NBA Bragging Rights by Franchise & by City

[Solid D]

A little bragging rights history to break the monotony during the 6-day break between games for the Spurs...

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by Franchise

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles (9)/Minneapolis (5) Lakers - 14
Chicago Bulls - 6
Detroit (3)/Ft. Wayne Pistons - 3
Golden State (1)/Philadelphia (2)/San Francisco Warriors - 3
Philadelphia 76ers (2)/Syracuse Nationals (1) - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Baltimore (1)/Washington (1)/Chicago (Packers/Zephyrs) Bullets - 2
Houston (2)/San Diego Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester (1)/Cincinnati/Kansas City (Kings)/KC-Omaha (Kings)/Sacramento (Kings) Royals - 1
St. Louis (1)/Tri-Cities (Blackhawks)/Milwaukee/Atlanta Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by City

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles Lakers - 9
Chicago Bulls - 6
Minneapolis Lakers - 5
Philadelphia 76ers (2), Philadelphia Warriors (2) - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knicks - 2
Baltimore Bullets - 1
Golden State (SF/Oakland) Warriors - 1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester Royals - 1
St. Louis Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Syracuse Nationals - 1
Washington Bullets - 1

[Solid D]

How many of you knew that the Atlanta Hawks started out play in the NBA as the Tri-Cities Blackhawks?

Tri-Cities (Moline, IL - Rock Island, IL - Davenport, IA) played in Moline, Illinois in the 6,000 seat Wharton Fieldhouse.

[1Parker1]

How many of you knew that the Atlanta Hawks started out play in the NBA as the Tri-Cities Blackhawks?

Duh, I knew that! Guess you aren't the true basketball fan that I thought you were, Solid D. :angel

[1Parker1]

Seriously though, I didn't realize the Bucks had a championship...when was this?

[SOFT SPURS]

A little bragging rights history to break the monotony during the 6-day break between games for the Spurs...

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by Franchise

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles (9)/Minneapolis (5) Lakers - 14
Chicago Bulls - 6
Detroit (3)/Ft. Wayne Pistons - 3
Golden State (1)/Philadelphia (2)/San Francisco Warriors - 3
Philadelphia 76ers (2)/Syracuse Nationals (1) - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3***********
Baltimore (1)/Washington (1)/Chicago (Packers/Zephyrs) Bullets - 2
Houston (2)/San Diego Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester (1)/Cincinnati/Kansas City (Kings)/KC-Omaha (Kings)/Sacramento (Kings) Royals - 1
St. Louis (1)/Tri-Cities (Blackhawks)/Milwaukee/Atlanta Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by City

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles Lakers - 9
Chicago Bulls - 6
Minneapolis Lakers - 5
Philadelphia 76ers (2), Philadelphia Warriors (2) - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3**************
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knicks - 2
Baltimore Bullets - 1
Golden State (SF/Oakland) Warriors - 1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester Royals - 1
St. Louis Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Syracuse Nationals - 1
Washington Bullets - 1

You forgot the famous *********

[Solid D]

Seriously though, I didn't realize the Bucks had a championship...when was this?

In 1970-71

In the 1969 NBA Draft, there was a coin-toss between the Milwaukee Bucks and the Phoenix Suns. Milwaukee won the rights to draft Lew Alcindor and in Alcindor's 2nd year, along with Bobby Dandridge and veteran All-Star Oscar Robertson, the Bucks won their only NBA Title. The day after the Bucks won the Championship, Lew changed his name to Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Alcindor/Jabbar played in Milwaukee for 6 years.

[bonesinaz]

How many of you knew that the Atlanta Hawks started out play in the NBA as the Tri-Cities Blackhawks?

Tri-Cities (Moline, IL - Rock Island, IL - Davenport, IA) played in Moline, Illinois in the 6,000 seat Wharton Fieldhouse.

That is the area where I grew up.

[dg7md]

There wouldn't be any "asterisks" by the title winner of the 99 season if it were the Lakers that won.

