This is 2010Shaq post

Are we talking quality or are we talking numbers ?

Boosie said better artist so we must be talking quality and aspects of being an artist and prince easily takes the cake for that

But they literally did do it

I haven't looked into the story but it seems like Kelly is a scumbag but i'd agree as i've heard his music and writing for others he is pretty top tier

but prince is the blueprint and remains untouched.

If you wanna go for self produced stats. Prince sold 100m+ self produced records.

Idk how much Kelly collaborated but his sits at less than that.

Prince had hits for over 2 decades too.

Boosie himself was confusing. He started saying "more hits than MJ, Prince, etc" but then went on to say he was a better artist. The thread turned from better artist to more hits overall too. lol

Deserves to be punched in the face.

i'm not saying that and it's more complicated...

but with MJ there is s*** Kelly did more consistently that he didn't.

With Prince, he did everything Kelly did and did it at a bigger, more influential level.

I just don't see how you could even begin to make an argument for Kelly over Prince other than subjective taste. At least with MJ if you're a writer/producer-head you could pick Kelly by that metric (not saying you'd be right too and MJ wrote tracks like Billie Jean)

Is Drake more talented than Andre 3000?

Is Adele more talented than Drake?

Where do you draw the line with that if you only going by stats and hits with no other metrics...

For me Andre 3000 would win over both in talent cos he made influential R&B+hip hop, was a GOAT rapper and did some amazing self-production but on paper is probably the least successful. People who only dedicate themselves to making hits for the mainstream might have more hits. But there's other roles an artist can play. And in the case of MJ he was bringing a lot of people together to make that catalogue happen. Prince valued his self expression, experimentation and writing differently. That means he was always going to have less hits. Does that make people like him and 3k worst artists by default?

I know I was just being funny. But some people really do think that just because you write/produce all that it makes you better for whatever reason.

If you making s*** music and do it all yourself then nah that's not impressive.

But if you have 2 decades of hits with very little help, yeah that does make you more talented almost undeniably and if you've put out consistent hits like Prince, that's very impressive. Prince went down as an influential GOAT in 3-4 categories. That's nuts.

It doesn't make your catalogue better but as an individual person it does mean you've contributed more to music. Prince's most iconic songs are his creations, for a lot of other people their most iconic songs were created by Max Martin or whoever else.

If Ye had put out his whole discog with no help are you not saying you'd be a little more impressed with his talent? It's just common sense that that makes someone even more impressive. Not coming for ye with that he's a goat on solo productions alone but just using as a hypothetical example to show the logic.

When talking about GOATs it depends if you talking about what we know about their artist projects or what we know about them as artists. There is a difference. MJ the musician is Michael. MJ the artist project is quincy rod temperton and whoever else and michael all working together to create something.

Some of the worst opinions I’ve ever seen in life sprinkled across the thread