Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]After Bird you guys quit for 22 years. What do you call that?
    Posted by lakersavenger[/QUOTE]
    That's a great point. The Celtics absolutely should have expected and been prepared for the deaths of Len Bias and Reggie Lewis.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : That's a great point. The Celtics absolutely should have expected and been prepared for the deaths of Len Bias and Reggie Lewis.
    Posted by digger0862[/QUOTE]

    The Nets lost (i) Michael Ray Richardson due to drug suspension, (ii) Drazen Petrovic due to tragedy, and (iii) Jayson Williams due to injury / criminal trial, but they rebuilt and were in back-to-back Finals while the Celtics were busy dozing in the cellar of the Eastern Conference.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : The Nets lost (i) Michael Ray Richardson due to drug suspension, (ii) Drazen Petrovic due to tragedy, and (iii) Jayson Williams due to injury / criminal trial, but they rebuilt and were in back-to-back Finals while the Celtics were busy dozing in the cellar of the Eastern Conference.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]


    Richardson career over in 1986
    Petrovic came to NJ in 1991 - died in 1993 (very sad day) at age 29
    Williams career year in NJ 1998

    Bias #1 draft pick 1986
    Lewis  #1 draft pick  1987

    Translation - it is doubtful any of the Nets would have played together, while the Celtics lost 2 #1 picks in a row, who would have played together for years!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RicoLakerfan. Show RicoLakerfan's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Well case closed the Celtics are the better franchise. So sad, other Laker fans can't accept this. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RicoLakerfan. Show RicoLakerfan's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Like I said...m'boy LakerNation would spell it out for you. And is if on cue... (This is like tag-team wrestling...YOU'RE UP LN!!)
    Posted by Qdaddy[/QUOTE]


    So your response basically is "Don't count anyhting but the last 15 years, that way we win." Sad. You'd be a lot happier laker fan if you just accepted the Celtics are better as I did. We're number 2 and proud of it.  
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsNot1966anymor. Show ItsNot1966anymor's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Richardson career over in 1986 Petrovic came to NJ in 1991 - died in 1993 (very sad day) at age 29 Williams career year in NJ 1998 Bias #1 draft pick 1986 Lewis  #1 draft pick  1987 Translation - it is doubtful any of the Nets would have played together, while the Celtics lost 2 #1 picks in a row, who would have played together for years!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11[/QUOTE]

    Even if Bias and Lewis had played together, you're assuming they would have been good enough to lead Boston past the Pistons and, more importantly, the Bulls.  Would Bias and Lewis have been as good as Stockton/Malone, Payton/Kemp, KJ/Barkley, because they all lost to the Bulls.  I guess we'll never know, but I think it's quite presumptuous to assume Boston would have more Finals appearances had they lived.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : The Nets lost (i) Michael Ray Richardson due to drug suspension, (ii) Drazen Petrovic due to tragedy, and (iii) Jayson Williams due to injury / criminal trial, but they rebuilt and were in back-to-back Finals while the Celtics were busy dozing in the cellar of the Eastern Conference.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]Actually we weren't in the cellar that year. The Nets were taken the 6 games by the Celtics who had comeback similar to the one they had in LA in the 2008 to come from behind. By the time the C's returned to the cellar, the Nets were neighbors.

    The Lakers have been the premier team in the NBA in Buss era, no argument. What surprises me is why anybody from LA would bother to come on BDC to be Laker trolls in the face of that. I guess maybe it is a rivalry even if the Lakers have been the stronger team since the late 80's?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Even if Bias and Lewis had played together, you're assuming they would have been good enough to lead Boston past the Pistons and, more importantly, the Bulls.  Would Bias and Lewis have been as good as Stockton/Malone, Payton/Kemp, KJ/Barkley, because they all lost to the Bulls.  I guess we'll never know, but I think it's quite presumptuous to assume Boston would have more Finals appearances had they lived.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]It is but Bias in particular was a tough loss. The C's with him coming of of the bench and the Big 3 and Aigne and DJ probably win at least 1 more ring. It might have extended Bird and Mchale's careers and clearly would have made their second unit athletic and given them the ability to change up and go small (McHale-Bird-Bias-Ainge-DJ). He was coming out of college Worthy like with more ball handling skills and a better jumper. It would have been similar to Worthy ( a second pick in the draft) dying the night you drafted him. 

