Pippen Says LeBron is "Best Player Ever"

Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

Originally Posted by jcbacall

Originally Posted by grittyman20

My bad...I think the word Pip used was "could be" as in having the potential to be.



And the ring argument is getting played out. Bill Russell has 11 rings, so according to that logic that make him better than MJ right?

that's not the point.<

its like, you can't be in a ferrari club when you don't have a ferarri.




Because winning in TEAM sports involves being on a TEAM. See Kobe this year, see D-Rose as well.

And spare the "But one player can help his team in basketball more than other sports" argument. That is true..but it's still a team sport first and the better teams win.



Horrible example with d-rose. His team was good enough, hence all the tie games late in the fourth quarter of games 2-5. HE, on the other hand, was not.
 
Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

Originally Posted by jcbacall

Originally Posted by grittyman20

My bad...I think the word Pip used was "could be" as in having the potential to be.



And the ring argument is getting played out. Bill Russell has 11 rings, so according to that logic that make him better than MJ right?

that's not the point.<

its like, you can't be in a ferrari club when you don't have a ferarri.




Because winning in TEAM sports involves being on a TEAM. See Kobe this year, see D-Rose as well.

And spare the "But one player can help his team in basketball more than other sports" argument. That is true..but it's still a team sport first and the better teams win.



Horrible example with d-rose. His team was good enough, hence all the tie games late in the fourth quarter of games 2-5. HE, on the other hand, was not.
 
Originally Posted by MaxElite

Jordan is the greatest scorer of all time? LULZ.


indifferent.gif
 
I bet Scottie is mad because so many ppl act like he wasn't a huge part of the reason the Bulls won those rings.
 
I bet Scottie is mad because so many ppl act like he wasn't a huge part of the reason the Bulls won those rings.
 
Originally Posted by SneakerFr

Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

Originally Posted by jcbacall


that's not the point.<

its like, you can't be in a ferrari club when you don't have a ferarri.




Because winning in TEAM sports involves being on a TEAM. See Kobe this year, see D-Rose as well.

And spare the "But one player can help his team in basketball more than other sports" argument. That is true..but it's still a team sport first and the better teams win.



Horrible example with d-rose. His team was good enough, hence all the tie games late in the fourth quarter of games 2-5. HE, on the other hand, was not.


Rose has to carry a brunt of his team's offense. It's hard to score when defenses can take other efficient players out of the game (Carlos Boozer anyone?) and then our team has to rely on you creating shots and going 1 on 5. Could Rose play better? Sure. But team effort trumps teams that has one star doiflng everything for them. Rings are great, but you don't win them without a collective effort.
 
Originally Posted by SneakerFr

Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

Originally Posted by jcbacall


that's not the point.<

its like, you can't be in a ferrari club when you don't have a ferarri.




Because winning in TEAM sports involves being on a TEAM. See Kobe this year, see D-Rose as well.

And spare the "But one player can help his team in basketball more than other sports" argument. That is true..but it's still a team sport first and the better teams win.



Horrible example with d-rose. His team was good enough, hence all the tie games late in the fourth quarter of games 2-5. HE, on the other hand, was not.


Rose has to carry a brunt of his team's offense. It's hard to score when defenses can take other efficient players out of the game (Carlos Boozer anyone?) and then our team has to rely on you creating shots and going 1 on 5. Could Rose play better? Sure. But team effort trumps teams that has one star doiflng everything for them. Rings are great, but you don't win them without a collective effort.
 
Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

LBJ (or any other player) DOESN'T need rings to be compared to MJ.

MJ stands alone. He is the GOAT, and not because of the rings either.


Exactly that whole I got more rings doesnt mean a certain player is better then another. Allen Iverson is arguable the most talented little man the game has seen regardless of rings/no rings. So is derek fisher>steve nash, john stockton, jason kidd...etc. Is Lamar Odom>karl malone, barkley, larry johnson, kevin garnett.... etc. Teams=rings. As history has shown no single player can do it alone, so just using common sense how can you judge/say one player is better then another based on something that isnt condusive to individual skill sets?
 
Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

LBJ (or any other player) DOESN'T need rings to be compared to MJ.

MJ stands alone. He is the GOAT, and not because of the rings either.


Exactly that whole I got more rings doesnt mean a certain player is better then another. Allen Iverson is arguable the most talented little man the game has seen regardless of rings/no rings. So is derek fisher>steve nash, john stockton, jason kidd...etc. Is Lamar Odom>karl malone, barkley, larry johnson, kevin garnett.... etc. Teams=rings. As history has shown no single player can do it alone, so just using common sense how can you judge/say one player is better then another based on something that isnt condusive to individual skill sets?
 
If a six time champion, a teammate of the man, and the best sf of his decade is "hating", then you guys are slurping.
 
If a six time champion, a teammate of the man, and the best sf of his decade is "hating", then you guys are slurping.
 
The debate Skip and Screaming A. had on First Take was
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif

Ehhhh it's that man's opinion.
 
The debate Skip and Screaming A. had on First Take was
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif

Ehhhh it's that man's opinion.
 
Back
Top Bottom