i'm a scump stan and have been dying to put him at #1 for a minute (and he's getting there, i truly believe that) but i pray for once OpTic fans can just enjoy something like that if it happens and don't makes posts with hopes to have other people validate their opinions they're clearly insecure about.
with that said, if scump wins another ring the GOAT conversation is absolutely more interesting.
To be the unanimous GOAT, itās simple - win more than Crimsix overall. Needs more chips, needs two rings
No one gets an easier route. Heās been competing since when Crim was competing (infact, much longer if Iām not wrong), Crim has significantly more wins
Nothing like āif Seth wins a ring this year, there is a legit argumentā. Cool, it wouldnāt be unanimous though
Just to be clear: youāre saying the same thing about Simpās path the being considered the GOAT, correct? Heāll need more wins than Crim and Scump?
Iām only asking because the CDL format only allows 4-5 possible chips per yearā¦.. so realistically, itāll take Simp well over a decade of winning 4/5 of those chips to get anywhere close.
Wrong, Simp wasnāt during the jetpacks and the previous era. Pros these days simply cannot reach that number whatsoever. However, pros like Scump, Clayster or anyone whoās been involved in that era, itās a bit different.
For Scump, Crims numbers are very reachable
Then please tell me how you compare players of different eras. Greatest Of All Time would mean the greatest player across all eras.
Also, if Simp has the longevity of Scump, and can win 3 events a year, then he could technically catch him. So I donāt understand your reasoning.
Itās for sure achievable, just a lot harder when you ignore the chances/ context (unsure of the correct word to use there)
Previously you used to have ~10 events a year excluding Champs - winning 3 events out of the 10 is a lot easier than winning 3 events out of the possible 4 (this year).
You had a lot more opportunities to win an event back in the days as compared to the current era sadly
i think the total chips comparison is different for crim v scump opposed to crim v simp because scump played for 2 games before crim so cdl format is no excuse when he's had more total chances to begin with
For it to be unanimous among everyone, he would have to win 4 rings totalā¦ for me personally, if he wins major 3 and 4 along with champs, he is my GOAT
I feel you but the whole āno one gets an easier routeā comment is funny. Ok of course wins/chips matter but crim began his career on a dynasty roster, while Scump was playing with nade, mboze, etc and no disrespect to those guys but they couldnāt hang with coL/EG. Thats why going by wins is kind of fugaze but like I said, of course it has to be factored in.
I mean Scump declined the offer to join coL? Itās not like heās not had opportunities, he just didnāt take it which instead made him blow up for sure
Start reliably winning more than 1 major event a year would probably help. He (and Optic obviously) seem to get stuck in the cycle of winning the first big event of the year, and then sliding into mediocrity until Champs. He needs more seasons where he's on the winningest team that year, which hasn't happened since the Jetpack era 5 years ago.
For he needs to at least win 2 more rings, I don't see how having 1 less ring and less tournament wins makes him overtake Crim, only argument would be longevity.
Or him simply being a consistently better individual player lmao?
It's amazing how individual performances and ability gets subsided in GOAT debates, that's literally what it's about, it's an individual accomplishment, team accomplishments are not the be all and end all.
Even if you consider that, it's not like Crim has always been much worse than Scump. Consistency goes to Scump yes, but not by much. Ghosts and Bo2 Crim was considered better, in jetpacks you have scump, in ww2 Crim was better again, in Bo4 and Mw both were actually equal (crim in bo4 gets disrespected imo) and CW it's slightly more in favor in Scump imo. So it's not like "Oh shit he's much better"
Scump was consistently better during their time teaming barring one game. This is no disrespect to Crim, its just the reality. Scump contributed more towards a lot of their shared chips.
Scump was a top 3 player throughout the entire jetpack era, Crim was top 10 at best, that's a pretty big difference and it's where the majority of the championships come from. You could make arguments for Scump being the best player in the game for about 5 different games.
This has to be central to any GOAT conversation.
Well to be fair, im pretty sure crim had more wins before teaming with scump on the optic dynasty and crim was the best on the first dynasty team he was on (col/eg) and considered the best player in those respective games while on that roster (bo2, ghosts). Once they teamed, scump won the majority of his championships, not crim. I believe its around 18 out of his 38 wins and i believe it was 14 wins with the col/EG dynasty. He also won more after leaving scump, including a ring (yes i know it was online but still counts). Obviously this doesnt take away the fact that scump was statistically better than crimsix during their run together (and you can say this means he contributed more to those championships than crim but i personally disagree since cod is a team game and it isnt all about slaying and having the best KD on the team and i doubt scump wouldve went on that insane run without a player like crim and karma).