    Lewis was a blow in as far as how far the Cs fell and had no star to carry on but Reggie doesn't make the C's better than the Pistons and Bulls any more than the Lakers were prepared to deal with them in their hay day. Sometimes you guys act like the Eldon Campbell era never happened.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Even if Bias and Lewis had played together, you're assuming they would have been good enough to lead Boston past the Pistons and, more importantly, the Bulls.  Would Bias and Lewis have been as good as Stockton/Malone, Payton/Kemp, KJ/Barkley, because they all lost to the Bulls.  I guess we'll never know, but I think it's quite presumptuous to assume Boston would have more Finals appearances had they lived.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]

    I'm not assuming anything!!  It was YOU who was trying to equate the Nets losing 3 players who would never had played together, with the Celtics losing two #1 picks in a row.  One might say you are being presumptuous, assuming the Nets would have won ANYTHING had nothing happened to those 3 players.  Nice try at spinning your argument, but that doesn't fly with me - sorry to disappoint you.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : who cares!! this is a basketball forum!!
    Posted by LALAKERSMAN[/QUOTE]

    For you Laker troll I highlighted the first couple of sentences which deals with WHAT SPORT ??? Reason was you could skip over the rest if it bored you reading about our other Championship sports teams.

    They are recopied & pasted for your delightful edification, I'm sure !!!


    2. Boston - 33 Championships


    Legendary coach Red Auerbach led the Celtics to nine NBA championships in 13 seasons between 1957 and 1969, making up more than half of the team's 17 titles. Boston's teams haven't been shabby of late, either—after an 86-year drought, the Red Sox were able to shake off the "Curse of the Bambino" in 2004, winning their sixth title. They added another in 2007. The Patriots won three Super Bowls in four years between 2001 and 2005, the Celtics won the NBA finals in 2008, and the Bruins are currently trying to win their sixth Stanley Cup. The Boston Braves also won a World Series in 1914 before moving to Milwaukee, then Atlanta. Wrtten before Bruins' Championship !!!


    4 (tie). Los Angeles- 22 Championships

    With 16 championships, the Lakers are basketball's second-most successful team, after the Boston Celtics. But the franchise won five of those championships while playing in Minneapolis.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Since the merge the title score is: Lakers 10 Bulls 6 Spurs 4 Celtics 4 Sorry but our nearest rival are the Bulls!
    Posted by Laker-Nation32[/QUOTE]

    Wrong. The Celtics should worry about breaking the tie with the Spurs before they worry about the Bulls, while the Pistons are breathing behind their neck...

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Only an idiot would start counting NBA championships after the ABA and NBA merged. It is a historical fact that the Celtics have 17 NBA championships. Only idiotic Faker trolls would say they have 10 titles since the merger. How championships did the Lakers win from 2003-2008? That's right, NONE! If you want to count championships count them all! And yes, the Lakers are the only NBA team to get swept 3 times in the Finals, 1959, 1983, and 1989. Plus, the Lakers are the only team in NBA history to lose in the Finals in every decade since the 50s. 
    Posted by 21st[/QUOTE]

    But wait, where were the Celtics when the Lakers won 13 of their 16 titles? Are there enough fish to catch in the New England ponds?

    The Lakers only swept the finals once. Guess which team lost to this sweepee 3 games in a row after leading the series 2-1...




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Any constructive comments, Lakeravenger, Laker Nation 32, Lakersfan 67, LALAKERsMAN & any other tinsletown troll Sportsteam Lovers ??? I only copied & pasted the Boston & LA Comments but go in to GOOGLE and put in "Top 10 Cities With the Most Sports Championships" if you'd like see the details of the other cities.   Top 10 Cities With the Most Sports Championships These cities have won the most major sports championships By Jason Koebler…
    Posted by mandobello[/QUOTE]

    This Jason Koebler obviously knows nothing. He obviously forgets that there are two sports even more popular than the NHL. And if he counts the MLS, how can he be so ignorant to ignore the NASL?

    So, giving the benefit of counting MLS, NASL and NHL, there is no reason for him to ignore college football and basketball.

    LA 42 - Lakers 11 Dodgers 5 Rams 1 Raiders 1 Ducks 1 Angels 1 USC football 7 (AP, UPI and BCS), UCLA football 1 UCLA basketball 11, Aztecs 1, Galaxy 2

    Boston 35 - Celtics 17, Red Sox 7, Bruins 6, Pats 3, Braves 1, Holy Cross 1

    I am kind enough to give you Holy Cross as "Boston". I hope you folks are not crazy enough to count UConn as Boston...

