Besides the Lakers and Celtics, who are the storied NBA franchises?

[msgkings322]

The Pistons have 3 lol. But yes I listed Warriors over Detroit in mine.

I edited that to 3 yep.

 

[Robotech]

Hold on, how are the Pistons and their 3 titles more obviously in than the Warriors and their 6 including the very first one ever?

Not to mention all the iconic Warriors (Wilt with his 100 point game, Barry, Run TMC, Steph/Klay/Dray) vs what, Isaiah Thomas and Rodman?

I don't want to be too much of a homer.

 

[Robotech]

Sorry, guys. I was getting the poll drafted when I accidentally clicked post. That's why I couldn't wait for your input on how many the poll should ask for (whether top 5 or a different number).

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I mean really the Jazz are only on this list because of the 98 finals. They are clearly the worst of the 11

 

[Robotech]

I mean really the Jazz are only on this list because of the 98 finals. They are clearly the worst of the 11

Well, at least 9 is a good, odd number of choices to have.

 

[msgkings322]

I don't want to be too much of a homer.

But in this case there's no homerism, the Ws are obviously more worthy than the Pistons. It's really not close.

The teams with the most titles ever are the big 2 (17 each), then the Bulls and Ws with 6 each. It's not homerism. Top 2, then next obvious 4 are Bulls, Warriors, and probably Spurs and Sixers.

 

[Robotech]

But in this case there's no homerism, the Ws are obviously more worthy than the Pistons. It's really not close.

The teams with the most titles ever are the big 2 (17 each), then the Bulls and Ws with 6 each. It's not homerism. Top 2, then next obvious 4 are Bulls, Warriors, and probably Spurs and Sixers.

Maybe I'm too influenced by a similar discussion on reddit. It's a younger crowd there, though. I had stated there that the Warriors had a good history after someone stated that the Warriors were nothing before Curry and that the Warriors had a pathetic history. I mentioned Wilt, Rick Barry, the 3 championships prior to the Kerr/Curry era, the Sleepy Floyd game, Nelly small ball, and Run TMC. I think I was downvoted to oblivion. LOL.

Granted, these millenial kids didn't have the same Warriors fan experience as me. I started watching just in time for the Sleepy Floyd game and Run TMC, before the dark years happened. Before Curry, all these millenial Warriors fans knew was pain and maybe the We Believe team.

This discussion was on the NBA subreddit, not the Warriors subreddit, but the most vociferous person arguing with me was a Warriors fan.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

But in this case there's no homerism, the Ws are obviously more worthy than the Pistons. It's really not close.

The teams with the most titles ever are the big 2 (17 each), then the Bulls and Ws with 6 each. It's not homerism. Top 2, then next obvious 4 are Bulls, Warriors, and probably Spurs and Sixers.

My issue with the Bulls is they had one run and that was it. It was as epic a run as there has been but still. The Spurs could be argued in a similar vein but theirs was longer and they also had some sneaky good teams back in the Gervin days.

Obviously a homer but outside of total playoff wins I don't see the Sixers with an edge. I'd put them 7th out of my 8 just ahead of the Knicks. The Heat are 9th imo over the Rockets and then I wouldn't even have the Jazz 11th.

Mine again

Lakers (changing my mind based on recent success)

Celtics

Spurs
Warriors
Pistons
Bulls
Sixers
Knicks
Heat
Rockets

 

[msgkings322]

My issue with the Bulls is they had one run and that was it. It was as epic a run as there has been but still. The Spurs could be argued in a similar vein but theirs was longer and they also had some sneaky good teams back in the Gervin days.

Obviously a homer but outside of total playoff wins I don't see the Sixers with an edge. I'd put them 7th out of my 8 just ahead of the Knicks. The Heat are 9th imo over the Rockets and then I wouldn't even have the Jaz 11th.

Mine again

Lakers (changing my mind based on recent success)

Celtics

Spurs
Warriors
Pistons
Bulls
Sixers
Knicks
Heat
Rockets

Michael Jordan is the literal STORY of the NBA. He ushered in the modern game/league/globalization/money. Doesn't matter that they had all 6 of their titles in a row, only two other teams have more. You literally cannot describe the NBA without the Bulls.

For what it's worth the Bulls also were in the very first NBA Finals (lost to the Ws) and they had some good teams with Derek Rose.

 

[Robotech]

My issue with the Bulls is they had one run and that was it. It was as epic a run as there has been but still. The Spurs could be argued in a similar vein but theirs was longer and they also had some sneaky good teams back in the Gervin days.

Obviously a homer but outside of total playoff wins I don't see the Sixers with an edge. I'd put them 7th out of my 8 just ahead of the Knicks. The Heat are 9th imo over the Rockets and then I wouldn't even have the Jazz 11th.

