# of superteams beaten by MVP or FMVP winners

[3ball]

Heres a list of superteams:

1959-1969 Celtics
1981-1987 Celtics
1983-1985 76ers
1984-1991 Lakers
1996-1998 Bulls
2004 Lakers
2008-2010 Celtics
2011-2014 Heat
2015-2017 Cavaliers
2017-2019 Warriors
2021 Lakers

# of superteams beaten by MVP or FMVP winners:
Larry Bird: 2(1984 Lakers, 1985 76ers)
Magic Johnson: 2(1985 Celtics, 1987 Celtics)
Kawhi Leonard: 2(2014 Heat, 2019 Warriors)
Stephen Curry: 2(2015 Cavs, 2017 Cavs)
Wilt Chamberlain: 1(1967 Celtics)
Moses Malone: 1(1983 Lakers)
Isiah Thomas: 1(1989 Lakers)
Michael Jordan: 1(1991 Lakers)
Chauncey Billups: 1(2004 Lakers)
Kobe Bryant: 1(2010 Celtics)
Dirk Nowitzki: 1(2011 Heat)
Tim Duncan: 1(2014 Heat)
Kevin Durant 1(2017 Cavs)

As we can see, to beat a superteam is extremely difficult and we dont even have one player who beat superteams more than 2 times. Among these players who have defeated 2 superteams, Bird, Magic, Curry(only in 2017) and Durant did this on their own superteams. This makes Kawhi's achievements far more impressive, as he beat 2 superteams without being on his own superteams. He deserve massive respect for pulling off miracles twice.

Beating a super-team means nothing if you have a super-team yourself.

So the only rings that matter are those with non-superteams, and also those with true 2nd options.

Here's a list of non-superteam rings, with an asterisk next to those with 2nd options (no 1b's or fmvp sidekicks)

89' Pistons
90' Pistons
94' Rockets*
95' Rockets*
11' Mavs*
04' Pistons
09' Lakers*
10' Lakers*
15' Warriors*
19' Raptors*
90's Bulls*

Btw, here's the list of champion 2nd options that never achieved elite 1st option stats or FMVP (true 2nd options) - Pippen, Gasol, Terry, Rip Hamilton, Klay, Horry... That's it... So rings with 2nd options like these guys are harder than rings with elite 1st option or FMVP sidekicks, aka Curry, Kobe, Kareem, Wade, Dumars, Tony Parker, etc.

Btw, Rodman wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs and was 36 years old, so if he was a "star", then so was 2010 Shaq.. And he averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs... Ultimately, the 96-98 Bulls weren't a super-team because they lacked 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial MVP candidates.

[Hey Yo]

Corrected. Seems I got the years wrong. Bird beat the Sixers in 1985, and the Lakers in 1984.

It seems like you get A LOT wrong.

[ShawkFactory]

Wait so the 14 Heat are a super team but the Nets right now aren’t?

K

[3ball]

Wait so the 14 Heat are a super team but the Nets right now aren’t?

K

Current Nets are a super-team

A super-team is 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial top 5 players

[mehyaM24]

Current Nets are a super-team

A super-team is 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial top 5 players

don't forget about 3 all-leaguers. chicago was the only team in 96 to have THREE (nevermind 6MOTY and COTY). nobody else could match their firepower.

[SATAN]

Wow. OP really got destroyed in his own thread.

[3ball]

don't forget about 3 all-leaguers. chicago was the only team in 96 to have THREE (nevermind 6MOTY and COTY). nobody else could match their firepower.

All-defense isn't included in super-team criteria, otherwise the 06' Cavs might be a super-team.. or the 10' Cavs

Btw, Rodman wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs and was 36 years old, so if he was a "star", then so was 2010 Shaq.. And he averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs... Ultimately, the 96-98 Bulls weren't a super-team because they lacked 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial MVP candidates

[RRR3]

OP actually thinks Andre Drummond is good. Even more than that he thinks he’s enough to make the Lakers a superteam.

Legit surprised he can remember how to get to this website.

