Jordan s teammates criticized Jen Du: There is no need to boast about greatness, don t imply mocking Jordan

The recent remarks of the Bulls Triple Crown member Stacey-King have pushed intergenerational debates in the basketball world to a new level. The center, who once fought side by side with Jordan, mercilessly satirized James and Durant's podcast remarks, dubbing it "Tears in the River for Me" and bluntly stated that "the greatest player in history never needs to repeatedly remind others how great they are."

"Great players will make fans argue about their status and make commentators analyze their achievements on the radio, rather than jumping out and emphasizing 'how good I am.'"

Kin pointed out sharply in an interview, "When players start to promote their greatness everywhere, or even deliberately distinguish between different from others, the problem arises. What they do now is essentially crying and complaining about the outside world's evaluation."

Kin's anger is especially directed at Durant's remarks about "the length of a career is more important than the championship." "He said that he has been playing in the league for more than 20 years, but he never mentioned his load management - he only played 82 regular season games in his entire career (another time in a reduced season), and James has only played 1 time."

Data shows that Jordan attended 82 games in his career, and the competitive attitude behind this attendance rate is exactly the professional spirit that stars in the 1990s praised.

More sharp criticism points to Durant's value in winning the championship. "After leaving the Warriors, he has not proved that he can win the championship without Curry." King named the Nets and the Suns' playoffs loss. "As known as the 'the most unstoppable scorer in history', these are unavoidable missed opportunities."

U.S. media statistics show that during the Warriors' two championships, Durant averaged 28.5 points in the finals, but after leaving, he did not break through the second round, which is in contrast to the title of "super scorer". The core of this debate is the intergenerational cognitive conflict that has lasted for many years in the basketball world. In the 1990s, legendary stars generally took Jordan as the benchmark, emphasizing the championship ring, dominance and competitive nature of the field; while modern superstars such as James and Durant called for recognition of career length, efficiency and comprehensive influence, and tried to redefine the standards of "great".

In fact, the greatness of the three stars has their own dimensions. Jordan's perfect resume of winning all the championships in six finals is still an insurmountable monument; James has maintained his peak form in 20 seasons, crossing three teams with four championships, adapting to the changes from traditional basketball to small ball era; Durant was selected as the All-Star 13 times, scoring champion 4 times, and his real career shooting percentage is 61.3%, and he is a historical offensive efficiency monster.

This debate may never have a standard answer, but Stacey-King's words also remind current stars: great narratives are never written by themselves, but are written by the performance of the arena and historical precipitation.