• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Ranking the NBA Champions, 2000-Present

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
00-02 Lakers are being over-rated a bit: Portland had them by the balls before the most epic chokejob in NBA history (makes OKC choke in game 6 look silly) and that Kings series had Donaghy written all over it. Both Portland and Kings team were similar to the Warriors and Parker/Ginobili prime Spurs in that they would attack you from multiple positions. Only the second year of that threepeat were they truly dominant.
 
I'm just going to comment on the OP's ranking

My ranking:
1. Shaq/Kobe Lakers These teams should be separated. I only think the 2001 Lakers were better than the 2014 Spurs while the others weren't close ... but sure.
2. 2014 Spurs Sure
3. 2016 Cavs ...LeBrons jumpshot compared to the Miami versions makes me uncomfortable with rating this team #3... do agree it is top 5 though
(NOTE: This is arguably peak "LeBron gets no calls" era ... this team with first-Cleveland-run referees is at worst 3rd)

4. Heatles Sure ... I agree with shoes22's assessment that they are roughly on par with the Cavs teams. I trust Heat LeBron more than Cavs LeBron because of the jumpshot. Would put 2012 slightly above 2016 Cleveland but 2013 below so this ranking is fine. Also, the referees were more reasonable with foul calls on LeBron in 2012 (ie. he actually got them) ... does that count?
5. 2008 Celtics This team is too low and is better than the 2016 Cavs team. Historically good defense...
6. 2015 Warriors okay
7. 09-10 Lakers okay ... 2009 was better than 2010 though
8. 2005 Spurs okay
9. 2004 Pistons okay
10. 2003 Spurs too high ... this team was literally just Duncan
11. 2007 Spurs way too low ... this team swept the 2007 Cavs who beat a pretty solid Pistons team. Should be a few spots higher.
12. 2011 Mavs sure ... this team would not have won except under exceptional circumstances (the historic amount of pressure/hate on LeBron in 2011)
13. 2006 Heat sure

Will try again

Top Five:
2001 Lakers (almost perfect)
2014 Spurs (greatest finals MOV in history)
2008 Celtics (historic defense)
2012 Heat (LeBron actually has a jumper and gets foul calls)
2016 Cavs (higher if we aren't using today's referees =D)

Next Five: (in no order)
2000/2002 Lakers (both teams close to losing but still very good)
2013 Heat (probably 6th)
2005/2007 Spurs (okay to slot 09 Lakers team here)

Worst:
2006 Heat
2011 Mavs
 
-2005: Spurs (prime Duncan, pre-prime Parker, pre-prime Ginobili)

I don't know how I'd rank the teams, but 2004-05 was Ginobili's absolute prime and it's not even close. That was the year when every time they needed a basket it was get the ball to Manu and get the hell out of the way. He led Argentina to the gold in Athens in the summer of 04. Most of the greatest games of his (NBA) career came that season, the only top 5 game of his that I can think of off the top of my head that wasn't that year was the closeout Game 6 vs Phoenix in 07. He was the main reason the Spurs obliterated the Suns in 5 in the 05 WCF and when the Spurs had blown a 2-0 lead to Seattle in the previous round he singlehandedly took over Game 5 to give the Spurs a 3-2 lead.
A lot of Spurs fans will tell you he was the Finals MVP in 05 also, especially with his performance in the fourth quarter of Game 7. Manu was an awesome player 06-08 until he started getting injured all the time, but 04-05 he was on another level completely.
 
I'm just going to comment on the OP's ranking

My ranking:
1. Shaq/Kobe Lakers These teams should be separated. I only think the 2001 Lakers were better than the 2014 Spurs while the others weren't close ... but sure.
2. 2014 Spurs Sure
3. 2016 Cavs ...LeBrons jumpshot compared to the Miami versions makes me uncomfortable with rating this team #3... do agree it is top 5 though
(NOTE: This is arguably peak "LeBron gets no calls" era ... this team with first-Cleveland-run referees is at worst 3rd)

