Last week, the San Antonio Spurs won the NBA Finals. It was their third title in the last five years, and their fourth in the nine seasons since Michael Jordan left the Bulls. For emphasis, the Spurs shut down LeBron James and swept the series, 4-0. In light of San Antonio's dominance, there's been a lot of discussion about whether the Spurs are a dynasty. To help answer that question, I examined the NBA's most dynastic teams ever.
The George Mikan Lakers
1947 - 1954 Minneapolis Lakers
George Mikan was the NBA's first true all-star, and unquestionably reigned as the greatest player in league history until Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain dominated the game years after his retirement.
During Mikan's first season with the Lakers, the team played in the National Basketball League, going 43-17 and coasting to a league championship. The next season, playing in the Basketball Association of America, Minneapolis won another title. Beginning in the 1949-50 season, the Lakers were a part of the newly-born National Basketball Association (NBA).
In the NBA's first year, the Lakers tied for the best regular-season record, swept their first three playoff opponents, and won the league title. After losing in the Western Division Finals the next season, the Lakers reeled off three straight championship wins, giving them four of the first five NBA titles, plus two league titles in the NBL and BAA before the NBA existed.
From 1947 - 1954, the Lakers went 316-148 (.681) in the regular season and won six titles in seven seasons. They never finished under .600, and ranked first or second in their division every season.
The Bill Russell Celtics
1956 - 1969 Boston Celtics
The greatest dynasty in NBA history, Russell's Celtics won 11 NBA championships in 13 seasons. In the two seasons they did not win it all, the Celtics lost in the NBA Finals (1958) or lost in the Division Finals to the eventual league champion (1967). Their regular-season record was 716-299 (.705), and for the first nine seasons of Russell's career, the Celtics had the best record in the NBA every year.
Competing against other great teams — Bob Pettit's St. Louis Hawks, Wilt Chamberlain's 76ers, and the great Laker teams with Jerry West and Elgin Baylor — the Celtics nonetheless dominated the league, capturing eight straight titles, and nearly winning 13 in a row. No other NBA team — indeed, no other major North American professional sports team — has ever had such a long-lasting, truly dominant reign. Russell's Celtics are unquestionably the greatest dynasty professional basketball has seen.
The Showtime Lakers
1979 - 1991 Los Angeles Lakers
With three Hall of Fame players, the NBA's most legendary rivalry, nine Western Conference titles, and five NBA titles, the Showtime Lakers were basketball royalty. When Magic Johnson was a rookie in 1979-80, the Lakers finished 60-22, the best record in the Western Conference, and beat the 76ers 4-2 to win the first title in the Showtime dynasty. After a down season the next year, the Lakers won the next four Western Conference titles, winning championships against the Sixers in 1981-82 and against the Celtics in 1984-85.
Although Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and James Worthy were only together from 1982-89, Magic played with either Abdul-Jabbar or Worthy throughout the Showtime dynasty. During those years, the Lakers' regular-season record was 712-272 (.724), and they won the Western Conference nine out of 12 times, winning five championships. The four NBA Finals they lost were to legendary opponents: the 76ers with both Julius Erving and Moses Malone, Larry Bird's Celtics, the Bad Boy Pistons, and — in the Lakers' last Finals appearance until the Shaq and Kobe years — to Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls.
The Larry Bird Celtics
1979 - 1988 Boston Celtics
During the nine seasons included here, Boston posted a regular-season record of 550-188 (.745) and finished with the best record in the NBA six times, plus the best record in the Eastern Conference an additional two seasons. During the 1980s, the Celtics were Eastern Conference champions five times and won three NBA titles.
It was during this decade that the Celtics/Lakers rivalry — already intense from the Bill Russell era, when Boston won six Finals series against the Lakers — became truly legendary. Magic Johnson and Larry Bird were the best players in the game, and their teams were consistently at the top of the league, meeting in the Finals three times. Either the Celtics or the Lakers made the NBA Finals every year from 1980 to 1989.
If there's an argument against including the Celtics on this list, it's that they never won back-to-back championships, with titles in 1981, '84, and '86. Of course, every serious basketball fan recognizes Bird's Celtics as an important NBA dynasty. These Boston teams even earned the grudging respect of many Laker fans — they may not have liked the Celtics, but you had to respect them. Naturally, the reverse applied as well. Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were friends off the court, and most fans believe that the rivalry made both teams better.