[Mr. Body]

Oh my God, I never realized the Spurs won 3 championships! Thanks for that!

[1Parker1]

Sidenote, it's really ashame that after 16 championships, what the Celtics have now come to.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

There wouldn't be any "asterisks" by the title winner of the 99 season if it were the Lakers that won.the asterisks indicate that we beat the lakers on our way to get the '99 title.

[TheMulvany]

If we're living in the past I guess the Celtics are 5x better than the Spurs...right?

[thispego]

Sidenote, it's really ashame that after 16 championships, what the Celtics have now come to.
actually, with the celtics having won 16 championships, it'd be a shame if they were still winning. it's the cycle of life in the nba.

[FromWayDowntown]

If we're living in the past I guess the Celtics are 5x better than the Spurs...right?

Of course, that would mean that the Spurs are infinitely better than the Mavericks. . . .

[E20]

Seriously though, I didn't realize the Bucks had a championship...when was this?
Jabbar.

[FromWayDowntown]

Jabbar.

and the Big O.

[Solid D]

Jabbar.


In 1970-71

In the 1969 NBA Draft, there was a coin-toss between the Milwaukee Bucks and the Phoenix Suns. Milwaukee won the rights to draft Lew Alcindor and in Alcindor's 2nd year, along with Bobby Dandridge and veteran All-Star Oscar Robertson, the Bucks won their only NBA Title. The day after the Bucks won the Championship, Lew changed his name to Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Alcindor/Jabbar played in Milwaukee for 6 years.

[E20]

and the Big O.
That too.

To Solid D's post above mine:

I need to put it into simpelton terms too. :lol

[Solid D]

If we're living in the past I guess the Celtics are 5x better than the Spurs...right?

I don't think people on this board live in the past...thus the angst by Spurs fans when the Spurs aren't performing up to their potential.

It's good to recognize and learn a little from a historical perspective.

I think it's amazing that cities like Dallas and Phoenix don't have a single NBA Championship, yet. In fact, they are not even a part of a "Franchise" Championship history.

I also compiled these lists so that some of the younger members of the forum might know how the league has changed and how so many of the franchises have had multiple homes.

[Marcus Bryant]

History doesn't matter when you have none.

[timvp]

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by timvp

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles Lakers - 9
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Detroit Pistons - 3
Philadelphia 76ers - 2
New York Knicks - 2
Houston Rockets - 2
Golden State Warriors - 1
Washington Wizards -1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Dallas Mavericks -0
Sacramento Kings - 0
Dallas Mavericks -0
Phoenix Suns - 0
Dallas Mavericks - 0

That's how I see it. I took away some championships that the current fan bases don't deserve.

:smokin

[Marcus Bryant]

Dallas Mavericks -0
Sacramento Kings - 0
Dallas Mavericks -0
Phoenix Suns - 0
Dallas Mavericks - 0

rofl

[Marcus Bryant]

Maybe Cuban will hang a banner for being up 2-0 in the Finals.

[Purple & Gold]

the asterisks indicate that we beat the lakers on our way to get the '99 title.
Lakers laugh at your asterisks.

[Solid D]

Lakers laugh at your asterisks.

Why? The Spurs beat the Lakers in the playoffs when they played them in 1999. In fact, they closed down the (GW) Forum 4-0.

[shelshor]

How many of you knew that the Atlanta Hawks started out play in the NBA as the Tri-Cities Blackhawks?

Tri-Cities (Moline, IL - Rock Island, IL - Davenport, IA) played in Moline, Illinois in the 6,000 seat Wharton Fieldhouse.
My favorite that didn't survive was the Providence Steamrollers

I will split one hair with you tho:
The Baltimore Bullets franchise that won the title in 1948 folded after the 1954-55 season and no current franchise claims it, not even the Packers/Zephyrs/Bullets/Wizards:

http://www.nba.com/wizards/history/00400304.html

[Solid D]

My favorite that didn't survive was the Providence Steamrollers

I will split one hair with you tho:
The Baltimore Bullets franchise that won the title in 1948 folded after the 1954-55 season and no current franchise claims it, not even the Packers/Zephyrs/Bullets/Wizards:

http://www.nba.com/wizards/history/00400304.html

Good catch, shelshor. The City of Baltimore has a Championship but the Franchise Packers/Zephyrs/Bullets/Wizards only has 1 Championship. I'll make the correction.

