Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
What do you mean?
Sometimes people value talent over results. Those people must concede that in the end results are what matter objectively...
I'll never rank a player over another (better)player just because that player has had a better career. The better player should always be ranked higher, no exceptions, that is as long as that's what I'm trying to measure.
Now, I will use both player's careers as a measure for determining the better player, but that's different. A better career is often indicative of a better player, but not always.
For instance, I use Jordan's 6 championships as a major factor in my reasoning for placing him above Shaq, but I ultimately rank him above Shaq not because he won more, but because I believe him to be the better player, and the extra winning comes as a result of that.
Putting it on paper, that explanation isn't as clear as I had hoped, but hopefully that made sense.