The "Ring" Argument

Some people just have no idea how hard it is to win and win consistently. Guys like Jordan, Kobe, Shaq and Duncan have made it look easy; always competing for or winning titles almost every year. The amount of effort and ability it takes to lead a team to a title is starting to become really underrated on ISH.

In the internet age with stats readily available, along with kids who haven't had the chance to watch a lot of the greats play as well as understand what they were watching, winning titles is underrated.

I thought the whole point of playing the game is for rings. Since "winning" is all a product of luck then why bother playing, just have a lottery to see who the NBA champion is.

CHarles Barkely....Karl Malone...are they better then Tim Duncan? Did they have better careers?

I would pick Timmy any day of the week over them...you know why?

The rings.....

END THREAD

Rings matter. Nope, Fisher isn't better than Lebron but when you compare 2 players who are about equal as far as ability goes, the one with more rings should and always does get the nod.

[QUOTE=SlayerEnraged]Rings matter. Nope, Fisher isn't better than Lebron but when you compare 2 players who are about equal as far as ability goes, the one with more rings should and always does get the nod.[/QUOTE]

YUP....

/Thread

[QUOTE=SlayerEnraged]Rings matter. Nope, Fisher isn't better than Lebron but when you compare 2 players who are about equal as far as ability goes, the one with more rings should and always does get the nod.[/QUOTE]
What happens when a player has only been in the league for a year and is already at the same ability as an older player with rings? Please stfu, using rings in a argument is stupid, so many factors and luck combine to win a championship, teammates, coaches, injuries, chemistry etc.

Kobe isnt better then Lebron because he has 5 rings ffs He has had the fortitude of having some great teammates and the greatest coach of all time and playing for a team that can go highly over the cap each year having the best talent.

Funny how no one dared to say this when people argue Jordan as the GOAT.

Its only come to light recently as Kobe has racked them up and proven to be a better player than his peers.

Suddenly, rings are a team achievement and hold no weight in determining an individuals worth. :roll: :roll:

If Jordan only won 1 ring he would be still the GOAT.

His abilities cant be questioned over a stupid ring.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]What happens when a player has only been in the league for a year and is already at the same ability as an older player with rings? Please stfu, using rings in a argument is stupid, so many factors and luck combine to win a championship, teammates, coaches, injuries, chemistry etc.

Kobe isnt better then Lebron because he has 5 rings ffs He has had the fortitude of having some great teammates and the greatest coach of all time and playing for a team that can go highly over the cap each year having the best talent.[/QUOTE]

Repped

This

It's very unfair to compare Kobe's career to LBJ and Durant because Kobe started his career in 1996. LeBron and Durant might win more Regular Season and Finals MVP than Kobe before they officially retires in the NBA.

[QUOTE=pauk]wow[B]... and i thought i was the only person in this forum who understands that rings are TEAM accomplishments... [/B]

well said and i agree... had many of these threads before exposing the ring argument...

I agree on evaluating a players career/talent/skill based on the impact he was able to give to his team... resulting in team success........ you have to also look at what he had to work with around him and the competition he was up against, thats very important! But i dont agree on evaluating a players career and so on based on simply RINGS......... this is not tennis!

a player can be a WINNER without ever winning a ring... how? By getting the best team record, getting to the ECF/Finals with [B]a scrub team[/B] who immediately have the worst record in the NBA when you leave them....... thats one example of being a WINNER making your teammates so much better........

When looking upon a players Championship rings... you want to look at what he did for that team..
was he the best player in that team?
was he the best player in the nba?
was he a sidekick? benchplayer? roleplayer? 6th man?
what did he had to work with around him, where they scrubs, where they stacked?

my point is... its about the CONTEXT/VALUE of that Championship Ring and not about the Number of RINGS....[/QUOTE]

You're a clown. You would be singing a different tune right now if LeBron won the chip in 2007... or even 1 game for that matter.

[QUOTE=The Iron Fist]Funny how no one dared to say this when people argue Jordan as the GOAT.