[FromWayDowntown]

I certainly don't equate regular season division titles to anything worthwhile, but I thought this was a somewhat interesting number -- particularly because the numbers are skewed in favor of a handful of teams over such a long period of time.

Since the merger the 23 of the 30 current teams have won at least 1 division title, but only 3 franchises have won more than 10. In order the teams with the most division titles since the merger are:

15 -- Spurs, Lakers
11 -- Celtics
8 -- Bucks
7 -- Pistons, Jazz
6 -- Bulls, Heat, 76'ers, Sonics
5 -- Nuggets, Suns,
4 -- Rockets, Pacers, Nets, Knicks, Trailblazers
3 -- Hawks, Magic, Kings
1 -- Mavericks, Timberwolves, Bullets/Wizards
0 -- Bobcats, Cavaliers, Warriors, Clippers, Grizzlies, Hornets, Raptors

[cornbread]

Lakers laugh at your asterisks.

I specifically remember crying. Lots of crying. Or was that in 2003?

[Purple & Gold]

Why? The Spurs beat the Lakers in the playoffs when they played them in 1999. In fact, they closed down the (GW) Forum 4-0.
Don't you think it's a little funny you put an asteriks for when you beat the Lakers. Considering the history between both of the teams.

[Purple & Gold]

I specifically remember crying. Lots of crying. Or was that in 2003?
It's almost like you think there is actually a rivalry. :rolleyes

[Solid D]

Corrected with original Baltimore Franchise separated from the Wizard franchise.

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by Franchise

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles (9)/Minneapolis (5) Lakers - 14
Chicago Bulls - 6
Detroit (3)/Ft. Wayne Pistons - 3
Golden State (1)/Philadelphia (2)/San Francisco Warriors - 3
Philadelphia 76ers (2)/Syracuse Nationals (1) - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Houston (2)/San Diego Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Baltimore Bullets - 1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester (1)/Cincinnati/Kansas City (Kings)/KC-Omaha (Kings)/Sacramento (Kings) Royals - 1
St. Louis (1)/Tri-Cities (Blackhawks)/Milwaukee/Atlanta Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Washington Bullets (1)/Chicago Packers/Zephyrs/Baltimore Bullets/Capitol Bullets/Washington Wizards - 1


NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by City

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles Lakers - 9
Chicago Bulls - 6
Minneapolis Lakers - 5
Philadelphia 76ers (2), Philadelphia Warriors (2) - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knicks - 2
Baltimore Bullets - 1
Golden State (SF/Oakland) Warriors - 1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Rochester Royals - 1
St. Louis Hawks - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Syracuse Nationals - 1
Washington Bullets - 1

[Purple & Gold]

I certainly don't equate regular season division titles to anything worthwhile, but I thought this was a somewhat interesting number -- particularly because the numbers are skewed in favor of a handful of teams over such a long period of time.

Since the merger the 23 of the 30 current teams have won at least 1 division title, but only 3 franchises have won more than 10. In order the teams with the most division titles since the merger are:

15 -- Spurs, Lakers
11 -- Celtics
8 -- Bucks
7 -- Pistons, Jazz
6 -- Bulls, Heat, 76'ers, Sonics
5 -- Nuggets, Suns,
4 -- Rockets, Pacers, Nets, Knicks, Trailblazers
3 -- Hawks, Magic, Kings
1 -- Mavericks, Timberwolves, Bullets/Wizards
0 -- Bobcats, Cavaliers, Warriors, Clippers, Grizzlies, Hornets, Raptors
And that's the difference between the Lakers and Spurs. We would never even think about division titles.

