Best to Worst NBA Franchises Historically.

[Real14]

1. Boston

2. Lakers

3. Chicago

4. Spurs

5. Pistons

6. Warriors

7. Knicks

8. Sixers

9. Rockets

10. Blazers

11. Sonics

12. Washington

13. Mavs

14. Hawks

15. Bucks

16. Heat

17. Jazz

18. Suns

19. Magic

20. Nets

21. Pacers

22. Cavs

23. Okc

24. Kings

25. Denver

26. Grizzlies

27. Twolves

28. Hornets

29. Clippers

30. New Orleans

31. Toronto

32. Bobcats

If you think that I'm incorrect on this then put your "so called" accurate list yourself. Thank you for your time.

[Fudge]

Franchices

[JohnFreeman]

Knicks better then the Heat?

[Real14]

Knicks better then the Heat?
Yes because heat have asterisks for rings.

[Real14]

Franchices
My mistake I was typing too damn fast.

[ImKobe]

Lakers > Celtics for the last 20 years.

[Real14]

Lakers > Celtics for the last 20 years.
Yes that's true.

[bigt]

Lakers > Celtics for the last 20 years.

We're not talking about a cut off period here though, we're talking all of history

[ImKobe]

We're not talking about a cut off period here though, we're talking all of history

For most of us here, the Russell Celtics are way before our time, it's hard to judge.

[PerfectCell]

You having Dubs at 6 I'm assuming you including the previous names of the same franchise. Then why are you splitting up Seattle and Okc?

[J Shuttlesworth]

Knicks better than the Heat?


http://i.imgur.com/xrU4X.gif

[Real14]

You having Dubs at 6 I'm assuming you including the previous names of the same franchise. Then why are you splitting up Seattle and Okc?
Okc and seattle are actually different franchises though.

[JohnFreeman]

Celtics > Lakers

[bigt]

For most of us here, the Russell Celtics are way before our time, it's hard to judge.

That's fair enough, but studying history is all about working with the information and sources we have. Does it make for an inaccurate form at times? Sure. But it doesn't mean we ignore it. The good thing is extending the history to the Celtics historic 60's run doesn't hurt the Lakers too much either :cheers: far and away the league's two best franchises

[outbreak]

if heat are at 16 knicks need to be at 17....

[JohnFreeman]

Reason for Knicks being top 10? Don't give me mecca of basketball bullshit

[Real14]

if heat are at 16 knicks need to be at 17....
Nope. Heat are the only team in NBA history to all have asterisks for titles. They deserved none of them.

[Real14]

Reason for Knicks being top 10? Don't give me mecca of basketball bullshit
:biggums:

[shadow]

i am biased here but imo the lakers have had a greater period of sustained excellence compared to the celtics. Boston won most of their rings during Russell's era and only one in recent history.

[Smook A.]

Why did you separate OKC and Seattle when they're the same franchise?

[ImKobe]

Reason for Knicks being top 10? Don't give me mecca of basketball bullshit

Maybe because they have 2 championships and 8 Conference titles and are the highest valued franchise in the NBA, set in the biggest market?

Houston has 2 championships and 4 Conference titles.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Rockets = 2 chips / 43 years

Knicks = 2 chips / 68 years

2/43 > 2/68

[J Shuttlesworth]

Maybe because they have 2 championships and 8 Conference titles and are the highest valued franchise in the NBA, set in the biggest market?

Houston has 2 championships and 4 Conference titles.
So the Knicks have a losing finals record and the Rockets don't? 2/4 > 2/8

How come conference titles only count as a good thing when we're not talking about LeBron? :lol

[ImKobe]

Kings should be ahead of the Cavs because they actually have a championship to their name with the same amount of conference titles (1)

[ImKobe]

Rockets = 2 chips / 43 years

Knicks = 2 chips / 68 years

2/43 > 2/68

8 conference titles/68 yrs vs 4 conference titles/43 yrs

8/68 > 4/43

[J Shuttlesworth]

8 conference titles/68 yrs vs 4 conference titles/43 yrs

8/68 > 4/43
8 conference finals and only 2 chips = losing finals record

[ImKobe]

8 conference finals and only 2 chips = losing finals record

So, not making the Finals is better than making the Finals? :oldlol:

[ninephive]

How in the world are the Spurs not above the Bulls? The Bulls had one great run and outside of that have been a terrible/mediocre franchise. The Spurs have missed the playoffs like 3 times in their entire history.

[ImKobe]

How in the world are the Spurs not above the Bulls? The Bulls had one great run and outside of that have been a terrible/mediocre franchise. The Spurs have missed the playoffs like 3 times in their entire history.

Spurs have 5 titles in 6 Finals, Bulls have 6. Both teams only had one true great era. Spurs have the Duncan/Pop era, Bulls had the Phil/Jordan era.

[J Shuttlesworth]

So, not making the Finals is better than making the Finals? :oldlol:
I'm just using the logic of the Kobe fanbase honestly. Why do you think 2/5 is such a big catch phrase around here?

[TheMilkyBarKid]

For most of us here, the Russell Celtics are way before our time, it's hard to judge.
So was Hitler, but there's still a lot of useful info on him, especially if you know where to look.
Fair enough if you reserve judgement, I just have a lot of respect for the Celtics.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Spurs have 5 titles in 6 Finals, Bulls have 6. Both teams only had one true great era. Spurs have the Duncan/Pop era, Bulls had the Phil/Jordan era.
Plus the Bulls were able to defender their title twice... and then do that all again. True mark of a dynasty

[ImKobe]

So was Hitler, but there's still a lot of useful info on him, especially if you know where to look.
Fair enough if you reserve judgement, I just have a lot of respect for the Celtics.

