I think you cannot compare first option rings to 2nd option rings.

Just like rings winning as a role player like Jason Kidd in 2011 doesn't mean he was better than Prime John Stockton, or other ring less point guards.

Winning an NBA Finals MVP is also better than winning a ring as a 2nd scoring option. first options gets double or triple teams while 2nd scoring options gets some easy baskets unless they are bricking some easy midrange shots.

[QUOTE=Lebron23;14749690]

Winning an NBA Finals MVP is also better than winning a ring as a 2nd scoring option. [/QUOTE]

Nice hot take

[QUOTE=Lebron23;14749690]Just like rings winning as a role player like Jason Kidd in 2011 doesn't mean he was better than Prime John Stockton, or other ring less point guards.

Winning an NBA Finals MVP is also better than winning a ring as a 2nd scoring option. first options gets double or triple teams while 2nd scoring options gets some easy baskets unless they are bricking some easy midrange shots.[/QUOTE]

Kidd led the Mavs in assists. He ran their offense. Rings as a starter counts.

He is above Stockton. Did you forget that he came 2nd in MVP voting? Did Stockton ever come close to that? He also led the Nets to the Finals twice, equalling or even surpassing Stockton's achievements with Utah. He's not too shabby on assists either.

It's a ring as a bench player that normally shouldn't count. There are a few exceptions, like Ray Allen. That 4-point play was exactly why he was on that team, and he delivered.

FMVP doesn't necessarily mean you were the best player or the #1 option.

KB '01
Rip Hamilton or Ben Wallace '04
TD '07
KG '08
Steph '15
Davis '20

Didn't win FMVPs but were the best players in those Playoff runs. I'm sure there's more from past eras but these instantly come into mind.

Also, about "2nd option", are we pretending that anything outside of scoring doesn't count? Ben Wallace was the MVP of the Pistons in 2004. In fact, he finished 7th in MVP voting. The FMVP was a "2nd option".

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14749695]FMVP doesn't necessarily mean you were the best player or the #1 option.

[B][U]KB '01[/U][/B]
Rip Hamilton or Ben Wallace '04
TD '07
KG '08
Steph '15
[B][U]Davis '20[/U][/B]

Didn't win FMVPs but were the best players in those Playoff runs. I'm sure there's more from past eras but these instantly come into mind.[/QUOTE]

:roll:

[QUOTE=Lebron23;14749690]Just like rings winning as a role player like Jason Kidd in 2011 doesn't mean he was better than Prime John Stockton, or other ring less point guards.

Winning an NBA Finals MVP is also better than winning a ring as a 2nd scoring option. first options gets double or triple teams while 2nd scoring options gets some easy baskets unless they are bricking some easy midrange shots.[/QUOTE]

I'm glad you finally admit that Jordan is ranked above Bronie.

For the math challenged, 6 FMVP, three-peating twice, in 15 years is head and shoulders above 4 FMVP in 20 years despite jumping to stacked super teams.

Now this is the ground breaking analysis I come to ISH for. I had a feeling first option rings meant more than 2nd option ones, but OP's in depth breakdown really put things into perspective.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;14749695]FMVP doesn't necessarily mean you were the best player or the #1 option.

KB '01
Rip Hamilton or Ben Wallace '04
TD '07
KG '08
Steph '15
Davis '20

Didn't win FMVPs but were the best players in those Playoff runs. I'm sure there's more from past eras but these instantly come into mind.[/QUOTE]

Agreed but Billups was their best player bro. Ben Wallace was a liability offensively. Billups scored, distributed and was a better defender at his position than RIP. The rest I agree with. But 1 / 1b rings aren’t the same as sidekick rings. That’s why for me Kobe’s count as an alpha level superstar is at 4 honestly.

Kidd's ring with Dallas means absolutely nothing to me in how his career is evaluated. Ditto for say Payton's ring with Miami.

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749742]Agreed but Billups was their best player bro. Ben Wallace was a liability offensively. Billups scored, distributed and was a better defender at his position than RIP. The rest I agree with. But 1 / 1b rings aren’t the same as sidekick rings. That’s why for me Kobe’s count as an alpha level superstar is at 4 honestly.[/QUOTE]

Naming Rip as the best player is LOL worthy.

I think OP is referring to tiers for the HOF.

Past decades if you were considered an ALL-Star it meant something .. and that put you at a different tier as a fan and media.
today an All-Star has less value ... is put in a resume' / but bearing is less weight.

IN the HOF .. you ae either a HOF'er or you are not.
I believe it is one of the reasons why the Hall created top 50 and top 75 to define that upper tier.

Dwight's only ring with the lakers was just a free lunch.

[QUOTE=Axe;14749751]Dwight's only ring with the lakers was just a free lunch.[/QUOTE]
With that said he was good off the bench

[QUOTE=basketballcat;14749694]Kidd led the Mavs in assists. He ran their offense. Rings as a starter counts.

He is above Stockton. Did you forget that he came 2nd in MVP voting? Did Stockton ever come close to that? He also led the Nets to the Finals twice, equalling or even surpassing Stockton's achievements with Utah. He's not too shabby on assists either.

It's a ring as a bench player that normally shouldn't count. There are a few exceptions, like Ray Allen. That 4-point play was exactly why he was on that team, and he delivered.[/QUOTE]

I'll take Stockton. Not even close ring or not