[Purple & Gold]

Not to talk shit about past championships (because it's where you're at right now that counts), but I do find it funny that many Spurs fans dog the Mavs and Suns about past championships.

[Solid D]

Don't you think it's a little funny you put an asteriks for when you beat the Lakers. Considering the history between both of the teams.

I didn't put an asterisk on any of the Spurs' seasons, nor did I put an asterisk on when the Spurs beat the Lakers. I was responding to your post. In two of the three Spurs' championship seasons, the Spurs defeated the Lakers. Now, you really do look like a troll.

[Purple & Gold]

I didn't put an asterisk on any of the Spurs' seasons, nor did I put an asterisk on when the Spurs beat the Lakers. I was responding to your post. In two of the three Spurs' championship seasons, the Spurs defeated the Lakers. Now, you really do look like a troll.
Why? Because I call somebody out for putting an asteriks when they beat the Lakers. I never come in here talking about past championships. (Something your fellow Spurs fans do all the time) If you think I'm a troll because I call out Laker hating and homerism... then :p:

[Solid D]

Why? Because I call somebody out for putting an asteriks when they beat the Lakers. I never come in here talking about past championships. (Something your fellow Spurs fans do all the time) If you think I'm a troll because I call out Laker hating and homerism... then :p:

Post my quote where I say I put an asterisk on when the Spurs beat the Lakers. The only thing I did was respond to your statement.

[Purple & Gold]

Post my quote where I say I put an asterisk on when the Spurs beat the Lakers.
I wasn't quoting you to begin with. :dramaquee

[Solid D]

Who are you quoting?

[Purple & Gold]

Read it again.

[Solid D]

Why? The Spurs beat the Lakers in the playoffs when they played them in 1999. In fact, they closed down the (GW) Forum 4-0.


Don't you think it's a little funny you put an asteriks for when you beat the Lakers. Considering the history between both of the teams.


I wasn't quoting you to begin with. :dramaquee

Pwn3d.

[Purple & Gold]

the asterisks indicate that we beat the lakers on our way to get the '99 title.


Lakers laugh at your asterisks.


Why? The Spurs beat the Lakers in the playoffs when they played them in 1999. In fact, they closed down the (GW) Forum 4-0.

Here you go smart guy. I was quoting Viva, you were quoting me. :donkey

[Solid D]

Don't you think it's a little funny you put an asteriks for when you beat the Lakers. Considering the history between both of the teams.

Therefore, this post above responding to my quote was misplaced. Your question, was addressed to me, but yet...it wasn't. Yeah, that makes sense.

[Purple & Gold]

Therefore, this post above responding to my quote was misplaced. Your question, was addressed to me, but yet...it wasn't. Yeah, that makes sense.
Your such a dumbass it's funny. I quoted Viva you quoted my response to him, so you obviously agree with him or you wouldn't have defended his post. But whatever. :rolleyes And "you" is in the general sense, and I said I didn't quote you to begin with.

:clap :clap :clap

Anyways this is stupid who cares. :dramaquee

[cornbread]

It's almost like you think there is actually a rivalry. :rolleyes

You spend enough time talking shit on Spurstalk to make me think otherwise. Are there really no Lakers boards out there?

[Solid D]

Are you speaking to anyone here in a general sense...or are you speaking to me this time?

[Purple & Gold]

Are you speaking to anyone here in a general sense...or are you speaking to me this time?
About being a dumbass. You.

[Purple & Gold]

You spend enough time talking shit on Spurstalk to make me think otherwise. Are there really no Lakers boards out there?
Homer boards suck. And I seem to see alot of fans of other teams here to.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

Your such a dumbass it's funny. I quoted Viva you quoted my response to him, so you obviously agree with him or you wouldn't have defended his post. But whatever. :rolleyes And "you" is in the general sense, and I said I didn't quote you to begin with.

:clap :clap :clap

Anyways this is stupid who cares. :dramaquee
LOL at the Laker fan making up shit just for the sake of an argument.

[Purple & Gold]

^^ Well I guess most Spurs fans must just not be that smart.

