Taking a broad look at NBA history reveals a gradual decrease in the prevalence of dynasties over time. The league`s early years were almost entirely dominated by just two teams: the Minneapolis Lakers secured five championships in six seasons, followed by the Boston Celtics winning 11 in 13, including an unmatched eight in a row. Neither achievement has been replicated since. Moving forward to the 1980s, while no single team completely dominated the decade, it was heavily influenced by the Lakers and Celtics once more. Every NBA Finals during that period featured one of them, with only five unique teams reaching the Finals in total: the Lakers, Celtics, 76ers, Rockets, and Pistons.
The 1990s saw a single team, the Chicago Bulls, reign supreme, although they typically faced different opponents in the Finals each year. A total of 13 teams reached the Finals in that decade. The Bulls won six titles across two separate three-peats. The Lakers quickly followed suit with their own three-peat, but the NBA hasn`t witnessed one since. In fact, the league has seen only three repeat champions after that Lakers run ended. The Lakers (again), Miami Heat, and Golden State Warriors each won two consecutive titles. That`s just three repeat champions over 23 years. For context, the 23 years preceding that Lakers streak featured five different repeat champions.
This trend isn`t limited to teams; it`s also visible among individual players. Consider the most successful players from different NBA eras. Bill Russell won 11 championships, a figure widely considered unbreakable today. Michael Jordan and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar each won six. Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan won five. LeBron James and Stephen Curry have won four. Is it more likely that the best players and teams are declining in quality over time, or that winning itself is becoming increasingly difficult? With each passing generation, the peak achievement seems to lower, and stringing together multiple championships becomes a greater challenge. This is the narrative of NBA history.
However, the slow shift towards parity has recently accelerated into a rapid change. On Sunday, the Oklahoma City Thunder eliminated the Denver Nuggets from the 2025 postseason. The Nuggets were the 2023 champions. The 2019 champion Raptors missed the playoffs entirely. Champions from 2020 (Lakers) and 2021 (Bucks) were eliminated in the first round, while the 2022 (Warriors) and 2024 (Celtics) champions were knocked out in the second round, alongside the Nuggets. This means the 2025 champion will be the seventh different team to win the title in the past seven years – an unprecedented streak in NBA history. Furthermore, none of the previous six champions even advanced past the second round in their title defense season.
What`s Driving the Decline of Dynasties?
Pinpointing the exact cause is complex and lacks a simple answer. The 2023 collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is a potential long-term factor, but it has only been in effect for two seasons, making it insufficient to explain a seven-year trend.
Another frequently cited reason that aligns better with the timeline is the change in commissionership in 2014. A common jest during the David Stern era was that the former commissioner`s ideal NBA Finals would feature the Lakers battling themselves. Adam Silver`s public statements have offered a contrasting perspective. In 2022, Silver stated, “Anybody running a league wants to see not necessarily in my mind parity on the floor every year, but parity of opportunity. You also want a system where the best players, the best-managed teams can also excel.”
The Silver era has undeniably included efforts aimed at leveling the playing field. He has overseen two CBA negotiations that moved in this direction, introduced the Play-In Tournament to promote competition among middle-tier teams, and flattened lottery odds to discourage tanking. Silver`s vision of a healthy league likely involves a greater variety of champions. However, the primary factors contributing to this diversity might largely be outside a commissioner`s direct control.
To truly understand what`s happening, we must examine the commonalities among these recent champions. The most evident shared characteristic is their approach to roster construction.
Three of the six recent champions won their titles shortly after trading multiple first-round picks for a veteran star. The Lakers acquired Anthony Davis, while the Bucks and Celtics both brought in Jrue Holiday. A fourth team, the Nuggets, traded a first-round pick and a player they had recently drafted in the first round (RJ Hampton) to acquire Aaron Gordon. While they didn`t win immediately, they secured the championship in their first season with a healthy roster built around him. A fifth team, the Raptors, also traded for a star in Kawhi Leonard. They didn`t need to give up multiple picks, mainly because he was an impending free agent, allowing them to pay for just one season before losing him.
These teams also tended to rely on older, more experienced players. Three starters for the 2019 Raptors (Kyle Lowry, Marc Gasol, Danny Green) were in their 30s. Seven of the 10 players in the 2020 Lakers` playoff rotation were in their 30s, with their best player, LeBron James, being 35. Jrue Holiday and Brook Lopez were both in their 30s when the Bucks won. Stephen Curry, Draymond Green, and Klay Thompson were in their 30s for the Warriors` 2022 championship run.
