|"Why isn't Bill Russell considered the greatest?"|
I wrote an article entitled "LeBron is Better Than Jordan (At 26)" comparing the careers of both players. I looked at both careers up to age 26 because of LeBron's current age during the 2011 season. For the past year everyone that has commented or called me has said the same thing, "What about Jordan's 6 titles?" Like I've always said, Jordan didn't win an NBA title until he was 28 years old bruh. So for the sake of this argument they don't exist. Lebron is only 27 years old bruh! People act the kid is 35 and is about to retire. I can remember when I caught a lot of heat when I said that Kobe was better than Jordan at 22! It's flat out true bruh. People are stuck on the entire career of Jordan and can't understand that his career was built one brick at a time. Like boyz completely forget that Magic played in 9 Finals, lost 4 of them and played terribly in 2. It takes time to win championships bruh. That's why they call them titles!!! They don't just give them joints away at the flea market!
However, since everyone wants to use titles to measure the greatness of a player let's take a look at it. Here is a sampling of some of the greatest players to ever play the game that have won multiple titles:
1. Bill Russell -11
2. Kareem Abdul Jabbar- 6
3. Michael Jordan- 6
4. Magic Johnson-5
5. Kobe Bryant- 5
6. Tim Duncan-4
7. Larry Bird-3
8. Wilt Chamberlain-2
So if we're only looking at titles why aren't people talking about Bill Russell or Kareem as opposed to Jordan? Better yet, why not Robert Horry who has 7 rings? While you're at it throw in Derrick Fisher who has 5 or John "Freaking" Salley who has 4! My point exactly! If we were only looking at titles we'd have to put Horry in the discussion and we all know that that doesn't make any sense. He was just a guy that was lucky enough to get on the right boat 7 times.
Titles don't always tell the story of greatness because Dan Marino was probably the most gifted quarterback to ever play the game and he never won a title. Can you say that Joe Montana was better than Marino or Peyton Manning because he won 4 Super Bowls? Absolutely not! He was just blessed to be throwing to the best receiver to ever play the game in Jerry Rice and coached by the inventor of the west coast offense, Bill Walsh!
Along those same lines we saw the same thing happen in the NBA with the Bulls. Not only did Jordan have Scottie and Rodman, they played for probably the best coach to ever walk the side lines. So to win 6 titles with that cast of characters wasn't impossible bruh. Do you really think the Jordan would have won 6 titles if he were playing in Milwaukee without Scottie or Phil bruh? Really?
Rings don't always tell the story of greatness because Jerry West, who is the Logo of the NBA, only has one. I think that people loved Jordan so much that after he started winning titles they started equating greatness with championship rings. Like I said before if that is the case, then Robert Horry is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history. Now how stupid does that sound?
Greatness comes down to a players complete game and what they bring to a team. Is the team better with a particular player on the field or on the court? But the amount of titles that a guy wins isn't the deciding factor because it's a team award. If that were the case they should change the NBA Logo to Bill Russell or Robert Horry! So to say that a person with more titles is greater based on the rings alone is completely ridiculous. By using that logic what you'll be saying is that Reggie Miller, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Dominique Wilkins, Allen Iverson and Patrick Ewing weren't great players! C'mon bruh!
Holla At Ya Boy!
Hit me up on Twitter: @jaygravesreport