A dunk is like the holy grail of basketball plays.
And herein lies the philosophical difference of opinion.
To me, this is just very naive, lacking in appreciation for the true meaning of the game, view.
Holy grail of basketball plays?
How? The result was simply two points. How are two points scored on a dunk any more meaningful than two point scored on beautiful ball-movement, leading to a "mundane" weak-side, wide open layup?
I'm far more impressed with the latter.
I'm not expecting to you to agree with that statement. I love dunks. Something about players getting all the way to the rim and throwing it down with anger. It's like a legal taunt. It brings energy. It fires up the team. It fires ME up. Especially oops.
Regardless - whether you agree or not - JT getting in the way constitutes him as getting owned. No questions asked. He fell down and was the victim of a LeBron dunk. No, not nearly as devastating as the Knight dunk, but owned nonetheless
EDIT: How ignorant. Just because I love dunks, and you don't agree - I lack "appreciation for the true meaning of the game"?
Lets get philosophical, then. What
is the true meaning of the game, Socrates? Do you expect your answer to that question to be universal? What a joke