At the risk of inspiring another silly “player ranking” debate: assuming these dudes are ranked, there’s no way Iverson should be above Kidd, Moncrief, and Bernard King. Iverson richly deserved his lack of ring by being, for the most part, a pretty inefficient player. Kidd and Moncrief were miles better than AI at everything, except looking cool and being charismatic. Defense and rebounding, anyone?

Also, Stockton should be above the Mailman, imo.

I agree with SI that as of now LeBron is pretty clearly the GOAT-WOR (Greatest of All Time Without a Ring). Weird. Clearly, amazing as he is, he needs a Curry and a Randolph by his side to get him over the top…

Not at all! You don’t deserve a title just for being a really good player.

When I see people like Iverson, Vince, Dirk, and Ewing on the list, Is say, “Duh! Those guys not only aren’t that good … their flaws were a big part of the reason they never won titles.”

Adrian Dantley? I think SI is worshiping at the altar of PPG a little much. The Pistons won a title BECAUSE they traded Dantley. He cared more about his shots than the team. I think if a team becomes a championship team because they trade you for someone more unselfish, who gets with the team concept, you forfeit any right to be on a “best players who never won a title” list.

Besides which, if every great player got a title, it wouldn’t mean anything. Lebron’s postseason failure this year hurts BECAUSE he can’t expect a title handed to him on a silver platter.

Certainly deserved a ring, shame though, never got it together to make the final push, due to the high amount of competition.