[Purple & Gold]

The great thing about SpursTalk is I don't even have to talk shit about the Spurs. Their own fans do it all the time. :elephant

[Solid D]

When the comment you make specifically addressed to me is simple name-calling...you have no real argument.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

^^ Well I guess most Spurs fans must just not be that smart.
Says the kid who cant follow his own argument.

[Purple & Gold]

When the comment you make specifically addressed to me is simple name-calling...you have no real argument.
I was using "you" in the general sense. Spurs fans in general.


Don't you think it's a little funny you put an asteriks for when you beat the Lakers. Considering the history between both of the teams.
I called you a dumbass, cause you didn't understand. :p:

And if you don't agree with the original post quoted, don't quote my response. :dramaquee

:lol

[Purple & Gold]

Says the kid who cant follow his own argument.
:dizzy :dizzy

[cornbread]

Homer boards suck. And I seem to see alot of fans of other teams here to.
Yep, everybody loves SPURStalk. :fro

[Purple & Gold]

Yep, everybody loves spurstalk. :fro
It is funny to see all the teams talk shit. Especially the Mavericks/Suns fans. I find that one entertaining.

And the Queens even have their own forum to laugh at. :lol

[Solid D]

http://static.flickr.com/113/289116911_75a377f923.jpg http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.aolsportsblog.com/media/2007/02/ginobili-amare.jpg http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/01/30/PH2007013000768.jpg http://www.nba.com/media/mf_600_070128.jpg

What? The Mavs, Suns and Lakers have animosity with the Spurs? Preposterous!

[photoguy]

I certainly don't equate regular season division titles to anything worthwhile, but I thought this was a somewhat interesting number -- particularly because the numbers are skewed in favor of a handful of teams over such a long period of time.

Since the merger the 23 of the 30 current teams have won at least 1 division title, but only 3 franchises have won more than 10. In order the teams with the most division titles since the merger are:

15 -- Spurs, Lakers
11 -- Celtics
8 -- Bucks
7 -- Pistons, Jazz
6 -- Bulls, Heat, 76'ers, Sonics
5 -- Nuggets, Suns,
4 -- Rockets, Pacers, Nets, Knicks, Trailblazers
3 -- Hawks, Magic, Kings
1 -- Mavericks, Timberwolves, Bullets/Wizards
0 -- Bobcats, Cavaliers, Warriors, Clippers, Grizzlies, Hornets, Raptors


Bulls have only won 6 times? I find that hard to believe. wow

[Tigole Bitties]

So Boston pwns all the other franchises in number of titles... but weren't a majority of those championships won in the sixties were when the league only had a 5 or 6 teams? :)

[BigBinBigD]

I never get why people want to brag about titles 5, 10, 30 years ago. When I get on NFL boards, I've never once brought up how many Super Bowls the Cowboys have won. Just lament how much they've sucked the last 10 years.

To me, all that matters is the current year, and if it's not over yet, the past year. Sure, you can be proud of what your teams have done. But to brag or talk shit about it, kinda silly IMO.

[Tigole Bitties]

I never get why people want to brag about titles 5, 10, 30 years ago.

Probably the same folks who still wear their high school letterman jackets and class rings. All about nostalgia and living in the past.

[BigBinBigD]

Probably the same folks who still wear their high school letterman jackets and class rings. All about nostalgia and living in the past.

And the ones who put socks and weights in their whity-tighties. :spin

[BLACKMAMBA24]

The only think i can remember about the Lakers-Spurs playoff series at first thought is Fisher running off the floor with his right arm in the air saying "Let's get out of here", before the review or something to that effect.

