Durant will retire w more points and rings than bron

[HabitualChiller]

KD isn't catching Bron in points and idk how you even came up with that idea. Bron is gonna average at least 22ppg for the next 3 years and that's with me assuming that his points are going to drop off because of how many options the team has. If this Lakers experiment goes as planned and there are 2 elite playmakers on the court at any given time, then his numbers will look similar to last season if not better.

 

[NYC Rebel]

..To answer your question, because its disingenuous.

You didnt drconstruct anything I stated.

 

[Miggs]

getting to the final and losing>>>>>>not getting to the finals at all

....it doesn't make sense to give someone extra credit because they lost earlier in their playoff run than someone who made it to the final round and lost

Im not giving either credit...

 

[Miggs]

Historians aren't going to reevaluate shyt. Championships are a team accomplishment. Has nothing to do with who the better individual player is. KD could end up being on 10 championship teams and he will still never be better than Lebron.

If KD wins 5-6 more and a few of those arent with the Warriors and his stats hold up over the next 5-6 years as a 1st team all NBA he will go over LeBron as long as Bron doesnt win anything else...Too early to say its impossible but he cant over him just winning titles on a stacked unbeatable team...

 

[CodeBlaMeVi]

KD is a better individual player than Steph.

I don’t know. Steph put KD on that Summer Jam screen plenty of times.

 

[Darealtwo1]

replying to yourself?

did you forget to log off your burner account Kevin?

asain thoughts has about 3-4 accounts on here replying to himself, giving him himself rep and coli cash on a daily basis

 

[Loose]

For the first time in history nikkas are devaluing rings and dismissing them as asterisk rings smh.

nikkas dont care about Robert horrys rings

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

nikkas dont care about Robert horrys rings

Or Steve Kerr's. But they wasn't allstars.

 

[JYoung24]

Resume aside, player for player KD not fukkin wit Lebron as a player bruh. And deep down even he knows that.
I ont care how much dude pads his resume riding the coattails of that already established potential dynasty, on the most fundamental level he's just not better. That's an opinion, but it's more along the lines of a factual one.

He is better then lebron

 

[JYoung24]

KD is a better individual player than Steph.

No hes not

 

[Guile]

He is better then lebron

No hes not

You think Steph is better than KD and LeBron?

 

[rbksNgirbauds]

He is better then lebron

Player for player? I disagree.
Why u feel that way tho?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Or Steve Kerr's. But they wasn't allstars.

No one counts Sam Jones, Havlicek, Worthy, or Pippen rings either.

People claimed the '99 Spurs were an asterisk title because shortened season, the '00 and '02 Lakers were asterisk titles because of reffing controversies, the '12 Heat were an asterisk title because of a shortened season, the '15 Warriors were an asterisk title because everyone got injured that year...claiming this was the first time that anyone has devalued a ring is ridiculous.

Remind me when Russell gets as much credit for his rings as MJ, when Havlicek gets as much credit for his rings as Kobe, when Pippen's 1991-1998 rings count as much as Kobe's 2000 ring, etc.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

No one counts Sam Jones, Havlicek, Worthy, or Pippen rings either.

Sure they do.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Made up a new stat? You brought up the overall losses. I brought up the overall wins to show the actual winning percentage. Nothing is made up.

Looks like you're the one making up things now. Kobe went from 15 losses per your own post to now 13 to change the win percentage and put bron in a better light. You wanted to look at overall career losses, now you don't.

I didn't bring up overall losses, I think that's a stupid argument. fifth column is the one that brought up that argument, I was just showing it was a stupid argument because plenty of other all-time greats have lost more.

I also didn't bring up percentage, you did, and I used the same method to show why it is a dumb argument.

Literally no one had ever brought up these arguments before LeBron. No one ever said that Kareem or Kobe had failed to win a title in too many seasons, even though they had done both more often than LeBron. No one ever calculated Hakeem's % of championship seasons and claimed that in the abstract without context that that number somehow graded him as a player.

The main problem is that LeBron's accomplishments have far surpassed what you wanted him to do, so now you gotta move the goalposts to all sorts of new crap in order to try to devalue him.

Truth is that there is only 1 player with more Finals MVPs than LeBron, and that's MJ. There are only 3 players with more regular-season MVPs than LeBron, and that number might be 1 or 0 by the time he's done. LeBron has the most 1st-team All-NBA selections ever, will probably have the most All-NBA selections ever total, will win the most playoff games ever, has the most playoff points ever, will have the most regular season points ever, and will go down as one of the most athletic players in history, one of the most intelligent players in history, one of the greatest passers in history, and one of the most versatile players in history, and is already a consensus top-3 player.

So go ahead and keep juelzing up new criteria to try to devalue him on. Ya'all already lost that race and you know it.

Sure they do.

Show me where the consensus has shown that Havlicek > Kobe because 8 > 5.

Show me where anyone claims Worthy > Hakeem cause 3 > 2.

And so on. It's a dumb argument.