Its only come to light recently as Kobe has racked them up and proven to be a better player than his peers.

Suddenly, rings are a team achievement and hold no weight in determining an individuals worth. :roll: :roll:[/QUOTE]

No one said it about Jordan because he dominated like few have ever had, maybe even more so, during both the regular season and playoffs in addition to obtaining nearly every individual accolade one can achieve.

[QUOTE=The Iron Fist]Funny how no one dared to say this when people argue Jordan as the GOAT.

Its only come to light recently as Kobe has racked them up and proven to be a better player than his peers.

Suddenly, rings are a team achievement and hold no weight in determining an individuals worth. :roll: :roll:[/QUOTE]


6x NBA MVP, 6x Finals MVP, and 11x Scoring Champion >>>> 1x NBA MVP, 2x FInals MVP, and 2x Scoring Champion.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]What happens when a player has only been in the league for a year and is already at the same ability as an older player with rings? Please stfu, using rings in a argument is stupid, so many factors and luck combine to win a championship, teammates, coaches, injuries, chemistry etc.

[B]Kobe isnt better then Lebron because he has 5 rings ffs He has had the fortitude of having some great teammates and the greatest coach of all time and playing for a team that can go highly over the cap each year having the best talent[/B].[/QUOTE]

As far as all time rankings, yes Kobe is ahead of LeBron (partially) due to his rings. You think Kobe would be a Top 10 player all time if he had no championships or finals mvps?

Also, haven't you ever thought that Kobe has played a part in those Lakers teams and Phil being so highly revered? If Kobe were just another scrub, Phil most likely doesn't have 11 rings and Shaq doesn't have 4. Doesn't that count for something?

Loser talk


This is lebron fans in a nutshell

They think a role player ring is the same as a superstar ring lool


Just excuses for their choking hero

Fact is horrys rings do count WHEN COMPARING HIM TO ANOTHER ROLE PLAYER

Just as phil jacksons rings count WHEN COMPARING HIM TO ANOTHER COACH


Not all rings are created equally


When comparing kobe to lebron.. HELL YEA RINGS COUNT

Its why jordan is #1 all time and guys like malone and baylor are 15th at best

Jordan is also a superior regular season, playoffs, and finals performer than Kob1tch Bryant.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]What happens when a player has only been in the league for a year and is already at the same ability as an older player with rings? Please stfu, using rings in a argument is stupid, so many factors and luck combine to win a championship, teammates, coaches, injuries, chemistry etc.

Kobe isnt better then Lebron because he has 5 rings ffs He has had the fortitude of having some great teammates and the greatest coach of all time and playing for a team that can go highly over the cap each year having the best talent.[/QUOTE]


No excuses. Bosh is > than Gasol (which incase you're a moron, Kobe won 2 with him) and Lebron had Wade last year and failed. Lebrons team actually had the best regular season record several years but he wasn't able to maintain that. You can be flamboyant about it all you want but the obstacle in basketball is to win. Therefore if you don't get it done (regardless of what reason), you haven't accomplished that obstacle. Duncan is gonna get the nod over Malone every time. Also in Lebrons 2 chances, they likely could have won if he would had played even decent.

[QUOTE=SlayerEnraged]No excuses. Bosh is > than Gasol (which incase you're a moron, Kobe won 2 with him) and Lebron had Wade last year and failed. Lebrons team actually had the best regular season record several years but he wasn't able to maintain that. You can be flamboyant about it all you want but the obstacle in basketball is to win. Therefore if you don't get it done (regardless of what reason), you haven't accomplished that obstacle. Duncan is gonna get the nod over Malone every time. Also in Lebrons 2 chances, they likely could have won if he would had played even decent.[/QUOTE]You say Bosh is better then Gasol but you claim that players around the same ability should be judged on rings :roll: :roll: Please, go suck Kobe's nuts some more

John Havlicek 8 rings. HOF'er, career 22 PPG in playoffs. Better than Kobe, right?

