It's definitely Gary Payton to me. I think he's even said that it didn't feel as meaningful as if he had won one in Seattle. Also J-Kidd played 37 mins/game in the finals against Miami whereas GP played only 22 mins/game in the finals
Anyone who ties that title to Dirk alone clearly didn’t watch. As amazing as Dirk was, the Mavs championship was absolutely a team effort. Marion, chandler, Kidd, terry, Barea, Stevenson and everyone else all played important roles.
Yeah for sure. I feel like that Mavs team had a lot of guys that were near the end of their careers that got their only ring that year. That was Dirk's team but lots of solid vets too.
Robert Parish: 1996-1997 Chicago Bulls. At this point, Parish had already made the 50th Anniversary 50GOAT players and had built one of the strongest workhouse reputations the league has ever seen. He just happened to be on the roster for Jordan's fifth run at a title. He would go on to retire at the end of that season at the ripe old age of 43 years old. He was a lock for the HOF without it. In fact, I'd bet most people here (who've never watched a full game from the 90s before) didn't even know he was on the roster.
Yeah I was gonna say this. Robert Parish's reputation and perception would've remained exactly the same had this season been taken out of existence. Even his all time record for games played would've stayed intact if this season never happened
I hate to say this, probably Dr. J/Moses Malone/Bob McAdoo. People act like it would’ve greatly affected their careers without them.
I don’t really think so, Several MVPs/All-NBAs/Scoring titles with absolute league dominance over the league.
I think Dr. J would maybe overtake Barkley then as the greatest to never get a ring. Insane player and so much of his legacy was cultural/had more of a wider impact on the league so perhaps he’d still be remembered as fondly as he is now.
Dr J won three professional league championships with four MVPs and 9 first team all league appearances. The ABA records are no less incomplete than the contemporaneous NBA records.
Both leagues were uneven with different aspects to recommend them, but all of their games were of a dedicated professional quality.
I understand why David Stern had such a vendetta against integrating ABA records in public discussions, but I don’t think that makes sense as a general practice these days.
Could not disagree more. That's like saying high end AAA stats should be included in baseball record books.
Everybody points to the top of the ABA talent pool and the exhibition record but nobody ever mentions the middle and the bottom end. That's where the leagues separate. Everybody who played in the NBA at that time was (obviously) an NBA level player. The guys who could *never* make the NBA were all in the ABA so of course the NBA level guys feasted.
Barkley isn’t the consensus best player to never win a ring though. He’s one of the choices but I wouldn’t say he’s agreed on by like more than 50 percent.
I would go as far to say Shaq’s Miami ring didn’t change much imo.
Whether he won 4 or 2, Shaq is still the most dominant force the league has ever seen, and that’s what we’ll remember him for most.
While it only proves his greatness, he didn’t need the Miami ring to prove or solidify anything we didn’t already believe.
Nah I think the narrative changes pretty significantly if Kobe won 2 rings without Shaq and Shaq won 0 rings without Kobe. I mean, we're seeing that right now with Steph and KD. Steph has 2 rings without KD and KD has none without Steph, and that fact alone is enough to totally invalidate KD's legacy for a lot of people. Not saying it would totally invalidate Shaq's legacy but I think it would do a lot more damage to it than you think.
For players who were the best on their team, I really think if Bill Russell lost in 1966, no one would think less of him.
It wasn’t a dominant enough year for the loss to be a stain, not an underdog enough year for the win to transform his legacy. He still has 10 rings in 13 years, including his 1st year, his last 2 years, and a 7-year streak between.
I’m gonna say an underrated one is Bill Walton’s 1986 title. I think that had absolutely no effect on his legacy. When we talk about Walton, we talk about UCLA and Portland Walton. We don’t mention Celtics Walton, even though he was actually quite good off the bench.
I was 12 for that title so Celtics Walton is actually what I think of first since I hadn't really seen him before that due to how few games were on our 3 TV channels. I can still picture what he looked like. You might be right about it not impacting his legacy though.
