The comment reduced the whole argument purley to number of rings, disregarding any other context. It’s right there in black and white.

Then you reinterpret it with paragraphs of context you presume to know he “meant”, but I missed?

Jordan played 35 Finals games… never once got more than 5 steals on the biggest stage - 7 ring Horry did. Horry GOAT? Or could selective context to prove a predetermined point be a bit silly?