Aside from common sense, what cements the Celtics as a dynasty aren't the three championships — normally the primary measure of a dynasty — but the fact that Boston was a consistent contender and was always the Eastern Conference favorite, with the Finals against the Lakers basically a coin flip. During these nine seasons, Boston had the best record in its conference eight times, had the best record in the NBA six times, went to the NBA finals five times, and won three NBA championships. Only dynasties do that.
The Michael Jordan Bulls
1990 - 1998 Chicago Bulls
When Michael Jordan joined the Bulls as a rookie in 1984, he was already an exceptional talent, but the Bulls couldn't win. They became playoff regulars, but it wasn't until the 1990-91 season that Chicago reached the NBA Finals. The Bulls won the first of three consecutive championships that year, and Jordan was named Finals MVP in all three. Then, Jordan announced his retirement, and the Houston Rockets won the next two championships. Jordan returned to Chicago, however, and the Bulls won another three championships with No. 23 back on the floor. Once again, Jordan was named Finals MVP each time.
During the eight seasons included here, the Bulls compiled a regular-season record of 490-166 (.747) and played in six NBA Finals, winning all six. If you omit the seasons in which Jordan didn't suit up, that mark rises to an incredible 388-104 (.789), with six championships in six seasons.
The main objection sometimes raised against this dynasty is a perceived lack of competition. Other than a Finals win over the Showtime Lakers, when Abdul-Jabbar was already retired and Magic was about to, the Bulls never went up against another team that had proven itself. The question is whether Jordan played in a weak era, when quality competition was scarce, or whether the Bulls were simply so dominant that they made good opponents look weak.
Regardless of the answer, everyone would agree that the Bulls established a dynasty in the 1990s.
***
Those are five dynasties no one should argue with, but there are other teams that should be mentioned as well. Bob Pettit's St. Louis Hawks won the Western Division four times in five years, beating Russell's Celtics for the league title in 1958. From 1961-1973, the Lakers won the Western Conference nine times. Los Angeles won a league title only once, however. They played second fiddle to the Celtics, but the 1980s Philadelphia 76ers were consistently a top team, finishing first or second in the Atlantic Division for eight straight seasons, winning the Eastern Conference three times, and sweeping the Lakers in the 1982-83 NBA Finals. With only one championship apiece, however, only the most liberal of observers would grant these teams dynasty status.
Other great teams won multiple titles, but lacked the sustained dominance that distinguished the teams mentioned above. In the early 1970s, the New York Knicks won two championships in four seasons, losing a third. They weren't a dominant team, however, finishing .700 only once. The Bad Boy Pistons played in three straight NBA Finals, winning back-to-back titles in 1989 and 1990. Their dominance was restricted to those three seasons, though. They had a couple of other 50-win seasons in the late '80s and early '90s, but they weren't serious championship contenders. The Houston Rockets, powered by Hakeem Olajuwon, won both NBA championships during Michael Jordan's first retirement. Those Houston teams never played in another Finals series, however, and never proved themselves against the Bulls.
Two potential dynasties remain to be mentioned. One is the Spurs team whose recent championship has made this topic an item of conversation. The other is the Lakers teams with Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant. At the conclusion of the 1999-2000 season, the Lakers won their first NBA title in over a decade. They won each of the next two as well, giving them three straight NBA championships, a feat equaled only by Mikan's Lakers, Russell's Celtics (who won eight in a row), and Jordan's Bulls (who did it twice).
Most fans consider a three-peat to equal an automatic dynasty, nothing else needed. But true dynasties have staying power, and the Lakers' dominance was short-lived. After a decent 2002-03 season and a Finals loss to Detroit the next year, Shaq went to Miami, coach Phil Jackson left the team, and the Lakers fell apart. That leaves the Lakers with a five-year run, during which they went 287-123 (.700), made four NBA Finals, and won three championships. That's probably a dynasty, but it doesn't seem like it belongs in the same category as Mikan or Magic.
The Tim Duncan Spurs
1998 - present San Antonio Spurs
We've now discussed six NBA dynasties: the '50s Lakers, the '60s Celtics, the '80s Lakers, the '80s Celtics, the '90s Bulls, and the early-'00s Lakers. What ties them together? The most obvious similarity is multiple championships, but even when they weren't winning, those teams were competitive. They all had regular-season winning percentages over .667, and they were usually favored in the playoffs. Good, gritty teams can pull things together in the postseason and rise to the occasion, but dynasties dominate from Day One.
The Spurs seem to fit those similarities. Starting in the strike-shortened 1998-99 season, the Spurs have gone 503-203 (.712) and won four NBA championships in nine years. Every year, the Spurs are a contender, and when they lose in the playoffs, it's usually an upset. San Antonio is a team that you expect to get a high playoff seed every year, and that you expect to perform at the highest level when it counts.
