Announcer calls MJ GOAT before 2nd ring, exemplifying my point........

[Knoe Itawl]

.....about how this guy was considered the greatest of all time before even his third ring.

First of all, check out the play from 2:30 onwards because it's a top 5 (IMO) Jordan sequence.

Then, check out the commentary by the announcer at 3:02. He says that MJ is the greatest to ever play, and he hadn't even won his SECOND ring yet!!

This is the point I was making about how yes rings have always been valued, but more emphasis was given the the overall impact of a player, how good a player was, etc.

This is why the "5 rings 5 rings" mantra espoused by the Kobetards is so stupid, and what's funny is that it really occurs because of MJ. That is, because MJ won 6, somehow these idiots have morphed that into the ultimate commentary on how great a player is (ie, having 5 somehow gets you in that neighborhood, as opposed to how much of an impact you have as a player).

No, the 6 rings were of course a part of his greatness, but a lot of the basketball world was calling him GOAT by his FIRST ring.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5sHdmQahNk

[Legends66NBA7]

Looking back at it, Jordan wasn't the GOAT. It was either Kareem or Russell, if we look at it in context of career.

As far a player goes, that's much harder to gauge, but considering Jordan was actually watched by the majority of the world due to TV, popularity, and backing it up with his play, it wasn't a bad choice. I get what your saying OP, but really... you are beating a dead horse.

[IGOTGAME]

Commentators have said the same about Kobe and Lebron at different points. Using a comment from a commentator isn't very persuasive.

Still curious, are you GOBB or Jeff?

[Vienceslav]

I always wanted to make a thread about when did MJ actually became consensus GOAT, by ISH standards it has to be after he completed his 2nd 3peat, meaning with 5 rings he'd be #2 behind Kareem.

[Knoe Itawl]

Looking back at it, Jordan wasn't the GOAT. It was either Kareem or Russell, if we look at it in context of career.

As far a player goes, that's much harder to gauge, but considering Jordan was actually watched by the majority of the world due to TV, popularity, and backing it up with his play, it wasn't a bad choice. I get what your saying OP, but really... you are beating a dead horse.

My point isn't really whether or not you think Jordan was GOAT. It's about that he had already been deemed GOAT by a large part of the basketball world before even winning a second ring.

It shows how the emphasis wasn't placed on number of rings, but overall impact. It would be like some "Magictard" back then saying "5 rings >>>>" when comparing Jordan and Magic, though Jordan was clearly the better player.

[branslowski]

Bases his whole argument off of a commentator...Notsureifserious...:coleman:

[Knoe Itawl]

Commentators have said the same about Kobe and Lebron at different points. Using a comment from a commentator isn't very persuasive.

Still curious, are you GOBB or Jeff?

Show me where an announcer has said Kobe or Lebron were the greatest to ever play the game. ESPECIALLY after their first title. If you can't, stop talking bullshyt.

Still curious, are you an idiot or a moron?

[3peated]

wow this is a very original topic, i'm sure you havent argued these same points before.

[Knoe Itawl]

Bases his whole argument off of a commentator...Notsureifserious...:coleman:

Because you're an annoying, simple minded Kobetard who contributes nothing of value to any basketball debate, I'm going to put you on ignore finally after this one reply.

I'm not basing my "whole argument" off of a commentator. I'm using it to show how there was a widespread notion back then that JOrdan was GOAT by his first ring, and that there weren't a lot of idiots (such as yourself) going around talking about 5 rings, 5 rings, like hero worshipping zombies.

Now that's the last time I'll ever comment to you on here. I don't mind reasonable Kobe fans, but Kobetards go on ignore.

[branslowski]

The guys who's whole existence on these boards is to bash Kobe, has a red troll bar, is a known troll, who vanished after he said "Kobe will never win a title without Shaq", practical dumbass who uses a commentators ignorant premature opinion, places me on the ignore list.:oldlol:

Good for you dumbass, good for you.

[Legends66NBA7]

My point isn't really whether or not you think Jordan was GOAT. It's about that he had already been deemed GOAT by a large part of the basketball world before even winning a second ring.