    As a matter of fact, only one city in America has ever had the honor of celebrating 3 championships in one sport year:

    1972 Bruins, 1972 Lakers, 1972 Trojans

    I think LA is the only city with two double-digit championship organizations: UCLA 11, Lakers 11





     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : You think Kobe was happy when he made the playoffs and got eliminated in the 1st round in 2006 and 2007?  The goal is to win an NBA championship, not make the playoffs every year and end up getting eliminated in the playoffs every year. 
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    The goal is to win the championship? Don't make me laugh. Nowadays your goal is to count moral victories.

    "we have heart, you quit"

    Your goal is NOT to win the championship. Your goal is only last one more game than the Lakers. What a pity goal!!!!




     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Richardson career over in 1986 Petrovic came to NJ in 1991 - died in 1993 (very sad day) at age 29 Williams career year in NJ 1998 Bias #1 draft pick 1986 Lewis  #1 draft pick  1987 Translation - it is doubtful any of the Nets would have played together, while the Celtics lost 2 #1 picks in a row, who would have played together for years!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11[/QUOTE]

    And without those two #1 picks together, the Celtics enjoy high picks throughout the drought.

    1989 #13 Michael Smith (the next Larry Bird)
    1994 #9 Eric Montross
    1995 #14 Eric Williams
    1996 #6 'Toine
    1997 #6 Ron Mercer
    1998 #3 Chauncey Billups
    1998 #10 PP
    2000 #11 Jerome Moiso
    2001 #10 Joe Johnson
    2001 #11 Kendrick Brown
    2006 #7 Randy Foye
    2007 #5 Jeff Green

    I mean there have been only two draft picks that gave decent contributions to the franchise (Toine and PP), while two other picks that showed their eyes on talent but they gave away (Billups and Joe Johnson). Otherwise, I think you should place your blame on the draft.

    Compared with the Lakers, these are their high picks over the same period:

    1993 #12 George Lynch
    1994 #10 Eddie Jones
    2005 #10 Andrew Bynum

    I say the Lakers cashed in more than half of their high picks.








     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : So your response basically is "Don't count anyhting but the last 15 years, that way we win." Sad. You'd be a lot happier laker fan if you just accepted the Celtics are better as I did. We're number 2 and proud of it.  
    Posted by RicoLakerfan[/QUOTE]

    You should be a lot happier if you just accept the reality. That the count is 10-4 and there is no chance getting close in the near term.

    If you count overall history, you still can't get anything better than a tie: 17-48 vs 16-47...

    If you count 9-3, you then have to tell us where the Celtics were when the Lakers won 13 of the 16 titles...

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from antiqueman1. Show antiqueman1's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Once again another Boston team dominates and wins a title. Stanley Cup Champions: Boston Bruins-2011. Celtics in 2008. Sox-2007- Pats-2005 Sox-2004 Pats 2004. Pats-2002  That is domination.

    You Laker fans have no replacement for the aging Kobe. Can't wait to start counting how many years you go dry.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from AvengingCelticFan. Show AvengingCelticFan's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Well case closed the Celtics are the better franchise. So sad, other Laker fans can't accept this. 
    Posted by RicoLakerfan[/QUOTE]

    We have to be realistic as Celtic fans, your Lakers have really just been far superior to us in the last 30 something years. Let's face it, we ruled in the '60's but that's it. It's been all Lakers since. We have to admit that and can't be blaming our problems on the deaths of players. That's life.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : We have to be realistic as Celtic fans, your Lakers have really just been far superior to us in the last 30 something years. Let's face it, we ruled in the '60's but that's it. It's been all Lakers since. We have to admit that and can't be blaming our problems on the deaths of players. That's life.
    Posted by AvengingCelticFan[/QUOTE]

    Finally, a sensible Celtic fan. Thank you.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Don't sell the Celtics short.  They also "win" a few more categories: More losing seasons: Celtics 17, Lakers 12 More seasons failing to win at least 40% of your games: Celtics 7, Lakers 3 Failing to qualify for the playoffs: Celtics 16, Lakers 5 I'm of the opinion  that individual fans can claim a championship as long as they were alive to witness it.  So it's fine for guys like Duke to  claim all 17 championships, and it's understandable why he focuses so much on the past.  But all you Celtics fans 45 and younger have been living in the Lakers era since 1980, and it's sorry that the only arguments you have are based on things you can only read about and never saw.
    Posted by ItsNot1966anymor[/QUOTE]

    I like the spirit of this post. Just got some additional stats that boost the Celtics' "superiority"...