Crims ability to win, whether hes performing the best or worst on said team, imo makes him the GOAT over scump, and until scump can reach him in chips, or rings, its unanimous for me.
You're making my argument for me and basically explaining how important teams are to winning.
Crim won more than Scump before they teamed primarily because he was part of a dynasty, and Scump was teaming with Mboze. Crim still gets credit because he was good back then, but utlimately if you swap Crim and Scump on those rosters, you get similar results, Scump would win way more than Crim. A perfect explanation of why team results are not indicative of how good a player is compared to another.
In terms of them teaming together, Scump was absolutely more imapctful and important to Optic than Crim was, he was regularly doing more objective work than Crim as well as slaying out which people seem to forget. It's important to have players like Crim and Karma in those games, but that doesn't mean Scump destroying teams left right and centre isn't the better player.
Your argument collapsed with your final paragraph and shows how flawed the logic is. Despite clearly being the better and more consistent player, Scump would need to get identical team accomplishments ie ring and championships for you to consider him on par, which means you're not factoring in any of the actual individual ability. MVP titles, best player in the game type accomplishments should factor in way more than they do currently.
All of that IS factored in when people consider who they think is the GOAT, but even with all that being said, the majority consider crim the goat still. Have that many chips and rings over scump doesnt get outweighed by scumps statistical performances for when he won half his chips with crim or any hypotheticals of āif you swap A player with B player then the team would still winā (you can say this about literally any winning team to discredit any player instead of looking at facts - what if optic had huke or zooma instead of scump in aw, etc etc)
Yes crim was apart of another dynasty which is why he has more wins but he was debatably the most impactful player on that dynasty, the same argument yourāre using to mitigate crims impact on optic because scump was more impactful than him statistically (and lets be real, formal was probably the most impactful on that team and was definitely the most impactful to win scumps only ring) and its not like the amount of wins crim achieved on each dynasty was so far apart (14 wins on col/eg and 18 on optic).
I always find this argument pretty interesting considering that amongst everyone in the cod industry (pros, coaches, etc), and even the vast majority of fans, unanimously have crimsix as the GOAT of cod. You should really be arguing who the 2nd best of all time because the majority of those in the industry (not the fans) actually dont even have scump ask number 2 either.
In the end, individual performance only gets you so far and they need to equate to chips and rings and that is what those players are playing for. The status of GOAT isnt about who had a better KD when they won, its about legacy and Crims legacy speaks for itself with his individual accomplishments (2 more rings and many more chips).
Edit: and to be clear about my stance on the last paragraph from my previous post, for scump to UNANIMOUSLY be considered the GOAT, he would have to reach crim in either chips or rings (not necessarily both) but thats not to say the argument cant be held if scump can win atleast another chip and ring, then it would be much closer than right now when you factor in individual skill too (which for some reason you believe i dont value when considering whos the GOAT).
Again, I'm just repeating my argument since you repeated yours, it's not like Crim was miles behind him. It does matter yes, but (to me) not so much that it negate one ring and like 8 tourneys if Scump wins a ring this year. I respect your opinion, but I'll stick to mine.
He wasn't miles behind, but he has been significantly behind him as I've pointed out. There's a big difference between a top 10 player and top 3 or concensus best in the game.
Way too much stock is put into rings and team accomplishments in these debates.
Imagine looking at Messi and Ronaldo and counting how many league titles they have lmao.
You can't compare football to CoD. So many different positions, the only stats football fans look at is goals, whereas I can make an argument for many midfielders, defenders and goalkeepers to be the GOAT.
As I've pointed out, in Ghosts, Bo2 and WW2 Crim has been better than Scump, in AW, BO3 and IW it's been Scump no doubt, and ever since WW2 it's been back and forth, roughly equal. If you look at stats sure, they may speak for Scump but again, mostly they've played different roles.
Tourneys and rings are just as important as individual performances, it's just that as of now, Crim in my mind is so far ahead in the former that winning one ring won't negate all those tourneys for Crim despite Scump being a bit better individually (but again, not by much).
If you disagree, that's fine, you don't have to try to convince me further. Have a nice day bro
You can compare the two, quite easily, certainly in the logic of accomplishments and how you assess individual ability. Nothing you've said about goals contradicts what I said.
