Best Player to Wear #5?

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by Mattsanity

Your passive aggressiveness is amusing.

and your aggressive aggressiveness is not - who says you get to come into a conversation like this and say it's ridiculous or tell us how we should conduct these threads? make your own thread

[Mattsanity]

Originally Posted by e-monk

and your aggressive aggressiveness is not - who says you get to come into a conversation like this and say it's ridiculous or tell us how we should conduct these threads? takes a lot of nerve I'd say

oh lawd. just remember that I wasn't the one who initiated our argument in this thread.

[e-monk]

Originally Posted by Mattsanity

oh lawd. just remember that I wasn't the one who initiated our argument in this thread.

who is arguing? there is a monkey in a cage, I poke him with a stick, he screeches in response - this is not arguing

[Mattsanity]

Originally Posted by e-monk

who is arguing? there is a monkey in a cage, I poke him with a stick, he screeches in response - this is not arguing

ahhh for once, I admit you got me. I got mixed up with this thread and that #3 thread. I was referring to the #3 thread. they're both good threads made by the T/S.

[Najee]

Originally Posted by Mattsanity

this poll should be based on their whole career. otherwise, it's ridiculous because you're cancelling out a chunk of their career just for wearing another number at the time.

Then it changes the context of the threads, which goes from "Who was the greatest player ever to wear that number?" to the generic "Who was the greatest player of all time?"-type of thread.

And the context is what makes the debate interesting. It also can dovetail into other discussions ("Who was the greatest player ever to wear No. 6 in his career?" "Why didn't LeBron James pick a number not famously associated with other players?").

[e-monk]

that's what I said

[Najee]

I said the same thing to Jamel Irief earlier today. I'm also applying the same statement to Mattsanity.

[Mattsanity]

Originally Posted by Najee

I said the same thing to Jamel Irief earlier today. I'm also applying the same statement to Mattsanity.

that's great. now these series of threads will be fully understood.

[GrandKenyon6]

This is quite easily Jason Kidd.

KG was #21 in his prime and Paul Pierce was the best player on that championship team. There's a difference between best player and most important player. KG was that team's most important player, but Pierce was its best player.

[Basel]

On to #6.

[doctordrizzay]

Robert Horry has 7 rings, so by Kobe Bryant fans logic...he is the Best. Voted for him based on Laker fan logic.

[King Joseus]

[Basel]

Originally Posted by doctordrizzay

Robert Horry has 7 rings, so by Kobe Bryant fans logic...he is the Best. Voted for him based on Laker fan logic.

Well Laker fan logic is the best logic there is, so you made the right choice. Robert Horry > Michael Jordan and was also more clutch, too. Robert Horry also should've been the one who said "Not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7..." as that would've made a lot more sense than that loser LeBron who only has 1 ring. Lmao.

[Jace]

I knew one of the Horrys was the Dr.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by Mattsanity

Garnett. If Kidd won MVP in 2002, which he should've in my opinion, then I would've probably chose him.

Oh no! Are people really approaching this, and player career assessment overall, this way? Who cares about the accolades voted on by writers? If he had a great season, he had a great season. It doesn't need to be validated by an award.