If an NBA player doesn't win a ring, should you not enjoy watching him?

[FTBS]

Some nikkas are truly unable to to appreciate a player for what he is without crowning him GOAT and aligning themselves with him. So the moment a player comes along who is comparable or even better they can't just sit back an enjoy that player as well. They have to look to team accomplishments or imaginery lists in order to preserve their guys spot. And sadly I am not exaggerating.

 

[NYC Rebel]

You couldn't even enjoy Steph Curry's performance last week :what1:

Me in bold

@Bigchee_Stop comparing him then RT @BSports Curry's performance was great, but it doesn't compare to two magical Michael Jordan games in losses

I swear....it's as if people want to find a reason for you to NOT appreciate something.

 

[Luke Cage]

i would enjoy watching him at the time. but 10 years later im not gonna be super excited to relive some random regular season game. so it basically comes down to playoffs in the end. but that doesn't mean i won't enjoy watching the players playoff performances. it just means that everytime i see karl malone or charles barkley play, im only seeing them lose against MJ over and over. I watch iverson play against the laker from time and i awknowlege his greatness but i only get to see him win 1 game before being dominated by the shaq and kobe.

If we talking about a great player who never even made the playoffs they pretty much get forgotten.

 

[RedBull]

Who says that we should not enjoy watching a player if he's ringless? What is that about? I've never heard such a thing. Are you asking "should a player be held to lower standard because he never won a ring?"

 

[NYC Rebel]

It shouldn't stop from appreciating the individual greatness of a player, I think no one in their right mind can say that Barkley, Ewing or Malone were not great players...but

Niqqa....fukk all of that "but" shyt.

Why can't a niqqa just stop there?

 

[NYC Rebel]

i would enjoy watching him at the time. but 10 years later im not gonna be super excited to relive some random regular season game. so it basically comes down to playoffs in the end. but that doesn't mean i won't enjoy watching the players playoff performances. it just means that everytime i see karl malone or charles barkley play, im only seeing them lose against MJ over and over.

10 years from now...you're going to reflect on the body of work he did in those games as opposed to a players rings.

Niqqas don't watch replays of MJ crying over the trophy. His greatness came out of the body of work he did in the regular season.

A lot of this shyt is new age. MJ's 63 point game was enjoyed for the purity of dominance. Doing that shyt today invites scrutiny if doing so in a loss.

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

I don't know, it looked too pure :playahata:

Nah, I was more than , I can't deny good entertainment when I see it that Curry show reminded me of Kobe in his younger days.

 

[mbewane]

Niqqa....fukk all of that "but" shyt.

Why can't a niqqa just stop there?

What's wrong with a balanced answer was just expanding on WHY it always comes up and how regular deep playoffs runs almost count more to me than total amount rings.

The point was: No, not winning a ring should not stop from enjoying watching a player.

 

[TheNig]

Agreed.....

I swear...we rob ourselves of enjoyment by placing these rules on players rather than simply enjoying what they do.

Trust me....you don't want to be the guy realizing how special a ringless athlete was AFTER he's retired.

Absolutely. Two of my biggest examples are Jim Kelly and Charles Barkley. Kelly ran the shyt outta that four WR set back in the day and you I'm not even gonna talk about Barkley. But becuz they didn't win the big one they are considered less than their peers.

 

[Tuc2DaBoot]

Yes... and unfortunately no.

Because the NBA is dominated by superstars, some fans of these superstars will form arguments to down fans of other players strictly by the ring talk. Not necessarily a Jordan/Kobe thing (which people do use that argument a LOT with), but more with players playing against each other. Ever since Bron got his ring, a lot of his fans clown Melo, Howard, etc. for not winning one. Hell, some are starting to even clown Durant a bit.

Hate it or love it, not having a ring is important to those who like their players because they DO win rings. The haves and have-nots.

 

[NYC Rebel]

What's wrong with a balanced answer was just expanding on WHY it always comes up and how regular deep playoffs runs almost count more to me than total amount rings.

The point was: No, not winning a ring should not stop from enjoying watching a player.

There's nothing balanced about that.

The answer should be found if you solely enjoy watching an athlete in his prime playing better than most you've ever seen. So what if he's ringless.

It's as if I shouldn't enjoy the vince Carter thread because he's going to retire ringless and did those dunks in the regular season.

I shouldn't enjoy it because he didn't overcome some artificial bar????

 

[Luke Cage]

10 years from now...you're going to reflect on the body of work he did in those games as opposed to a players rings.

Niqqas don't watch replays of MJ crying over the trophy. His greatness came out of the body of work he did in the regular season.

A lot of this shyt is new age. MJ's 63 point game was enjoyed for the purity of dominance. Doing that shyt today invites scrutiny if doing so in a loss.

its not a matter of opinion i stated fact. look at any minimovie or documentary about any nba teams season. they usually skim through the regular 82 game season in 30 minutes and then cover the playoffs for another 30 minutes or more depending on the length of the movie.

think about that 82 reg season games is = less than 30 playoff games. Playoffs are always more memorable because it only the best teams included. If a great reg season player always fails to perform against the best teams. it takes away from their legacy. they dont have to get a ring but they at least have to be a threat come post season.

 

[NYC Rebel]

Yes... and unfortunately no.

Because the NBA is dominated by superstars, some fans of these superstars will form arguments to down fans of other players strictly by the ring talk. Not necessarily a Jordan/Kobe thing (which people do use that argument a LOT with), but more with players playing against each other. Ever since Bron got his ring, a lot of his fans clown Melo, Howard, etc. for not winning one. Hell, some are starting to even clown Durant a bit.

Hate it or love it, not having a ring is important to those who like their players because they DO win rings. The haves and have-nots.

A ring shouldn't mean shyt to your sports enjoyment. It means something to the players....but what am I watching sports for? Should I not find entertainment in an athlete because he may not win a ring?

 

[King Poetic]

if he had 2 or 3 other teammates who where all-stars and didn't win.. i'll label him a waste of talent.. if he's a one man show say lebron in cleveland or kobe befor gasol got there i say no



side note ::
nope.. barry bonds is my favorite baseball player and it didn't bother me he never won a championship... since he only bats 4 times a game and he usually walks 3 out of 4 times

 

[mbewane]

There's nothing balanced about that.

The answer should be found if you solely enjoy watching an athlete in his prime playing better than most you've ever seen. So what if he's ringless.

It's as if I shouldn't enjoy the vince Carter thread because he's going to retire ringless and did those dunks in the regular season.

I shouldn't enjoy it because he didn't overcome some artificial bar????

Breh, sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but what I'm really saying is exactly what you're saying. I don't care if a player is ringless, shyt I grew up watching the 90s Knicks