It shows how the emphasis wasn't placed on number of rings, but overall impact. It would be like some "Magictard" back then saying "5 rings >>>>" when comparing Jordan and Magic, though Jordan was clearly the better player.

Come to think of it, I've actually come across articles pointing out to Magic fans mocking Jordan fans because he didn't have rings before the 91 Finals. Infact, I've seen some suggest that Jordan wasn't on Magic's level because he was too selfish or he didn't have the impact because of his scoring nature.

I think the same scenario applies to Bird vs Magic. I've seen many claim here that Bird was considered the better player of the 2, but after most saw Jordan win 6 titles, Magic started to get more consideration as the better player between himself and Bird because he had won more titles. Not saying you can't make the case of Magic over Bird, but opinions shifting to one side to other like that... I can see how rings were the key in it.

[hitmanyr2k]

I remember a couple of years ago seeing an interview with Chick Hearn where he said Jordan was already being heralded as the greatest ever and then reeled off a list of his accomplishments. This was before the first 3peat had been completed I believe.

[Knoe Itawl]

Come to think of it, I've actually come across articles pointing out to Magic fans mocking Jordan fans because he didn't have rings before the 91 Finals.

I think the same scenario applies to Bird vs Magic. I've seen many claim here that Bird was considered the better player of the 2, but after most saw Jordan win 6 titles, Magic started to get more consideration as the better player between himself and Bird because he had won more titles. Not saying you can't make the case of Magic over Bird, but opinions shifting to one side to other like that... I can see how rings were the key in it.

In any sport, even when there's a consensus recognized goat, you will have detractors. I'm sure there are hockey fans who don't think Gretzky's GOAT. Additionally, there are Bird, Wilt, Magic, etc. fans to this day who don't feel Jordan was better than them.

As I mentioned, my point wasn't really to go into whether Jordan was, or was not GOAT. My point is that as far as widespread recognition was concerned, a majority of the bball world thought him goat after 1 ring. I lived through then so I know, but I used this random Miami announcer saying it as a way to indicate what the times were like then and how there wasn't so much of this "rings rings" stuff. That's more a product of modern times (ironically because of Jordan).

Further, we all know how competitive Jordan was. He definitely wanted to go down as goat, however he retired after 3 rings saying he "had nothing left to prove". Why would he say that? Because he was comfortable enough that he was deemed goat that it wasn't about winning any more rings.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Somebody post a link the OP saying Kobe would never win with Pau shortly after the trade.


That seems to always shut him up.

[Knoe Itawl]

branslowski
This message is hidden because branslowski is on your ignore list.

[Marchesk]

Looking back at it, Jordan wasn't the GOAT. It was either Kareem or Russell, if we look at it in context of career.

If Jordan had suffered a career ending injury at that point, he would maybe be top 20.

I started watching in the mid 80s. At first Bird was being called the GOAT, and then it shifted to Jordan. I never heard them mention Kareem in that category. Wilt and Russell were afterthoughts by that point.

[branslowski]

branslowski
This message is hidden because branslowski is on your ignore list.

Wow, I think I might off myself now.....:coleman:

[Marchesk]

It shows how the emphasis wasn't placed on number of rings, but overall impact. It would be like some "Magictard" back then saying "5 rings >>>>" when comparing Jordan and Magic, though Jordan was clearly the better player.

Is Jordan? That's the consensus, but first we need to define what "best" means. If it means best at making your team a winner, then Magic does have a case. If we're talking 1 on 1 skills or best scorer, then no, of course not. But basketball is first and foremost a team sport. And Magic won as much as anyone since Russell. He went to nine finals, and then he had to retire early because of HIV. Dude was only 31.

[Marchesk]

My point is that as far as widespread recognition was concerned, a majority of the bball world thought him goat after 1 ring. I lived through then so I know, but I used this random Miami announcer saying it as a way to indicate what the times were like then and how there wasn't so much of this "rings rings" stuff. That's more a product of modern times (ironically because of Jordan).

Yeah, but ultimately a player is judged on their overall career, not whether people thought they looked like the best basketball player in their prime (some say that was Shaq btw). That's why Kareem has a legitimate case. Anyone in the typical top 5 does. And they all have their detractors. "But Jordan never won without Pippen and Phil", for example.

