Thankyou. I'm tired of the Shaq>>Hakeem because he has more rings arguments or any other variation. I've been saying this for years and i never use championships to measure a players career over another.
but basketball is a different animal from football and baseball. individual players have more impact. that's why guys like hakeem, jordan, magic, bird, wilt, russell, chamberlain, robertson, walton, isiah, kareem, shaq, all have championships. and its why guys like barkley and malone are looked at just a step below.
It is simple NO ONE should get 'Star Calls' Lebron has been practicing with Pros since he was like 14 if he was not good. . . it would be shameful carmelo didn't get that experiece neither did wade kobe T-mac KG etc Lebron has been groomed for the nba since like 12~13 I mean in a MAJOR way I look at his background like Parker and Dirk See . . lebron is basically what would happen if AMERICA let teenagers become Pros before graduating high school [See Parker - pro at 15 . . .see Dirk . . Pro at 16] Just officiated the game as it is stated and the same for everyone Rocket River
Doesn't make it right. I just don't think a player should be held back in his place in history because his GM failed to surround him with talent.
barkley was surrounded by talent in phoenix. malone had stocton, he couldn't get past jordan. barkley couldn't beat the rockets or jordan. ewing couldn't beat the rockets are jordan. all three had great chances at winning, but they were beaten by greater players. hakeem won his first championship on a team with no other hall of famers.
If anyone thinks Barkley and Malone are "a step below" Isiah Thomas and Bill Walton based on championships -- well that just supports my point that championships are overrated.
1) Is it possible that Lebron would lead still the league in and-ones if all games were officiated fairly? Absolutely. 2) How likely would he be the one to lead the league in and-ones if all games were officated fairly? I don't really care, because that was not my point. 3) Let me spell it out for you (again): Lebron leading the league now, in and-ones, has a lot to do with bias officiating. Now, if you want to continue barking up the wrong tree to help yourself sleep better at night, then go ahead. But for your reference, you need to work on your logic. I really hope you can see that there is a clear distinction between points 1, 2, and 3.
Beaten by greater teams. If the Bulls never had Pippen and Michael Jordan never won a championship yet accomplished everything else in his career (MVPs, scoring titles) does this stop him from being recognised as the greatest? Yes it would, simply because his individual greatness would be devalued because his teams could not win, and it isn't fair. Shaq already has more rings than Hakeem, but Hakeem is the better player. Hell Robert Horry has more rings than Hakeem, i guess that makes him better too. It's just a silly basis for an argument. But people will still use it, each to their own. If a player is severly outclassed in a playoff or championship series (eg Olajuwon>Ewing, Robinson) then you have an argument. Because they were unable to raise their game when they needed to, that is the only way you can really compare two players.
and if you think barkley is on their level well I don't know what you're watching. isiah's pistons had to get through bird's celtics and they used to beat the bulls. barkley wouldn't have been able to beat either of those teams. barkley got a chance to play with hakeem and drexler, and he still couldn't get over the top.
Barkely wasn't on their level. He was above it. Again, it's a TEAM game. I don't pin winning and losing on a single player. An aging Hakeem and Drexler. And they were eliminated by a better team (the Jazz).
all barkley has in his career is excuse for not winning a championship. isiah's pistons had to beat teams who are considered great and they did, barkley's didn't. so believe what you want, the proof is in the results. its not like the pistons beat scrubs to win. they beat bird's celtics, magic's lakers. they got over the hump. what was so great about isiah's teams, he didn't play with any other hall of famers
Actually, Joe Dumars is a hall of famer and Dennis Rodman might be. But even if they weren't, you don't think this current Pistons team is great? They have no hall of famers, yet I think everyone here would agree they're a top 3 team at least. The Bad Boys Pistons were a great team. When Barkeley was with the Rockets all 3 stars were already past their prime.
but joe dumars is hall of famer in part because he played on that team. joe dumars wouldn't be a hall of famer on a bad team. let me put it this way about barkley, the suns had a 3-1 lead on the rockets in 94-95 playoffs and they blew it. in game seven, in phoenix, one suns' player scored over 40 points and one player for the suns got shut down by chuckie brown. if kevin johnson's teamate would have stepped up, his teamate might have ring. lol
lebron > tmac lebron's back > tmac tmac doesnt know how the 2nd round of the playoff is. i hope he does, but if his back goes out again next year, i will be one ticked off Rockets fan.
But I disagree with the premise that you can pin winning/losing on a single player. So, that doesn't qualify as "proof" to me. It was a great team. A great team doesn't require great individual players. Just look at the current Detroit Pistons.
Yeah, honestly guys the T-mac defensiveness has got to end. Just because you might think LeBron, Kobe, et al are awesome players and deserving of praise - which they are - doesn't mean that you hate T-Mac.
