Off Topic (We hit 1 Million Views)

Status
Not open for further replies.
It aint just fans. Players seem to put winning on top of the list of a players accomplishments too.

When it comes to great players, we talking the list of the best ever, they are so close to each other in skills and accomplishments that rings have to be the tie breaker.
 
I'm saving all my talking points for the day one of yall niggas are ready to have a real debate on Kobe vs Lebron on Tiny Chat
 
Goldie said:
View attachment 117157
Click to expand...
tenor.gif


Fam got himself two lightbrights
 
Circle jerker 4 said:
Wait so u are saying its overrated?
Click to expand...
overrated means too much emphasis is being placed on it

everyone cant win a title...just by the shear number of players and teams.

again, so many variables go into winning a title. The players count for a percentage as individual talents, the coach counts as a percentage as someone who can cultivate the talent, and the front office counts for a percentage b/c of the duty to assemble the talent.

there is a reason only a few teams in the history of the league have won titles.

show me a team that when they had a dominate run didnt have all 3 of those boxes checked.
 
But at the same time, even though winning is important and rings should be used when talking bout a players legacy, it shouldnt be the only thing.

Imagine if Kobe never got traded on draft night to the Lakers and stayed on the Hornets. The 3 rings with Shaq would have never happened. Kobe lilely wouldnt have been able to carry a team to a ring in his early 20s.

In that case, lets say Kobe won 2 with the Hornets. Would anyone still say Kobe > Bron?

What im trying to say is as important as winning is, a good percentage of the ability to win is based on the team you end up playing for.

Id say winning is 65% based on the player, and 35% on situation. So it should be weighted the same way in a players legacy.
 
Last edited:
AZTG said:
It aint just fans. Players seem to put winning on top of the list of a players accomplishments too.

When it comes to great players, we talking the list of the best ever, they are so close to each other in skills and accomplishments that rings have to be the tie breaker.
Click to expand...
if people, both fans and media never said stuff like "such and such is a great player...too bad he never won a title"...do you think players would still place that level of emphasis on not winning a title?

Players hear/read about that stuff all the time and as much as they try to downplay it, it seems to only matter b/c the aforementioned people make it matter

its one thing to say you dont think Russell Westbrook isnt a good player b/c of his style of play...its another to say he isnt a good player or as great of a player b/c he was unable to win a title.
 
Goldie said:
I got elephant memory fam.

You said "i don't even like lebron" , when i offered u the fade :ghost:
Click to expand...
but i dont like lebron enough to debate with you about it b/c most of it will be my best guess about him as a player

but i will contend that if the only knock as a fan that you have on him vs kobe is that kobe has more rings, then read my posts made within this last hour, and thats my position
 
AP21 said:
overrated means too much emphasis is being placed on it

everyone cant win a title...just by the shear number of players and teams.

again, so many variables go into winning a title. The players count for a percentage as individual talents, the coach counts as a percentage as someone who can cultivate the talent, and the front office counts for a percentage b/c of the duty to assemble the talent.

there is a reason only a few teams in the history of the league have won titles.

show me a team that when they had a dominate run didnt have all 3 of those boxes checked.
Click to expand...
But all that shit that u just mentioned makes it so much more special when a specific player is actually able to do just that as often as kobe or mj hence the emphasis on it, as well as the context of how valuable that player was to those dominant teams.
 
I'm done talkin about it, i just hope u don't come with that weak ass argument when we debate.
 
Circle jerker 4 said:
But all that shit that u just mentioned makes it so much more special when a specific player is actually able to do just that as often as kobe or mj hence the emphasis on it, as well as the context of how valuable that player was to those dominant teams.
Click to expand...
point being, they didnt do it on their own and a buncha shit had to happen just right in order for them to be the champion

hadnt used this in a while but "its not black and white"
 
AP21 said:
its not weak at all

your main point in every kobe vs lebron debate is rings without proper context
Click to expand...

Kobe being 5-2 and Lebron being 3-5 is one of many reasons why kobe is far superior.

But lets break another point down real quick before i step away from this debate.

What's the difference between football and basketball? The players in basketball play offense AND defense. So that'll be 50/50 right, half offense and half defense right?

Kobe has the record for the most all defensive teams in NBA history. That's 50% of the game, not even mentioning more scoring titles. While defending the other teams best player every night.


All im saying is fam, if u think all a nigga is coming with is ring talk, ur gonna have a long day trying to debate me.
 
AP21 said:
if people, both fans and media never said stuff like "such and such is a great player...too bad he never won a title"...do you think players would still place that level of emphasis on not winning a title?

Players hear/read about that stuff all the time and as much as they try to downplay it, it seems to only matter b/c the aforementioned people make it matter

its one thing to say you dont think Russell Westbrook isnt a good player b/c of his style of play...its another to say he isnt a good player or as great of a player b/c he was unable to win a title.
Click to expand...

In the late 70s and early 80s, the NBA as a league was dead and almost collapsed. There was very little media coverage of the NBA, no social media, no casual fans, no ESPN, no 24-7 coverage BUT people were still killing Dr.J for not being able to win the ring until he finally won. DR.J himself was the hardest on himself for not winning.

Winning a ring is necessary when it comes to cementing your legacy as a goat.

No one is expecting Jeremy Lin to win a ring and no one is killing him for not winning.

Great players are required to win.

Its not just media or fans and not just the NBA. The feeling is already that the Phillies signing Bryce Harper was a mistake if they dont win a world series in the next 3-4 years.

So yea winning was always important.
 
Goldie said:
Kobe being 5-2 and Lebron being 3-5 is one of many reasons why kobe is far superior.

But lets break another point down real quick before i step away from this debate.

What's the difference between football and basketball? The players in basketball play offense AND defense. So that'll be 50/50 right, half offense and half defense right?

Kobe has the record for the most all defensive teams in NBA history. That's 50% of the game, not even mentioning more scoring titles. While defending the other teams best player every night.


All im saying is fam, if u think all a nigga is coming with is ring talk, ur gonna have a long day trying to debate me.
Click to expand...
nope try again

if this was tennis, the finals record would matter. A finals record in a team sport cant be in your criteria for saying who the best player out of two individuals are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top