The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

[ZM Punk]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

The Knicks or 76ers. You could make a case for either of them, but if I had to choose I would probably say Philly.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

Ive thought about it. I think #3 (behind LA and Boston) has to be Chicago. I realize its driven by one player but that player left such tremendous footprints that its hard to ignore. And 6 Championships is just too big of a number for anyone else to be put ahead of Chicago.

Next, I would say its either the 76ers, Pistons or the Spurs. The Spurs have more titles (1 I think) but the 76ers have had a more sustained run than the Spurs. I think when you also add up their finals appearances over the years along with some of the great players who played for them (Wilt, Dr. J, Moses Malone, Charles Barkley, Allen Iverson) they get the edge.

So here would be my top 10:

1. Boston Celtics
2. LA Lakers
3. Chicago Bulls
4. Philadelphia 76ers
5. Detroit Pistons
6. San Antonio Spurs
7. New York Knicks
8. Houston Rockets
9. Portland Trailblazers
10. San Diego/LA Clippers...Ha

[ZM Punk]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

Ive thought about it. I think #3 (behind LA and Boston) has to be Chicago. I realize its driven by one player but that player left such tremendous footprints that its hard to ignore. And 6 Championships is just too big of a number for anyone else to be put ahead of Chicago.

Next, I would say its either the 76ers, Pistons or the Spurs. The Spurs have more titles (1 I think) but the 76ers have had a more sustained run than the Spurs. I think when you also add up their finals appearances over the years along with some of the great players who played for them (Wilt, Dr. J, Moses Malone, Charles Barkley, Allen Iverson) they get the edge.

So here would be my top 10:

1. Boston Celtics
2. LA Lakers
3. Chicago Bulls
4. Philadelphia 76ers
5. Detroit Pistons
6. San Antonio Spurs
7. New York Knicks
8. Houston Rockets
9. Portland Trailblazers
10. San Diego/LA Clippers...Ha

When I think of historically I think of teams that are consistently at or around the top for the most part of said teams existence. Thats why I can't put the Bulls at number 3, because before Jordan they just weren't that good. I mean out of the teams 41 years of existence, 21 of them have been losing seasons.

[P2K]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

The Bulls were nothing before Jordan and they look like nothing after him so far.

When you create a thread like this and say you want to know the top teams historically, I'm thinking most wins, most playoff wins, how long they've been in the league.

I didn't know it was it was most titles won and what one player has done for the league.

That's like saying the Patriots should be put ahead of Green Bay when talking about the NFL.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

When I think of historically I think of teams that are consistently at or around the top for the most part of said teams existence. Thats why I can't put the Bulls at number 3, because before Jordan they just weren't that good. I mean out of the teams 41 years of existence, 21 of them have been losing seasons.

I realize that and thats why I struggled with it. But like I said, Jordan and that Bulls team were so larger than life its impossible to look past them. Plus you look at the fact that they have significantly more championships than anyone else and it doesnt really leave room for anyone to displace them even though their run of excellence was relatively brief.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

The Bulls were nothing before Jordan and they look like nothing after him so far.

When you create a thread like this and say you want to know the top teams historically, I'm thinking most wins, most playoff wins, how long they've been in the league.

I didn't know it was it was most titles won and what one player has done for the league.

That's like saying the Patriots should be put ahead of Green Bay when talking about the NFL.

I never said the Bulls should be excluded because their run of excellence started with Jordan and only lasted for a relatively brief period of time. But check out my previous post. I pretty much lay out there why I put the Bulls at #3.

[ZM Punk]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

I realize that and thats why I struggled with it. But like I said, Jordan and that Bulls team were so larger than life its impossible to look past them. Plus you look at the fact that they have significantly more championships than anyone else and it doesnt really leave room for anyone to displace them even though their run of excellence was relatively brief.

But they were only great in the 90's, that doesn't exactly equal historically successful. For the most part they have been a historically subpar franchise that had a historically successful run in the 90's. Hell even in Jordan's early years they struggled.

[The 24th Letter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

I didnt realize that was required to be included in this discussion, it says the top teams historically, not the teams who have won the most titles. If we were doing this same debate in football, would anyone discount Buffalo for not winning a title even though they got there so many times and were proven to be a great team? Im not trying to come across as hostile, just wondering where the cut off is then, title or no title Utah is a really good team and has been really consistent, they deserve to be in the discussion but not near the top of the list.

im not saying thats the pre req or that they wouldnt make MY list b\c of that...

just speculating

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

But they were only great in the 90's, that doesn't exactly equal historically successful. For the most part they have been a historically subpar franchise that had a historically successful run in the 90's. Hell even in Jordan's early years they struggled.