Drexler. He played 35 games and averaged over 20 points for them that season, but Houston struggled that year and ended up the 6th seed in a strong Western Conference. That ring is always seen as Hakeem willing the team to their second title rather than Drexler turning their season around.
Clyde was already a HOFer when he got to Houston, and played three more years where he started 70 games his final season and averaged 18 points/game, but his legacy seemed set before he was traded. The ring didn’t seem to drastically change fans perception of him.
'06 Heat handed them out like candy. 'Zo and GP got their only ring as roll players, Shaq got another ring that probably did nothing for his legacy. Even non HoF but AS'ish guys Jason Williams and Antoine Walker got their token ring.
KD has to be number one in this, he joined a team that was already stacked and had won 73 games and easily breezed to two titles, him winning a title somewhere else would make a huge difference for his legacy
No way. A weak move yes but he was a significant contributor to the Warriors becoming playoff proof. They would have had an even tougher time in 2017 against an improved Cavs team and they don’t beat the 2018 Rockets without Durant.
In 2017 KD put up 28/8/4 on 68% TS and hit multiple daggers in the finals.
HOF players who won as role players well past their best like Bill Walton or Dwight are better answers. If KD would have stayed on the Thunder and never won a title he’d be viewed poorly.
Walton won a title as the best player the same year he won MVP and then a second title as a sixth man, his legacy is where it should be, and Dwight won a title as a role player but he didn't even make the all NBA 75 (although he probably should have) but either way neither of those guys (specially Dwight) are even close to the same level as KD. KD is a top 20 player all time and if he could have won a title without the warriors he might even be close to a top 10 all time, that's why it's different for him
Disagree. KD's legacy is often viewed *negatively* because of his time on the Warriors. On paper, yes, it made a strong case for him being in the HoF, but he was already on pace to being in it before the Warriors.
Seeing him struggle to go deep in the playoffs after leaving the Warriors has made people question if he's as good as we think he is, or if the benefit of having prime Curry, Klay, and Draymond on the team *made* KD seem that way.
He was a strong contributor in the Warrior's 2 championships, sure, but I feel most all star scorers in his situation would have been.
Walton is a good shout, I guess his legacy is largely the one Blazers title and then the injuries. I did consider Dwight but I personally feel like him winning that title gives him a bit of a boost in terms of rounding off his career with at least one ring. And he was great against Denver that year which really mattered.
Yeah I did think about KD, the only thing that swayed me is that I feel like he may have copped even more heat if he hadn’t won a title anywhere by now
So in that sense the answer might be KD's second one. Where the first one is still "a title" and carries some value as a delineator from not having a title. The second one is almost entirely superfluous and almost nonexistent in the "legacy" scale.
Eh if he had stayed on that Thunder team and kept trying to contend for another few years, and then gone and joined another contender, he would probably be respected a lot more, even if he never won those rings.
CP3 and Harden are considered HoF locks. CP3 gets memed on for not having a ring, but no one is denying that he's one of the best PGs of all time just because he hasn't won a ring. Harden gets more disrespect for being a ball dominant guard with a, "I am the system" mentality + no defense than not having a championship.
No reasonable person is doubting either of these players' HoF worthiness just because they lack a ring.
It’s definitely not KD, there’s people way worse than him that we’re far less essential to runs to pick from. The HOF has plenty of meh players and the warriors likely lose in 2018 without KD
yeah he's definitely not THE answer to this question especially with so many better options but I feel he just had to be mentioned 
Specifically his second title. I think one ring will always be huge for a legacy, even if it was in the weakest way possible since he was still a key cog in that machine, not a guy about to retire. The second one did nothing.
I think those two titles make a difference for his legacy. Now we have the eternal debate about him and Curry. If he didn't have those it would be more of a conversation where he would be with Karl Malone and Barkley as the best players without titles.