Broadly speaking, these teams exemplify the “all-in” era. The Lakers were built almost entirely through major trades. The Raptors acquired their top player via trade. The Nuggets, Bucks, and Celtics drafted their foundational stars but made aggressive moves for veterans to bolster their immediate championship aspirations. The Warriors represent an indirect example; while their 2022 team lacked a flashy new addition, their 2017 and 2018 championships were heavily influenced by Kevin Durant. Even in 2022, the Warriors benefited indirectly from Durant`s past presence, as his vacated salary slot eventually absorbed Andrew Wiggins, arguably their second-best player that year. These are all teams that successfully gambled big on the player movement that has defined the last 15 years or so of NBA history.
This trend matters for two significant reasons. The first is simply volume. These star-laden teams had to compete against each other. Your “all-in” trade might position you as a contender, but it doesn`t prevent other teams from making similar power moves. While theoretically one team could have made a move so superior it built a dynasty, the fact that none did points to the second factor: cost.
The price for acquiring superstar or even high-level starting players has reached unprecedented levels because so many teams are now desperate to land such talent. Demand significantly outweighs supply, particularly for younger stars. The Lakers paid a premium for Anthony Davis not just for his talent but because he was only 26 at the time of the trade. Holiday also cost a substantial amount, though slightly less because he was older when acquired. While Golden State`s core players were homegrown, the Warriors paid them top dollar. Even with what was then the highest payroll in NBA history, they had extremely limited resources left to build out the rest of their roster.
This financial constraint is a fundamental element contributing to the champion turnover. The cost of going “all-in,” as these teams did, meant sacrificing depth and future maneuverability. The Warriors lost key reserves Gary Payton II and Otto Porter after the 2022 Finals. The Bucks lost P.J. Tucker. The Raptors gradually saw their entire championship core depart over subsequent years. These examples are from teams that won before the 2023 CBA, and it`s crucial to remember that once you`ve traded all your draft picks, you cannot repeat that strategy.
Part of the reason the Lakers struggled significantly to trade Russell Westbrook was that they had already spent all their draft assets to acquire Davis. The Bucks invested heavily in stars like Jrue Holiday and eventually Damian Lillard, leaving them with minimal draft capital to spend on depth and defense. The Nuggets anticipated this issue and attempted to solve it proactively by trading their meager remaining future draft capital for immediate, lower-value picks. Their logic was that they could simply draft their depth affordably instead of paying market value in trades or free agency. This is a sound strategy if the players you draft are good. Unfortunately for Denver, their recent draft picks haven`t panned out, leaving the Nuggets without assets to trade for veterans to compensate. In essence, they lost key 2023 role players like Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Bruce Brown, and Jeff Green because they believed they could replace them internally but ultimately couldn`t.
How Does This Prevent Repeat Champions?
Primarily, because depth and maneuverability have become more critical than ever due to one unfortunate reality: player health. It is significantly less common for NBA teams to remain healthy throughout a four-round playoff run today compared to the past. Data supports this observation, courtesy of Lev Akabas. Between 1994 and 2018, there were only three seasons where five All-Stars missed a playoff game due to injury, with the number never exceeding five in that entire span. Since 2019, however, every postseason has seen at least five All-Stars miss time, with the number reaching a peak of 10 in 2021.
So, who was the defending champion in 2021? That would be the Lakers. You might recall they were leading their first-round series against the Phoenix Suns until Anthony Davis suffered a groin strain. A year later, the defending champion Bucks pushed the Celtics to a Game 7 despite playing their entire second-round series without Khris Middleton. Nearly every member of this year`s Celtics team either entered the playoffs injured or got hurt during the postseason, including Jayson Tatum reportedly tearing his Achilles. The Nuggets might have overcome the Thunder if Michael Porter Jr. had two healthy arms.
While injuries are obviously beyond a team`s control, what helps teams overcome them? Depth, youth, and maneuverability. A strong bench allows a team to survive a few games or even a series without a key player. Younger players are more likely to develop and help fill the void left by injured players or those lost through trades or free agency. Possessing trade assets means that, following a postseason loss, you can address shortcomings and try again the following season. However, these “all-in” teams often lack at least one, if not all, of these crucial elements. They are frequently built around older players who may decline after winning a title rather than improving. They are thinner due to the push for the championship and lack the assets to remedy that weakness.