Why are you pointing this out again? I understand all that but still, when I look at it, your looking at 6 championships to the Sixers (2?) or the Pistons 3. Thats 3X and 2X as much respectively. I realize it came in a short period of time. When I look at what the Sixers have done since the 60s I dont think its more impressive than what the Bulls have done even in a shorter period of time. Basically, when I look at it, the Bulls accomplished more in 8 years than pretty much any other team (not named the Lakers or Celtics) have done in 40 years. And I dont think they should be excluded just because it was over a short period of time. It still counts. And it was also kind of the golden era for the NBA...the 80s and 90s were actually. If I take the various things into consideration, its the Bulls. If you want to make your own list go ahead.

[P2K]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

Then why the hell did you create this thread and asked for others' opinions when you obviously had your mind set and discount anything else brought up?

The OS NBA Forum in full bloom.


Or maybe it's just me. I guess I'm just so biased and need to stay out of this because I have no clue of what I talk about.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

Then why the hell did you create this thread and asked for others' opinions when you obviously had your mind set and discount anything else brought up?

The OS NBA Forum in full bloom.


Or maybe it's just me. I guess I'm just so biased and need to stay out of this because I have no clue of what I talk about.

I didnt have my mind made up. I thought about it after starting the thread. Im not discounting anything. I made a list and youre discounting my list. Thats fine. But I also encourage you to make your own list so I can poke holes in it. If you think it should be the Sixers because their success has been more spread out, thats totally valid as I said at the outset. But from my end, as I thought about it, the Bulls had too strong of a case.

[EWRMETS]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

Both Philadelphia teams (Warriors/Sixers), then the Knicks.

After that, it's a few teams that can fight for next.

The Warriors were just as successful or even more successful as a Cali team than a Philly team so I wouldn't just call them a Philly team.

Sixers are up there but they really have had only had two streaks of excellence..the short time with Wilt and the Dr. J years.

The Spurs did have an era or consistent competiveness with Gervin and won 5 division titles with him. There recent dynasty over the past 9 years is greater than anything the Sixers did by far. While the Gervin era isn't as good as the Wilt or Dr. J. era, the Duncan era has been remarkable. Even before Duncan, the Spurs were a real competitive team with Robinson.

No team is close to the Lakers and Celtics in terms of continued success but I think the Pistons then Spurs have been the top teams historically. If you place the Sixers over the Spurs, it's simply because they have a longer NBA history. After the Spurs and Pistons, it would probably be the Warriors and Sixers followed by the Knicks and Bulls.

[P2K]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

I didnt have my mind made up. I thought about it after starting the thread. Im not discounting anything. I made a list and youre discounting my list. Thats fine. But I also encourage you to make your own list so I can poke holes in it. If you think it should be the Sixers because their success has been more spread out, thats totally valid as I said at the outset. But from my end, as I thought about it, the Bulls had too strong of a case.

You are discounting what others are saying because when I made my list, you didn't come back with a nice debate.

You came back with "Nice avatar".

That right there fired off shots. You get what you get after doing that.

[P2K]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

The Warriors were just as successful or even more successful as a Cali team than a Philly team so I wouldn't just call them a Philly team.

The Warriors, while good in California, were way more dominant and are way more of a historical landmark while in Philadelphia. Sorry, but I can't agree with you on this.

Sixers are up there but they really have had only had two streaks of excellence..the short time with Wilt and the Dr. J years.

And that means nothing? That spans over three decades by themselves. 60s, 70s and 80s.

The Spurs did have an era or consistent competiveness with Gervin and won 5 division titles with him. There recent dynasty over the past 9 years is greater than anything the Sixers did by far. While the Gervin era isn't as good as the Wilt or Dr. J. era, the Duncan era has been remarkable. Even before Duncan, the Spurs were a real competitive team with Robinson.

While the Spurs run now is awesome, that trumps Chamberlain, Greer, Doc, Cunningham, Moses, Barkley and Iverson?

No team is close to the Lakers and Celtics in terms of continued success but I think the Pistons then Spurs have been the top teams historically. If you place the Sixers over the Spurs, it's simply because they have a longer NBA history.

Isn't that a part of the equation?

After the Spurs and Pistons, it would probably be the Warriors and Sixers followed by the Knicks and Bulls.

Your opinion. Nothing wrong with that.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: The Lakers and Celtics are the top teams historically but who comes next...

You are discounting what others are saying because when I made my list, you didn't come back with a nice debate.

You came back with "Nice avatar".

That right there fired off shots. You get what you get after doing that.

I cant believe youre bent out of shape about that. It was no big deal. I was just razzing you a little because you were lobbying hard for Philly teams with this very conspicuous Philadelphia avatar.