Are Rings Overrated?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Z_Wipf
    SBR MVP
    • 01-15-10
    • 1131

    #1
    Are Rings Overrated?
    When you talk about how good a player is you always talk about how many rings they have. Am I the only one who thinks it's a bad way to judge individual accomplishments? You can't hold that they had a bad team against a player.
  • THE PROFIT
    SBR Posting Legend
    • 11-27-09
    • 17701

    #2
    But with the way sports works, if he's that good a championship caliber team will pay for him
    Comment
    • acarmelo1
      SBR Hall of Famer
      • 09-29-09
      • 6321

      #3
      what do you mean overrated? They are made of Pure Gold and Diamonds they are really underrated. If you are a good player, you will make up for your sucky team.
      Comment
      • BGS 9.5
        SBR MVP
        • 01-10-08
        • 4628

        #4
        Ask Dan Marino and Barkley this question
        Comment
        • Doug
          SBR Hall of Famer
          • 08-10-05
          • 6324

          #5
          there certainly is a luck factor in getting rings.
          Comment
          • jjgold
            SBR Aristocracy
            • 07-20-05
            • 388179

            #6
            I guess a little overrated, depends on what team you play on.

            Each player is different
            Comment
            • keyboarding
              SBR Hall of Famer
              • 07-30-09
              • 6817

              #7
              I don't think anyone even brings rings into the discussion unless you're already talking about a highly skilled/accomplished player.
              Comment
              • Z_Wipf
                SBR MVP
                • 01-15-10
                • 1131

                #8
                Originally posted by keyboarding
                I don't think anyone even brings rings into the discussion unless you're already talking about a highly skilled/accomplished player.

                But like in Lebron's case people say he isnt great because he hasn't done anything yet. I think it's a little unfair to put the blame on him. But like someone said Barkley and Marino never got a ring because in their prime their teams sucked. I guess it goes back to when Rodney Harrison and T.O. were going at it and Harrisons only comeback was that he had rings and T.O. never will. It's lame. Your team won, not you. I'd rather be a great player and never win a championship
                Comment
                • poochiecollins
                  SBR MVP
                  • 01-27-09
                  • 1782

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Z_Wipf
                  When you talk about how good a player is you always talk about how many rings they have. Am I the only one who thinks it's a bad way to judge individual accomplishments? You can't hold that they had a bad team against a player.
                  In rating player performance, absolutely. The impact an individual player has on a team varies from sport to sport, as well as luck, and a player cannot currently have a higher impact on the game than the rest of the team collectively in either of the three major American team sports. Many stars can significantly increase their chances of winning by taking a dramatic pay cut, but why should they be expected to? It's also nice sometimes to see a star stay on a team because they grew up in the area or some similar sentimental reason, and they shouldn't be pressured to do otherwise over superficial judging.

                  Judging players by championships won is generally lazy and unintelligent.
                  Comment
                  Search
                  Collapse
                  SBR Contests
                  Collapse
                  Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                  Collapse
                  Working...