the hype man in the back is how i envision CN every time harlem/apalisoc makes a post
1. Babe Ruth
2. Michael Jordan
3. Wayne Gretzky
4. Pele
5. Jerry Rice
the hype man in the back is how i envision CN every time harlem/apalisoc makes a post
He said "MJ>Kobe>TD>LeBRONZE"
You're right, it is what it is but I'm also free to speculate his place among the all-time greats by analyzing stuff like that. Its the same way I would analyze Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds. They wouldn't put up those HR numbers had they played in the dead ball era or one where there was stringint testing for PHD's. Or that football players from different eras likely wouldn't leave the same legacy had they played: A. with an integrated sport and B: With bigger faster and stronger players and without the leather helmets.
The eras are set in stone but not the rankings. That's why its always better to compare by eras.
But he was still dominant. Being dominant simply means he had no compe ion, and at any level, whether you're that much better or they are that much worse, the "domination" aspect comes from the differential, not from the absolute value of Wilt's skills.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)