[mehyaM24]

All-defense isn't included in super-team criteria, otherwise the 06' Cavs might be a super-team.. or the 10' Cavs

Btw, Rodman wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs and was 36 years old, so if he was a "star", then so was 2010 Shaq.. And he averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs... Ultimately, the 96-98 Bulls weren't a super-team because they lacked 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial MVP candidates

all-league>allstars. its no coincidence chicago won the amount of games they did - they simply had more talent on the floor than everyone else.

not sure why you mentioned 97 or 98 btw. i was talking about 96. the same year chicago fielded 3 all-leaguers, which nobody else had.

[3ball]

all-league>allstars. its no coincidence chicago won the amount of games they did - they simply had more talent on the floor than everyone else.

not sure why you mentioned 97 or 98 btw. i was talking about 96. the same year chicago fielded 3 all-leaguers, which nobody else had.

Rodman wasn't all-defense in 97' or 98' and all-defense isn't all-league

So keep reaching

The Bulls won so much because they had the #1 offense, which Rodman hurt

Drummond destroys old Rodman (Drummond was an 18/14 player before joining lebron)

[mehyaM24]

Rodman wasn't all-defense in 97' or 98' and all-defense isn't all-league

So keep reaching

Drummond destroys old Rodman (Drummond was an 18/14 player before joining lebron)

nobody mentioned 97 or 98. again we are talking about 96.

all-league = all-team fyi. so semantic BS aside, nobody else fielded that talent except chicago - another reason they were a superteam.

[3ball]

nobody mentioned 97 or 98. again we are talking about 96.

all-league = all-team fyi. so semantic BS aside, nobody else fielded that talent except chicago - another reason they were a superteam.

Rodman wasn't all-nba/league in 96'

And again, all-defense isn't included in super-team criteria, otherwise the 06' Cavs might be a super-team.. or the 10' Cavs

Ultimately, it's a joke - Rodman wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs and was 36 years old, so if he was a "star", then so was 2010 Shaq.. And he averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs... Ultimately, the 96-98 Bulls weren't a super-team because they lacked 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial MVP candidates

Nobody mentioned

Beating a super-team means nothing if you have a super-team yourself.

So the only rings that matter are those with non-superteams, and also those with true 2nd options.

Here's a list of non-superteam rings, with an asterisk next to those with 2nd options (no 1b's or fmvp sidekicks)

89' Pistons
90' Pistons
94' Rockets*
95' Rockets*
11' Mavs*
04' Pistons
09' Lakers*
10' Lakers*
15' Warriors*
19' Raptors*
90's Bulls*

[mehyaM24]

Rodman wasn't all-nba/league in 96'

And again, all-defense isn't included in super-team criteria, otherwise the 06' Cavs might be a super-team.. or the 10' Cavs

Ultimately, it's a joke - Rodman wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs and was 36 years old, so if he was a "star", then so was 2010 Shaq.. And he averaged 4/8 in the 97' Playoffs... Ultimately, the 96-98 Bulls weren't a super-team because they lacked 3 perennial all-stars or 2 perennial MVP candidates

nobody said rodman was all-nba. he was all-team defense (1st). and jordan/pippen made all-teams on both ends.

once again, nobody else had that combination in 96. prove me wrong and name another 3 - otherwise chicago stays a superteam.

[3ball]

nobody said rodman was all-nba. he was all-team defense (1st). and jordan/pippen were made all-teams on both ends.

once again, nobody else that combination in 96. prove me wrong and name another 3 - otherwise chicago stays a superteam.

There's no such thing as "all-team"

There's only all-nba/all-league, which Rodman was not

or there's all-defense, which Rodman wasn't in 97/98, nor does it count towards super-team anyway

Carry on

[mehyaM24]

There's no such thing as "all-team"

There's only all-nba/all-league, which Rodman was not

or there's all-defense, which Rodman wasn't in 97/98, nor does it count towards super-team anyway

Carry on

of course there is. you'e never heard of 1st TEAM all-defense?

no other team in 96 had 3 all-leaguers and/or all-teamers. only chicago did. if you can't find another team in 96 with that combination then chicago stays a superteam.

97 and 98 are also irrelevant. why do you keep bringing up years not mentioned?