    # time lost game 7 at home (which of course means they are favorites):
    Celtics 4 Lakers 1

    # times failing to reach the finals:
    Celtics 44 Lakers 32

    # times failing in the conference finals with HCA (which, according to some, means they are favored):
    Celtics 6 Lakers 4

    # times failing to win the championship
    Celtics 48 Lakers 47
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tachometrix. Show Tachometrix's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : I like the spirit of this post. Just got some additional stats that boost the Celtics' "superiority"... # time lost game 7 at home (which of course means they are favorites): Celtics 4 Lakers 1 # times failing to reach the finals: Celtics 44 Lakers 32 # times failing in the conference finals with HCA (which, according to some, means they are favored): Celtics 6 Lakers 4 # times failing to win the championship Celtics 48 Lakers 47
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Such a weak argument. How about posting the real facts! 

    Whatever you say you still won't change history, when you wake up tomorrow the Celtics will still have 17 championships and the Lakers still lost 9 times to the Celtics in the finals. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Such a weak argument. How about posting the real facts!  Whatever you say you still won't change history, when you wake up tomorrow the Celtics will still have 17 championships and the Lakers still lost 9 times to the Celtics in the finals. 
    Posted by Tachometrix[/QUOTE]

    You dare tell me which fact I post wasn't a fact?

    When I wake up tomorrow I still know that the Celtics weren't even good enough to lose to the Lakers in 13 of their 16 championships, not to mention the Celtics failed more often than the Lakers...

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tachometrix. Show Tachometrix's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : You dare tell me which fact I post wasn't a fact? When I wake up tomorrow I still know that the Celtics weren't even good enough to lose to the Lakers in 13 of their 16 championships, not to mention the Celtics failed more often than the Lakers...
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    That's what I mean, you can't backup what you say with facts because almost everything you say is according to you and not based on historical fact.

    The reason why you keep bringing up failure is because you're a troll. Only trolls focus on failure. Here's a hint, no matter what you say when you see the rafters of the TD Garden you still see 17 championships by the Celtics. That's a fact! 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from kybested. Show kybested's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : I like the spirit of this post. Just got some additional stats that boost the Celtics' "superiority"... # time lost game 7 at home (which of course means they are favorites): Celtics 4 Lakers 1 # times failing to reach the finals: Celtics 44 Lakers 32 # times failing in the conference finals with HCA (which, according to some, means they are favored): Celtics 6 Lakers 4 # times failing to win the championship Celtics 48 Lakers 47
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    You must be an orphan because if you had a father he would have taught you it's not how many times you fall but how you get up from the fall.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jdm894g. Show jdm894g's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : This Jason Koebler obviously knows nothing. He obviously forgets that there are two sports even more popular than the NHL. And if he counts the MLS, how can he be so ignorant to ignore the NASL? So, giving the benefit of counting MLS, NASL and NHL, there is no reason for him to ignore college football and basketball. LA 42 - Lakers 11 Dodgers 5 Rams 1 Raiders 1 Ducks 1 Angels 1 USC football 7 (AP, UPI and BCS), UCLA football 1 UCLA basketball 11, Aztecs 1, Galaxy 2 Boston 35 - Celtics 17, Red Sox 7, Bruins 6, Pats 3, Braves 1, Holy Cross 1 I am kind enough to give you Holy Cross as "Boston". I hope you folks are not crazy enough to count UConn as Boston... As a matter of fact, only one city in America has ever had the honor of celebrating 3 championships in one sport year: 1972 Bruins, 1972 Lakers, 1972 Trojans I think LA is the only city with two double-digit championship organizations: UCLA 11, Lakers 11
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Im a big RAMS fan, but that championship was won during the cleveland days. Most folks in LA/OC didn't even know that.  Once they left LA for OC, they dropped their LA ties. Ducks and Angeles are in Anaheim in Orange County which is not LA.  Aztecs is even a greater stretch, thats San Diego! 

    UCLA won all those championships in the 60s and early 70s.  NCAA was totally different then.   I went to Long Beach State and as history is told, Wooden dodge the 49ers as much as possible back then.  Even UCLA ducked and dodged UNLV in the late 80s and early 90s.

    Im sure Boston can throw out La Crosse and Hockey titles.  

    Honestly I dont care what city has the most titles all together.  The bottom line is that the Celtics 17 and FAKERS 16, with 5 being in another city.  
     

Share