PDA

View Full Version : Should the Lakers franchise have one their NBAtitles taken away?



midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 03:30 PM
To make this clear, this is not a troll thread, but a serious inquiry into the validity of one of the Lakers "NBA" titles.

I don't understand how a title won when the league was clearly called the "BAA" can be considered an NBA title. Sure, the BAA became the NBA, but the ABA was absorbed into the NBA in a similar way, but you don't see anyone calling the Pacers "3 time NBA champions."

And for those idiot Laker fans who are gonna no doubt say, "Well, it was the same league." No it wasn't. When the BAA became the NBA in 1950, they also added a division along with six new teams.

So really, in my mind, the Lakers franchise are sitting on 15 NBA titles and not 16.

lefty
09-27-2010, 03:30 PM
2002
2009
2010

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 03:33 PM
2002
2009
2010

This isn't a troll thread. Those titles were won in the NBA, therefore they count.

The 1949 title was not.

lefty
09-27-2010, 03:34 PM
This isn't a troll thread.

It is now

picc84
09-27-2010, 03:37 PM
Don't matter to me. The Lakers look forward, not backwards. Thats what teams do when they have a future.

You used to know what that felt like.

lefty
09-27-2010, 03:38 PM
Don't matter to me. The Lakers look forward, not backwards. Thats what teams do when they have a future.

You used to know what that felt like.
The last time you won a legit title was in 2001

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 03:40 PM
Don't matter to me. The Lakers look forward, not backwards. Thats what teams do when they have a future.

You used to know what that felt like.

You faggots have no problem looking backwards when you're trying to match titles with the Celtics.

Lol BAA title.

Gold Tooth Carl
09-27-2010, 03:42 PM
The last time you won a legit title was in 2001

Not true playa, he is still the Champion of butthurt

JamStone
09-27-2010, 03:43 PM
If that's the case, technically, no NBA title should count before 1976-77 season. Take away 13 Celtics titles too. The NBA wasn't the same league before 1976. If the distinction is merger versus expansion, the pre-ABA/Nba merger NBA was a very different league as well. All titles before 1976 shouldn't count.

Sportcamper
09-27-2010, 03:47 PM
This stuff only matters in strike shortened seasons…Should ANY team be called NBA Champions when the season exists of a handful of games & then the playoffs?…Of course not!…

In any case after this seasons the Lakers will have 17 NBA titles all won with a full schedule…:lobt2:

lefty
09-27-2010, 03:48 PM
This stuff only matter in strike shortened seasons…Should ANY team be called NBA Champions when the season exists of a handful of games & then the playoffs…Of course not…

In any case after this seasons the Lakers will have 17 NBA titles all won with a full schedule…
Yeah the Spurs were the only team not to play 82 games in 1999

namlook
09-27-2010, 03:51 PM
I don't understand how a title won when the league was clearly called the "BAA" can be considered an NBA title. Sure, the BAA became the NBA, but the ABA was absorbed into the NBA in a similar way, but you don't see anyone calling the Pacers "3 time NBA champions."

It's simple.

The BAA was the NBA with a different name.

The ABA existed separately from the NBA and both were in existence at the same time. You can't have two NBA champions.

Steve Kerr
09-27-2010, 03:53 PM
No titles before the salary cap draft lottery era should count. Furthermore, since they created the draft lottery in response to the Rockets tanking for a 2nd consecutive season to get Olajuwon, the two championships won with Olajuwon do not count.

z0sa
09-27-2010, 03:54 PM
It would seem an asterisk is in order.

NRHector
09-27-2010, 03:55 PM
This stuff only matters in strike shortened seasons…Should ANY team be called NBA Champions when the season exists of a handful of games & then the playoffs?…Of course not!…

In any case after this seasons the Lakers will have 17 NBA titles all won with a full schedule…:lobt2:is not the Spurs fault that the rest of the league was pussyfied becuase they did not play 82 games, the Spurs won the games that counted the most, the playoffs and the championship games

Ashy Larry
09-27-2010, 04:30 PM
is not the Spurs fault that the rest of the league was pussyfied becuase they did not play 82 games, the Spurs won the games that counted the most, the playoffs and the championship games

even though Phil slapped an asterisk on that '99 title, if our boys had won, I guarantee we wouldn't put an asterisk on that bitch.

NRHector
09-27-2010, 04:32 PM
even though Phil slapped an asterisk on that '99 title, if our boys had won, I guarantee we wouldn't put an asterisk on that bitch.no shit Sherlock

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 04:34 PM
If that's the case, technically, no NBA title should count before 1976-77 season. Take away 13 Celtics titles too. The NBA wasn't the same league before 1976. If the distinction is merger versus expansion, the pre-ABA/Nba merger NBA was a very different league as well. All titles before 1976 shouldn't count.

I actually agree with that.

I've always thought that there should be a distinction between the pre and post-merger eras.

The Celtics are the greatest pre-merger franchise.

And the Lakers are the greatest post-merger franchise.

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 04:37 PM
Mid, runnin' as fast as he can.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 04:46 PM
Mid, runnin' as fast as he can.

The hell you talking about.

Lakers have 15 NBA titles. I stand by that.

It's too bad the media has too much vested interest in their beloved cash cow that is the Los Angeles Lakers to examine, or even acknowledge, the issue.

There's going to be a lot of advertising dollars this season behind a "Will the Lakers catch the Celtics?" storyline.

Realistically, you guys only have 11. But for the sake of the argument, I'm including those 4 bogus titles you won in Minny.