[LakeShow]

[QUOTE=BigBinBigD]I never get why people want to brag about titles 5, 10, 30 years ago. QUOTE]

Until your team wins one and you experience it, You will never get it! :devil

[LakeShow]

NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS by timvp

Boston Celtics - 16
Los Angeles Lakers - 9
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 2
Detroit Pistons - 3
Philadelphia 76ers - 2
New York Knicks - 2
Houston Rockets - 2
Golden State Warriors - 1
Washington Wizards -1
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trail Blazers - 1
Seattle SuperSonics - 1
Dallas Mavericks -0
Sacramento Kings - 0
Dallas Mavericks -0
Phoenix Suns - 0
Dallas Mavericks - 0

That's how I see it. I took away some championships that the current fan bases don't deserve.

:smokin

Since we're taking away undeserved titles......fixed! :toast

[slayermin]

I would think the league would be tougher if it only had 8 teams. Even the fifties and the sixties had it's share of great athletes. Each team from those past eras had star players.

[Mr. Body]

Since we're taking away undeserved titles......fixed! :toast

Hey meathead, Los Angeles doesn't have that many championships. Minneapolis won a few of those for ya.

[LakeShow]

Hey meathead, Los Angeles doesn't have that many championships. Minneapolis won a few of those for ya.

No Shit?? :madrun :pctoss You mean to tell me all of those parades I went to in downtown LA were for the Minneapolis Lakers, not the Los Angeles Lakers? :madrun :madrun :madrun

:lol You guys are hilarious!

[shelshor]

I would think the league would be tougher if it only had 8 teams. Even the fifties and the sixties had it's share of great athletes. Each team from those past eras had star players.
And not only that, but all but a handful of them had to have real jobs in the off season--and a few had to have a job during the season to feed the kids

[bdictjames]

Which franchises havent won a championship since ever? Excluding to Bobcats and the Mavs of course..

[shelshor]

Which franchises havent won a championship since ever? Excluding to Bobcats and the Mavs of course..
Toronto Raptors
New Jersey Nets
Charlotte Bobcats
Orlando Magic
Indiana Pacers {in the NBA--they did win in the ABA}
Cleveland Cavaliers
Vancouver/Memphis Grizzlies
Dallas Mavericks
Charlotte/New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets
New Orleans/Utah Jazz
Minnesota Timberwolves
Denver Nuggets
Phoenix Suns
Buffalo Braves//San Diego/Los Angeles Clippers

No longer around:
Providence Steamrollers
Chicago Stags
Washington Capitols
Toronto Huskies
St. Louis Bombers
Cleveland Rebels
Detroit Falcons
Pittsburgh Ironmen
Indianapolis Jets (1948-49 season only)/Olympians (1949-53)
Denver Nuggets (1949-50)
Sheboygan Redskins
Anderson Duffey Packers
Waterloo Hawks--not sure if this was a different franchise than Tri-Cities (Blackhawks)/Milwaukee/Atlanta Hawks

[Sportcamper]

Still waiting for the Dallas Mavericks to win a championship... :depressed

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20070206/2007_02_06t141103_338x450_us_italy_embrace.jpg

[Solid D]

I grew up a Celtics fan and saw many of their championship runs. The old Boston Garden isn't there any more but I still enjoy seeing Boston's games. Since I've lived in San Antonio for so many years, the Spurs are where it's at now for me. Like life, watching your favorite sports teams are about the journey and not just about today and where your next meal is coming from.

You enjoy the whole thing, each and every day.

[shelshor]

Not that it has to do with braggging rights but I was amused by these

http://www.nba.com/history/season/19521953.html
From the 1952-53 SEASON OVERVIEW
Excessive fouling was still a big problem, and several rules changes relating to the last few minutes of a game had failed to bring adequate relief. Coaches liked playing the percentages of hoping for a miss of at least one of two free throws while their own team scored a two-point basket. Fouls rose to 58 per game, and teams set records for free throw attempts.

http://www.nba.com/history/season/19531954.html
From the 1953-54 SEASON OVERVIEW
A curious rule was put in place in another attempt to cut down on the excessive fouls which was draining the excitement from the game. Each player was limited to two fouls per quarter; if he committed a third, he would have to be removed for the remainder of that quarter. The number of fouls decreased to 51 per game, but late-game free-throw shooting contests remained the rule.

http://www.nba.com/history/season/19541955.html
From the 1954-55 SEASON OVERVIEW
Two momentous events in NBA history occurred prior to the 1954-55 season. George Mikan, who had been the standard-bearer as the league gained a foothold in the public consciousness, announced his retirement. But if anything could overshadow the departure of the game's greatest player, it was the adoption of the 24-second clock and an accompanying limit on the number of fouls a team could commit in a quarter. Syracuse owner Danny Biasone and his GM, Leo Ferris, came up with the shot clock idea, which along with the team foul limit, created the pro basketball game we know today.

