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

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14749759]I'll take Stockton. Not even close ring or not[/QUOTE]

Why?

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749764]Why?[/QUOTE]

Efficiency, consistency and durability are more important to me than triple doubles. Only negatives on Stockton were being too unselfish and too loyal to the Jazz.

[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]

I know you didn't put Kobe as the #1 dude in 2001 :facepalm

[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]


:lol

[QUOTE=dankok8;14749743]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]

Jason Kidd was still putting up the same numbers in Dallas that he was for most of his career. Payton on the other hand was a role player.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;14749771]Efficiency, consistency and durability are more important to me than triple doubles. Only negatives on Stockton were being too unselfish and too loyal to the Jazz.[/QUOTE]

Stockton is the greatest pure PG in NBA history, he didn't get MVP notice mostly because MVP is narrative driven and those last two Magic MVP's were kinda BS.

And really...when is a PG a first option? PG's should be third or even fourth options in my book

[QUOTE=John8204;14749801]Jason Kidd was still putting up the same numbers in Dallas that he was for most of his career. Payton on the other hand was a role player.



Stockton is the greatest pure PG in NBA history, he didn't get MVP notice mostly because MVP is narrative driven and those last two Magic MVP's were kinda BS.

And really...when is a PG a first option? PG's should be third or even fourth options in my book[/QUOTE]

I would have picked Stockton over MVP Malone if I'd had to choose between the two. What would Stockton have done in the weak east that the Nets played in?

[QUOTE=hold this L;14749778]I know you didn't put Kobe as the #1 dude in 2001 :facepalm[/QUOTE]

You could easily make the argument he was 1b. He was the best player on the floor in the most competitive series, IE 2001 WCF

Shaq - 30/15/3
Kobe - 29/7/6

2012 LeBron - 30/10/6
2013 LeBron - 26/8/7
2016 LeBron - 26/10/8

Kobe’s 2001 is every bit as good as those runs and he was definitely a better defender than 2016 LeBron. And as good or better than 2012 and 2013 LeBron

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749825]You could easily make the argument he was 1b. He was the best player on the floor in the most competitive series, IE 2001 WCF

Shaq - 30/15/3
Kobe - 29/7/6

2012 LeBron - 30/10/6
2013 LeBron - 26/8/7
2016 LeBron - 26/10/8

Kobe’s 2001 is every bit as good as those runs and he was definitely a better defender than 2016 LeBron. And as good or better than 2012 and 2013 LeBron[/QUOTE]
The WCF was their most competitive series, the one they won by an average of 22 ppg? What :lol

And no, Kobe was not as good defensively as LeBron was when he was in Miami or in the 2016 Finals.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14749829]The WCF was their most competitive series, the one they won by an average of 22 ppg? What :oldlol:

And no, Kobe was not as good defensively as LeBron when he was in Miami or in the 2016 Finals.[/QUOTE]

Ether.

Never seen a fanbase just blatantly make shit up like kobe stans. They bought into the mamba mentality and are forced to do mental gymnastics in an attempt to shape a reality that doesn't exist. Sick ****ers.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14749829]The WCF was their most competitive series, the one they won by an average of 22 ppg? What :oldlol:

And no, Kobe was not as good defensively as LeBron when he was in Miami, or in the 2016 Finals.[/QUOTE]

Those were full playoff runs and not just Finals.

And no, 2012 and 2013 LeBron wasn’t definitively better defensively than Kobe (his teams best defender) in 2001 and certainly not 2016. That was a chase down block highlight only. Stop embellishing.

Miami as a team was great defensively. LeBron played a part in that, considering 2012 and 2013 are the only seasons in his career where he truly played high-quality consistent defense. As I said those seasons could be argued either way with Kobe.

But 2016? Hell no.

By competitive I meant the 2001 Spurs > 2001 Sixers, in terms of competitiveness numb nuts. 58 wins in the West > 56 wins in the East.

And the reason they were so damn dominant was because of Kobe Bryant. Good lord your Bron knob slobbing knows no bounds.

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749832]Those were full playoff runs and not just Finals.

And no, 2012 and 2013 LeBron wasn’t definitively better defensively than Kobe (his teams best defender) in 2001 and certainly not 2016. That was a chase down block highlight only. Stop embellishing.

Miami as a team was great defensively. LeBron played a part in that, considering 2012 and 2013 are the only seasons in his career where he truly played high-quality consistent defense. As I said those seasons could be argued either way with Kobe.

But 2016? Hell no.