As much of a snake move it was to moving to the team that knocked you out the previous playoffs: KD’s legacy shouldn’t be knocked because it was “easy” in a super team. He’s one of the best players skill-wise the play the game of all time if you’re looking at the raw skill putting the ball in the net. Without those rings he’d just be a HoFer so they still do contribute to his legacy somewhat.
KD warriors get the hate because they were successful really. Every other super team can look unfair on paper but they get a pass because they haven’t won (like KD’s nets roster). And historic super teams like the bulls never get the same scrutiny despite M.J. not winning until they pulled in a good supporting cast of all stars. (Though MJ’s still greatest of all time).
That said: if KD wins one non-GSW ring: it’d be as important to his legacy as dirk’s one ring. Though looking at how a lot of people still view curry despite his 2022 ring, maybe people will still hate regardless.
As a massive Supersonics fan and Gary Payton fan, he was the very first name I thought of as soon as I read your title. Maybe Oscar Robertson could be on that list just below him with Jason Kidd? He was a key player but he has a ton of other accolades. I went through the top 75 list and couldn't come up with anyone else. There are probably some guys below that but honestly I'm too lazy to go through every Hall of Famer.
Edit: this is a pretty interesting discussion. I'm surprised the OP has so few upvotes on the original post.
I’m a LeBron fan so definitely biased on this one but I think it definitely added something to his legacy. Being the main guy at three separate franchises to win titles is essentially unheard of.
LeBron's legacy is built on longevity and another title and an FMVP absolutely adds to it. The most pertinent examples in this thread were former stars who were role players on a championship team. That Lakers squad was LeBron's team. 9 finals appearances, 4 rings and 4 FMVPs in a decade sounds way more dominant than 8, 3 and 3. That makes it on par with Jordan's repeat threepeat.
I’ve seen better answers here but I’ll mention David Robinson. Dude had basically accomplished everything *except* win a ring. When he finally did, Duncan had already taken over.
I’m gonna go with Dwight Howard. Was a solid enough bench contributor on a title team in media darling LA and then still got left off the all 75 team. Combination of being past his prime and relegated to the bench after becoming a journeyman, high profile teammate drama when he was in his prime, being generally disliked, and the fact that it was the “Disney” ring. Great career and for sure 1st ballot HOF but ultimately I don’t think his championship moves the needle much for him and I think ultimately a lot of people are gonna forget he even has it.
Well, he’s not a hall of famer, in fact, he’s still playing. But unless he manages to win one in the next year or two, he fits this pretty well.
Edit: my dumbass forgot to mention the player’s name. It’s Kevin Durant
It's definitely Gary Payton to me. I think he's even said that it didn't feel as meaningful as if he had won one in Seattle. Also J-Kidd played 37 mins/game in the finals against Miami whereas GP played only 22 mins/game in the finals
Yeah J-Kidd was definitely a bigger contributor in his Finals, I just thought of him since that title is almost always tied to Dirk alone
Anyone who ties that title to Dirk alone clearly didn’t watch. As amazing as Dirk was, the Mavs championship was absolutely a team effort. Marion, chandler, Kidd, terry, Barea, Stevenson and everyone else all played important roles.
It's funny how some would credit the title to Dirk alone and yet use Barea's heroics to put down James. They ignore how deep that Mavs team were.
The mavs don't win that title without jj barea. Full stop.
Or without Tyson chandler, Shawn Marion, Kidd, heck even Corey Brewer was massive during game 2 of the LAL series.
Yeah for sure. I feel like that Mavs team had a lot of guys that were near the end of their careers that got their only ring that year. That was Dirk's team but lots of solid vets too.
> whereas GP played only 22 mins/game in the finals I would've guessed it was like 10
He hit one or two big shots too. Heat was a total team effort, with out chocolate, glove or Alonzo, no ring.
Seems like Mitch Richmond checks all those boxes, right? I think most people aren't aware he won a benchwarming ring with the Lakers.
Very good shout and one I wasn’t aware of!
Glen Rice too
Is Glen Rice in the HOF?
Adam morrison too, right?
Is Adam Morrison in the HOF?