[QUOTE=RRR3]John Havlicek 8 rings. HOF'er, career 22 PPG in playoffs. Better than Kobe, right?[/QUOTE]
Must be according to Kobe fans

[QUOTE=RRR3]John Havlicek 8 rings. HOF'er, career 22 PPG in playoffs. Better than Kobe, right?[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=178915[/url]

Nice posts by Kblaze300000 in this thread.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]You say Bosh is better then Gasol but you claim that players around the same ability should be judged on rings :roll: :roll: Please, go suck Kobe's nuts some more[/QUOTE]


Your whole anaysis/logicin your head is beyond my impair. Anyone that thinks Karl Malone is > Duncan or Lebron is > Kobe is a complete moron. Sure those guys played and were keyword trying to win, but they failed. That's what it's all about. Let's say Joe and Bob average 94% on regular tests, but Joe fails his final test and gets 50% on his final while Bob passes it. That's exactly what guys like Stockton, Malone and Lebron(up to this point) are.

[QUOTE=Rake2204].

To me, Bryant helping his '06 squad win 45 games with Smush Parker as the team's third leading scorer and nearly upsetting the Suns in the first round was just as impressive to me as his being a part of a super talented championship team featuring Pau Gasol, Shaquille O'Neal, and Andrew Bynum. Again, if the Gasol deal was never struck, would Kobe be viewed as "less great" if he then never developed a solid enough supporting cast to win any Shaq-less rings? Yes, Kobe would probably be viewed as such. But would it be accurate? No. Would he be any less of a great player? No.[/QUOTE]
Nice point - but it is strictly a appreciation of a player balling not per say his validation to getting to a championship or a ring.

AI had 100% role players around him , which equates to 1 super star taking his team to the finals. (Yes that was impressive)
But to put the validation that Kobe is a top 5 or 10 all time player , and not reaching the finals except when he had Shaq or Pau validates those players were a large key to those championships than Kobe's career ring total.

I am picking on Kobe as an example because he's quote " super star " unquote

And will be in the HOF , but not honing that those 5 rings were because of his dominate role.

OP focusing on rings is an opstacle to valid players worth , should be re-evaluted even super star value to rings , when a player has 5 or 6 compared to a superstar with a weaker roster and won 3 rings.
-------------

[QUOTE=SlayerEnraged]Your whole anaysis/logicin your head is beyond my impair. Anyone that thinks Karl Malone is > Duncan or Lebron is > Kobe is a complete moron. Sure those guys played and were keyword trying to win, but they failed. That's what it's all about. Let's say Joe and Bob average 94% on regular tests, but Joe fails his final test and gets 50% on his final while Bob passes it. That's exactly what guys like Stockton, Malone and Lebron(up to this point) are.[/QUOTE]
I give up with these Kobe fans, they contradict themselves, they come up with retarded examples, not including all the variables that can occur in a final.

On ability wise how the **** can you compare Lebron to Kobe at all? How can you not see that Lebron is nearly better then Kobe at all facets of the game? Im Durant fan, I have no reason to be bias at all.

I see it with my glasses off, whilst you still have your yellow and purple ones still on.

Anyone that even brings up the Derek Fisher or Robert Horry argument is a moron devoid of basketball intelligence.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]I give up with these Kobe fans, they contradict themselves, they come up with retarded examples, not including all the variables that can occur in a final.

On ability wise how the **** can you compare Lebron to Kobe at all? How can you not see that Lebron is nearly better then Kobe at all facets of the game? Im Durant fan, I have no reason to be bias at all.

I see it with my glasses off, whilst you still have your yellow and purple ones still on.[/QUOTE]

I never said Lebron wasn't better than Kobe this season or last season u moron. Here's the problem with 90% of ISH'ers: They're full of assumptions. They assume u think this or that but really don't know wtf they're talking about. We're talking about all time wise and no untill Lebron wins a championship, he's not gonna be with the elites. U mad and gonna :cry: ?

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]I give up with these Kobe fans, they contradict themselves, they come up with retarded examples, not including all the variables that can occur in a final.

