The Ring is NOT the Only Thing

The "Basketball for Thought" is a commentary by Kris Gardner.

November 1999

I am constantly amazed and confused when I hear fans and media summarize a player's career with the following statements: "...but he didn't win a championship". Or "he only won 1." "He was a great player, but..." With the recent death of basketball icon and legend Wilt Chamberlain, Chamberlain's hoop bio was summarized into a few short words: "He was a great player; but, he only won two rings." Only two rings?! Apparently, winning two rings diminished Wilt's greatness. Give me a break!!! Let me make one thing perfectly clear: winning a championship is hard work. It also involves a little luck as well.

Rockets' forward Charles Barkley recently announced he would retire at the end of the 1999 - 2000 season. Despite being one of the 50 Greatest Basketball Players, people have continually tagged Charles with the "he never won a ring" albatross around his neck. The same has been said of Utah's Karl Malone and John Stockton as well as other hoop legends like Laker Elgin Baylor.

Winning a championship shouldn't be a prerequisite for greatness. A player is great by putting up great numbers game in, game out and year in, year out. Look at it from the opposite point of view: winning a ring does not make a player great. San Antonio Spurs journeyman forward Jaren Jackson won a ring last season. Jaren is not a great player. (Sorry, Jaren. But, you know you aren't a great player.) Steve Kerr has been on the last 4 championship teams. He's not a great player. Heck, Fennis Dembo received a ring as a part of the 1989 Detroit Pistons. Fennis wasn't even an average player.

Obviously, the ultimate goal of any star player worth his salt should be to win a championship.

However, teams win championships; not just star players. Michael Jordan was a great player for his first six seasons; but, people began questioning his greatness until the Bulls won their first championship.

Then, MJ helped lead the Bulls to five more; thereby, making champs of "stellar" players like Scott Williams, B.J. Armstrong, Will Perdue, etc. (I feel safe in saying none of those guys will be voted as one of the top players of all time.)

It's not a shame Barkley won't win a ring in his career. (Sorry, Rockets' fans. No ring for you this year.) I won't bore you with the politically correct answers of a shame being poverty, prejudice, etc. In the basketball sense, it's a shame to be a great player and never play on a playoff team. It's a shame to have a promising career cut short by injury or a tragic accident. Not winning a ring should be a blip on a player's career; not the Northern Lights.

If winning a championship were easy, don't fans realize stars like Baylor, Barkley, Malone, and Stockton would have tapped that winning philosophy many years ago? Many factors contribute to winning: injuries, coaching, chemistry, luck, teammates' talent, opposition's talent, or, quite simply, being in the right place at right time.

Kevin Garnett has become one of the game's top three players. He may never win a ring. Shaquille O'Neal may never win a ring. Tim Duncan may never win another ring. Those players will still be great players with great careers whether they have rings on their fingers or not.

Why is MJ considered the greatest player of all time? He only won six rings. Bill Russell won eleven.