Medvedenko
09-27-2010, 04:47 PM
I actually agree with that.

I've always thought that there should be a distinction between the pre and post-merger eras.

The Celtics are the greatest pre-merger franchise.

And the Lakers are the greatest post-merger franchise.

:married:

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 04:49 PM
:married:

How'd the hair appointment go today?

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 05:52 PM
Lakers have 16 NBA titles. I stand by that.

Yep, yep.

Daddy_Of_All_Trolls
09-27-2010, 05:59 PM
How about if the NBA gives the Lakers one more title instead. 1948 NBL title was won by Minneapolis before the merger, and the NBL was stronger than the BAA or whatever it was called. Or maybe the NBL was the ABL, I would have to look it up.

Facts are the Lakers have 17 titles:
16 NBA
1 NBL.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 06:07 PM
How about if the NBA gives the Lakers one more title instead. 1948 NBL title was won by Minneapolis before the merger, and the NBL was stronger than the BAA or whatever it was called. Or maybe the NBL was the ABL, I would have to look it up.

Facts are the Lakers have 17 titles:
16 NBA
1 NBL.

Nope. In that case, the Lakers have 15 NBA titles, 1 NBL, and 1 BAA.

"The league was founded in New York City on June 6, 1946 as the Basketball Association of America (BAA).[2] The league adopted the name National Basketball Association in 1949 after merging with the rival National Basketball League (NBL)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA

They merged with a separate league to create one, which also brought in 6 new teams. It's the EXACT same thing as when the NBA merged with ABA. But you don't see anyone crediting the Pacers with the 3 NBA championships.

There should be a separate distinction in the same way.

But as always with the Lakers, there's a convenient "exception."

Medvedenko
09-27-2010, 06:08 PM
How'd the hair appointment go today?

Good, oh by the way, nice smack talk. Keep it up, you're raising the bar here.

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 06:08 PM
In that case, the Lakers have 16 NBA titles

Yep, yep.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 06:09 PM
Yep, yep.

"Fixed it for you" isn't your style, Culburn.

Frankly, I'm disappointed.

Oh the other hand, you enjoying every one of those 15 NBA titles?

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 06:12 PM
you enjoying every one of those 16 NBA titles?

Yep, yep.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 06:13 PM
Yep, yep. I'm enjoying my 15 NBA titles. And there's nothing you can do to take 'em away.

Jelloisjigglin
09-27-2010, 06:13 PM
It won't be taken away. Like another poster said, it was the NBA under a different name. It counts. End of story.

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 06:18 PM
lmcontrollinao!!!

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 06:23 PM
lol BAA title.

Koolaid_Man
09-27-2010, 06:46 PM
lol BAA title.

Aye yo Resistance is Futile biotch :lol

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a68/Koolbreezey/1-4.gif

LkrFan
09-27-2010, 07:02 PM
Nope. In that case, the Lakers have 15 NBA titles, 1 NBL, and 1 BAA.

"The league was founded in New York City on June 6, 1946 as the Basketball Association of America (BAA).[2] The league adopted the name National Basketball Association in 1949 after merging with the rival National Basketball League (NBL)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA

They merged with a separate league to create one, which also brought in 6 new teams. It's the EXACT same thing as when the NBA merged with ABA. But you don't see anyone crediting the Pacers with the 3 NBA championships.

There should be a separate distinction in the same way.

But as always with the Lakers, there's a convenient "exception."

Only dumbasses quote wikipedia, tbh. :wakeup

Venti Quattro
09-27-2010, 07:22 PM
BAA BAA black sheep have you any wool
yes sir yes sir three bags full

Giuseppe
09-27-2010, 08:06 PM
lol BAA title.

Dang, Mid foiled me.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 08:34 PM
Only dumbasses quote wikipedia, tbh. :wakeup

Only dumbasses fail to understand that a wikipedia entry is supported by reference articles. If you weren't illiterate, as most Lakers fans are, you'd see the quote I posted was gleaned from an article titled "The First Game."

It's further cross-referenced later in the entry with an article called "The NBA is born."

Are Laker fans really this fuckin' stupid?

Venti Quattro
09-27-2010, 08:37 PM
Don't you have a job to do or friends to attend to or a family to take care of? You worry too much about the Lakers and their fans.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 08:38 PM
Don't you have a job to do or friends to attend to or a family to take care of? You worry too much about the Lakers and their fans.

:cry

21_Blessings
09-27-2010, 08:42 PM
:cry

Yes, that describes you and your bruised ass perfectly.

Venti Quattro
09-27-2010, 08:43 PM
:cry all of you innocent children born in so cal after 1985 are bandwagon lakers fans

:cry it is what it is. you have been predestined to be bandwagon fans :cry

the lakers only have 15 championships :cry

:cry i love elden campbell

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 08:46 PM
Lol. Thinking I love Elden Campbell.

:cry oblivious to irony.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 08:46 PM
Yes, that describes you and your bruised ass perfectly.

lol BAA title.

midnightpulp
09-27-2010, 08:50 PM
Lol at Venti Quattro going on IronBootlegger's profile and looking for support.

"were you born after 1985? did you choose to support the lakers over the clippers? then according to midnightpulp, you're a fucking bandwagon fan. CROFL"

"but he's worse though. he hates the lakers but he has sedale threatt on his sig and elden fucking campbell on his sig and custom user name. biggest fucking hypocrite on spurstalk."

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/converse.php?u=17094&u2=12289