Trojan 24
Veteran
Shaq and Kareem were better than kobe though...if lakers had a choice they would have kept shaq and got rid of kobe back in 04 05
But they did have a choice and Buss chose Kobe
Shaq and Kareem were better than kobe though...if lakers had a choice they would have kept shaq and got rid of kobe back in 04 05
I want to know when did rings become so heavily weighed in judging player's career. Until recently, being a ringless great player didn't have any stigma on a player's accolades, nor prevent them from being considered a great. it's what they did night in and night out, the way they played that they will be remembered. Now it's like"they HAVE to win a ring", in order for someone to be considered great? HA! Yeah right.
and da other idiots at ESPN who cosigned him for pushin dat nonsense.But they did have a choice and Buss chose Kobe
Doesn't mean a damn thing. Everyone's situation is different.
If KG never leaves the Wolves, he's seen as a perennial loser, much like Melo and T-Mac.
You can't have it both ways. You can't judge a player largely by team success (rings), but then ask said player to remain loyal as opposed to seeking out the best situation for him to attain team success.
The guys who've stayed in one city typically were in a great situation to begin with. A larger market attractive to free agents and they always had talent around them. Wade in the post-Shaq years prior to 2010 is probably the one exception.