The Championship only counts if you win Finals MVP?

[MalikX]

No LeBron stans. Y'all nikkas are retarded.

This logic gets levied everyday against Kobe yet I never see it used against other players when we talk about their legacies.

How does this logic apply to Kareem who has 6 rings and only 2 FMVPs. Does that mean 4 of his rings don't count? (Don't reply to this thread without answering this)

Does Stephen Curry have no rings considering Igoudala took home the MVP that Finals?

 

[MalikX]

Watch nikkas answer not a single question and come in here on some Juelz gif shyt

 

[Wavy Hair Chipped Teeth]

SHUT UP YOU fakkit

 

[King Jove]

no but being the best player with the best performance in an nba finals win means a little bit something more legacy wise or comparing greats.

it's the difference between the robert horry's and the dirk nowitzki's

 

[inndaskKy]

Does Stephen Curry have no rings considering Igoudala took home the MVP that Finals?

Yes, that's correct. And also because they couldn't beat them when they were healthy the next year. (Bogut was insignificant)

 

[letti cook]

arguments like these were all created to defend the honor of

no matter what, nikkas will always point to 6 for 6 in the finals, 6 finals mvps...its the standard

so no matter how many rings and final appearances Lebron grabs they gone him for that finals record and he bet not let Kyrie get an mvp
Kobe got cause Shaq got them first 3 finals mvps

whoever comes from the throne gotta get pass them standards. Is what it is

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

A chip is a chip. Players don't care about that other shyt. But on this message board and individual legacies, yes it matters...to a certain degree. Let's say a Pippen stan argues he's better than kobe because he has more rings...now what

 

[MalikX]

Yes, that's correct. And also because they couldn't beat them when they were healthy the next year. (Bogut was insignificant)

Now answer the question on Kareem Abdul
Jabbar.

He has 6 championships and 2 finals mvps. He's widely considered a top 3-4 player all time by all basketball heads. Using this same silly logic, he's only led his team to 2 rings. The other 4 times he was "carried" by whoever won MVP. Why is this logic not used on him? Explain the discrepancy. If you win 2 FMVPs on 5 rings, you're a bum but if you win 2 FMVPs on 6 rings (which is worse), you're not a bum and considered top 3 all time? Explain that breakdown in logic

 

[Mad Good Dro]

When trying to argue a player is better because of rings yes being the best player on your team in the finals matters

Is pippen better than kobe?

 

[inndaskKy]

Now answer the question on Kareem Abdul
Jabbar.

He has 6 championships and 2 finals mvps. He's widely considered a top 3-4 player all time by all basketball heads. Using this same silly logic, he's only led his team to 2 rings. The other 4 times he was "carried" by whoever won MVP. Why is this logic not used on him? Explain the discrepancy. If you win 2 FMVPs on 5 rings, you're a bum but if you win 2 FMVPs on 6 rings (which is worse), you're not a bum and considered top 3 all time? Explain that breakdown in logic

I'm not part of that discussion playboy. I'm just here to shyt on the warriors.

But Kareem is a real champion and makes his teammates better

 

[MalikX]

A chip is a chip. Players don't care about that other shyt. But on this message board and individual legacies, yes it matters...to a certain degree. Let's say a Pippen stan argues he's better than kobe because he has more rings...now what

So why don't we use it when we compare Kareem to Jordan or Duncan? They both have more Finals MVP. That "logic" has only been used on Kobe. No one else.

 

[Dame Dash's Motor Oil]

Of course it counts even without the FMVP. However, it's still an important distinction and achievement. More often than not (1981-Cedric Maxwell, 2015-Iguodala) , it means you were the best player in the world at the most important time of the season, when everyone tries their absolute hardest. Players know that too and they value the award very much. You think Kobe was happy with 3 rings and 0 FMVPs, then why all that beef with Shaq? Nah, he wanted a championship of a Kobe-led team, he wanted to lift the Finals MVP trophy too. I remember reading somewhere that Kareem was a little mad at Magic getting the award in 1980 just off the strength of his Game 6 performance. So if the players give a shyt, we should too.

 

[WMG the 2nd]

Y'all nikkas and Stan war vets are fukkin stupid

 

[letti cook]

So why don't we use it when we compare Kareem to Jordan or Duncan? They both have more Finals MVP. That "logic" has only been used on Kobe. No one else.

CAUSE NO ONE COMPARES KAREEM AND TIM TO JORDAN....KOBE AND LEBRON. IT ONLY APPLIES TO THEM

AND STEPH CAUGHT IT CAUSE PEOPLE JUMPED THE GUN AND TRIED TO LUMP HIM IN WITH JORDAN AFTER 2 YEARS

 

[FS4LFE]

No LeBron stans. Y'all nikkas are retarded.

This logic gets levied everyday against Kobe yet I never see it used against other players when we talk about their legacies.

How does this logic apply to Kareem who has 6 rings and only 2 FMVPs. Does that mean 4 of his rings don't count? (Don't reply to this thread without answering this)

Does Stephen Curry have no rings considering Igoudala took home the MVP that Finals?

So you/y'all saying if Wade won a FMVP next to Bron or if Kyrie won last year or in the future, it wouldnt be used as a knock against LeBron?