4. Heatles Sure ... I agree with shoes22's assessment that they are roughly on par with the Cavs teams. I trust Heat LeBron more than Cavs LeBron because of the jumpshot. Would put 2012 slightly above 2016 Cleveland but 2013 below so this ranking is fine. Also, the referees were more reasonable with foul calls on LeBron in 2012 (ie. he actually got them) ... does that count?
5. 2008 Celtics This team is too low and is better than the 2016 Cavs team. Historically good defense...
6. 2015 Warriors okay
7. 09-10 Lakers okay ... 2009 was better than 2010 though
8. 2005 Spurs okay
9. 2004 Pistons okay
10. 2003 Spurs too high ... this team was literally just Duncan
11. 2007 Spurs way too low ... this team swept the 2007 Cavs who beat a pretty solid Pistons team. Should be a few spots higher.
12. 2011 Mavs sure ... this team would not have won except under exceptional circumstances (the historic amount of pressure/hate on LeBron in 2011)
13. 2006 Heat sure

Will try again

Top Five:
2001 Lakers (almost perfect)
2014 Spurs (greatest finals MOV in history)
2008 Celtics (historic defense)
2012 Heat (LeBron actually has a jumper and gets foul calls)
2016 Cavs (higher if we aren't using today's referees =D)

Next Five: (in no order)
2000/2002 Lakers (both teams close to losing but still very good)
2013 Heat (probably 6th)
2005/2007 Spurs (okay to slot 09 Lakers team here)

Worst:
2006 Heat
2011 Mavs
Whats with the downgrading of what the 2011 Mavericks did?
They Beat OKC who went on to face the heat in 2012 finals in 5 games.
They had 2 10+ times all stars a defensive player of the year

I would rate the 2013 and 2014 heat as better than 2012. They had OKC in a strike shortened season and OKC youth showed out.
I Think Boston would of dspatched OKC as well that season.
 
@SpursFan21, what are your thoughts on the 2003 Spurs vs. the 2005 Spurs vs. the 2007 Spurs?

There seems to be a general consensus that the 2014 team was the best of them all (which is interesting, because the core stars were all debatably past their primes - a testament to coaching, cohesion, and playing style). But I think most of us are having trouble discerning which of the teams from the first decade of the 2000s was the strongest.
 
2005 Spurs was Duncans first finals without David Robinson. Also statistically the team had a strong SRS and dominated the western conference then took out the defending Champion Pistons.

I would rank them ahead of both the 2003 Spurs and the 2007 Spurs. both installments featured aging versions of principle players.
2014 - people talk about the aging core but both Leonard and Green were key components of this team. and Parker at 31 hardly past his prime.
1998
2005
2003
2007
 
2005 Spurs was Duncans first finals without David Robinson. Also statistically the team had a strong SRS and dominated the western conference then took out the defending Champion Pistons.

I would rank them ahead of both the 2003 Spurs and the 2007 Spurs. both installments featured aging versions of principle players.
2014 - people talk about the aging core but both Leonard and Green were key components of this team. and Parker at 31 hardly past his prime.
1998
2005
2003
2007
Wizard of moz I am really tired of you trolling my post with your funny's on post you disagree with. Your constant obsessive post talking about my posting style and you always commenting on my posting style instead of the actual content.

Your attitude is rather demeaning and this crazed fan obsession gig that your on is way past overdue to be addressed.

Believe it or not . There actually people on these boards that often agree with what I have to say and are able to discern the difference between funny and a valid Opinion.
You have even brought up off topic threads to demean or disrespect my sports related post siderailing a discussion.

Now I don't know what you find funny about my ranking of the Spurs team. however its must be a difference of an opinion to your own so you choose to mock my opinion rather than post your own.
 
@SpursFan21, what are your thoughts on the 2003 Spurs vs. the 2005 Spurs vs. the 2007 Spurs?

There seems to be a general consensus that the 2014 team was the best of them all (which is interesting, because the core stars were all debatably past their primes - a testament to coaching, cohesion, and playing style). But I think most of us are having trouble discerning which of the teams from the first decade of the 2000s was the strongest.

