Everytime I see someone say "Well he has a ring!" Last time I checked you are part of a team so if you play on a team that isn't that good how are you expected to win a championship? Oh that's right you should use free agency to go to a countender and screw loyalty right! This is B.S. just because a player has a ring doesn't make him better then someone with out one! IT IS A TEAM SPORT! Show me someone who can win a game all by himself! MJ need 4 other guys on the court!
2007-06-18 07:37:06 · 9 answers · asked by mrjamfy 4 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Here is 1 I just thought of! So based upon championships are the determining factor in a players greatness then Robert Horry is one of the best NBA players in history! Hell he is better then Bird, Robinson, Olajuwon, Magic oh yeah he is better then those guys because he has 6 rings right! LOL This a prime example. Or better yet he is better then Tracy Mcgrady (who hasn't won any at this point!)
2007-06-18 08:06:42 · update #1
Once again rings don't make the player! There is way tomuch hype about this postseason pressure. Now that is B.S.! I know from my personal experiences in college baseball! I was a closer and you don't get much more pressure then that in any sport! So once again rings are only hardware thay don't make the player great!
2007-06-19 01:19:17 · update #2
Because they listen to the idiots on ESPN. If Chris Berman said "Wow, Paul Byrd is one of the best pitchers in baseball" when clearly he is not, you would see a bunch of bandwagon Paul Byrd fans.
The best case of this is Dan Marino. No SB ring and he owns the QB record book. My favorite player, Joe Montana, is the guy people usually say was the best of all time. The fact he had ten times more talent surrounding him and half the numbers of Marino but more rings says a lot about his situation.
Make your own opinion people. Then have it actually make some sort of sense.
2007-06-18 09:36:56 · answer #1 · answered by Nick S 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because winning championships is a widely accepted index of how productive a team is; when a guy is on several of these teams, it is not usually a coincidence. When you are gunning for the biggest prize in your sport, you almost always have to get a win in a building where there are a lot of people pulling for you to lose. How you deal with the pressure to win makes you a champion or a choke artist.
True enough, there are plenty of great players without rings. They are winners, but not champions. You wanted the truth, but you can't handle the truth! Championship rings are the greatest measure of a pro athlete's success. Deal with it, punk. . . .
2007-06-18 14:54:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There have been many great players who have never won a championship. When it comes to identifying real greatness, those who know do not consider the number of championships won. Play the game hard and have fun. However, the real purpose of competition is to win and you really can't blame a player who may use free agency to move to a contender.
2007-06-18 14:48:46 · answer #3 · answered by ThePerfectStranger 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I couldn't agree more.
If we based greatness in baseball on the number of championships won, then the Hall of Fame would have members like Johnny Murphy, Art Jorgens, Tommy Byrne and Billy Johnson. Having a title is great if you're a major contributor, but no single player in baseball can win a championship by themselves.
2007-06-18 14:42:56 · answer #4 · answered by Craig S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they use to base greatness of a player if he was the man on multiple championship winning teams.jordan was the man on great teams.bird,magic and so on.people throw these words around like if they use em enough they get money back or somethin.i think everyone agrees dan marino is a great q.b. even though he didnt win the big one.it definately doesnt mean trent dilfer is better,or ben roethlisberger is.i think in their case people say that just to raise eyebrows.or kind of an 'óh yeah but'.its pretty childish really.everybody needs a good team around em.
2007-06-18 15:16:31 · answer #5 · answered by mike hunt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some people do base their opinions of greatness on championships. I don't. Ernie Banks was one of the greatest and never won a ring. I look at their career statistics and how much they contributed to their teams.
2007-06-18 15:14:47 · answer #6 · answered by dwmatty19 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
PRESSURE... players like Derek Jeter know bout what its like when your in the playoffs compared to regular season... hes 1 player that can bring morale to a team n change a teams season... u can say its bullshit but that wont change the fact that hes got 4 rings
2007-06-18 21:49:40 · answer #7 · answered by K.G. 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
One of the best modern players (Arod) will never get a ring (because I have cursed him), but he can't be judged as a player because of the failure of the team he plays for (mostly caused by his agent's greed), but for what he does to contribute to baseball lore and history.
2007-06-18 14:46:20 · answer #8 · answered by brettj666 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's easier than thinking.
2007-06-18 14:43:22 · answer #9 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