[Legends66NBA7]

In any sport, even when there's a consensus recognized goat, you will have detractors. I'm sure there are hockey fans who don't think Gretzky's GOAT. Additionally, there are Bird, Wilt, Magic, etc. fans to this day who don't feel Jordan was better than them.

I see your point. Although, I do feel need to explain that hockey fans actually bring up a good point to suggest a guy like Mario Lemieux was on Gretzky's level at a certain part of his career and that's why some would consider him to be even better. But like you, I think what fuel's that is being a Gretzky detractor.


As I mentioned, my point wasn't really to go into whether Jordan was, or was not GOAT. My point is that as far as widespread recognition was concerned, a majority of the bball world thought him goat after 1 ring. I lived through then so I know, but I used this random Miami announcer saying it as a way to indicate what the times were like then and how there wasn't so much of this "rings rings" stuff. That's more a product of modern times (ironically because of Jordan).

Further, we all know how competitive Jordan was. He definitely wanted to go down as goat, however he retired after 3 rings saying he "had nothing left to prove". Why would he say that? Because he was comfortable enough that he was deemed goat that it wasn't about winning any more rings.

Yes and modern times does take a lot of things out of context, but I think the fan bases (at least some on here and other websites I've visited) do the see fundamental difference when they do their own research on ring counting.

As for Jordan himself, yes, he didn't have anything to prove anymore when he had all the major accolades and greatness. Off course, coming back just helped further cement his legacy.


If Jordan had suffered a career ending injury at that point, he would maybe be top 20.

I started watching in the mid 80s. At first Bird was being called the GOAT, and then it shifted to Jordan. I never heard them mention Kareem in that category. Wilt and Russell were afterthoughts by that point.

I know about Bird being called GOAT, which further proves that it's strange that Magic would be considered higher or even the better player.

Although, I find it interesting that Kareem wasn't mentioned and Wilt/Russell being afterthoughts. This shows to me that even though modern times can be influenced, the very early stages of TV and media (in terms of viewership for the NBA) definitely influenced that period of times as well, sort of all being "prisoners in the moment" in a way, but for Bird and Jordan's case, they did produce at a high level to have the feeling of being "GOAT" of their time.

[Marchesk]

This shows to me that even though modern times can be influenced, the very early stages of TV and media (in terms of viewership for the NBA) definitely influenced that period of times as well, sort of all being "prisoners in the moment" in a way, but for Bird and Jordan's case, they did produce at a high level to have the feeling of being "GOAT" of their time.

Part of it was marketing, of course. You could of sworn Magic was making passes nobody in the history of the game had ever made, or Bird was making shots no other great shooter could make in the past. Or that there had never been anyone before with MJ's crazy athleticism (except Dr J of course).

As for the feeling of GOAT, yeah that's what you get when you get to see a top 5-10 all-time great play. But at the end of the day, you measure up overall career impact, not whether the media says MJ was the GOAT. He's not ranked over Kareem without that second three-peat. No way.

Anyway, it's subjective. What if Sampson hadn't turned out to be injury prone? Would Hakeem have a couple more titles and be top 5? There's a million what-ifs.

[SpecialQue]

I really don't get all the Jordan knob-gobbling on here. He's not going to hang out with you if you keep trying to suck his dick. He had triumphs and failures, just like every other player in the NBA.

The only player with a near perfect career was Bill Russell.

[jlip]

I've addressed this many times before. MJ being called GOAT before his 2nd ring was not something unique to him and was not by any means an accurate assessment of his rank as a player at the time. Someone calling him GOAT in '92 was just the latest example of a long line of premature GOAT proclamations made about "the next big superstar."

In this 1956 article (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ENUmAAAAIBAJ&sjid=owIGAAAAIBAJ&pg=2445,4482680&dq=russell+so-good-he-scares-you+mikan&hl=en), George Mikan calls Bill Russell the "best ever" before Russell even played one NBA game.