Mine again

Lakers (changing my mind based on recent success)

Celtics

Spurs
Warriors
Pistons
Bulls
Sixers
Knicks
Heat
Rockets

You might be right about the Jazz, but Stockton and Malone are just so awesome. Plus, you have Sloan, Maravich, and Dantley. Finally, the '97 and '98 Jazz teams that lost to the Bulls were really, really good. They just had the misfortune of playing a great, great team. I think they are probably better than many Finals winning teams.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Michael Jordan is the literal STORY of the NBA. He ushered in the modern game/league/globalization/money. Doesn't matter that they had all 6 of their titles in a row, only two other teams have more. You literally cannot describe the NBA without the Bulls.

For what it's worth the Bulls also were in the very first NBA Finals (lost to the Ws) and they had some good teams with Derek Rose.

I fully understand most are going to lean Jordan but that dude caught some exceptionally soft (by finals standards) western opponents. Had he caught the 80s Lakers or the 2000s Spurs/Lakers we are talking a slightly different legacy. They hit their peak at the perfect time. Their weakest spot (the 5) they faced a bunch of dump trucks at that spot in the finals.

 

[msgkings322]

I fully understand most are going to lean Jordan but that dude caught some exceptionally soft (by finals standards) western opponents. Had he caught the 80s Lakers or the 2000s Spurs/Lakers we are talking a slightly different legacy. They hit their peak at the perfect time. Their weakest spot (the 5) they faced a bunch of dump trucks at that spot in the finals.

OK sure but you are minimizing all the other stuff. It wasn't just 6 titles. It was the size and scope of the NBA before and after Jordan. Again, if you were writing a book about the history of the NBA and you didn't have a big chapter about the Bulls you'd have your contract ripped up.

Every dynasty has a lot of luck involved. The Magic coin toss. Sam Bowie drafted over Mike. The cap spike and free agency of KD. Don't do this what if stuff. MJ is as much a 'story' as any other player in NBA history.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

The 98 Jazz were by far the Bulls toughest finals opponent.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

OK sure but you are minimizing all the other stuff. It wasn't just 6 titles. It was the size and scope of the NBA before and after Jordan. Again, if you were writing a book about the history of the NBA and you didn't have a big chapter about the Bulls you'd have your contract ripped up.

I certainly can't dispute that point

 

[MHSL82]

Because they need to give that name back to New Orleans. There is literally no place in the NBA that you would be less likely to associate with Jazz than Utah.

There aren’t many lakes in Los Angeles.

7 Team Names That Make No Sense

We all have favorite teams. But some team names just don't make any sense, like these...

philadelphia.cbslocal.com

 

[logic]

I fully understand most are going to lean Jordan but that dude caught some exceptionally soft (by finals standards) western opponents. Had he caught the 80s Lakers or the 2000s Spurs/Lakers we are talking a slightly different legacy. They hit their peak at the perfect time. Their weakest spot (the 5) they faced a bunch of dump trucks at that spot in the finals.

This minimizes how tough it was to come out of the east during that era. Also, you could argue the same for some west titles; were nets and 76ers teams that made it really competition?

 

[Stakesarehigh]

This minimizes how tough it was to come out of the east during that era. Also, you could argue the same for some west titles; were nets and 76ers teams that made it really competition?

Don't disagree. Just saying the perfect finals record needs a little context considering...

 

[logic]

Don't disagree. Just saying the perfect finals record needs a little context considering...

I don't wholly agree, those blazers, sonics, and jazz teams were all very good. Way better than the pacers, nets, and 76s teams of the 2000s that the Lakers beat

 

[MHSL82]

Don't disagree. Just saying the perfect finals record needs a little context considering...

Jordan is the GOAT, they were an absolute dynasty. But people talk about the 6/6 as if Jordan’s teams didn’t play in other years where they (not just Jordan) didn’t make it to the Finals. That’s why when people point out that Brady and LeBron lost in the championship game whereas Jordan didn’t to be less effective of an argument to me. First, LeBron has fewer than Jordan, played in a less tough league, averaged fewer points (but higher other stats), and had better teammates. (Though Jordan did have Pippen, Kerr, and a better coach.) Brady playing the NFL is a bit of apples versus oranges since the Super Bowl is single elimination. No one’s beating the Bulls or Patriots in a best of 7.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I disagree that "no one" could beat any of Jordan teams. As it actually occurred when they faced other elite teams. Now I will say the 95 96 Bulls team is probably the best team ever but to say no one could beat them is inaccurate to me.

Thats where I take issue with the Jordan narrative.