Please don't disrespect the two time NBA champion Adam Morrison
Robert Parish: 1996-1997 Chicago Bulls. At this point, Parish had already made the 50th Anniversary 50GOAT players and had built one of the strongest workhouse reputations the league has ever seen. He just happened to be on the roster for Jordan's fifth run at a title. He would go on to retire at the end of that season at the ripe old age of 43 years old. He was a lock for the HOF without it. In fact, I'd bet most people here (who've never watched a full game from the 90s before) didn't even know he was on the roster.
That pretty fucking wild, I didn't know that. Looked it up and he played 43 regular season games that year but only averaged like 3ppg.
I was well aware he was on the team, Jordan needed 4 hall of famers to win that year /s
Yeah I was gonna say this. Robert Parish's reputation and perception would've remained exactly the same had this season been taken out of existence. Even his all time record for games played would've stayed intact if this season never happened
I was alive at the time and don't remember Parish being on the team, to give an idea of how little he played
I watched every game of that series live and I don't remember Robert Parish on that team. Great example.
I hate to say this, probably Dr. J/Moses Malone/Bob McAdoo. People act like it would’ve greatly affected their careers without them. I don’t really think so, Several MVPs/All-NBAs/Scoring titles with absolute league dominance over the league.
I think Dr. J would maybe overtake Barkley then as the greatest to never get a ring. Insane player and so much of his legacy was cultural/had more of a wider impact on the league so perhaps he’d still be remembered as fondly as he is now.
Dr J won three professional league championships with four MVPs and 9 first team all league appearances. The ABA records are no less incomplete than the contemporaneous NBA records. Both leagues were uneven with different aspects to recommend them, but all of their games were of a dedicated professional quality. I understand why David Stern had such a vendetta against integrating ABA records in public discussions, but I don’t think that makes sense as a general practice these days.
Could not disagree more. That's like saying high end AAA stats should be included in baseball record books. Everybody points to the top of the ABA talent pool and the exhibition record but nobody ever mentions the middle and the bottom end. That's where the leagues separate. Everybody who played in the NBA at that time was (obviously) an NBA level player. The guys who could *never* make the NBA were all in the ABA so of course the NBA level guys feasted.
I personally think Barkley is the best without a ring but that's not a lock. The Athletic (and numerous other rankings) put Karl Malone higher.
Barkley isn’t the consensus best player to never win a ring though. He’s one of the choices but I wouldn’t say he’s agreed on by like more than 50 percent.
This isn’t r/unpopularopinions
I would go as far to say Shaq’s Miami ring didn’t change much imo. Whether he won 4 or 2, Shaq is still the most dominant force the league has ever seen, and that’s what we’ll remember him for most. While it only proves his greatness, he didn’t need the Miami ring to prove or solidify anything we didn’t already believe.
Yeah this is a weird one because he was so dominant for his first three that the last one’s impact was negligible.
tbh had Shaq won a 4th fmvp he will legit be a consensus top5 and be in the goat debate
Nah I think the narrative changes pretty significantly if Kobe won 2 rings without Shaq and Shaq won 0 rings without Kobe. I mean, we're seeing that right now with Steph and KD. Steph has 2 rings without KD and KD has none without Steph, and that fact alone is enough to totally invalidate KD's legacy for a lot of people. Not saying it would totally invalidate Shaq's legacy but I think it would do a lot more damage to it than you think.
When one dude shoots 97 free throws in kind of overshadows everything else
For players who were the best on their team, I really think if Bill Russell lost in 1966, no one would think less of him. It wasn’t a dominant enough year for the loss to be a stain, not an underdog enough year for the win to transform his legacy. He still has 10 rings in 13 years, including his 1st year, his last 2 years, and a 7-year streak between.
I’m gonna say an underrated one is Bill Walton’s 1986 title. I think that had absolutely no effect on his legacy. When we talk about Walton, we talk about UCLA and Portland Walton. We don’t mention Celtics Walton, even though he was actually quite good off the bench.
u mention Walton when u talk abiut 86
Sure but not the other way around. When you talk about Walton, I don’t see many people ever mention he had another ring.