If I was going to rank the Spurs five title teams:

(1) The 2014 Spurs is easily the strongest team in franchise history. They won so many playoff games in ridiculous blowouts. They had a really rough first six games vs Dallas but then played an almost perfect Game 7 to eliminate them. Then went out and destroyed the Blazers in the second round, I swear they won every game by 20 except the one they lost. Then 3 of the 4 wins vs OKC were blowouts, I think Game 2 was a 35 point win and Game 5 was like 30 points too. And then the Miami series they completely dominated. The 2014 Spurs got some of the easiest shots I have ever seen a team get. That was the year Splitter sold his soul to stay healthy, and healthy Splitter is one of the top passing bigmen and unbelievable guarding the pick and roll. They got so much out of Patty Mills that season too. Mills was in the best shape of his career and might have been the best backup point in the league. He seemed to come out of nowhere because he wasn't really a rotation player in 2013. But he was kind of fat in 2013, I remember when he lost a lot of weight that summer some of the local media didn't recognize him at Spurs media day right before the 2013-14 season started.

(2) The 2005 Spurs are probably the strongest Spurs team on paper. They were elite defensively, had prime Duncan, Ginobili was in god mode that entire season, and while Horry was a nobody in the regular season he really turned it on once the playoffs hit. Horry hit some really crushing daggers against Denver and Phoenix before his famous 4th quarter + OT performance to steal Game 5 in Detroit. Strange because Horry was a complete no-show the previous year, especially against his old team the Lakers in the second round. The 2005 team could have been a 65 win team if not for Duncan's turning his ankle on Rasheed's foot about a month before the playoffs started. The 2005 Pistons might be the greatest team the Spurs have ever beaten in a series though. I know they only won 54 games but the Wallace boys would wear Duncan down to the point he didn't have a lot left by the fourth quarters of games, and Duncan's usually a really strong fourth quarter player. Maybe a little of that was his ankles (he hurt his other one vs Seattle in the second round), but Big Ben was a real handful in those days. He'd go trap your point guard at half court and then go beat the shit out of your bigman before he could get great position. I always feel like the Spurs really escaped with that title and Pop still says he couldn't believe the Spurs won that series.

(3) This one is tough to call, because the quality of play in the league was pretty awful in 1999, but I'll go with the 1999 Spurs as the third best title winning team in franchise history. Robinson was still the best defensive bigman in the league and the 99 Spurs regularly held opponents into the 60s scorewise. It wasn't a fluke, their defense was killing everyone in 97-98 too. The 99 team though was impossible to score on in the last 3-4 minutes of a game, and they eeked out every close game they played unless the other team got really hot (eg Allan Houston in Game 3 of the Finals). They won 12 playoff games in a row on that defense and went 15-2 in the postseason, with only a loss to Minnesota in Game 2 of the first round and New York in Game 3 of the Finals. They were really ugly offensively though.

(4) The 2007 team had the big 3 in their primes but the supporting cast was a little weak. I think they went 15-4 in the playoffs but the competition wasn't very tough aside from Phoenix in the second round. I'm not sure they win if Golden State didn't eliminate Dallas in the first round, the Mavs were a nightmare matchup for the Spurs with their isolations and ability to hit the offensive glass.

(5) 2003 was easily the weakest of the five Spurs title teams. That year the supporting players were either too young or too old and you never knew what you were going to get from them. The 2003 Spurs reminded me a lot of the 1994 Rockets. One dominant bigman carrying them and a really inconsistent supporting cast that could get on fire because they were so talented but who would also blow leads because they were so young and dumb. Parker was particularly feast or famine. He had a really strong Game 6 to close out the Lakers but then ended up getting benched in both of the closeout Game 6 vs Dallas and New Jersey in the WCF and Finals. Ginobili never really fit into the team that year. He had his moments no doubt but he was injured all the time in the first half of the season and never looked comfortable. It wasn't until 2003-04 when the team really saw the versatile player from the Argentine national team.

If I was going to rank the ten best Spurs teams ever I would rank them:
1. 2014 (won title)
2. 2005 (won title)
3. 2012 (lost to OKC 4-2 in the WCF)
4. 1999 (won title)
5. 2016 (lost to OKC 4-2 in the second round)
6. 2006 (lost to Dallas 4-3 in the second round)
7. 2007 (won title)
8. 2004 (lost to LA Lakers 4-2 in the second round)
9. 2003 (won title)
10. 2013 (lost to Miami 4-3 in the Finals)
 
Last edited:
This is a great thread, can't believe I'm just seeing it.

GOAT Squads:

1) -2000-2002 Lakers: Shaq was nearly impossible to guard. Sure, teams started the hack-a-Shaq, but it really wasn't that effective. Add to that Kobe - who was still a top-5 player in the NBA before his prime - ensured that teams could not effectively double Shaq. Their perimeter defense with Fisher, Horry, Fox, Kobe, and others was nearly unstoppable, arguably one of the best of the given choices, and they all could make plays by themselves.

