luka, while Pippen failed to make it to the Finals with Hakeem and the Trailblazers.

[Iwasawitness]

Brother, Pippen was a great #2 option like an Anthony Davis. He was not on the level of peak Wade or Curry.

Sure, but unlike Irving, he’s proven he can lead a team.

Pippen and Irving both won 1 series as the number 1. Pippen did better in the 2nd round, but he refused to stay in the game as Phil called for Kukoc to hit the game winning shot, Kukoc hit the shot with Pippen on the bench, Horace Grant ended the series with a higher GmSc, and ultimately the Bulls lost the series. The following year the Bulls were 34-31 before Jordan came back. Kyrie managed to make it to the Finals with Luka, while Pippen failed to make it to the Finals with Hakeem and the Trailblazers.

I hope you're not actually trying to argue that Irving is better at leading a team than Pippen.

[One Last Shot]

Sure, but unlike Irving, he’s proven he can lead a team.

Pippen and Irving both won 1 series as the number 1. Pippen did better in the 2nd round, but he refused to stay in the game as Phil called for Kukoc to hit the game winning shot, Kukoc hit the shot with Pippen on the bench, Horace Grant ended the series with a higher GmSc, and ultimately the Bulls lost the series. The following year the Bulls were 34-31 before Jordan came back. Kyrie managed to make it to the Finals with Luka, while Pippen failed to make it to the Finals with Hakeem and the Trailblazers.

I hope you're not actually trying to argue that Irving is better at leading a team than Pippen.

Funny thing is Celtics made the Conference Finals without Kyrie then the very next season when Irving played, they got rekt in the 2nd round but hey its easier to said they both won 1 playoffs series they should be equal without the context that Pippen actually led the Bulls to 55 wins when the best player in the NBA leave their team while still getting the highest salary for the Bulls, finished 3rd in MVP voting and should've beat the eventual Conference champs Knicks in 94 if the refs didn't screwed them with that phantom call.. and when did Hakeem played for the Blazers?