What Makes an NBA Dynasty? | The Bill Simmons Podcast

The Ringer’s Bill Simmons and Ryen Russillo give their definitions of what makes an NBA dynasty and debate whether the Golden State Warriors’ run with Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green qualifies.

For more from The Ringer:

[JordanConley]

I think this Warriors team is a dynasty. When all 3 are healthy, they win. Plus they still have years left to win or at least compete for more titles.

[cptsketch]

If Duncan Spurs are Dynasty, Kobe's Lakers are a dynasty

[rileyhaley]

A dynasty to me has always been if you win 3 titles in 4 years..

[SuperSupersoda]

I think there's only been one nba dynasty, maybe: Russell's Celtics. I think we mis-use the word dynasty. In history, a dynasty is a term used for multiple kings from the same family passing down their crown to the next generation. I think to be a dynasty, you have to have the first king, and then, that king has to pass down the crown to the next generation. First half of the twentieth century New York Yankees would clearly qualify, as an example.

I think Russell's Celtics only qualify if you consider the Bird-McHale-Parish era as the "next generation" of the Celtics dynasty.

[chas_post]

How can you say prolonged dominance is the definition of dynasty and not have the Spurs? Five championships, six Finals berths and 18 straight playoff appearancss with a 63% win percentage18 in 18 years. Easily a dynasty just like the Warriors. Four titles and five Finals in eight years with arguably the best team ever! I would have both Bulls, Spurs, Warriors, Bird and Russell Celtics teams, Showtime and Kobe & Shaq Lakers.

[auggiesonatta]

if golden state wins next year not only does Curry tie Magic with 5 rings but the warriors dynasty is 5 in 9 years matching lakers 80 - 88

[abcsorensen]

The definition of a dynasty is a group that maintains power over a period of time.

[danielocean]

Funny thing about this topic is that it’s the same as MVP. Whoever you think is MVP, you’re right, because there’s no criteria. Same thing here, whether or not you think the Warriors are a dynasty or not fundamentally depends on the definition.

[aaronhutchinson]

I think since the 90s. Most would Agree. MJs run. Spurs 99 thru14 is a run. They were in it almost every year. Like Bill said. They could have won 7. The Shaq/Kobe Lakers would be in it as well from 00 thru 04. 4 final appearances in 5 years and then the Warriors 15 thru 22. They are incorrect about the Bulls. 94 I think they win..they still have Horace and BJ. MJ, Scottie. Horace on this run and jump traps were a nightmare. 95 is up in the air, but obviously that potentially will change the 96 thru 98 run.

[michaelgonzalez]

Warriors, Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, Bulls

[victorvic]

Agree with Bill.
Dynasty hits different.

[Aceboogie_]

0:50 you the only nigga arguing about it wtf 😭😭😭the warriors are obviously a dynasty

[davidisrael]

He has a non 0 chance of making it, but I'd say we're still *far* from it being "likely" Wiggins makes the HoF.

[javierlandaverde]

Basically going by Bill Simmons there is only 1 dynasty. That BOS Celtics dynasty winning a bunch of titles when NBA was under developed and not a very deep league with multiple teams and offer not much competition

[evanclp]

yeah modern NBA it's more about the players. Magic and Kareem's Lakers, Bird's Celtics, Jordan's Bulls, Shaq and Kobe's Lakers, Duncan's Spurs, LeBron's Heat/Cavs, and Steph's Warriors.

[ineedsaltplease]

Why not just use the 3peat as the litmus I don't get it

[StarFlix]

According to Merriam-Webster the word Dynasty means "a succession of rulers" or "a powerful group that maintains its position for a considerable time". So to me the NBA's succession of rulers that maintained their position for a considerable time would be Mikan's Lakers (5 titles in 6 years), Russell's Celtics (11 titles in 13 years), Jordan's Bulls (6 titles in 8 years) and these current Warriors (4 titles in 8 years). Any other elite run of champions featured another team that also won multiple times during "their rule". Magic's Lakers won 5 in 9 years, but Bird's Celtics won 3 in 6 years during that stretch. Duncan's Spurs won 4 in 9 years but Shaq's Lakers three-peated during the same time. So for me there have been 4 true dynasties and then several almost dynasties.

[maticherzog]

GSW, of course its a dynasty, 4 titles in less than 10 years and 2 finals losses.. the only issue is that apart from 2 (actually 1) Cleveland runs they did not have an equal opponent. For a dynasty you also need legit competition

[ThorfinnMacbeth]

I thin im pretty generous with this- and i prefer sustained excellence to blinding brief dominance (in this specific discussion ).... Also, I hear what Ryen is saying, but for me thats why this discussion is a bit different for me than the great player discussion. I think it actually slightly DETRACTS from the dynasty thing when its really just one player.... For a dynasty i want an image of 2-4 guys in a given uni together on the court in my head.
So for me and again this is dynasties not 'greatest teams"
Russell's Celtics
[gap]

Bulls (the greatest team but sort of hurt by the fact that we are kind of just describing one mans career- but the strength of Jackson, and Pippen, Rodman when he was there builds it back)
Showtime
gap
(all about equal but)
Spurs, (especially the 4 with the three guys)
Warriors,
Celts
thats it

Mikan lakers a pre history kind of dynasty
Kobe Shaq the greatest non-dynasty run of all time (perhaps greater peak then many of the dynasty teams)
Kobe championships later not quite the same thing really just his career in the same context
Heat- an amazing run
bad boys great team, rockets etc

[Peekul]

Maybe era is better and dynasty is reserved for the Celtics, magic lakers, Jordan bulls, Duncan spurs only.
Bird magic era, Shaq Lakers era, Kobe era, lebron era. The eras are when teams and players are dominant but not always winning. I think warriors are close to a dynasty.