I did two separate threads about Kareem (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282043) and Bird (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=241244)GOAT conversations. Kareem didn't win his 2nd title until 1980, and I listed multiple quotes from the 70's with people saying he was already the greatest ever. The same with Bird. Jerry Sloan called Bird the "greatest player ever to play in this league" (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6536738&postcount=4) in 1980 while Bird was still a rookie.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Further evidence of Jordan being the GOAT

Skip to 1:06 in the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns9l8baQ8a0

[Knoe Itawl]

I've addressed this many times before. MJ being called GOAT before his 2nd ring was not something unique to him and was not by any means an accurate assessment of his rank as a player at the time. Someone calling him GOAT in '92 was just the latest example of a long line of premature GOAT proclamations made about "the next big superstar."

In this 1956 article (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ENUmAAAAIBAJ&sjid=owIGAAAAIBAJ&pg=2445,4482680&dq=russell+so-good-he-scares-you+mikan&hl=en), George Mikan calls Bill Russell the "best ever" before Russell even played one NBA game.

I did two separate threads about Kareem (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282043) and Bird (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=241244)GOAT conversations. Kareem didn't win his 2nd title until 1980, and I listed multiple quotes from the 70's with people saying he was already the greatest ever. The same with Bird. Jerry Sloan called Bird the "greatest player ever to play in this league" (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6536738&postcount=4) in 1980 while Bird was still a rookie.

I've explained that the whole Jordan GOAT thing is actually secondary to the main point I was making. That is, that yes there was considerable respect given to titles, and yes having multiple titles was always helpful to a legacy. HOWEVER, it is more of a modern (read: Kobetard) phenomenon that titles are the end all/be all and all you have to do is say "5 rings" and somehow that ends any conversation of comparing a player with less rings to the person with 5.

I was pointing out that Jordan hadn't even won his second ring and was pretty much universally recognized as GOAT by then. As I said, I know all of this because I lived through it, however I happened to be watching this vid and I had made this point several weeks back, and this random Miami announcer saying it helped to illustrate that. That's why I posted it.

[Knoe Itawl]

This message is hidden because TheMarkMadsen is on your ignore list.

[TheMarkMadsen]

This message is hidden because TheMarkMadsen is on your ignore list.


why did you type that out?

:confusedshrug:

[Knoe Itawl]

Is Jordan? That's the consensus, but first we need to define what "best" means. If it means best at making your team a winner, then Magic does have a case. If we're talking 1 on 1 skills or best scorer, then no, of course not. But basketball is first and foremost a team sport. And Magic won as much as anyone since Russell. He went to nine finals, and then he had to retire early because of HIV. Dude was only 31.

And there's no disrespect to Magic. He's in my top 5-6. And Jordan translated his individual greatness into team success (6 titles, most wins in a season all time, followed up by 69 wins, etc. etc.).

At any rate, I don't want to get sidetracked into talking about MJ vs MJ. As I mentioned, that wasn't really the point.

[gts]

I've explained that the whole Jordan GOAT thing is actually secondary to the main point I was making. That is, that yes there was considerable respect given to titles, and yes having multiple titles was always helpful to a legacy. HOWEVER, it is more of a modern (read: Kobetard) phenomenon that titles are the end all/be all and all you have to do is say "5 rings" and somehow that ends any conversation of comparing a player with less rings to the person with 5.

I was pointing out that Jordan hadn't even won his second ring and was pretty much universally recognized as GOAT by then. As I said, I know all of this because I lived through it, however I happened to be watching this vid and I had made this point several weeks back, and this random Miami announcer saying it helped to illustrate that. That's why I posted it.

:facepalm Your obsession with Kobe and his fans is reached comic proportions

Here's some quotes from people that know the game live the game and playd the game to tide you over until your next mental breakdown via Kobe Bryant

[gts]

Toronto's Jalen Rose:
"I'll be watching because I'm an NBA lifer -- I watch every game I can. We don't want to be the team that gave up 81 -- nobody wants to be looked at like that -- but we have to give Kobe his due. This is the best all-around player and competitor in the game. And the scary part is, he will only get better, especially with Phil Jackson on his side. He will go down as one of the all-time greats."

Cavs Guard, Eric Snow:
"Hats off, he's the best. It's hard to get 50 in a game. He did it in a half. It takes a tough player who works really hard. I think he's one of the best ever."