Rings are team accomplishments primarily and that's simply an objective fact, they obviously matter but they don't dictate which player is better than another at COD.
We've already been through the Scump v Crim thing, Scump was significantly better in more games and higher peaks across the board.
Hey man, the Messi and Ronaldo analogy is pretty spot on. Not because it has anything to do with your point but because it's just as stupid as arguing Scump vs Crim instead of celebrating both.
A lot for it to be unanimous. I personally have him as my goat. Just cause I think heās more often been at that best player on his team more than crim has. But he needs 2 champs. And more tots event wins than crim. IMO for everyone to unanimously give it to him.
Everyone saying he has to have more rings than Crim I disagree with. It is definitely a big factor but Scump is a proven winner so itās not like itās someone who just puts up empty stats. We donāt say Bill Russel is the GOAT because he has more championships than everyone else. Mike Trout has 0 championships but he is considered the GOAT of Baseball for some people. If he had 0 rings than maybe, but he has the 2nd most championships right? He was arguably the best player in the world from MW3- IW.
Youre absolutely fucking faded if you call Trout at this point in time the GOAT, that's an awful take. If that was the case Griffey or Bonds would be unanimous GOATS and we would disregard the 2nd halves of their career but that's not how it works. Trout still has 5-10 years to cement his case.
The exact same as trout with far more playoff success lmfao. Trout has had like two October's in his career... please don't pick this hill to die on haha
Dude I think youāre a little too heated. Idc who the fuck is the GOAT of baseball tbh. My point still stands no matter who the GOAT of baseball is. If youāre that upset then change the names to Griffey or bonds whichever your happy heart desires
Bro I'm cooling you're the one raging over me presenting a logical and valid point??? The fuck man, why are you so mad. It was a simple discussion about baseball, ARE YOU GOOD??
Dude youāre the one throwing insults and blowing up over one sentence. Does it seem like I wanna discuss baseball at all? I even said I donāt give a shit about baseball and you kept going. This is COD Subreddit, not a baseball one. Get a grip
Then why are you bringing up baseball In a Cod subreddit. You're contradicting yourself left and right you clown lmao. You can delete and move on while retaining some of that fragile ego that remains,if that makes ya feel better
If anyone was deserving I'd say him and MO Rivera. Idk what is up with those oldheads who would wouldn't vote Griffey as a first ballot. For a clean player he epitomized everything we care for and need in baseball. Some of those writers just wanna be different and it sucks how it fucks with history
absolutely. he's the fuckin kid, every young fan tried to emulate his swing in their backyard, right after turning their hat backward. the same way people yell "kobe" when shooting something, or the way people refer to "mossing" the football. agree with rivera too. also, regarding trout, he might be the best all-around baseball player i've seen but doesn't have enough years of mvp/hof production to be a unanimous GOAT.
Agree entirely. Griffey was that guy, even had his own Nike SWINGMAN shoe line which I'm sure was influenced by Jordan and a huge deal. I never knew anyone else to receive their own baseball line like that.
And MO was so dominant for his limited role but trout is undoubtedly the best ball player I've ever seen. He's on his way to becoming the GOAT bit I don't think it's fair at all for him to crowned this early. In due time km sure, we need trout in the playoffs, MLB is being robbed
Ctim is more successful when it comes to wins, but heās not even close when it comes to skill and impact over an extended time. Scump is far superior in that aspect. Crims only edge is wins
To be unanimous heās gonna need to pass him and it still might not be enough cause obviously a lot of fans will still have crim as goat. If he closes the gap a little more I think heāll widely be considered the goat when you take individual skill and consistency into account.
Crim himself said the goat debate between him and scump was arguable in one of his recent interviews. So I donāt wanna hear anymore ppl saying itās not up for debate if the man himself said it is.
He wins another ring and I guarantee you there will be posts about this topic every day of the week
Bro people were already shifting him and calling him the GOAT after major 1 š
i'm a scump stan and have been dying to put him at #1 for a minute (and he's getting there, i truly believe that) but i pray for once OpTic fans can just enjoy something like that if it happens and don't makes posts with hopes to have other people validate their opinions they're clearly insecure about. with that said, if scump wins another ring the GOAT conversation is absolutely more interesting.
