If Rings make you the best ?

Question

then i guess we can say this is the top 5 players off all time


# 1 Bill Russell (11)

# 2 Sam Jones (10)

# 3 (tie) KC Jones Tom Sanders John Havlicek (8)

# 4 (tie) Robert Horry Frank Ramsey Jim Loscutoff (7)

# 5 (tie) Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Michael Jordan Scottie Pippen Bob Cousy


Honorable Mentions (tied for 6th place) * 5 Rings

Magic Johnson

George Mikan

Dennis Rodman

Ron Harper

Steve Kerr

Don Nelson

Michael Cooper

Larry Siegfried

Slater Martin

Jim Pollard

Vern Mikkelsen

Additional Details

the point im trying to make is its not how many you win its how you win

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

Rings are what makes you legend, but as you showed you can't determine the "skills" or "best" just using rings, you have to take into considerations such as skills, leadership, importance of that player, and other records and accomplishments. It's the mixture of all of these that makes a player great.

EDIT: But let me ask you this, if Michael Jordan never won a ring, would you still consider him GOAT?

Source(s):

MC

Answer 2

Rings only show what you've accomplished, not how skilled you are. Patrick Ewing never got a ring, but he's one of the best Centers of all time. Look at Horry however, he's called the "ring-man", but is he really that good of a player? I guess ring only shows how smart of a player you are in choosing which team to go with. Russell however, the best ever.

Edit: As to your response on "how to win", well, not really. Did Robert Horry really contribute that much to the Spurs or Lakers? I mean, a game winning shot is nice, but consistency? I mean, I'm willing to bet that if Jordan never had Pippen and Rodman there, he wouldn't have gotten rings either. So as to "how they win", that's questionable in many cases, especially for those with rings, but never did anything.

Answer 3

You're right. "Rings" aren't everything. I can't stand when someone mention "rings" when having a who's better debate.
______________________________________…
Sorry Nickster, Gary Payton has a "ring"..

Source(s):

2006 NBA Finals

Answer 4

When teams win rings, it is because each individual on that certain team played their role in order to accomplish that one amazing goal.

You can have half-way decent players (Robert Horry) win rings simply due to the fact that he was in the right place at the right time, but at the same time AMAZING athletes seem to miss out on the Finals year in and year out because they don't have the greatest supporting cast. Take MJ23 for instance, he recieved help from the likes of B.J. Armstrong, Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant, Steve Kerr, Cartwright, Paxson, Harper, and so on. However; with all this help Jordan was still able to LEAD his team year after year after year with his determination and hardworking attitude.
Players like Lebron James, Chris Paul, or Carmelo Anthony are amazing and their stats/awards/All-NBA team selections say so, but until they get that infamous "ring"....they cannot put themselves on the same page as the greats of this game.

So it is true that just because you have the ring, doesn't make you the greatest.

Answer 5

championship ring on top of a players individual awards would make you one of the best. you cant say CP3 is the best ever player judging by his stats last season and this season or even Lebron because NBA season doesn't end in a regular season. post season separate the great players from a good players when they hold a championship trophy in June.

if Jordan didn't win a ring, he wouldn't have 6 NBA Finals MVP. i doubt if he would win 5 NBA MVP. Jordan was destined to win a championship. it was just a matter of when.

Answer 6

What up Desp,

Rings aren't everything... but in the mindset of a professional basketball player(s) they should be everything. If you had a plan to play in the NBA for 10 years- your mindset should be i'm going to win 10 rings.

It is rare that a ring is based on just one player. You are right that Robert Horry may not be a "hall-of-fame" even an all-star caliber player- but the guy has ice water in his veins with the game on the line- and would be considered one of the best post-season players of all-time.

Your point is well made that it's not how many- but it's how you win. And stats alone don't determine everything. There are some all-time greats who have never won a ring: ie: Karl Malone, John Stockton, Pistol Pete Maravich, Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, Gary Payton, Reggie Miller, etc.

Are we really going to argue that Eddie House is better than Patrick Ewing or Charles Barkley because he has more rings???

I think when we are talking about the all-time greats and we try to separate them from one another- that is a valid thing to bring into the argument.

For example in the '80s when you had that Bird/Magic rivalry- Larry wil always talk about how Magic won more rings than him. Because they cared more about winning that ring- than winning individual accolades along the way- though they collected their fair share of those.

You can't go on stats alone- but in separating greatness rings do matter. And all the Gary Paytons, Patrick Ewings, etc. (might trade some of that individual glory) for a ring.

Nickster