OMG -- we actually agree on something! A few days ago Robby and I were talking about how Peyton Manning and Dan Marino are easily two of the best QBs of all time, and he said it shouldn't matter that they happen to have one and zero rings, respectively, because one player can't control the fate of the whole team -- especially in football. Bingo! For quite some time, I'd been thinking exactly the same thing, and wondering how serious sports minds could possibly buy into this hogwash.
The whole nonsense about championship rings -- and it's come to a head in recent weeks in the conversations about LeBron and Kobe and D-Wade -- is a farce. People say A-Rod wasn't a real Yankee until last year, when he finally won a ring. This logic is not only ridiculous; it also misses the point that A-Rod will never be a real anything -- ring or no ring. Hello? These are team sports we're talking about. One player doesn't win. If you've got a roster filled with names like Kanehl and Cannizzaro and Throneberry, it doesn't matter if you're Ted Williams; you're not going to the World Series.
Ernie Banks is often mentioned as the best baseball player to never win a championship. Hey, Ernie Banks was one of the best shortstops in baseball history, period -- end of sentence. Is Derek Jeter better than Ernie Banks because he's got five rings? No way. Luckier, yes: Jeter plays for the Yanks; Banks played for the Cubs. The curse of the Cubs wasn't his fault. Was John Elway chopped liver until he won his first Super Bowl at age 38 -- and then all of a sudden he became great? Will LeBron be a better player when he wins in Miami (which I hate to admit, he undoubtedly will) than he was when he failed in Cleveland? Not for my money; he just came up with a better, if more cynical, strategy. The only individual whose value can, and should, be judged by the number of rings he has, is the general manager -- the guy who actually puts together the team. Or maybe the owner, who gives the GM the bucks to work with.
These days the Elias Sports Bureau can measure every infinitesmal factor in performance, from offensive winning percentage to batting average on balls in play to plus/minus points when Joe Blow is in the game . . . and we're still judging a player's worth by the number of rings he's got on his fingers??? That whole idea is as ludicrous as the positively inane idea that one particular pitcher on a team, and only that one pitcher -- The Closer -- can pitch the ninth inning of a tight game when a lead needs to be protected. What a crock! And yes, I'll be talking about that one real soon . . .
- Hank
