Do you value superteam rings the same as any other championship?

PassMeTheBall · Post #1 » by **PassMeTheBall** » Thu May 2, 2024 8:46 pm

Do you view for example the 2012-2013 Heat & 2017-2018 Warriors rings the same as let's say the 1995 Rockets title or 2003 Spurs title?

BooomBaby · Post #2 » by **BooomBaby** » Thu May 2, 2024 8:48 pm

They count the same, so yes.

Dominator83 · Post #3 » by **Dominator83** » Thu May 2, 2024 8:57 pm

They all count. But of course there's levels are different. Like Lebron's signature championship is by far the Cleveland one.

Post #4 » by **Harry Garris** » Thu May 2, 2024 8:58 pm

Why does it matter how I value them individually? I think what matters is how the NBA fanbase views them as a whole. It's the entire fanbase that serves as the basis for this concept of legacy to come out of.

Raps in 4 · Post #5 » by **Raps in 4** » Thu May 2, 2024 8:59 pm

No. Durant's 2 rings mean nothing to me. I rank Dirk and KG ahead of him in my all-time rankings. LeBron's Miami titles are also pretty worthless (but he's won on other teams too, which salvages his legacy).

CS707 · Post #6 » by **CS707** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:01 pm

I value them more. Look how hard it is to put together a successful super team. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

One_and_Done · Post #7 » by **One_and_Done** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:09 pm

They're all equally meaningless in rating players.

Post #8 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:10 pm

I mean we are going to need to pictures of said rings to judge which one is prettier mate. Help us out here.

ellobo · Post #9 » by **ellobo** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:11 pm

I don't even acknowledge the concept of super teams. A team is a team, regardless of how it was assembled.

And to me, a championship is a championship, regardless of who is on the winning team, who they beat, or any other circumstances (like injuries, strike years, or the bubble).

ballzboyee · Post #10 » by **ballzboyee** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:14 pm

I don't really hold anything against those players for collectively trying to win championships. If the CBA allows two or three max or near max contract guys to team-up while at the same time these franchises can maintain a decent roster on the back end, then the players are smarter than the system, and they deserve the props. That's just game theory. The object is to win. Lebron was intelligent for taking advantage of that window. It's a copy cat league, and Durant quickly did the same thing teaming up with Curry. I just look at it as an era in basketball. The new CBA probably killed superteams, and as time passes I think how people perceive those teams will shift toward a more historical perspective related how the league was run as the time. The league probably should have never allowed it to occur in the first place, but it did. You can't blame the players. Blame the league. Now they have corrected it.

PD28 · Post #11 » by **PD28** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:15 pm

All rings are rings but personally, I think some rings are more respected than others. Ex. 2011 Mavs

JRoy · Post #12 » by **JRoy** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:17 pm

No.

Not a fan of the Superfriends.

brackdan70 · Post #13 » by **brackdan70** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:18 pm

Rings is Rings.

Swish1906 · Post #14 » by **Swish1906** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:23 pm

Some rings have more value and respect, the best example is Dirks.

When someone asks me what I would rank higher, this one ring or the two of the stupid Durant Warriors superteam, my answer would be of course Dirks.

Some rings have also a harder path than others (opponents, injuries in the series etc)

makubesu · Post #15 » by **makubesu** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:27 pm

I won because my teammates were good > I win because Jordan was playing baseball

PassMeTheBall · Post #16 » by **PassMeTheBall** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:32 pm

makubesu wrote:I won because my teammates were good > I win because Jordan was playing baseball

You do realize Rockets were the 6th seed & had to go through Stockton/Malone, Barkley/Johnson, Robinson/Rodman & Shaq/Penny in the Finals all without home court advantage.

KGtabake · Post #17 » by **KGtabake** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:41 pm

No.
To me the rings of Olajuwon in '94, of the Pistons in '04, of Nowitzki in '11, of the Spurs in '14, of Steph in '15, of Giannis in '21 and of Jokic last season weigh significantly more than the others.
Simply put, if these players(or these teams) didn't/don't win ever again it doesn't matter.
Their legacy is set.

thejigglyroom · Post #18 » by **thejigglyroom** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:47 pm

Me as a Warriors fan enjoyed watching the team win its titles and value them as what they are. NBA titles. Had fun at the parades and still go back and watch the games from time to time. I couldn’t give 2 F’s what fans from other teams think about them. They’re irrelevant to my enjoyment.

NZB2323 · Post #19 » by **NZB2323** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:47 pm

I think we can use context for a player winning a ring.

Hakeem winning a ring in 94 is more impressive to me than Durant winning a ring in 17.

It’s a pretty big reason to rank Hakeem over Durant. Compare the teammates they had when they won it all.

One_and_Done · Post #20 » by **One_and_Done** » Thu May 2, 2024 9:47 pm

KGtabake wrote:No.
To me the rings of Olajuwon in '94, of the Pistons in '04, of Nowitzki in '11, of the Spurs in '14, of Steph in '15, of Giannis in '21 and of Jokic last season weigh significantly more than the others.
Simply put, if these players(or these teams) didn't/don't win ever again it doesn't matter.
Their legacy is set.

Duncan in 03 had to carry his team much more than those guys.