George Gervin:
"To compare it to anybody would be useless. He set himself apart from everyone else. Everyone looks for another Michael Jordan, and there probably won't be one. What Kobe did was establish himself as one of the greatest scorers of all time at an early age. He's a phenom. I'm a believer, man. Now we've got to sit back and wait and see if anyone scores 82."

Chicago Bulls G, Ben Gordon:" That should put all the questions to rest who's the most talented and who's the, you know, best offensive player in the league. You know if he would've had a decent first half, he might've got 100 points last night. I mean if anybody can go out there and score 25 points a quarter I would definetly say it's Kobe."

Chicago Bulls F/C, Tyson Chandler: "We're witnessing greatness right now. We need to understand that. (asked: "Is he the best of the best?") Yeah, definitely."

Mavs GM, Mark Cuban:
"It's amazing. Beyond amazing. He's on another level from any other player at this point. It's like he is toying with teams. If you push up on him, he just takes two steps back and shoots from further out. I hope the NBA adjusts its TV schedule so we all can see him play more. It would be fun to watch and fun to debate how far a one-man show can drag four other players in a team sport."

Orlando Magic Guard, Keyon Dooling:
"It's not just a buzz about Kobe, it's a holler. That guy is incredible. That's why he's the best player in the league

Orlando Magic Assistant GM, Otis Smith:
"Whether you like him or dislike him, Kobe is a special player. He has the killer instinct in him that a lot of the talented players don't have. When he smells blood, he goes for the jugular. That's a (Michael) Jordan-like quality."

Hornets Guard Kirk Snyder:
"I heard about it after I had finished hanging out with David West, and he called me and said that Kobe had scored 81. My first thought was is that I'm in the NBA with probably one of the best players ever to play in the NBA."

Jerry West:
"I don't know if anyone could have stopped him last night. It's so senseless to me to say he shouldn't take over like that. You give the same amount of shots to everybody else and they're not making that many, I know it. Players are jealous of greatness. Kobe is a unique talent and a unique person. His belief that he can jump to the moon is never going to change. But I admire him, what he's been able to overcome. You would think he would be a fair-haired man of the NBA with what's he's already done. But he's taken a fairly good battering.

Ex-Bull and now-Analyst Steve Kerr:
"I'm always one to credit the guys who win. I don't know if I would have given Kobe the M.V.P. last week. But what he did in the game last night, he's so clearly the best player out there.

[Knoe Itawl]

[QUOTE=gts]:facepalm Your obsession with Kobe and his fans is reached comic proportions

Here's some quotes from people that know the game live the game and playd the game to tide you over until your next mental breakdown via Kobe Bryant

[buddha]

winning championships didn't improve Michael Jordans playing ability. he could have won zero championships and still be the GOAT.

[Marchesk]

winning championships didn't improve Michael Jordans playing ability. he could have won zero championships and still be the GOAT.

Nah, I give you Oscar Robertson as a rebuttal to that.

[Budadiiii]

How many gimmicks you got Josh? :oldlol:

[diamenz]

jordan is goat because he elevated his game in the fourth or when his team needed it... although no one is perfect.

jordan is goat because he made the smartest basketball play and exploited defenses to the point where coaches would sh!t the bed.

jordan is goat because his game was graceful and gorgeous.

jordan is goat because he delivered on both ends of the court.

jordan is goat because he evolutionized his game throughout his career.

jordan is goat because his fundamentals were a picture of perfection.

jordan is goat because when he got called out by players or coaches like stackhouse, van gundy or george karl, he would deliver like no other.

jordan is goat because because he won three str8 rings in an incredible era without a dominant big man.

...there's more to being a goat than just having great stats and winning rings. look at the big picture, folks!

[PHILA]

Dr Jack Ramsey: Kobe Bryant is the best closer in the game. Better than Jordan

:no:

A peaked Jordan was on a different level than Kobe in clutch time. In 24 playoff games from 1990-92 he was shooting over 60% with the game on the line. Kobe may have the advantage in certain areas like FT% and TOV, but overall Jordan is making so much more happen since his offensive game was not built around his perimeter jump shot. They may have a similar mentality, but in terms of effectiveness it is not close.