On ability wise how the **** can you compare Lebron to Kobe at all? How can you not see that Lebron is nearly better then Kobe at all facets of the game? Im Durant fan, I have no reason to be bias at all.

I see it with my glasses off, whilst you still have your yellow and purple ones still on.[/QUOTE]

What variable did Lebron not have in his 2 finals appearences? Maybe i'd feel sympathetic for him losing if he didn't play like shit in the finals :lol

[QUOTE=SlayerEnraged]I never said Lebron wasn't better than Kobe this season or last season u moron. Here's the problem with 90% of ISH'ers: They're full of assumptions. They assume u think this or that but really don't know wtf they're talking about. We're talking about all time wise and no untill Lebron wins a championship, he's not gonna be with the elites. U mad and gonna :cry: ?[/QUOTE]
Why the **** are we judging on career status when both their careers aren't even over or are at the same stage?

Still rings dont make one player then another, they could of just had the fortitude of having great teammates, coach, money to buy more players.

And why would I be mad if Lebron wins a championship or not, I support the Thunder, I have owned you to many times now to keep caring.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]I give up with these Kobe fans, they contradict themselves, they come up with retarded examples, not including all the variables that can occur in a final.

[B]On ability wise how the **** can you compare Lebron to Kobe at all? How can you not see that Lebron is nearly better then Kobe at all facets of the game?[/B] Im Durant fan, I have no reason to be bias at all.

I see it with my glasses off, whilst you still have your yellow and purple ones still on.[/QUOTE]

Wait what? :oldlol: Did you seriously just post that?

[QUOTE=longtime lurker]Wait what? :oldlol: Did you seriously just post that?[/QUOTE]Currently yes, and it isnt even close, Kobe is better at playing in the post and shooting, but that's where it ends.

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]Why the **** are we judging on career status when both their careers aren't even over or are at the same stage?

Still rings dont make one player then another, they could of just had the fortitude of having great teammates, coach, money to buy more players.

And why would I be mad if Lebron wins a championship or not, I support the Thunder, I have owned you to many times now to keep caring.[/QUOTE]

Ur a sad little chitzu trying to play and compete with the big german shepards. Hurry move along now...everybody lets give KDthunderup a loud :applause: for his commendable effort lmao. P.S. What was Lebrons age in the finals last year? 26 or 27? 26 year old Kobe isn't going to lose with Wade and Bosh on his team lol.:sleeping u weak.

[B]Tim Duncan had he faced a Healthy Prime Barkley and a Prime Malone would have gotten poulverized.

The only thin he is Better than Barkley and Malone is as a Shot Blocker cause he plays more like a Center.

Barkley outplayed Duncan at ages 34-36 when he was overweight and constantly injured[/B]

[B][QUOTE=Lebron23][url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=178915[/url]

Nice posts by Kblaze300000 in this thread.[/QUOTE]


Well if that was done today or even 20 years ago you might say some of those celtic players might have a case.. But just like jordans 6 modern day titles look better than russells 11 from the 60s... So do kobes 5 against somes 7 or 8 from that period aswell...


What lebron fans fail at most on here is comon sense


They like to make half a$$d judgement against anything lebron lacks

They would be willing to drop jordans accomplishments just to degrade kobes


The fact is.. Rings are what back up jordans stats and records.. Without rings mj wouldnt even sniff the top 5.. People would treat him like they do baylor or malone...

This is what validates kobe.. History


Sorry lebrick fans. You cant rewrite history[/B]

[QUOTE=KDthunderup]Currently yes, and it isnt even close, Kobe is better at playing in the post and shooting, but that's where it ends.[/QUOTE]

Okay thanks for clearing that up. I thought you meant throughout their careers. Fair enough, but even post mortem Kobe is doing his best to keep up with Lebron despite the fact that it's his like 15th year in the league. Some players are still calling him the best player in the league.

[QUOTE=Tenchi Ryu]Basketball is a team sport, which is true. But the thing about Basketball is that unlike any other team sport, the court and overall flow of the game can be effected by one person. One person can be making a huge impact on the game. Its usually these people who are brought up in the RING discussion in the first place, not the role-players or scrubs who did their intended part.