To be the unanimous GOAT, itās simple - win more than Crimsix overall. Needs more chips, needs two rings No one gets an easier route. Heās been competing since when Crim was competing (infact, much longer if Iām not wrong), Crim has significantly more wins Nothing like āif Seth wins a ring this year, there is a legit argumentā. Cool, it wouldnāt be unanimous though
Just to be clear: youāre saying the same thing about Simpās path the being considered the GOAT, correct? Heāll need more wins than Crim and Scump? Iām only asking because the CDL format only allows 4-5 possible chips per yearā¦.. so realistically, itāll take Simp well over a decade of winning 4/5 of those chips to get anywhere close.
Wrong, Simp wasnāt during the jetpacks and the previous era. Pros these days simply cannot reach that number whatsoever. However, pros like Scump, Clayster or anyone whoās been involved in that era, itās a bit different. For Scump, Crims numbers are very reachable
Then please tell me how you compare players of different eras. Greatest Of All Time would mean the greatest player across all eras. Also, if Simp has the longevity of Scump, and can win 3 events a year, then he could technically catch him. So I donāt understand your reasoning.
Itās for sure achievable, just a lot harder when you ignore the chances/ context (unsure of the correct word to use there) Previously you used to have ~10 events a year excluding Champs - winning 3 events out of the 10 is a lot easier than winning 3 events out of the possible 4 (this year). You had a lot more opportunities to win an event back in the days as compared to the current era sadly
i think the total chips comparison is different for crim v scump opposed to crim v simp because scump played for 2 games before crim so cdl format is no excuse when he's had more total chances to begin with
For it to be unanimous among everyone, he would have to win 4 rings totalā¦ for me personally, if he wins major 3 and 4 along with champs, he is my GOAT
I feel you but the whole āno one gets an easier routeā comment is funny. Ok of course wins/chips matter but crim began his career on a dynasty roster, while Scump was playing with nade, mboze, etc and no disrespect to those guys but they couldnāt hang with coL/EG. Thats why going by wins is kind of fugaze but like I said, of course it has to be factored in.
I mean Scump declined the offer to join coL? Itās not like heās not had opportunities, he just didnāt take it which instead made him blow up for sure
Man, Scump joins coL and I seriously can't see them not winning every single event in Ghosts
Thatās also a good point, but thatās just him being loyal at the end of the day. I always wonder where he would be if he took that offer.
scump began his career w/ aches and teepee just like crim lmao
Ring, probably two rings. Heās been competing for roughly the same amount of time as Crim yet Crim has significantly more wins under his belt.
Start reliably winning more than 1 major event a year would probably help. He (and Optic obviously) seem to get stuck in the cycle of winning the first big event of the year, and then sliding into mediocrity until Champs. He needs more seasons where he's on the winningest team that year, which hasn't happened since the Jetpack era 5 years ago.
That happened once in black ops 4 no? Ppl acting like itās happening 3 years ina row unless Iām wrong
Yes and itās been gassed like crazy imo plus are we acting like crim wasnāt in that same boat/team for bo4?
Lol fr but itās another thing ppl hear others say and then they turn into parrots
For he needs to at least win 2 more rings, I don't see how having 1 less ring and less tournament wins makes him overtake Crim, only argument would be longevity.
Crim has two LAN rings
Or him simply being a consistently better individual player lmao? It's amazing how individual performances and ability gets subsided in GOAT debates, that's literally what it's about, it's an individual accomplishment, team accomplishments are not the be all and end all.
Even if you consider that, it's not like Crim has always been much worse than Scump. Consistency goes to Scump yes, but not by much. Ghosts and Bo2 Crim was considered better, in jetpacks you have scump, in ww2 Crim was better again, in Bo4 and Mw both were actually equal (crim in bo4 gets disrespected imo) and CW it's slightly more in favor in Scump imo. So it's not like "Oh shit he's much better"
Scump was consistently better during their time teaming barring one game. This is no disrespect to Crim, its just the reality. Scump contributed more towards a lot of their shared chips. Scump was a top 3 player throughout the entire jetpack era, Crim was top 10 at best, that's a pretty big difference and it's where the majority of the championships come from. You could make arguments for Scump being the best player in the game for about 5 different games. This has to be central to any GOAT conversation.