4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points



Per 48 Statistics, in 82games.com format.


http://i.imgur.com/mkjVAW4.png

Michael Jordan - 1990-92 Playoffs (24 Games, 70.8% Win Percentage)

73.7 pts, 9.7 rbs, 4.8 ast, 3.4 tov, 0.97 blk, 5.3 stl, 62.2% FG, 82.8% FT, 40% 3 Pt. FG



From NBA.com: http://i.imgur.com/79n6NpB.png

Kobe Bryant - 2006-2009 Playoffs (32 Games, 59.4% Win Percentage)

47.6 pts, 6.0 rbs, 5.3 ast, 1.9 tov, 0.0 blk, 1.5 stl, 45.2% FG, 85.5% FT, 26.7% 3 Pt. FG

[GOBB]

:oldlol:

[Knoe Itawl]

:oldlol:

Shut up me.

[tmacattack33]

Commentators have said the same about Kobe and Lebron at different points. Using a comment from a commentator isn't very persuasive.

Still curious, are you GOBB or Jeff?

I have never heard anyone say that about Kobe.

And i have never heard any commentator on national TV (ABC, TNT, or ESPN) say that Lebron is the greatest player to ever play so casually. They will either add in a "might" (as in he "might" be the greatest player ever) or a "could eventually be". If I am wrong, prove it and drop a link.

[Heavincent]

I have never heard anyone say that about Kobe.


I'm pretty sure Mark Jackson said it.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I have never heard anyone say that about Kobe.

And i have never heard any commentator on national TV (ABC, TNT, or ESPN) say that Lebron is the greatest player to ever play so casually. They will either add in a "might" (as in he "might" be the greatest player ever) or a "could eventually be". If I am wrong, prove it and drop a link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVWFIGhD980

[NumberSix]

Yeah, the whole ring counting and needing to stack up a certain amount of accolades thing is a very new phenomena. Bill Russell would have 0 case for being better than Jordan even if Jordan never won a single ring. By 1989, Bill Russell had no case over Jordan.

[bizil]

I think MJ's peak value was what many meant back then. There's a difference between peak value and GOAT criteria. So in the peak value since, I can see that argument. GOAT wise, it wasn't such a lock after the second ring. After the threepeat, I think it was cool to start giving MJ GOAT status. In comparison to Dr. J, Bird, and Magic, MJ had far less of a supporting cast to win his rings. We knew this and in retrospect it probably pushed MJ up the ladder even more.

[Magic 32]

Knoe Itawl has been going at this for how long?

10 years?

[retaxis]

Why are so many people from the lower pedigree so obsessed with 'greatest', 'best' etc. Its as if they were raised by parents who told them they would be nothing unless they are the best which would explain why all the failures live vicariously online while disengaging themselves from things that actually matter.

[poido123]

And when did I ever say that Bryant wasn't a great player? Also, what does all that have to do with saying that just using this "5 rings 5 rings" Kobetard argument is stupid? :confusedshrug:

It's like you guys just see anything you feel is detracting from your hero and find the need to defend, regardless of whether you've actually looked at what's actually being discussed.


Kobe sucks, Jordan is the greatest, yep Knoe Itawl is back :oldlol:

Please stop, you're making me dislike Jordan conversations.

[ripthekik]

Why are so many people from the lower pedigree so obsessed with 'greatest', 'best' etc. Its as if they were raised by parents who told them they would be nothing unless they are the best which would explain why all the failures live vicariously online while disengaging themselves from things that actually matter.
The armchair psychologist strikes again, did you see the message I left for you the last time you tried this? :oldlol:

and to the dumbass OP, no. If MJ only had 1 ring and lost 3 times in the finals, it'd be easy to argue someone else for the GOAT spot. He was considered GOAT then because he was active and people live in the moment. Your accolades survive time.. now when we talk Jordan, we start from 6 rings. Without it, his spot won't be so clear.

