"That don't mean anything!"-Robert Horry explains why LeBron James doesn't need more rings than Michael Jordan to be the GOAT
LeBron James, Michael Jordan, and Robert Horry
© Tommy Gilligan and RVR Photos - USA TODAY Sports© Bob Donnan-USA TODAY Sports
There is no more significant award in NBA basketball than winning a championship. That's why we judge and applaud players for the number of rings they have and often use that point when debating an individual legacy compared to their rivals. But should that be the case?
MJ vs. LeBron
We hear discussions and debates in the NBA world almost every day, but there is no more extensive argument than the GOAT debate between Michael Jordan and LeBron James. The fans of both superstars will always vouch for their guy, list all their accomplishments, and explain why one is better than the other, creating numerous and often heated arguments.
One of the most brought up points in the MJ vs. LeBron debate is often the Finals record and number of championships. Obviously, Michael is infamous for winning six titles in six Finals trips without a single defeat, while LeBron has a rather underwhelming 4-6 record on the biggest stage. A lot of people disqualify LeBron, for that matter, while others think it's overblown and more of a positive, showing he made it to the Finals more times.
Recommended Articles
7x Champ reacts
Robert Horry is far from the biggest name or star, but he is one of the biggest champions the league has ever seen, winning seven titles during his career. "Big Shot Rob" made a name for himself, being the ultimate role player and X-Factor, often providing for his teams in the clutch and being a massive part of his teams' championship runs.
But still being the multi-time champion he is, Horry doesn't believe rings equal greatness. In a conversation with TMZ a few years ago, Robert got asked if LeBron will become the GOAT if he surpasses MJ's ring count:
"No, cause that don't mean anything...That don't mean anything. That's why it's a team sport... They measure great players by how many championships they win when that's the stupidest thing ever. That's like saying Karl Malone and Charles Barkley are not great players. All these others idiots who don't play basketball and who have never played basketball wanna judge a guy's greatness by his number of championships. They're idiots."
Robert Horry, TMZ
Horry really went in and made a good point. Greats like Charles, Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Iverson, and others never managed to win it all, but they are still considered great. Although the number of rings you have should play a part in how your legacy is viewed, it shouldn't play such a huge factor as it does, at least in Horry's eyes.