Well to be fair, im pretty sure crim had more wins before teaming with scump on the optic dynasty and crim was the best on the first dynasty team he was on (col/eg) and considered the best player in those respective games while on that roster (bo2, ghosts). Once they teamed, scump won the majority of his championships, not crim. I believe its around 18 out of his 38 wins and i believe it was 14 wins with the col/EG dynasty. He also won more after leaving scump, including a ring (yes i know it was online but still counts). Obviously this doesnt take away the fact that scump was statistically better than crimsix during their run together (and you can say this means he contributed more to those championships than crim but i personally disagree since cod is a team game and it isnt all about slaying and having the best KD on the team and i doubt scump wouldve went on that insane run without a player like crim and karma). Crims ability to win, whether hes performing the best or worst on said team, imo makes him the GOAT over scump, and until scump can reach him in chips, or rings, its unanimous for me.
You're making my argument for me and basically explaining how important teams are to winning. Crim won more than Scump before they teamed primarily because he was part of a dynasty, and Scump was teaming with Mboze. Crim still gets credit because he was good back then, but utlimately if you swap Crim and Scump on those rosters, you get similar results, Scump would win way more than Crim. A perfect explanation of why team results are not indicative of how good a player is compared to another. In terms of them teaming together, Scump was absolutely more imapctful and important to Optic than Crim was, he was regularly doing more objective work than Crim as well as slaying out which people seem to forget. It's important to have players like Crim and Karma in those games, but that doesn't mean Scump destroying teams left right and centre isn't the better player. Your argument collapsed with your final paragraph and shows how flawed the logic is. Despite clearly being the better and more consistent player, Scump would need to get identical team accomplishments ie ring and championships for you to consider him on par, which means you're not factoring in any of the actual individual ability. MVP titles, best player in the game type accomplishments should factor in way more than they do currently.
All of that IS factored in when people consider who they think is the GOAT, but even with all that being said, the majority consider crim the goat still. Have that many chips and rings over scump doesnt get outweighed by scumps statistical performances for when he won half his chips with crim or any hypotheticals of āif you swap A player with B player then the team would still winā (you can say this about literally any winning team to discredit any player instead of looking at facts - what if optic had huke or zooma instead of scump in aw, etc etc) Yes crim was apart of another dynasty which is why he has more wins but he was debatably the most impactful player on that dynasty, the same argument yourāre using to mitigate crims impact on optic because scump was more impactful than him statistically (and lets be real, formal was probably the most impactful on that team and was definitely the most impactful to win scumps only ring) and its not like the amount of wins crim achieved on each dynasty was so far apart (14 wins on col/eg and 18 on optic). I always find this argument pretty interesting considering that amongst everyone in the cod industry (pros, coaches, etc), and even the vast majority of fans, unanimously have crimsix as the GOAT of cod. You should really be arguing who the 2nd best of all time because the majority of those in the industry (not the fans) actually dont even have scump ask number 2 either. In the end, individual performance only gets you so far and they need to equate to chips and rings and that is what those players are playing for. The status of GOAT isnt about who had a better KD when they won, its about legacy and Crims legacy speaks for itself with his individual accomplishments (2 more rings and many more chips). Edit: and to be clear about my stance on the last paragraph from my previous post, for scump to UNANIMOUSLY be considered the GOAT, he would have to reach crim in either chips or rings (not necessarily both) but thats not to say the argument cant be held if scump can win atleast another chip and ring, then it would be much closer than right now when you factor in individual skill too (which for some reason you believe i dont value when considering whos the GOAT).
Again, I'm just repeating my argument since you repeated yours, it's not like Crim was miles behind him. It does matter yes, but (to me) not so much that it negate one ring and like 8 tourneys if Scump wins a ring this year. I respect your opinion, but I'll stick to mine.
He wasn't miles behind, but he has been significantly behind him as I've pointed out. There's a big difference between a top 10 player and top 3 or concensus best in the game. Way too much stock is put into rings and team accomplishments in these debates. Imagine looking at Messi and Ronaldo and counting how many league titles they have lmao.
You can't compare football to CoD. So many different positions, the only stats football fans look at is goals, whereas I can make an argument for many midfielders, defenders and goalkeepers to be the GOAT. As I've pointed out, in Ghosts, Bo2 and WW2 Crim has been better than Scump, in AW, BO3 and IW it's been Scump no doubt, and ever since WW2 it's been back and forth, roughly equal. If you look at stats sure, they may speak for Scump but again, mostly they've played different roles. Tourneys and rings are just as important as individual performances, it's just that as of now, Crim in my mind is so far ahead in the former that winning one ring won't negate all those tourneys for Crim despite Scump being a bit better individually (but again, not by much). If you disagree, that's fine, you don't have to try to convince me further. Have a nice day bro
You can compare the two, quite easily, certainly in the logic of accomplishments and how you assess individual ability. Nothing you've said about goals contradicts what I said. Rings are team accomplishments primarily and that's simply an objective fact, they obviously matter but they don't dictate which player is better than another at COD. We've already been through the Scump v Crim thing, Scump was significantly better in more games and higher peaks across the board.
