Rings and Statistics are just like a sword in the world of sports: You live by them, and you die by them. These are two valuable things to analyze an athlete by in terms of current or all-time ranks, but it comes to a point where if your not careful, you could become obsessed with them and over value them without putting them in proper perspective. Rings, as we all know, are a team achievement, but that is only half of the story. It is also how well a player raises his level of play while elevating the play of those around him that puts him further among the all-time greats. This is why Michael Jordan is so far ahead of everyone, because not only does he have 6 championships, but he was the Undisputed Leader of his team as he raised his game as well as the game of others such as Scottie Pippen, Paxson, Rodman, etc. Jordan also won 6 Finals MVPs, which means that he was the most dominant player every year they won the championship. When you factor in his career playoff avg. of 33.45 ppg (NBA Record) along with his 10 Scoring Titles, 10 All-NBA First Team Selections, 9 All-NBA Defensive 1st Team Selections, along with the rest of his body of work, the case is completely made for him to be the G.O.A.T. He did it all, and there were no holes in his game. Not only could he be a scoring leader, but he could also win! We also know that Bill Russell won 11 rings, as well as 5 MVPs. However, he cannot be called the greatest because of that alone. His career field goal pct. was .440, which is not great at all, especially for a center. He is still among my top 6 of all-time, but that hinders him from even being at no. 2 for me. Wilt Chamberlain was an absolute animal, both as a scorer and rebounder at 7'1" 275 lb. The only man to average 50.4 ppg, 25.7 rpg ('62), score 100 ('62), grab 55 boards in a game (11/24/60), along with a total of 7 scoring titles, and 11 rebounding titles. Chamberlain also had career highs of 37.6, 27 rpg ('60), 38.4 ppg, 27.2 rpg ('61), and 44.8 ppg, 24.3 rpg ('63). Those are eye-popping numbers, but ironically, Wilt shrank in the playoffs when it really mattered!!! Wilt's giant stats dropped in the postseason. Chamberlain's regular season career scoring avg. was 30.10 ppg, but his career playoff scoring average was 22.5 ppg!! Wilt was clearly a ball hog, who cared more about his own numbers BEFORE his team's success. This is why he only has 2 rings! He is disqualified as well. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the All-Time Scoring Leader, who also has 6 rings like MJ, but a record 6 League MVPs. However, like Wilt, Kareem's production dropped. Not as much as Wilt, but slightly.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html
That is called putting things in perspective. This is why I CANNOT understand Kareem's ridiculous letter to Scottie Pippen where he degrades Michael Jordan's career and legacy by saying Wilt was greater because of STATISTICS, but fails to mention how Chamberlain ran away in the playoffs. However, he goes on to close out the letter by bringing up Bill Russell's 11 rings and saying THE RING IS THE THING!!! Dude, you brought up stats with Wilt first!! I respect Kareem and love what he did for the game, but he was WAY OUT OF LINE!!! As I eluded to earlier, Wilt had holes in his game, MJ had none. MJ has more scoring records in the regular season and playoffs than Wilt. Jordan faced a larger depth of talent than Wilt did in his time.
Michael Jordan:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html
vs.
Wilt Chamberlain:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html/
Once again, I am putting both stats and rings in perspective, ladies and gentleman. Kareem is not the only one to devalue Jordan's greatness. A sportswriter named Elliott Kalb, aka "Mr. Stats" wrote a book called "Who's Better, Who's Best in Basketball", where he overvalued stats so much that he not only put Wilt ahead of MJ because of that, but he even painfully overrated Shaq and put him as NUMBER 1!!! Nothing but hot garbage!!! When you call yourself, "Mr. Stats" I should not expect more or less anyway. Of all people, he put Shaq no. 1? How could you live with yourself?!! The guy finds every excuse in the book for his case about Shaq, including using numbers from his Orlando & L.A. Lakers years that are not even worthy of putting him there!!! Yes, Shaq was the best in the NBA during his 3-peat years, and Kobe was CLEARLY the sidekick. However, he dominated when Hall of Famers like Hakeem, Robinson, and Ewing, were well past their primes and making their exit. The only guys at his position that he could throw around were Alonzo Mourning, Rik Smits, Sabonis, Shawn Bradley, Mutombo, and Divac. None of these guys could lace the sneakers of guys like Hakeem, & co. Shaq got schooled by Dream in the '95 Finals after leading the league in scoring. O'Neal was also swept in Orlando by the Bulls, who had no HOF Center in '96, and by the Spurs in '99, with Duncan & a past-his-prime Robinson. During the end of his 3-peat run toward '03, when Shaq's weight had begun to expand, it took a toll on his body, which caused his game to slowly decline. Mr. Kalb also glossed over the fact that, like Wilt, he was a TERRIBLE free-throw shooter, and how he missed numerous games because of his lack of conditioning. Shaq has NEVER averaged over 30 ppg, even at his peak with weaker competition. However, he never mentions this at all with him. Diesel is still in my top 10, but at #8.
