Rings do matter in NBA Goat talks. Here’s why.
This is just water cooler, or mainly message board, discussions. So called “experts” and highly decorated NBA greats even get their highly biased opinions in through online news clippings. The talking heads on television are fans of the game, too. Do not believe how they present themselves on screen. Deep down, they’re biased as hell. Just like you. Just like me. Slow times for the NBA right now especially in the midst of a nasty lockout, but that shouldn’t stop anyone from running their mouths. Rings matter in this argument.
Recently, I came to the conclusion that Michael Jordan is the greatest NBA player ever driven by career win shares, career player efficiency rating, and accomplishments. The “playing era” argument was completely eliminated because it was subjective. People state their case about the competition around the player at that time citing other superstars, teams, rules, and what not. I am aware of this, but if you think about it, the more it does not matter.
This type of thinking affects everyone and usually gets them in trouble.
Go watch Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” if you do not believe me. It’s a great film about people dissatisfied about the present focusing on the past. They fantasize, and end up romanticizing, about a particular era labeling it as “the golden age.” What’s even more pathetic is that many people end up romanticizing a time they did not even live in. People have trouble accepting current times because the problems they inhabit. That’s all. That is why I chose to eliminate the bullshit. You have to be able to accept any player in any era even players from today. How does one do that?
Stick with the numbers and accomplishments.
The accomplishments are only at the NBA level: league MVP, Finals MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, all NBA selections, all defense selections, notable statistical achievements, and all star game appearances. The rookie of the year is a good award, but does not indicate what type of career the player will have. The award just notes that the player was the best rookie. The All Star Game MVP is meaningless junk – it’s just one game and random as hell.
Here is the most sensitive issue for some people – the titles. The rings. The championships.
Point blank, the player has to have them. Yes, it is a team accomplishment. The NBA championship is a team award. No kidding. However, that does not change the fact that the player has to have as many as they can in “NBA Greatest of All Time” arguments. If the player does not have any, don’t bother bringing them up.
Certain guys will probably say “The rings shouldn’t be a part of the arguments because it’s not an individual award.”
Ok. Let’s explore this.
The title isn’t an individual award, but the Bill Russell Finals MVP is. That award is purely individual driven. The player has to perform very well and have the numbers to back that shit up. His team has to win the series in order for him to get it. That’s the only way.
The rings do matter.
Some people will say that rings do not determine how well the player did things on the court.
Hey, that’s true, too. However, that type of thinking causes trouble just like the “era competition” talk though. How can anyone judge that? How well did the player pass the ball? Dunk? Shoot? Defend? How well did said player score? Rebound? Block shots? Handle clutch situations? Leadership?
Do we determine how pretty their jump shot was? How much arc they put in the shot? How well did the ball rotate? How difficult was the situation? How difficult was the bank shot? At what angle and trajectory? How fast did the player get to the rim? By a tenth of a second?
So again, “Rings do not determine how well the player did things on the court.” You sure you want to stick with that? Go ahead. I’m not. It’s just lame.
Rings do matter in combination with other awards and accomplishments. To say that the rings do not matter is stupid.