2) 2014 Spurs: This team was arguably the best on this list. Obviously Miami was at their worst in 2014; however, they were still an outstanding team. Spurs didn't care and trashed them. Green and Mills having career years made the aging of Parker and Ginobli less-noticeable. Kawhi combined with Tim Duncan, Diaw, and Splitter made the Spurs impossible to drive against. Just a very tight unit.

3a+b) 2012 and 2013 Heat: People forget how cruelly efficient Miami's offense was during their championship years. Spo installed a beautiful offense that allowed LeBron to be just as successful off-ball as on-ball. Battier is one of the smartest players in the past twenty years. Heat were holistically worse in 2013, even with the addition of Ray, but they were still damn good.

4) 2005 Spurs: Top-to-bottom the most talented Spurs roster. Ginobli, Parker, and Timmy had outstanding seasons and were flanked by other great talent. I was less impressed with their cohesion than the 2014 Spurs, nevertheless, the team was still outstanding.

5) 2004 Pistons: Arguably the best defensive team of all time. There wasn't one player in their starting five that wasn't an all-NBA defense caliber player. They showed that excellent defense and teamwork can beat any degree of talent. The 2004 Lakers, top-to-bottom, were as talented as any team we've ever seen. But they couldn't figure out how to stop a Pistons team that knew every aspect of the game backwards and forwards.

All-Time Teams:
6) 2016 Cavs: As a team, we weren't strong enough to beat any of the top-5. With that said, the sheer talent of Kyrie and LeBron makes us one of the best teams of the past two decades. If we can really stick to our core, I think the Cavs may have a Spurs like dynasty on their hands for the next six years or so. We have an aging top-3 all time talent, a lot of young, promising pieces, and a core that will age into success.

7) 2007 Spurs: It's tough to rank these guys because they only had one playoff round where they were tested. With that said, they did beat the prime-level "Seven Seconds Or Less" Suns and posted a top-5 most dominating NBA Finals performance. The team wasn't sexy, but they did everything right, and won because of it.

8) 2009-10 Lakers: These teams get no credit because they weren't as good as the Shaq-Kobe Lakers; however, that's a mistake. Oddly enough, given the talent, this squad was more likely to grind you out. Nonetheless, Kobe and Gasol gave the team two guys who could score at will. Unfortunately, top-to-bottom, they were not as talented as a lot of other aforementioned teams.

NBA Champions, But Not All-Timers:
9) 2015 Warriors: It's tough to evaluate this team because they won three straight playoff series where the other team was missing at least one starter for the majority of the time, including a finals performance where their opponent was missing two all-star starters. Nonetheless, their offense changed the game, and that is to be respected.

10) 2008 Celtics: They were one of the first, real superteams. Nonetheless, as a unit, I find them to be incredibly overrated. The 2004 Pistons did everything the 2008 Celtics did but better. Outside of creating superteams, this squad is most well-known for revitalizing the careers of three stars who had never won before.

11) 2011 Mavs: They sort of acted a precursor to the 2014 Spurs. Building off the 2004 Pistons, the 2011 Mavs showed that stifling defense, an offense that creates easy buckets, and excellent basketball IQ can lead to a championship victory over a superteam.

12) 2003 Spurs: Sure, they established San Antonio as a dynasty. And sure, their frontcourt defensive players were incredibly impressive. And finally, yes, we all know that this team showed Duncan's all-time potential. But as a unit they were just not as impressive as most teams who've won championships since 2000.

13) 2006 Heat: Outside of further emphasizing Shaq's all-time greatness and introducing us to Dwyane Wade, this team was incredibly unimpressive. Most of their squad was washed up, and at best they were a poor man's version of the 2000-02 Lakers. Riley installed an iso-heavy offense that relied on Dwyane Wade's drive-and-dish ability. This offense allowed Shaq to be successful again, and to that, the team deserves credit. The Pistons were outstanding that year, and Riley found a way to utilize Shaq against Detroit's defense, which was impressive. But the team was underwhelming as far as NBA champions go.
 