Here are Shaq's totals:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html
I also learned that Kalb's ranking was done by votes from older writers and older players, which is why he has Bob Cousy & Bob Pettit ahead of Hakeem Olajuwon. How can you look at me with a straight face and say that?!! Yes, both men were great players and pioneers in their own way, but NEITHER can hold a candle to The Dream. When you look at Cousy, he had a HORRIBLE career shooting percentage (37.5 %). Out of a 300 game stretch from '51-'60, Cooz ranked FORTY-SECOND in field goal pct. (37%). Are you kidding me? As for Pettit, yes he is an NBA champ ('58), 2-time MVP ('56, '59), 2-time Scoring Leader, with career averages of 26.4 ppg & 16.2 rpg. However, just like Cousy, he thrived in the pre- Russell, Wilt era, where players where slower, shot too much, shot poorly and could not jump. Once the color of the league started to change with more black players like Wilt, Russ, Elgin, etc. Pettit could not dominate the way he did before. He beat Russell once in the Finals ('58) because Russ was injured, but lost to him three times ('57, '60, '61). He too, like Russell shot within the 44% range. Hakeem was a perfect combination of footwork, athleticism, and quickness. He was a great offensive player who was the best ball handling center of all-time, and he was very well-rounded defensively in shot-blocking, rebounding and steals. He dominated both ends of the court effectively. The best player in the '90s next to MJ. The man had a total of almost 6,000 combined blocks/steals in his career, along with career highs of 27.3 & 27.8 ppg in '94 & '95 with a career high 14 rpg & 4.6 bpg in '90. Not only that, but he RAISED his level of play in the playoffs with 25.9 ppg, 11.2 rpg, 3.3 bpg, .528% shooting. He did all of this while playing against larger competition such as Shaq, Ewing, Admiral, Mailman, Barkley, etc. and beat them all!!!
Hakeem Olajuwon:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/olajuha01.html
Bob Cousy:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/cousybo01.html
Bob Pettit:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pettibo01.html
That book was a poor man's version of Bill Simmons' Book of Basketball at the most and I did not even spend one dime on it and neither should you!
The same thing goes even for football. Joe Montana and Jerry Rice are generally considered the G.O.A.T.s of their position, not just because of rings, but how they performed WHILE leading their teams to those Super Bowl wins. Both Rice and Montana were not only terrific players in the regular season, but they raised their level of play higher in the PLAYOFFS!!! Like Jordan, they turned the heat up when it mattered most. We all know Rice's track record as the Undisputed greatest WR of all-time, because of his multiple records, but he also holds every postseason receiving record. There are those who detract Rice's greatness by saying he was great only because of his QBs (Montana & Young). However, Jerry carried his own weight with his work ethic, conditioning, athleticism, football IQ, and his ability to run the perfect route to separate himself from the defender. Rice's play making was among the best as he could run a short or medium route and turn it into a bigger play for the TD. He knew how to time his route so that he could stop to be in the right position to leap and pull the ball down, whether he was in single or double coverage. If it was all about his Quarterbacks, then John Taylor & Dwight Clark would be at his level as HOFers and All-Pros with his same numbers. Jerry used these same abilities that I have just mentioned to not only win 3 Super Bowls, but to be the most UNSTOPPABLE receiver in each game!!!
Jerry Rice:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RiceJe00.htm
As for Montana, he is the greatest QB of all-time, because he was the perfect combination of post-season & regular season QB as he was not only the best in the Super Bowl, but he also had one of the best regular season winning percentages of all-time (.713). Joe was also extremely accurate and a great decision maker when throwing the football, with his 92.3 QB Rating and 63.2 competition % as proof. The rest of his numbers speak for themselves.
Joe Montana:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MontJo01.htm
This is what separates him from the John Elways and Dan Marinos because, even though both Marino and Elway have more yards & TDs, Joe raised his game further than them in the playoffs, along with outplaying them in the Super Bowl. This does not degrade either player at all, but it is all about putting things in proper order.
Dan Marino:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MariDa00.htm
John Elway:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/E/ElwaJo00.htm
In closing, my point of writing this is to put things in perspective. Statistics and championships should be talked about in moderation. We should not overemphasize stats and awards, because that devalues rings. At the same time, we should not do the same when bringing up rings, because that devalues the rest of a player's resume. Dan Marino, Cris Carter, Karl Malone, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, etc. never won a ring. Does that mean they sucked? No way!!! They just did not win, nor raise their level or their teams level of play to the absolute highest point. Each man is still Hall of Fame worthy. The objective is not only to win, but to play at the highest level in the process while making others better. Jordan did it, Magic did it, Montana and Rice did it as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment