I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    California is not the 'Land of a Thousand Lakes' so the name itself should have stayed in Minny and been given back in 1989 instead of the T'Wolves. Mikan would have a statue outside the new stadium and the 5 titles would have their own banners.

    Ah well, what LA did to that team is shameful

    But I disagree about an astersik b/c of the shot clock... you're not going to asterisk the early Word Series (are you?) with the lower mound and all the other changes that game has gone through...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    The 'Jazz' name should have stayed in New Orleans... you don't see the Oklahoma City Sonics do ya?

    Whenever the game of basketball leaves a worthless place (like Charlotte, and Memphis can move to the East) then the Sonics name will return and the 1979 banner hang in the rafters.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from krismk. Show krismk's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    I'm such an idiot.
    I always thought it was about Veronica Lake
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]California is not the 'Land of a Thousand Lakes' so the name itself should have stayed in Minny and been given back in 1989 instead of the T'Wolves. Mikan would have a statue outside the new stadium and the 5 titles would have their own banners. Ah well, what LA did to that team is shameful But I disagree about an astersik b/c of the shot clock... you're not going to asterisk the early Word Series (are you?) with the lower mound and all the other changes that game has gone through...
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    Yes Ram, I absolutely do give that era an asterisk.....baseball has undergone many changes but the game is still basically the same....

    the NBA of the pre shot clock was another game in and of itself......and the league almost went under before revamping the product......only during that time could a team win 18-17 due to "stall ball" which was in vogue...

    only in that era could two teams play a game that went into five overtimes with only one shot taken by either team in each of those overtimes...

    only during that era could the game's greatest star (George Mikan) have to retire because he couldn't play under the "new rules"...

    Yes indeed....that era deserves an asterisk when we talk NBA History....

    that's what makes the Celtic championship history so great...all in the "modern era".....all in the city of Boston....with a complete dominanace of our competition in the Finals (17-4 .809)....and an even better showing agains our arch rivals (the Lakers) with a 9-3 record (.750)......

    really....it doesn't get any better than that....





     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Skins and Heart. Show Skins and Heart's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    Mikan has a statue at Target Center.

    Fully agree that names and colours ought to stay with a teams city of Origin. Lakers in Minneapolis, Jazz for New Orleans. However Pistons really does suit Detroit nicely.

    The only good thing to come out the Thunder was they left the Sonics legacy. Which hopefully will the model for future moves.

    As to the Minneapolis titles. The Lakers as a whole forgot about them after the move to LA. Had the attitude of what happened in Minneapolis stayed in Minneapolis. No retired numbers, and Mikans #99 ought to be properly honoured in LA. And then there is just one banner for the five championships. It's just paying as little respect to the titles and history as possible.

    You go to Staples and see 12 banners, for a team claiming 16. It just makes no sense. Maybe for fans who can't count or think the NBA started in 1980 it makes perfect sense?

    Five banners, and retirement services for the 'honoured' numbers and then that would be the start of a proper acknowledgment of the history.

    Buying back the trophies would also help.....


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Skins and Heart. Show Skins and Heart's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    As for the banner/s and titles going back to Minniapolis. I'd say there is as much chance of that happening, as Greece having the Elgin Marbles returned.

    Which is just about as close to zero as you can get.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]that's what makes the Celtic championship history so great...all in the "modern era"....it doesn't get any better than that....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php?title=NBA_Eras

    "On February 19, 2008, the NBA declared that the Phoenix Suns and the Denver Nuggets will play the first outdoor game on October 11, 2008, at the Indian Wells Tennis Garden. It will be the first outdoor game in the modern era of the NBA."

    NBA outdoor games: 1972 Bucks vs Suns, 2008 Suns vs Nuggets, 2009 ..."

    In other words, the modern era, according to this article, won't include anything prior to Sept. 1972.

    Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 6 (even if you claim the modern era started in October 1972)

    http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/3/10/2041448/kevin-love-double-double-streak-record-52-minnesota

    "Second, Kevin Love set the new modern-era consecutive double-double streak record with his 52nd straight."

    Wilt did it in 220 consecutive games from 1964-67

    http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/scoutingreport_wolves_pacers_gameday_2011_03_08.html

    "The stage is set for Kevin Love to take the throne as the double-double king in the modern era. If the Wolves power forward records a double-double tonight, it will be his 52nd in a row, passing Moses Malone' mark set in the 1978-79 season."

    Tally: Lakers 11 Celtics 8 (even if you claim the modern started in Jan 1968)


    http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/27896909


    "On Friday, Minnesota Timberwolves All-Star power forward Kevin Love notched his 52nd consecutive double-double, moving past Hall of Fame center Moses Malone for most consecutive double-doubles since the NBA merged with the ABA in 1976. ...

    As many have pointed out, Love's streak is nothing compared to what Wilt Chamberlain used to do, running off consecutive double-double games by the hundreds and averaging a double-double in each of his 14 seasons. Comparing Chamberlain to Love is apples to oranges, though, and Love's accomplishment in the modern era has deserved the acclaim it's received."

    Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4


    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ycn-11206016

    "The 5 Worst Lakers Shooters in the Modern Era - Fan’s Analysis

    Since the introduction of the three-point line in 1979-1980 these Lakers regulars (minimum 1,000 FG attempts) have struggled the most to put the biscuit in the basket."

    Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4


    http://gcobb.com/2010/06/21/bryant-is-second-to-jordan-in-the-modern-era-of-the-nba/

    "I don’t list him as the greatest because Michael Jordan sits in that position but he’s second on my list in the modern era of basketball"

    Tally: Lakers 8 Celtics 2 (Jordan's career started in 1985)


    http://www.squidoo.com/top-5-nba-players-ever

    "Doug Collins once said that he didn't think he'd be a player in the NBA in the modern era."

    Tally: Lakers 9 Celtics 3 (given that Doug Collins' career ended in 1981)


    http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/06/16/second-to-none-the-best-second-round-picks-in-the-nbas-modern-era/

    Here is a list of the Top 10 second round picks in the modern era of basketball. (Most people believe that the modern era of the NBA began when the three-point rule was instituted, in the 1979-80 season.)

    Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4


    So, let's summarize of what the field said about the modern era.

    institution of the 3-point shot: Lakers 10-4
    Jordan's career as yardstick: Lakers 8-2
    Doug Collins' opinion: Lakers 9-3
    Using Wilt as the double-double yardstick: Lakers 11-8 at the worst
    Using the NBA-ABA merger: Lakers 10-4
    Using the outdoor game yardstick: Lakers 10-6 at the worst

    Duke, this are just from a few pages of Google, and you get blown out already. I mean, it's silly for you to try to count the loot of the "Modern era", you get routed every time. My suggestion for you: stick with the Jurassic era, then you have the chance of forcing a tie: 17-48 vs 16-47.


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

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]with a complete dominanace of our competition in the Finals (17-4 .809)....and an even better showing agains our arch rivals (the Lakers) with a 9-3 record (.750)......
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    And you keep boasting about the Celtics' failure in the playoffs or to make the playoffs, and use it as a bragging point.

    17-4 in the finals = means when the lost, they lost in the early round. Is that an honor?

    9-3 against the Lakers = when they failed, they failed in the early round to avoid the Lakers. I know they are scared to see Shaq/Kobe 3-peat, that's why they would rather lose to the Nets (after leading 2-1) and let the Nets get swept. Yet you ignore that kind of failure and keep boosting 9-3, absurd!!!

    Tell me, which record is better?

    16-15-9-11-7-5 vs 17-4-11-11-6-16 

    Yet you think "4 losing finalist + 16 missing playoffs" is better than "15 losing finalists + 5 missing playoffs".

    You advocate losing and think that's good. Why?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/05/tom-brady-we-just-didnt-make-enough-plays/


    Brady said the loss hurts, but that he’s rather lose the Super Bowl, as he has twice now, than not get to the Super Bowl.

    “I’d rather come to this game and lose than not get here,” Brady said. “Hopefully we’ll be back at some point. We had a great year, we just didn’t make enough plays.”

    Duke, maybe you should tell us what a loser Brady is...

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerFan67. Show LakerFan67's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    Such a ridiculous thread. The league was different, the city was different, bah bah bah.

    One could say that Boston won all those titles when there were only 8 teams. Quit preoccupying yourself with L.A.

    Inferiority complex.  :)
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerFan67. Show LakerFan67's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    Anything to get your minds off the loss tonight--blowing such a huge lead.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Skins and Heart. Show Skins and Heart's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/05/tom-brady-we-just-didnt-make-enough-plays/ Brady said the loss hurts, but that he’s rather lose the Super Bowl, as he has twice now, than not get to the Super Bowl. “I’d rather come to this game and lose than not get here,” Brady said. “Hopefully we’ll be back at some point. We had a great year, we just didn’t make enough plays.” Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Agree 100%. I'd rather my team playing for a championship and lose than not that opportunity.


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from victorlee1234. Show victorlee1234's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]Here is my thought process. 1. They were won in the pre shot clock era so basketball was a completely different game then. 2. They were titles won in another city that still belong to that city. 3. LA doesn't respect them enough to give them each there own banner nor do they retire the numbers of all the famous Minnesoata players so they treat them like they only kind of count anyways.
    Posted by DFURY13[/QUOTE]

    Who the F cares what a Laker hater thinks about LA anyway?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakerfaker. Show lakerfaker's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk : Agree 100%. I'd rather my team playing for a championship and lose than not that opportunity.
    Posted by Skins and Heart[/QUOTE]

    I agree about playing for the championship. How about this what if?   What if Minnesota decided to hang 5 banners at their stadium?  It just says Minnesota - World Championship Year ______.   Seems they have a right to say they won some titles don't they?   I think titles belong to cities, not names.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from breaktime. Show breaktime's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]As for the banner/s and titles going back to Minniapolis. I'd say there is as much chance of that happening, as Greece having the Elgin Marbles returned. Which is just about as close to zero as you can get. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles
    Posted by Skins and Heart[/QUOTE]
    I didn't know Elgin Baylor played marbles
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    I have to admit that the idea of Minneapolis hanging the banners never occurred to me...I think it's a brilliant idea since is involves professional sports and is part of the city's history....the Lakers can still claim the titles as their own.....win/win situation...

    as far as having the opportunity to play for the championship....I agree that it is special....second only to winning the title....I never said it wasn't important as one of our Laker fans seems to suggest all the time.....this whole issue of which franchise is the greatest began when Hollinger wrote his article proclaiming the Lakers as the best....then the battle began and continues to rage on.....there are so many different "takes" on this one.....mine has always been the concept of comparing the teams head to head in the most important categories when ranking teams (just as they do in boxing....Ali/Frasier...Hagler/Hearns/Leonard....etc)

    regular season record head to head:

    Celtics 153 (.554)
    Lakers 123 (.446)

    Finals results:

    Celtics 9 (.750)
    Lakers 3 (.250)

    World Champions:

    Celtics 17
    Lakers 16

    Modern (shot clock era):

    Boston Celtics 17
    Los Angeles Lakers 11

    Finals winning percentage:

    Celtics 17-4 (.809)
    Lakers 16-15 (.516).......since moving to Los Angeles the record is 11-15 (.423)

    I rest my case......in my opinion this is the most relevant way to judge two teams who's fans are claiming the #1 ranking....I realize many Laker fans don't see it that way.....ok by me....
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from LakerFan67. Show LakerFan67's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    Still whining, still feeling stress by living off the past...Ancient history.

    2000s-Lakers 5 titles, Celtics 1 & still crying.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheNewGKDynasty. Show TheNewGKDynasty's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]Here is my thought process. 1. They were won in the pre shot clock era so basketball was a completely different game then. 2. They were titles won in another city that still belong to that city. 3. LA doesn't respect them enough to give them each there own banner nor do they retire the numbers of all the famous Minnesoata players so they treat them like they only kind of count anyways.
    Posted by DFURY13[/QUOTE]
    Doesn't matter what you think or wish how things should be. To the league, everybody outside of Boston and most importantly Lakers fans it's 16. It is what it is not what you and a few Celtics fans wish it were. Learn to live with it.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]In Response to I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk : Doesn't matter what you think or wish how things should be. To the league, everybody outside of Boston and most importantly Lakers fans it's 16. It is what it is not what you and a few Celtics fans wish it were. Learn to live with it.
    Posted by TheNewGKDynasty[/QUOTE]
    When you are right you are right.  It is what it is.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheNewGKDynasty. Show TheNewGKDynasty's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

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

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk : http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php?title=NBA_Eras "On February 19, 2008, the NBA declared that the Phoenix Suns and the Denver Nuggets will play the first outdoor game on October 11, 2008, at the Indian Wells Tennis Garden. It will be the first outdoor game in the modern era of the NBA." NBA outdoor games: 1972 Bucks vs Suns, 2008 Suns vs Nuggets, 2009 ..." In other words, the modern era, according to this article, won't include anything prior to Sept. 1972. Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 6 (even if you claim the modern era started in October 1972) http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/3/10/2041448/kevin-love-double-double-streak-record-52-minnesota "Second, Kevin Love set the new modern-era consecutive double-double streak record with his 52nd straight." Wilt did it in 220 consecutive games from 1964-67 http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/scoutingreport_wolves_pacers_gameday_2011_03_08.html "The stage is set for Kevin Love to take the throne as the double-double king in the modern era . If the Wolves power forward records a double-double tonight, it will be his 52nd in a row, passing Moses Malone' mark set in the 1978-79 season." Tally: Lakers 11 Celtics 8 (even if you claim the modern started in Jan 1968) http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/27896909 "On Friday, Minnesota Timberwolves All-Star power forward Kevin Love notched his 52nd consecutive double-double, moving past Hall of Fame center Moses Malone for most consecutive double-doubles since the NBA merged with the ABA in 1976. ... As many have pointed out, Love's streak is nothing compared to what Wilt Chamberlain used to do, running off consecutive double-double games by the hundreds and averaging a double-double in each of his 14 seasons. Comparing Chamberlain to Love is apples to oranges, though, and Love's accomplishment in the modern era has deserved the acclaim it's received." Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4 http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ycn-11206016 "The 5 Worst Lakers Shooters in the Modern Era - Fan’s Analysis Since the introduction of the three-point line in 1979-1980 these Lakers regulars (minimum 1,000 FG attempts) have struggled the most to put the biscuit in the basket." Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4 http://gcobb.com/2010/06/21/bryant-is-second-to-jordan-in-the-modern-era-of-the-nba/ "I don’t list him as the greatest because Michael Jordan sits in that position but he’s second on my list in the modern era of basketball" Tally: Lakers 8 Celtics 2 (Jordan's career started in 1985) http://www.squidoo.com/top-5-nba-players-ever "Doug Collins once said that he didn't think he'd be a player in the NBA in the modern era ." Tally: Lakers 9 Celtics 3 (given that Doug Collins' career ended in 1981) http://www.scoresreport.com/2008/06/16/second-to-none-the-best-second-round-picks-in-the-nbas-modern-era/ Here is a list of the Top 10 second round picks in the modern era of basketball. (Most people believe that the modern era of the NBA began when the three-point rule was instituted, in the 1979-80 season.) Tally: Lakers 10 Celtics 4 So, let's summarize of what the field said about the modern era. institution of the 3-point shot: Lakers 10-4 Jordan's career as yardstick: Lakers 8-2 Doug Collins' opinion: Lakers 9-3 Using Wilt as the double-double yardstick: Lakers 11-8 at the worst Using the NBA-ABA merger: Lakers 10-4 Using the outdoor game yardstick: Lakers 10-6 at the worst Duke, this are just from a few pages of Google, and you get blown out already. I mean, it's silly for you to try to count the loot of the "Modern era", you get routed every time. My suggestion for you: stick with the Jurassic era, then you have the chance of forcing a tie: 17-48 vs 16-47.
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Nice research, even if you are a Laker fan.

    The biggest discrepancy in style of play and the rules of the game CLEARLY is between pre and post shot clock era basketball. 1954 was way different from 1964 as opposed to 1964 from now.

    But it makes the most sense to me to seperate the modern NBA by the ABA-NBA merger of 1976. That added a lot more teams, bigger postseason and was just a few years before Magic/Bird entered and the tv era really took off. If that is the case it is 10-4 Lakers.

    But of course, the NBA has not done that, teams around in the 50's can still claim their titles. They won't be robbed of them. But I am fine if the Los Angeles Lakers want to claim the title of greatest franchise in the 'modern' NBA but the Celtics can claim the title of GREATEST FRANCHISE IN THE HISTORY OF THE NBA and remain #1 on any greatest list... even if LA is 10-4 in the last 30 years, the rediculous stetch by their franchise to claim the 5 pre-shot clock era Minny titles their own organization takes dumps on... just to get the total to 17-16 good guys... means Boston remians #1. If those 5 titles came in the 1955-75 time range and were won in the city of LA, the claim to leapfrog Boston based on more recent success would have legit credibilty. Currently it doesn't until they tie us.

    I personally would have liked to have been a baby boomer and lived my life in the 1945-2030 range, especially with the direction the word is taking and the ease of the American man to live an upper middle class lifestyle in 60's-90's.

    and of course I'd have been alive to watch the Red/Russ Celtics dominate the NBA.

    Instead I don't remember a Celtic game before the '88 playoffs and am destined to die in the 2070's after a life in lower middle class as the World/environment falls apart and of course the Lakers continue to get gifted titles by shady trades and ref hose jobsWink
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    I do have one question.....the last year of the BAA was '48/49....there were 12 teams.....in '49/50 the NBA was born and there were 17 teams....

    why does the title the Lakers won in '49 count in the NBA's list of champions.?   ....in the late '40's the Baltimore Bullets won the title....the team later disbanded then returned to the league for one year as the Chicago Zephyrs before returning to Baltimore as the Bullets.....they stayed in Baltimore for 10 seasons until moving to Washington....they won a title in the late '70's....the name was later changed to the Wizards in a politically correct move.....checking the record the franchise is not given credit for the first title...I'm not sure why....

    if the "new" Cleveland Browns win an NFL championship, will it count along with those won in the '50's & '64.......?

    seriously......just wondering....
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk

    In Response to Re: I think the Lakers 5 minnesota Titles should have an asterisk:
    [QUOTE]I do have one question.....the last year of the BAA was '48/49....there were 12 teams.....in '49/50 the NBA was born and there were 17 teams.... why does the title the Lakers won in '49 count in the NBA's list of champions.?   ....in the late '40's the Baltimore Bullets won the title....the team later disbanded then returned to the league for one year as the Chicago Zephyrs before returning to Baltimore as the Bullets.....they stayed in Baltimore for 10 seasons until moving to Washington....they won a title in the late '70's....the name was later changed to the Wizards in a politically correct move.....checking the record the franchise is not given credit for the first title...I'm not sure why.... if the "new" Cleveland Browns win an NFL championship, will it count along with those won in the '50's & '64.......? seriously......just wondering....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]
    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/

      Duke,
    I think it has to do with the fact that the old Baltimore franchise is classified as defunct(ceased to exist) where as teams like the Lakers and Pistons simply moved to a new city. In any event the above link spells out the league franchise history. What do you think?
       Seems
      
     

Share