If I was going to rank the Spurs five title teams:



(3) This one is tough to call, because the quality of play in the league was pretty awful in 1999, but I'll go with the 1999 Spurs as the third best title winning team in franchise history. Robinson was still the best defensive bigman in the league and the 99 Spurs regularly held opponents into the 60s scorewise. It wasn't a fluke, their defense was killing everyone in 97-98 too. The 99 team though was impossible to score on in the last 3-4 minutes of a game, and they eeked out every close game they played unless the other team got really hot (eg Allan Houston in Game 3 of the Finals). They won 12 playoff games in a row on that defense and went 15-2 in the postseason, with only a loss to Minnesota in Game 2 of the first round and New York in Game 3 of the Finals. They were really ugly offensively though.

QUOTE]

It wasn't poor quality play,, it was a different brand of basketball.
that 1998-99 spurs team swept kobe and shaq.
They swept a blazers team that took out Malone and Stockton. ( team was aged though but they had been tot he finals the year before)
The rockets still had Barkley and Olajuwan along with Scottie Pippen.
the West had 5 teams win over 62% of their games the East had 4 teams win over 62%

sure it was a strike shortened season but it was a veteran League at the time.

on the Eastern side you had the knicks take out the heat who had Tim Hardaway still peaking and a prime Alonzo Mourning
The knicks also beat an Indiana Team that still had Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson, Dale Davis, Mullin, Smits and Jalen Rose.

That Knicks team itself had Patrick Ewing, Sprewell, Allan Houston and Larry Johnson.

What they didn't have that year was the Chicago Bulls.

The league still had 14 or 15 future hall famers in the 30-35 age range having very productive seasons and most of the young Talent was coming into the league after 4 years of College.

2002- 2007 were far weaker seasons for the NBA as you had an influx of Talent where the majority of the draft classes didn't have 4 years of College combined with the retirement of the prior decades stars really left a void.
It wasn't a different brand of basketball.
that 1998-99 spurs team swept kobe and shaq.
They swept a blazers team that took out Malone and Stockton. ( team was aged though but they had been tot he finals the year before)
The rockets still had Barkley and Olajuwan along with Scottie Pippen.
the West had 5 teams win over 62% of their games the East had 4 teams win over 62%

sure it was a strike shortened season but it was a veteran League at the time.

on the Eastern side you had the knicks take out the heat who had Tim Hardaway still peaking and a prime Alonzo Mourning
The knicks also beat an Indiana Team that still had Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson, Dale Davis, Mullin, Smits and Jalen Rose.

That Knicks team itself had Patrick Ewing, Sprewell, Allan Houston and Larry Johnson.

What they didn't have that year was the Chicago Bulls.

The league still had 14 or 15 future hall famers in the 30-35 age range having very productive seasons and most of the young Talent was coming into the league after 4 years of College.

2002- 2007 were far weaker seasons for the NBA as you had an influx of Talent where the majority of the draft classes didn't have 4 years of College combined with the retirement of the prior decades stars really left a void
 
Last edited:
The problem I run into with those Laker teams is the change in illegal defense rules and the increase in pick and rolls. Shaq was never great in the pick and roll, but teams didn't run it constantly like they do now. What happens when you constantly put Shaq in a pick and roll? What about if you go "small" and put a big out there that can shoot, making him guard the perimeter?

Now, offensively, the guy was a damn monster. There was no one big or strong enough to handle him one-on-one. However, under the old rules, you either had to play him straight up or actually commit to a double. Shaq was an excellent passer out of a double team, especially when he knew where it was coming from. Under the new rules, it is far easier to disguise where that double is coming from, making it more difficult for Shaq to make the right decision.

The Lakers were dominant for those three years, but they didn't just blow everyone out (as has been pointed out). There are a number of teams that seem to be well-equipped to beat those Lakers teams (last year's Warriors team, oddly enough). They also didn't take a ton of threes. That 2000 title team took 13 threes per game. 2001 took 15.5 threes per game. 2002 took 17.5 threes per game. Now, compare that to the 2015 Warriors (27 per game) and this year's Cavs (29 per game). Can Shaq and Kobe be efficient enough to overcome the math problem?

It's hard for me to make a call until I know what rules we're playing under. As it stands, I would probably give those Laker teams the edge as the favorite in basically any match-up, but they're hardly unbeatable.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top