It's a shtick and invented by Red Auerbach.
What's this "heart" bull ? You sound like a terrible ESPN forum poster in the vein of history2b or some such.
You want the uncomfortable truth here? Winning one le takes not just a little, but A LOT of luck. Yes, the best teams often have a greater earned/luck ratio, but you need a lot of breaks along the way, especially with regard to health.
The Lakers first "repeat" in '88 saw Isiah Thomas limited in game 7 by an ankle injury. And in the game before that, Bill Laimbeer was called for a bull foul on Kareem that led the Lakers to win a game they had no business winning. On the same note, good fortune struck the Pistons next season when Magic and Worthy went down for injuries.
The Lakers '00 le? They never had to play the defending champions, who swept them a year before and suffered their best player missing the playoffs. Then they needed an epic Portland chokejob to get out of the WCF. The '02 le? I won't even cite the game 6 screwjob, but Peja was injured the entire series and the normally sharp shooting Kings struggled massively at the line in game 7.
'09. Both Yao and McGrady miss the 2nd round matchup with the Lakers, and those Rockets pushed the Lakers to 7. We can't say for sure if those two players would've made a difference, but in any event, it was a huge break for the Lakers. On the Eastern Conference side of things, KG misses the playoffs with an injury, and the Cavs, who were a terrible matchup for the Lakers, get eliminated by a luckbox Magic team, who the Lakers matched up with perfectly, considering they had no wing players worth a and Jameer Nelson was at 20% (PG defense was the Lakers achilles heel in those days).
And I can pick apart the Spurs les in a similar fashion. This is why the "repeat" shtick is arbitrary bull . The stars need to align to just win one le, much less two or three-in-a-row, and it just so happens the stars never aligned in back-to-back seasons for the Spurs.
End of the day, though, rings are rings. You don't win any extra hardware for repeating.