Putting all these factors together provides a plausible explanation. At least for now, what we`re observing seems less tied to enforced league-wide parity and more to the aggressive roster-building strategies that have become characteristic of this era in NBA history. This style of team construction creates a number of viable, championship-level teams concurrently but also makes each of those teams more susceptible to immediate decline. This vulnerability, combined with the increased frequency of postseason injuries in the modern NBA, makes it harder than ever to win multiple championships with the same core. Furthermore, as discussed, this aligns with the natural historical progression the sport has followed for eight decades – the arc of history bends away from long-standing dynasties.
But just because the trend has slowly moved away from dynasties doesn`t mean they are extinct. The question on everyone`s mind remains: is the dynasty truly dead?
Is This Era of Parity Here to Stay?
Again, there`s no simple answer. There`s compelling evidence suggesting this level of parity could become the new norm. We`ve touched on the 2023 CBA, and teams are only now beginning to fully grasp its effects; keeping a team together for more than a few years is more challenging than ever before. Injuries are also likely here to stay. As Lev Akabas noted, NBA players cover roughly 9% more distance per game now than they did a decade ago. The modern game demands more physical mileage from players` bodies, likely contributing to more injuries, and there`s no obvious fix for this. Champions coming off grueling four-round playoff runs are theoretically more vulnerable to these injuries than other teams. Injuries will always pose a potential threat to any aspiring dynasty.
However, if we view this recent period of parity primarily as a consequence of roster-building strategies rather than a deliberate league initiative, we must consider where roster building is headed before declaring the current situation permanent. While the “all-in” era is far from over, it now coexists with what could be termed the “all-out” era.
What does “all-out” mean? Essentially, when one team goes “all-in” by trading a star, the team they trade *with* is going “all-out.” For a few years, that “all-out” team will likely be poor, or they wouldn`t have traded their stars in the first place. But eventually, that team improves again, often in a more sustainable way.
Consider the Oklahoma City Thunder. The Clippers went “all-in” for Paul George. In return, the Thunder received Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and a treasure trove of draft picks. They`ve utilized some of these picks (notably on Jalen Williams) but have also managed to stockpile and trade others while using their own picks to land core pieces (Chet Holmgren being a prime example). This strategy allows them to build patiently.
When a team goes “all-in,” the objective is immediate success. When a team goes “all-out,” however, the goal is future success. Patience is a virtue in this scenario. Think back to the pitfalls we discussed earlier: age and depth. These are not problems for the Thunder currently. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is 26. Alex Caruso is their only rotation player older than him. Depth is also not an issue; the Thunder have used 10 players in their recent playoff runs, most of whom could credibly start for other teams. Maneuverability is how they plan to avoid future problems. The Thunder have accumulated so many draft picks that when their role players become older and expensive, they can cycle them out and replace them with young, cost-controlled newcomers acquired through the draft or trades facilitated by their draft capital.
The Thunder are currently the leading example of this emerging “all-out” era, but other contenders built similarly are on the horizon. The Rockets and Spurs share similar characteristics: they are young, talented, still inexpensive, and have amassed a considerable number of draft picks to use for either immediate needs or long-term roster maintenance. In an ideal scenario, these teams could win while maintaining their “all-out” philosophy. However, should the need arise to make an “all-in” move, they possess the assets to do so without completely gutting the rest of their roster, thanks to their accumulated spare parts.
Naturally, these “all-out” teams face a similar challenge to the “all-in” teams: they must compete against one another. The Thunder are currently at the forefront, but as long as several such talented young teams exist, building a dynasty while battling them won`t be easy. Yet, reflect on the history we covered at the beginning of this article. The NBA was already, albeit slowly, becoming less conducive to dynasties. We might need to accept that our old definitions of what constitutes a dynasty have become outdated. That doesn`t preclude us from establishing a new understanding.
Nobody declared the “death of the dynasty” when the Jordan-era Bulls won barely half the number of championships as the Russell-era Celtics. Instead, they acknowledged that replicating the Celtics` dominance decades later was simply impossible. We find ourselves in a similar position today. In the current landscape of the NBA, the idea of a star player or team consistently winning five or six championships, or perhaps even three in a row, might simply not be feasible anymore. Nevertheless, it is highly probable that one or more of these “all-out” teams will break the current streak of seven different champions in seven years.
When this new era of NBA history stabilizes, a player like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Victor Wembanyama, or one of their contemporaries will likely emerge as the defining winner of their generation. Their legacy might be marked by three or four championships instead of five or six. This wouldn`t make them or their teams inherently less great than those from previous eras with higher ring counts. It would simply reflect the continuously evolving nature of the NBA.
Jasper Hawthorne