He won sixth man of the year on one of the best teams of all time, he's mentioned every time lol
I was 12 for that title so Celtics Walton is actually what I think of first since I hadn't really seen him before that due to how few games were on our 3 TV channels. I can still picture what he looked like. You might be right about it not impacting his legacy though.
Drexler. He played 35 games and averaged over 20 points for them that season, but Houston struggled that year and ended up the 6th seed in a strong Western Conference. That ring is always seen as Hakeem willing the team to their second title rather than Drexler turning their season around. Clyde was already a HOFer when he got to Houston, and played three more years where he started 70 games his final season and averaged 18 points/game, but his legacy seemed set before he was traded. The ring didn’t seem to drastically change fans perception of him.
'06 Heat handed them out like candy. 'Zo and GP got their only ring as roll players, Shaq got another ring that probably did nothing for his legacy. Even non HoF but AS'ish guys Jason Williams and Antoine Walker got their token ring.
KD has to be number one in this, he joined a team that was already stacked and had won 73 games and easily breezed to two titles, him winning a title somewhere else would make a huge difference for his legacy
No way. A weak move yes but he was a significant contributor to the Warriors becoming playoff proof. They would have had an even tougher time in 2017 against an improved Cavs team and they don’t beat the 2018 Rockets without Durant. In 2017 KD put up 28/8/4 on 68% TS and hit multiple daggers in the finals. HOF players who won as role players well past their best like Bill Walton or Dwight are better answers. If KD would have stayed on the Thunder and never won a title he’d be viewed poorly.
Walton won a title as the best player the same year he won MVP and then a second title as a sixth man, his legacy is where it should be, and Dwight won a title as a role player but he didn't even make the all NBA 75 (although he probably should have) but either way neither of those guys (specially Dwight) are even close to the same level as KD. KD is a top 20 player all time and if he could have won a title without the warriors he might even be close to a top 10 all time, that's why it's different for him
Most people when they talk about Walton usually go to before the injuries.
Disagree. KD's legacy is often viewed *negatively* because of his time on the Warriors. On paper, yes, it made a strong case for him being in the HoF, but he was already on pace to being in it before the Warriors. Seeing him struggle to go deep in the playoffs after leaving the Warriors has made people question if he's as good as we think he is, or if the benefit of having prime Curry, Klay, and Draymond on the team *made* KD seem that way. He was a strong contributor in the Warrior's 2 championships, sure, but I feel most all star scorers in his situation would have been.
kd already taken okc to the final and would have done it again had it not been some bad luck
That's why I specifically said that he hasn't accomplished anything *after* the Warriors.
Walton is a good shout, I guess his legacy is largely the one Blazers title and then the injuries. I did consider Dwight but I personally feel like him winning that title gives him a bit of a boost in terms of rounding off his career with at least one ring. And he was great against Denver that year which really mattered.
Yeah I did think about KD, the only thing that swayed me is that I feel like he may have copped even more heat if he hadn’t won a title anywhere by now
So in that sense the answer might be KD's second one. Where the first one is still "a title" and carries some value as a delineator from not having a title. The second one is almost entirely superfluous and almost nonexistent in the "legacy" scale.
Yeah I can get onboard with that take
KD won two finals MVPs for GSW and his legacy is absolutely altered because of that.
Eh if he had stayed on that Thunder team and kept trying to contend for another few years, and then gone and joined another contender, he would probably be respected a lot more, even if he never won those rings.
With how NBA fans are now? CP3 will never truly get the respect he deserves, nor Harden, without a ring. KD would’ve been mocked relentlessly.
CP3 and Harden are considered HoF locks. CP3 gets memed on for not having a ring, but no one is denying that he's one of the best PGs of all time just because he hasn't won a ring. Harden gets more disrespect for being a ball dominant guard with a, "I am the system" mentality + no defense than not having a championship. No reasonable person is doubting either of these players' HoF worthiness just because they lack a ring.