[gts]

The armchair psychologist strikes again, did you see the message I left for you the last time you tried this? :oldlol:

and to the dumbass OP, no. If MJ only had 1 ring and lost 3 times in the finals, it'd be easy to argue someone else for the GOAT spot. He was considered GOAT then because he was active and people live in the moment. Your accolades survive time.. now when we talk Jordan, we start from 6 rings. Without it, his spot won't be so clear. yeah love his 'lower pedigree" remark... :lol

Nothing but a self indulgent ass clown

[Knoe Itawl]

Kobe sucks, Jordan is the greatest, yep Knoe Itawl is back :oldlol:

Please stop, you're making me dislike Jordan conversations.

I swear people just spout whatever nonsense comes to mind, regardless of how inane it is. Because I've always said "KObe sucks" right.

I don't give a shyt what you dislike, btw.

[BlackVVaves]

I agree with your premise to an extent OP, but when you get to the top 12 or 15 players of all time, team success (most notably championships), and personal achievement are used as an imperfect metric to assess which player had the most impact in the course of NBA history, usually correlating to sustained greatness (and subsequently, the concept behind a player's legacy).

So while Jordan may have been the GOAT in terms of his skill and production on the court, he still needed those championships to solidify his legacy against the likes of Kareem, Magic, Bird, ect.

As for Kobe, same thing. Those championships are probably even more important to his legacy, since he played in an era that produced such great talents who have also won and are ranked in that 7-10range (Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, LeBron). They are all transcendent players who left their mark on the league in a profound way, so for those who weigh championships heavily, having 5 titles compared to just 3 really does count.

Anyway OP, give up the crusade. Even the Kobetards have given up their antics that they were running around here with about Kobe being better than Jordan, and soon they will do the same with LeBron. You however.....I remember you shrieking around here how Kobe would never win a title without Shaq and then again saying he wouldn't win without Pau. And then you so predictably disappeared when it not only happened, but twice :oldlol:

You have been just as bad as Kobe ******gers, you've been a Kobe hater through and through. Find a new hobby.

[sportjames23]

.....about how this guy was considered the greatest of all time before even his third ring.

First of all, check out the play from 2:30 onwards because it's a top 5 (IMO) Jordan sequence.

Then, check out the commentary by the announcer at 3:02. He says that MJ is the greatest to ever play, and he hadn't even won his SECOND ring yet!!

This is the point I was making about how yes rings have always been valued, but more emphasis was given the the overall impact of a player, how good a player was, etc.

This is why the "5 rings 5 rings" mantra espoused by the Kobetards is so stupid, and what's funny is that it really occurs because of MJ. That is, because MJ won 6, somehow these idiots have morphed that into the ultimate commentary on how great a player is (ie, having 5 somehow gets you in that neighborhood, as opposed to how much of an impact you have as a player).

No, the 6 rings were of course a part of his greatness, but a lot of the basketball world was calling him GOAT by his FIRST ring.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5sHdmQahNk


:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[guy]

Show me where an announcer has said Kobe or Lebron were the greatest to ever play the game. ESPECIALLY after their first title. If you can't, stop talking bullshyt.

Still curious, are you an idiot or a moron?

I'm pretty sure I've heard some say that about Lebron or at least that he was the second greatest (which means he would've been called the greatest had Jordan never existed).

[andgar923]

I don't see what the big fuss is about? :confusedshrug:

All that the OP is stating is that MJ was considered the GOAT by his play, not his accolades. So even if he would've retired after 1 or 2 a good margin in the basketball community would've considered him the GOAT.

It wasn't rings that made MJ the GOAT (necessarily) it was how he played.

I also agree that there's been other players given that label, those players also happen to have a legit argument tho.

I think that his play alone warrants MJ as a GOAT contender.

His rings and achievements only cements it.

[longtime lurker]

And when did I ever say that Bryant wasn't a great player? Also, what does all that have to do with saying that just using this "5 rings 5 rings" Kobetard argument is stupid? :confusedshrug:

It's like you guys just see anything you feel is detracting from your hero and find the need to defend, regardless of whether you've actually looked at what's actually being discussed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ma3YpyuuxE

Do you ever get tired of looking like a douchebag?

[Lebron23]

i beg to disagree.

