Quote:
Originally Posted by Vecchio1
Team player?? Are you kidding? He has given up on teams of the past and does not make the players around him better. He takes teammates out of their groove with his 1 man show. Rings are very important, players like Malone, Wilkins, Barkley, Stockton, Nash will be forgotten by most as time goes on. Lebron GOAT...ha.
|
I disagree with you on both cases. For starters, most of Lebron's teammates love playing with him. He demands a lot from them but works as hard or harder. You've had many take less money to play with him. Yes, it did look like he gave up on the Cavs years ago, being tired of carrying them. That being said, in Miami players really liked playing with him. Much has been said that he is very court smart and remembers all the players habits (as in how they play, what they do).
Do rings help give players a historical significance? Of course. That doesn't mean a player is better because he has more rings. Dan Marino never won a ring and I highly doubt he'll be forgotten. Those that know the sport will know who is and was good. Maybe a fanboy will forget but the question was who is better, not who will be remembered better 50 years from now.
But again, Kobe and Lebron will both be historically significant being that both have rings (Kobe with more) and both are great though one more so than the other (depending on who you ask).