By competitive I meant the 2001 Spurs > 2001 Sixers, in terms of competitiveness numb nuts. 58 wins in the West > 56 wins in the East.

And the reason they were so damn dominant was because of Kobe Bryant. Good lord your Bron knob slobbing knows no bounds.[/QUOTE]

Here are his 2016 playoff stats from reddit

Overall: 31.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 45.9%, [B]-14.0%[/B]

Threes: 24.1 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 36.7%,[B] -12. 6%[/B]

Twos: 36.6 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 50.5%, [B]-13.9%[/B]

<6ft: 37.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 61.3%, [B]-23.5%
[/B]
LeBron's defence in the 2016 finals:

Overall: 31.6 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 47.9%,[B] -16.3%[/B]

Threes: 29.0 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 39.6%, [B]-10.6%[/B]

Twos: 33.3 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 53.6%,[B] -20.3%[/B]

<6ft: 38.5 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 63.6%, [B]-25.1%[/B]





Eye test shows insane mixture of rim protection, team defense, on-ball defense, and excellent overall awareness and timing. Prime Bill Russell shit. Peak Draymond shit. Most underrated defender of all time. Lol @ acting like his 2016 defense was no big deal. It easily clears Kobe.

[video=youtube;vIZui0MEfcw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIZui0MEfcw[/video]

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749832]Those were full playoff runs and not just Finals.

And no, 2012 and 2013 LeBron wasn’t definitively better defensively than Kobe (his teams best defender) in 2001 and certainly not 2016. That was a chase down block highlight only. Stop embellishing.

Miami as a team was great defensively. LeBron played a part in that, considering 2012 and 2013 are the only seasons in his career where he truly played high-quality consistent defense. As I said those seasons could be argued either way with Kobe.

But 2016? Hell no.

By competitive I meant the 2001 Spurs > 2001 Sixers, in terms of competitiveness numb nuts. 58 wins in the West > 56 wins in the East.

And the reason they were so damn dominant was because of Kobe Bryant. Good lord your Bron knob slobbing knows no bounds.[/QUOTE]
Jesus Christ, you're legitimately clueless in so many things that you say :lol LeBron absolutely played high quality consistent defense his last 2 years in Cleveland and his first year in Miami, he locked down the league MVP for fcks sake. And as AltAcct showed, 2016 was a lot more than just a chase down block highlight.

And no, you can't claim a series was their "most competitive" when it was literally one of the least competitive series in NBA history :lol The Kings & Sixers played them much more competitively, and talent wise you could argue the Kings had just as much talent, if not more than the Spurs did, even if they didn't have anybody as good as Duncan.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14749837]
Eye test shows insane mixture of rim protection, team defense, on-ball defense, and excellent overall awareness and timing. [B]Prime Bill Russell shit. Peak Draymond shit.[/B] Most underrated defender of all time. Lol @ acting like his 2016 defense was no big deal. It easily clears Kobe.

[video=youtube;vIZui0MEfcw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIZui0MEfcw[/video][/QUOTE]

Lebron played really good defense in the 2016 Finals but he's no was nowhere near a defensive big in total impact. The bolded is laughable. Only on ISH...

As for young Kobe he was really good defensively but he started falling off after 2000 and only occasionally brought it in the playoffs. There is no problem calling prime defensive Lebron which was 2009-2013 and then probably the renaissance in 2016 as a whole tier better than post-2000 Kobe defensively.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14749831]Ether.

Never seen a fanbase just blatantly make shit up like kobe stans. They bought into the mamba mentality and are forced to do mental gymnastics in an attempt to shape a reality that doesn't exist. Sick ****ers.[/QUOTE]
:oldlol:

That 'WhiteKyrie' dup is obviously just a casual.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14749850]Lebron played really good defense in the 2016 Finals but he's no was nowhere near a defensive big in total impact. The bolded is laughable. Only on ISH...

As for young Kobe he was really good defensively but he started falling off after 2000 and only occasionally brought it in the playoffs. There is no problem calling prime defensive Lebron which was 2009-2013 and then probably the renaissance in 2016 as a whole tier better than post-2000 Kobe defensively.[/QUOTE]

His rim protection stats from 2015 and 2016 playoffs are better than peak Dray. The bolded is reality... he protected the rim at an elite level and had all-time great help defense.

I'm sorry you can't accept that.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14749852]His rim protection stats from 2015 and 2016 playoffs are better than peak Dray. The bolded is reality... he protected the rim at an elite level and had all-time great help defense.