Jordan was top 3-4 after he briefly retired in 1993-94. he became the undisputed greatest player of all time after the Bulls beat the Jazz in the 1998 NBA Finals.

[Dragonyeuw]

Having grown up during the Jordan era, and being aware of the news articles and commentator talk at the time, I do recall Jordan getting GOAT talk before the end of the first 3peat. Hell, as premature as it seems now in retrospect, Jordan was getting snippets of GOAT talk BEFORE he won the first title in 91. That spoke to the level of artistry he was displaying on a nightly basis before he achieved championship success.

[Marchesk]

Yeah, the whole ring counting and needing to stack up a certain amount of accolades thing is a very new phenomena. Bill Russell would have 0 case for being better than Jordan even if Jordan never won a single ring. By 1989, Bill Russell had no case over Jordan.

Russell's top 5. He has a case.

[jlip]

Yeah, the whole ring counting and needing to stack up a certain amount of accolades thing is a very new phenomena. Bill Russell would have 0 case for being better than Jordan even if Jordan never won a single ring. By 1989, Bill Russell had no case over Jordan.

:facepalm

[Knoe Itawl]

I agree with your premise to an extent OP, but when you get to the top 12 or 15 players of all time, team success (most notably championships), and personal achievement are used as an imperfect metric to assess which player had the most impact in the course of NBA history, usually correlating to sustained greatness (and subsequently, the concept behind a player's legacy).

So while Jordan may have been the GOAT in terms of his skill and production on the court, he still needed those championships to solidify his legacy against the likes of Kareem, Magic, Bird, ect.

As for Kobe, same thing. Those championships are probably even more important to his legacy, since he played in an era that produced such great talents who have also won and are ranked in that 7-10range (Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, LeBron). They are all transcendent players who left their mark on the league in a profound way, so for those who weigh championships heavily, having 5 titles compared to just 3 really does count.

Anyway OP, give up the crusade. Even the Kobetards have given up their antics that they were running around here with about Kobe being better than Jordan, and soon they will do the same with LeBron. You however.....I remember you shrieking around here how Kobe would never win a title without Shaq and then again saying he wouldn't win without Pau. And then you so predictably disappeared when it not only happened, but twice :oldlol:

You have been just as bad as Kobe ******gers, you've been a Kobe hater through and through. Find a new hobby.

Actually if he still "needed those championships to solidify his legacy", he wouldn't have been so widely considered GOAT that a random announcer was calling him that before his second ring. And he wouldn't have felt comofortable enough on his status as GOAT that he retired after "only" 3 rings. Additionally, I'm not saying that his rings didn't add to his greatness and legacy, only that most people weren't running around talking about "5 rings >>1" and "3 rings >>1" back then.

This is solidified by the widespread noting that he was GOAT by his second ring. I really don't get what's so hard to understand about that simple notion. There were no "ringtards" back then. People looked at championships won, but it's a newer phenomenon to center on them like they're the end all/be all. If Jordan had 4 ships to Kobe's 5, these tards would act like that meant he was the superior player, you can bet on that. By the same token, Bryant's rings do not have a bearing on whether he's a better player than Bron, with only 2.

As for the rest of the garbage you wrote, it's funny that you mentioned what Kobetards have done, but are participating in Kobetard LIES. I never "disappeared" after Kobe's other titles. In fact, I addressed them numerous times. Something I won't do again since I did it on several occassions, but you can google it if you'd like. I dont' mind people disagreeing with me. I just hate liars, or people who lazily say things without knowing what they're talking about.

[Knoe Itawl]

I don't see what the big fuss is about? :confusedshrug:

All that the OP is stating is that MJ was considered the GOAT by his play, not his accolades. So even if he would've retired after 1 or 2 a good margin in the basketball community would've considered him the GOAT.

It wasn't rings that made MJ the GOAT (necessarily) it was how he played.

I also agree that there's been other players given that label, those players also happen to have a legit argument tho.

I think that his play alone warrants MJ as a GOAT contender.

His rings and achievements only cements it.

Thank you. Really such a simple point, but when you get Kobetards, people with reading comprehension problems, etc. then that gets lost in idiocy, distractions and other nonsense.