Worst possible example. Hitler is probably the most infamous person in all of history while Russell was just a basketball player from a different era.:lol How much footage do we have from that basketball era? How evolved was the game back then? How good was their competition? All these things come into consideration.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

Worst possible example. Hitler is probably the most infamous person in all of history while Russell was just a basketball player from a different era.:lol How much footage do we have from that basketball era? How evolved was the game back then? How good was their competition? All these things come into consideration.
I think you missed the point, I was saying Hitler was before our time yet we can still examine and discuss what he did.
Not Russell = Nazi.
Yes the game is indeed different to what it is today, but basketball like some other sports (Aussie football for example) is constantly evolving and therefore it is hard to say what is any more/less valid.

[ImKobe]

I think you missed the point, I was saying Hitler was before our time yet we can still examine and discuss what he did.
Not Russell = Nazi.
Yes the game is indeed different to what it is today, but basketball like some other sports (Aussie football for example) is constantly evolving and therefore it is hard to say what is any more/less valid.

Hitler is far more covered and studied than Bill Russell. You're talking about a leader of one of the biggest nations vs some athlete from an era where Basketball was not even that popular. We probably have more footage of Hitler from the 40s than Russell's NBA games.

Two different circumstances.

[JohnFreeman]

I'm just using the logic of the Kobe fanbase honestly. Why do you think 2/5 is such a big catch phrase around here?
damn

[ImKobe]

I'm just using the logic of the Kobe fanbase honestly. Why do you think 2/5 is such a big catch phrase around here?

Because Lebron has a losing record in the Finals, despite having Wade and Bosh for 4 out of 5 Finals series. 2/4 with Wade and Bosh :facepalm, and making the Finals in the East in this era is a joke anyways.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Because Lebron has a losing record in the Finals, despite having Wade and Bosh for 4 out of 5 Finals series. 2/4 with Wade and Bosh :facepalm, and making the Finals in the East in this era is a joke anyways.
So why do the Knicks, who are in the "mecca of basketball", get excuses for losing in the finals? 2/4 > 2/8 right? Rockets > Knicks?

Knicks are also in the shitty east and can't even make the playoffs despite having a superstar

[ImKobe]

So why do the Knicks, who are in the "mecca of basketball", get excuses for losing in the finals? 2/4 > 2/8 right? Rockets > Knicks?

Knicks are also in the shitty east and can't even make the playoffs despite having a superstar

When comparing franchises, Finals record is not the end argument. You have to realize that the Knicks are the most valuable franchise in the NBA. It matters when you compare franchises.

[J Shuttlesworth]

When comparing franchises, Finals record is not the end argument. You have to realize that the Knicks are the most valuable franchise in the NBA. It matters when you compare franchises.
lol this is just horseshit. You could also say LeBron is the most valuable player in the NBA. I'd say the fact that the Knicks are in the most famous city in the US and have failed to win a ring in the last 40 years should count against them, especially with that losing finals record. Are you saying finals record is the end all for players? If so, where do you rank Jerry West?

[ImKobe]

lol this is just horseshit. You could also say LeBron is the most valuable player in the NBA. I'd say the fact that the Knicks are in the most famous city in the US and have failed to win a ring in the last 40 years should count against them, especially with that losing finals record. Are you saying finals record is the end all for players? If so, where do you rank Jerry West?

THAT'S NOT WHAT IM SAYING. A player's Finals record is not comparable to a Finals record of a franchise when making comparisons. Houston has made less NBA Finals than the Knicks (twice as less).

By your logic, missing the Playoffs would be better than not making the Finals. In some context, it might actually be true if the team that made the Finals played in a Conference that was so much worse than the other Conference.

07 Cavs only faced one team with a record over .500 when going to the Finals, and that team had replaced Ben Wallace with an old Chris Webber. While Kobe in the 1st round faced a team with a better record than any team Lebron faced in the Playoffs that year (Phoenix winning 61 games vs Detroit winning 53, Spurs winning 58) and a team that took the defending champs to 6 games and should have even won the series if it weren't for a few bad calls and Nash being injured in a close game, Amare getting suspended.

CONTEXT is everything.

[SexSymbol]

1. Lakers
2. Boston
3. Bulls
4. Spurs
5. Heat
6. Pistons
7. 76ers
8. Rockets
9. Sonics/OKC
10. Mavs

[DaSeba5]

The Heat are not even in the top 15? That's a joke, right? And the Knicks above them? :roll:

[Legends66NBA7]

Had to re-do the list. Not sure if it's completely accurate, but I it's about right...

1. Los Angeles Lakers (or Boston)
2. Boston Celtics (or Lakers)
3. San Antonio Spurs
4. Chicago Bulls
5. Philadelphia 76ers
6. Detroit Pistons
7. Miami Heat
8. Houston Rockets
9. Golden State Warriors
10. New York Knicks

11. Oklahoma City Thunder
12. Portland Trail Blazers
13. Dallas Mavericks
14. Utah Jazz
15. Phoenix Suns
16. Milwaukee Bucks
17. Atlanta Hawks
18. Washington Wizards
19. Sacramento Kings

20. Orlando Magic
21. Indiana Pacers
22. Brooklyn Nets
23. Cleveland Cavaliers
24. Denver Nuggets
25. Memphis Grizzlies
26. Los Angeles Clippers
27. New Orleans Pelicans (formerly the original Hornets)
28. Minnesota Timberwolves
29. Toronto Raptors
30. Charlotte Hornets (formerly the Bobcats)

[robert_shaww]

1. Lakers
2. Boston
3. Bulls
4. Spurs
5. Heat
6. Pistons
7. 76ers
8. Rockets
9. Sonics/OKC
10. Mavs


:facepalm