Jump to content


Greatest Nba Franchise Discussion


45 replies to this topic

#41 fleung22

fleung22

    PokerStars Global Events Rep (PokerStars Macau)

  • Members
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver-->Toronto-->Macau

Posted 01 July 2009 - 05:02 AM

View PostBigDMcGee, on Monday, June 22nd, 2009, 10:53 PM, said:

Okay, I know they were unlucky, but that doesn't change anything for this discussion.between 88 and 2008 they were in the eastern finals exactly once, in 2001-02 in one of the weakest eastern conferences in history.During that stretch the lakers were in the NBA finals 6 times, winning 3 times. Also, when I say irrelevant, I don't mean clippers irrelevant, I mean in comparison to the Lakers irrelevant. Once McCale's foot and Bird's back went out, they were never a championship contender unill 2007-08, that's all I'm saying. The laker's record of consistency is remarkable.
pretty much what I was gonna say. definitely unlucky but luck isn't a real argument. nobody is an unlucky as the Clippers...for real, how could the system be so bad? it's not that bad...it's got to be some sickly bad luck to run sooooooo bad as a franchise. you could literally have a monkey randomly drafting players and have better results. makes me laugh to think the Pens have gone from winning a stanley cup, hitting rock bottom, then winning a stanley cup. in the time span of those 2 championships the Clips have made the playoffs once.


#42 BigDMcGee

BigDMcGee

    Forum Entitlist

  • Members
  • 23,987 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2009 - 05:16 AM

View Postfleung22, on Wednesday, July 1st, 2009, 8:02 AM, said:

pretty much what I was gonna say. definitely unlucky but luck isn't a real argument. nobody is an unlucky as the Clippers...for real, how could the system be so bad? it's not that bad...it's got to be some sickly bad luck to run sooooooo bad as a franchise. you could literally have a monkey randomly drafting players and have better results. makes me laugh to think the Pens have gone from winning a stanley cup, hitting rock bottom, then winning a stanley cup. in the time span of those 2 championships the Clips have made the playoffs once.
clippers aren't just unlucky, they are incompetently run by an apathetic and compulsively cheap owner.
Posted Image
"We are only wise in knowing that we know nothing"
-Socrates

"Dust. Wind. Dude."
-Ted Theodore Logan

"I'm a basketball player and a businessman, not a Thundercat,"
-Lebron James

#43 babylondonks

babylondonks

    I have had a perfectly wonderful evening

  • Members
  • 4,104 posts
  • Location:but this wasn't it.

Posted 11 July 2009 - 08:08 AM

View PostGeneralGeeWhiz, on Saturday, June 20th, 2009, 11:54 AM, said:

Fixed their post. This list is pretty off base. The Pistons at #13 and the Phoenix Suns at #5? Did a 14 year old retarded kid make this list???
John Hollinger....so yes.As a Celtics fan I obviously think they should be on top but I definately see the argument for the Lakers and think it should be a 1/1a situation like somebody else said. The fact that between them they've won >1/2 the titles is ridiculous. Just a note about the C's making the Eastern Finals a few years back in a weak conference, the West was the weak conference for most of the previous years of the league so it could be said that many of LA's conference finals shouldn't count as much. I'm just playing devils advocate here, I think they're both an achievement :club:

#44 babylondonks

babylondonks

    I have had a perfectly wonderful evening

  • Members
  • 4,104 posts
  • Location:but this wasn't it.

Posted 11 July 2009 - 08:09 AM

And agree with BigD, Clippers have been horrible. I doubt they actually have scouts at this stage.

#45 GeneralGeeWhiz

GeneralGeeWhiz

    Go Niners

  • Members
  • 5,191 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cupertino/Garden City, CA
  • Interests:mtt bubbles, girls, fast cars and golf.
  • Favorite Poker Game:mtt bubbles

Posted 11 July 2009 - 04:26 PM

View Postbabylondonks, on Saturday, July 11th, 2009, 9:08 AM, said:

John Hollinger....so yes.As a Celtics fan I obviously think they should be on top but I definately see the argument for the Lakers and think it should be a 1/1a situation like somebody else said. The fact that between them they've won >1/2 the titles is ridiculous. Just a note about the C's making the Eastern Finals a few years back in a weak conference, the West was the weak conference for most of the previous years of the league so it could be said that many of LA's conference finals shouldn't count as much. I'm just playing devils advocate here, I think they're both an achievement :club:
back to the original point, should the Lakers or Celtics be #1 and the other be #1a? It's a debate with no answer.

#46 Mercury69

Mercury69

    Half man! Half man!

  • Members
  • 14,244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pftph!
  • Favorite Poker Game:NLHE

Posted 31 July 2009 - 12:29 PM

Spurs ahead of the Bulls and Sixers? If that's the case, then I'll ignore Civil War history also as being insignificant.Bulls should be recognized not just for Jordan, but for the great supporting cast Jackson put together to support the guy. Scotty Pippen, Bill Cartwright, Horace Grant, John Paxson, Dennis Rodman (at various times). Don't tell me those guys weren't a factor.Also, Detroit at 13? WTF? Up at least 5 notches, if not more. They pretty much owned the latter half of the 80's and were top notch until '91.
"We had all the momentum. We were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look west, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark, that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back." —Raoul Duke, Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas

"Those are brave men knocking at the door. Let's go and kill them!" - Tyrion Lannister



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users