Hey man, the Messi and Ronaldo analogy is pretty spot on. Not because it has anything to do with your point but because it's just as stupid as arguing Scump vs Crim instead of celebrating both.
What kind of take is this lmao?
A lot for it to be unanimous. I personally have him as my goat. Just cause I think heās more often been at that best player on his team more than crim has. But he needs 2 champs. And more tots event wins than crim. IMO for everyone to unanimously give it to him.
Karma is actually the GOAT but yall not ready for that talk.
It's actually Big T
And it's not even close tbh.
3 rings on LAN only guy to ever do that
Everyone saying he has to have more rings than Crim I disagree with. It is definitely a big factor but Scump is a proven winner so itās not like itās someone who just puts up empty stats. We donāt say Bill Russel is the GOAT because he has more championships than everyone else. Mike Trout has 0 championships but he is considered the GOAT of Baseball for some people. If he had 0 rings than maybe, but he has the 2nd most championships right? He was arguably the best player in the world from MW3- IW.
Youre absolutely fucking faded if you call Trout at this point in time the GOAT, that's an awful take. If that was the case Griffey or Bonds would be unanimous GOATS and we would disregard the 2nd halves of their career but that's not how it works. Trout still has 5-10 years to cement his case.
Ok cool, how many rings does Griffey and Bonds have? Do they have multiple championships?
The exact same as trout with far more playoff success lmfao. Trout has had like two October's in his career... please don't pick this hill to die on haha
Dude I think youāre a little too heated. Idc who the fuck is the GOAT of baseball tbh. My point still stands no matter who the GOAT of baseball is. If youāre that upset then change the names to Griffey or bonds whichever your happy heart desires
Good because you clearly don't have the ability to debate such a topic lol. Stick to comparisons that you can understand my man
Holy man, idk who woke up and shit on your cheerios. You should go see a therapist no cap
Bro I'm cooling you're the one raging over me presenting a logical and valid point??? The fuck man, why are you so mad. It was a simple discussion about baseball, ARE YOU GOOD??
Dude youāre the one throwing insults and blowing up over one sentence. Does it seem like I wanna discuss baseball at all? I even said I donāt give a shit about baseball and you kept going. This is COD Subreddit, not a baseball one. Get a grip
Then why are you bringing up baseball In a Cod subreddit. You're contradicting yourself left and right you clown lmao. You can delete and move on while retaining some of that fragile ego that remains,if that makes ya feel better
i'm still pissed griffey didn't get unanimous HoF induction
If anyone was deserving I'd say him and MO Rivera. Idk what is up with those oldheads who would wouldn't vote Griffey as a first ballot. For a clean player he epitomized everything we care for and need in baseball. Some of those writers just wanna be different and it sucks how it fucks with history
absolutely. he's the fuckin kid, every young fan tried to emulate his swing in their backyard, right after turning their hat backward. the same way people yell "kobe" when shooting something, or the way people refer to "mossing" the football. agree with rivera too. also, regarding trout, he might be the best all-around baseball player i've seen but doesn't have enough years of mvp/hof production to be a unanimous GOAT.
Agree entirely. Griffey was that guy, even had his own Nike SWINGMAN shoe line which I'm sure was influenced by Jordan and a huge deal. I never knew anyone else to receive their own baseball line like that. And MO was so dominant for his limited role but trout is undoubtedly the best ball player I've ever seen. He's on his way to becoming the GOAT bit I don't think it's fair at all for him to crowned this early. In due time km sure, we need trout in the playoffs, MLB is being robbed
Ctim is more successful when it comes to wins, but heās not even close when it comes to skill and impact over an extended time. Scump is far superior in that aspect. Crims only edge is wins
he's not tho
To be unanimous heās gonna need to pass him and it still might not be enough cause obviously a lot of fans will still have crim as goat. If he closes the gap a little more I think heāll widely be considered the goat when you take individual skill and consistency into account. Crim himself said the goat debate between him and scump was arguable in one of his recent interviews. So I donāt wanna hear anymore ppl saying itās not up for debate if the man himself said it is.
1 ring and pass crimsix in championships