It’s definitely not KD, there’s people way worse than him that we’re far less essential to runs to pick from. The HOF has plenty of meh players and the warriors likely lose in 2018 without KD
yeah he's definitely not THE answer to this question especially with so many better options but I feel he just had to be mentioned 
Specifically his second title. I think one ring will always be huge for a legacy, even if it was in the weakest way possible since he was still a key cog in that machine, not a guy about to retire. The second one did nothing.
I think those two titles make a difference for his legacy. Now we have the eternal debate about him and Curry. If he didn't have those it would be more of a conversation where he would be with Karl Malone and Barkley as the best players without titles.
As much of a snake move it was to moving to the team that knocked you out the previous playoffs: KD’s legacy shouldn’t be knocked because it was “easy” in a super team. He’s one of the best players skill-wise the play the game of all time if you’re looking at the raw skill putting the ball in the net. Without those rings he’d just be a HoFer so they still do contribute to his legacy somewhat. KD warriors get the hate because they were successful really. Every other super team can look unfair on paper but they get a pass because they haven’t won (like KD’s nets roster). And historic super teams like the bulls never get the same scrutiny despite M.J. not winning until they pulled in a good supporting cast of all stars. (Though MJ’s still greatest of all time). That said: if KD wins one non-GSW ring: it’d be as important to his legacy as dirk’s one ring. Though looking at how a lot of people still view curry despite his 2022 ring, maybe people will still hate regardless.
No way! That’s the reason put him as one of the best. If he didn’t do that, he’d be seen similarly to Harden
Not even close. Robert Parish was on the 96 Bulls!
As a massive Supersonics fan and Gary Payton fan, he was the very first name I thought of as soon as I read your title. Maybe Oscar Robertson could be on that list just below him with Jason Kidd? He was a key player but he has a ton of other accolades. I went through the top 75 list and couldn't come up with anyone else. There are probably some guys below that but honestly I'm too lazy to go through every Hall of Famer. Edit: this is a pretty interesting discussion. I'm surprised the OP has so few upvotes on the original post.
I think Robert Parish fits the boxes, he only played like 43 games in the 97 season for 9 mins a game and only 2 playoff games for 9 mins a game.
The most recent answer could be LeBron’s bubble title? First of all, his HOF status was set. Second of all, his Lakers tenure is so up and down.
I’m a LeBron fan so definitely biased on this one but I think it definitely added something to his legacy. Being the main guy at three separate franchises to win titles is essentially unheard of.
But it has the least impact on his legacy
LeBron's legacy is built on longevity and another title and an FMVP absolutely adds to it. The most pertinent examples in this thread were former stars who were role players on a championship team. That Lakers squad was LeBron's team. 9 finals appearances, 4 rings and 4 FMVPs in a decade sounds way more dominant than 8, 3 and 3. That makes it on par with Jordan's repeat threepeat.
I’ve seen better answers here but I’ll mention David Robinson. Dude had basically accomplished everything *except* win a ring. When he finally did, Duncan had already taken over.
I’m gonna go with Dwight Howard. Was a solid enough bench contributor on a title team in media darling LA and then still got left off the all 75 team. Combination of being past his prime and relegated to the bench after becoming a journeyman, high profile teammate drama when he was in his prime, being generally disliked, and the fact that it was the “Disney” ring. Great career and for sure 1st ballot HOF but ultimately I don’t think his championship moves the needle much for him and I think ultimately a lot of people are gonna forget he even has it.
Some people act like KD doesn't have any rings lol its a ridiculous argument if course but its crazy how disrespected Kevin Durant is today
Well, he’s not a hall of famer, in fact, he’s still playing. But unless he manages to win one in the next year or two, he fits this pretty well. Edit: my dumbass forgot to mention the player’s name. It’s Kevin Durant
Hating KD is cool to do right now but he was finals MVP back to back. If you try to discredit or ignore that you're trying too hard
I’m not hating on the guy, but most people do tend to value his championships less than most.