Deciding where the Kobe-Shaq Lakers fit among the all-time great teams is impossible, largely because the game and the athletes playing it have changed so dramatically over the last few decades. Deciding where they fit among recent three-peat teams -- those being the 1991-93 and '96-98 Bulls -- is far easier.

Behind the first, ahead of the second.

And if you really want to get specific, the '91-92 Bulls' team heads the list of all nine squads in question. This isn't something that pure numbers can prove. The '95-96 Bulls, after all, won a league-record 72 games, and last year's Lakers had the best postseason march, going 15-1 in the playoffs. So what? Pure numbers, as the Kings are the latest to prove, don't make a team the best. A variety of influences determine that -- some statistical, some physiological, some hypothetical. Every now and then, there's probably a good dose of something mystical at work as well.

All that said, here are three reasons the first modern-day three-peaters were the best:

1. The Vaunted Three-Star Constellation: It's a basketball axiom that the truly great teams had three legitimate stars. The early '90s Bulls -- heretofore referred to as tri-Bulls I -- came closest with three players who could dominate their positions -- Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant. The later Bulls had an aging Dennis Rodman as the third peg. The current Lakers have muddled through with an ancient A.C. Green one year, an old Horace another, and this season a crafty Robert Horry, who is actually a small forward.

2. Talent, Intelligence and Depth: Have you seen the replays of those Bulls on ESPN Classic or NBA.com? I saw them live but couldn't quite appreciate the combination of talent, athleticism and precision. The 20-something MJ, Scottie and Horace were a veritable blur. Combined with the tandems of BJ Armstrong/John Paxson and Bill Cartwright/Scott Williams, they could squeeze the life out of any offense and had so many weapons they led the league in field-goal percentage. Despite MJ leading the league in scoring, seven players on that squad still averaged seven points or better.

The current Lakers don't have nearly the same balance and the mid-'90s Chicago teams -- heretofore referred to as tri-Bulls II -- were a patchwork of role players after MJ and Pip. True, the '95-96 Bulls led the league in scoring MJ's first year back, but after that they weren't particularly strong in any one area, relying instead on superior guile, execution and mental toughness in the crunch to snare two more titles.

3. Level of Competition: That guile was enough for the tri-Bulls II because the league was in the competitive doldrums as a new wave of talent -- the Orlandos, Miamis and Charlottes -- waited for seasoning, the old guard -- Knicks and Rockets -- had their best days behind them and the rest -- Lakers, Pacers -- were in transition limbo. How else do you think they won 72 games in one season with Jack Haley on the roster?

Tri-Bulls I, meanwhile, staked their turf against a healthy mix of teams in both conferences riding high. After the first round, every series seemed to be a blood bath, exemplified by the '91-92 recap - sweep of the Heat, the Knicks at their best beaten in 7, the hey-day Cavs bumped in six and the wildly dangerous (or dangerously wild) Blazers taken down in six as well. The tri-Lakers both were at their best and faced their stiffest tests last season, going through the Kings, Blazers and Spurs before squashing a gritty but worn-out Sixers squad.

Where all this gets interesting, of course, is that the Lakers have a chance to ascend to truly rarefied air by adding a title or two to the string. Nets VP Willis Reed, for one, believes the chances are good since it will be several years before an answer to Shaq comes along.

The Lakers clearly need to improve the supporting cast and Kobe and Shaq already are showing the physical and mental strain of playing 100-plus games per season. But all those minutes and clutch performances give them that much more synchronicity and confidence in the clutch.

As it stands, leave them at No. 2, behind Tri-Bulls I. Whether or not they stay there is up to them.

Ric Bucher covers the NBA for ESPN The Magazine. E-mail him at ric.bucher@espnmag.com.