Beyond winning, another characteristic of dynasties is star power. Mikan dominated the NBA. Russell was a five-time NBA MVP. The argument can be made that Magic Johnson and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar were the best ever at their respective positions. Larry Bird was a legend in his own time. Michael Jordan is widely considered to be the greatest basketball player ever. Shaquille O'Neal, in his prime, was clearly the best player in the league.
The Spurs' Tim Duncan is of that caliber. Still at or near his prime, Duncan has already established himself as one of the greatest players in the history of the game. Since an official Finals MVP was established in 1969, five players have won multiple regular-season MVPs and multiple Finals MVPs: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, and Tim Duncan. That places Duncan in very select company.
What separates the Spurs is Duncan's supporting cast. Mikan's Lakers had three other Hall of Famers. Russell played with Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman, and John Havlicek. Magic and Abdul-Jabbar had each other, plus fellow Hall of Famer James Worthy. Bird had a fine supporting cast, most notably Kevin McHale and Robert Parrish. Jordan had Scottie Pippen. Shaq and Kobe had each other.
David Robinson was still playing when the Spurs won their first two championships, in 1999 and 2003. But in 2002-03, Robinson was past his prime and more of a role player than a star; since his retirement, the Spurs have won two more titles without any obvious Hall of Fame talent aside from Duncan. That isn't to say that San Antonio doesn't have other good players — it obviously does — but since 1998, Duncan and Robinson are the only Spurs to be named all-NBA, and only Duncan has been first-team.
Let's take one last look at the Spurs' numbers, stacked up against our other dynasties. The categories are regular-season winning percentage, conference titles, and NBA championships.RS win% NBA CS Conf CS Mikan Lakers .681 6* 6* Russell Celtics .705 11 12 Showtime Lakers .724 5 9 Bird Celtics .745 3 5 Jordan Bulls .747 6 6 Shaq/Kobe Lakers .700 3 4 Duncan Spurs .712 4 4
*Two of six titles were before NBA existed.
The primary argument against the Spurs is that they have not won consecutive titles. San Antonio has captured league championships in 1999, 2003, 2005, and 2007. The counterpoint is that the Spurs have won three titles in five seasons. The only other teams to accomplish that are those I have already classified as dynasties. The Spurs have won four titles in nine seasons; I am positive that if you win half the championships in a decade, you're a dynasty, and San Antonio has nearly accomplished that. And of course, the 1980s Celtics never won back-to-back. If that's a rule, you have to throw out Larry Legend. Even the Showtime Lakers never won more than two in a row.
Common sense says that just as Bird's Celtics (who ruled the Eastern Conference for a decade) were more dynastic than the Bad Boy Pistons (who did win back-to-back), the Spurs, with their sustained dominance, are a greater dynasty than the Phil Jackson Lakers of 1999-2004. I certainly consider San Antonio to be a dynasty. They aren't yet at the level of Russell's Celtics or Jordan's Bulls, but with another title next season — and the Spurs have as good a chance as anyone — they could reach the level of the 1980s Lakers and Celtics.
In this column, I've addressed every NBA team that won back-to-back titles, as well as any that won three championships or made at least four Finals appearances in fewer than eight seasons. There are two more teams I feel should be mentioned, although I don't believe either can be classified as a dynasty. In the early 1950s, the New York Knicks went to three straight NBA Finals. They lost all three, and no team without a title can really be a dynasty, but the only other teams with three consecutive Finals appearances have all been mentioned.
The Bullets may have been the team of the '70s. They won the Central Division five times in a row, finished one game back twice, and won the Atlantic Division after they moved to Washington. During that time, they played in four NBA Finals, winning in 1978. A dynasty? No. But a fine team that few people remember.
Below is a personal ranking of what I believe to be the 10 greatest dynasties in NBA history.
1] 1956 - 1969 Boston Celtics
2] 1979 - 1991 Los Angeles Lakers
3] 1990 - 1998 Chicago Bulls
4] 1947 - 1954 Minneapolis Lakers
5] 1979 - 1988 Boston Celtics
6] 1998 - present San Antonio Spurs
7] 1999 - 2004 Los Angeles Lakers
8] 1961 - 1973 Los Angeles Lakers
9] 1976 - 1986 Philadelphia 76ers
10] 1987 - 1990 Detroit Pistons
Have fun destroying that list.
June 18, 2007
gary gambino:
Well-researched!