You would never hear Fisher > Iverson cause of rings, cause his impact wasn't a dominate force to GET the ring.

Compare to say a argument like Kobe > Iverson cause of rings, that's different since Kobe WAS one of the dominant forces mostly responsible for the ring. Teammates are important, but the more elite you are, the better you'll make your team, simple as that. Cleveland Lebron was a testament to that. T-Mac on the Rockets had a opportunity IMHO.[/QUOTE]


this..... Football is the sport where i would say the rings argument is kinda baseless. Basketball on the other hand is a sport where one player can carry team.

Rings are meaningless.
Performances are the only things that matter.

Good playoff performances enhance a players career.
Good Finals performances enhance a players career.

Lebron is a better playoff performer then Kobe outside of the Finals.
Kobe has 2-3 good Finals performances.

Lebron with 2+ good Finals performances surpasses Kobe.

Its pretty simple stuff.

:applause:

[QUOTE=I.R.Beast]this..... Football is the sport where i would say the rings argument is kinda baseless. Basketball on the other hand is a sport where one player can carry team.[/QUOTE]

Some of the positions make less of an impact, but quarterback definitely makes a big impact... Look at the Colts with Peyton Manning and then this year without him..

Furthermore, look at all of the teams that have won superbowls since 1967... overwhelming number of those teams had great QBs.

I agree that one player can carry a team easier in basketball than football, but one player can only carry a team so far in both sports.

[B][QUOTE=32Dayz]Rings are meaningless.
Performances are the only things that matter.

Good playoff performances enhance a players career.
Good Finals performances enhance a players career.

Lebron is a better playoff performer then Kobe outside of the Finals.
Kobe has 2-3 good Finals performances.

Lebron with 2+ good Finals performances surpasses Kobe.

Its pretty simple stuff.

:applause:[/QUOTE]


You have to be the most idiotic dumb reeetard piece of monkey meat sucking delusional ignorant son of a b$tch on the internet



RINGS ARE MEANINGLESS?????!!!!????


Holy sweet mary mother of jesus christ son of god.... How on gods green earth can the most important thing inbasketball BE EFFING MEANINGLESS


RINGS BY A SUPERSTAR > RINGS BY A STAR > RINGS BY A ROLE PLAYER > RINGS BY A SCRUB


HOW IS THIS HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

Jordan isnt goat because he scored a ton of points... OR ELSE IVERSON WOULD BE TOP 10!!!!!!

its about rings PLUS stats PLUS records PLUS skills

Everything counts numbnuts... THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THE GAME OF BASKETBALL THAT IS MEANINGLESS EXCEPT YOUR DUMBAAAASSSS


[/B]

^Why did you post the same thing again after 4 minutes and then deleted the first one? :lol

Rings give people an excuse/reason to state the obvious.

KG wasn't any better in 08 than he was in 04; in fact, he wasn't even close to as dominant. He was just put in a better situation. KG was amazing all along. You knew it. I knew it. Everyone knew it. The fact that he won that ring in 08, despite not being nearly as good as he was 4 years earlier just gave the simpletons a reason to finally admit it.

Does anyone honestly believe he was better in 08? Or rather, was it a product of him coming to a much more complete and well coached team (and better organization)? What if KG was never put in that situation? We'd have trolls like plenty of people in this thread claiming he wasn't good enough and shouldn't be compared to ____ because he didn't have a ring when clearly he could have (and did) win won, when he was put in a better situation.

Rings aren't meaningless; they are just overused when discussing the impact of individual players for the reasons I mentioned above.

I made a thread once on multiple forums asking how many Rings Kobe would have won if he played his Career with the exact same rosters Iverson had.

(Both Iverson and Kobe entered the league in 1997).

99% of people said 0-2 and I'd say more like 75%+ said 0-1.

Would Kobe have been a worse player?
No, but he would have won less because of shitty rosters.

This is why Rings are absolutely meaningless in Player Comparisons.