I'm sorry you can't accept that.[/QUOTE]

You can't possibly be doubling down on that stupid take. Just admit you exaggerated.

Lebron's defensive usage is small meaning he contests very few shots given the number of minutes he's on the floor. That's normal for an offensive star that isn't a big man so not criticizing but he's nowhere near Draymond let alone Bill freaking Russell on defense. In the 2016 Playoffs Lebron contested 213 shots (32.4 DFG%) and Draymond contested 437 shots (39.4 DFG%) with way more of Draymond's contests being near the rim as well.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14749855]You can't possibly be doubling down on that stupid take. Just admit you exaggerated.

Lebron's defensive usage is small meaning he contests very few shots given the number of minutes he's on the floor. That's normal for an offensive star that isn't a big man so not criticizing but he's nowhere near Draymond let alone Bill freaking Russell on defense. In the 2016 Playoffs Lebron contested 213 shots (32.4 DFG%) and Draymond contested 437 shots (39.4 DFG%) with way more of Draymond's contests being near the rim as well.[/QUOTE]

Dray is an animal. Everywhere at once.

Never said he was overall better than peak dray, but did peak Dray things. Drays main responsibility is defense. Lebron contested less while leading the playoffs in blocks

You misunderstood thinking I was saying he had the same impact or responsibility on defense. I'm saying when needed he performed like those dudes in huge moments and overall much much better than Kobe.

In my opinion, if a player can get blame for a team losing, he should be able to get full credit for winning.

For instance many blame John Starks for the Knicks losing the Championship in 94. But he only gets partial credit if they win because he's not the best player?

[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]
Tony Parker 2014

Can’t have it both ways (07)

[QUOTE=ninephive;14749937]Tony Parker 2014

Can’t have it both ways (07)[/QUOTE]

I thought about putting that in there but then I looked over the first 3 series and you could argue for 3-4 different Spurs players tbh, Parker was kind of inconsistent but had his moments that year.

[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14749825]You could easily make the argument he was 1b. He was the best player on the floor in the most competitive series, IE 2001 WCF

Shaq - 30/15/3
Kobe - 29/7/6

2012 LeBron - 30/10/6
2013 LeBron - 26/8/7
2016 LeBron - 26/10/8

Kobe’s 2001 is every bit as good as those runs and he was definitely a better defender than 2016 LeBron. And as good or better than 2012 and 2013 LeBron[/QUOTE]


Yeah Kobe had Shaq beat in many of the advanced stuff and was the best closer in the league by a wide margin while Shaq was essentially a 0 in crunch time in that run plus you have to look at their production through the first 3 rounds and not just the overall because there was a massive gap in the Finals due to match-ups (even then they had a road win with Shaq fouled out), but KB was clearly the better player through the first 3 series and had that amazing 4-game road stretch from the WCSF to the WCF. Lakers vs. Spurs was the real NBA Finals and KB was better by a WIDE margin and that matters.

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14749852]His rim protection stats from 2015 and 2016 playoffs are better than peak Dray. The bolded is reality... he protected the rim at an elite level and had all-time great help defense.

I'm sorry you can't accept that.[/QUOTE]

This is a dumb comparison, Dray's best attributes are not protecting the rim (from an undersized 4 at that). Lebron was amazing defensively in 2016, you don't have to make crappy comparisons to make the point.

[QUOTE=hold this L;14750435]This is a dumb comparison, Dray's best attributes are not protecting the rim (from an undersized 4 at that). Lebron was amazing defensively in 2016, you don't have to make crappy comparisons to make the point.[/QUOTE]

lmaoo

he is low iq

The thread title is why Jordan's rings have the highest quality

There's never been anyone that won multiple rings with a bigger statistical gap between 1st and 2nd option, or a sidekick with lower peak capability (scouting report worthy), than Jordan's 6 chips

[QUOTE]NBA Central: [URL="https://*********.com/social/"]Kendrick Perkins calls out Charles Barkley for being ringless[/URL]
pic.twitter.com/5BpfImX8Za

– via [URL="https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral"]Twitter TheNBACentral[/URL]


[/QUOTE]

and than there are role players rings on a stacked team vs an all time great :facepalm

[QUOTE=3ba11;14750557]The thread title is why Jordan's rings have the highest quality

There's never been anyone that won multiple rings with a bigger statistical gap between 1st and 2nd option, or a sidekick with lower peak capability (scouting report worthy), than Jordan's 6 chips[/QUOTE]

True