[Solid D]

I remember when the league decided to improve with that ugly "3-to-make-2" rule.

That certainly bumped up the scoring and helped players like Wilt, who were poor FT shooters, but otherwise... it was just lame.

[ShoogarBear]

Conference Championship Banners
San Antonio Spurs - 3
Dallas Mavericks - 1

http://www.smileyhut.com/music/rock.gifhttp://www.smileyhut.com/music/rock.gifhttp://www.smileyhut.com/music/rock.gif

Three Point Championship Trophies
Dallas Mavericks - 1
San Antonio Spurs -0
:elephant:elephant:elephant

Appearances by Owner on Letterman
Dallas Mavericks - 1
San Antonio Spurs - 0
:elephant:elephant:elephant

[shelshor]

I remember when the league decided to improve with that ugly "3-to-make-2" rule.

That certainly bumped up the scoring and helped players like Wilt, who were poor FT shooters, but otherwise... it was just lame.
What was the backcourt foul rule? If you fouled in the backcourt it was the same free throws as a shooting foul?

[Solid D]

What was the backcourt foul rule? If you fouled in the backcourt it was the same free throws as a shooting foul?

That backcourt foul rule was in place for a long time but I never really liked it. Two FTs were awarded on backcourt fouls for almost 3 decades (until the early 1980s). The NBA finally got rid of it but I never really understood the reasoning behind it, other than to speed up play. Teams actually got 3 shots to make 2 on a backcourt foul when the fouling team was over the limit for the quarter.

[BigBinBigD]

[QUOTE=BigBinBigD]I never get why people want to brag about titles 5, 10, 30 years ago. QUOTE]

Until your team wins one and you experience it, You will never get it! :devil

Five Super Bowl championships? :toast I think I get it. I just don't dwell on the past.

[shelshor]

That backcourt foul rule was in place for a long time but I never really liked it. Two FTs were awarded on backcourt fouls for almost 3 decades (until the early 1980s). The NBA finally got rid of it but I never really understood the reasoning behind it, other than to speed up play. Teams actually got 3 shots to make 2 on a backcourt foul when the fouling team was over the limit for the quarter.
Thanks--I too was glad to see both the 3 to make 2 free throws and the back court fouls go
Don't waste time looking it up, but do you know off the top of your head when they started advancing the ball to mid-court after a time out at the end of a half?
And wasn't there a period when the team inbounding the ball had an option of whether to inbound from midcourt or from under the basket they were defending?

[Solid D]

Thanks--I too was glad to see both the 3 to make 2 free throws and the back court fouls go
Don't waste time looking it up, but do you know off the top of your head when they started advancing the ball to mid-court after a time out at the end of a half?
And wasn't there a period when the team inbounding the ball had an option of whether to inbound from midcourt or from under the basket they were defending?

No I don't know when they went to side-out-of-bounds midcourt. Check here.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html

[shelshor]

No I don't know when they went to side-out-of-bounds midcourt. Check here.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html
Oh good--Thanks for the link
It was in the 1976-77 season

From the same page is another one that we should probably be glad isn't still around:
1950-51
• After a free throw is made in the last three minutes, there is a jump ball (between the player who committed the foul and the player fouled) instead of possession for the team that committed the foul.
To eliminate deliberate fouling and roughness

[ShoogarBear]

1950-51
• After a free throw is made in the last three minutes, there is a jump ball (between the player who committed the foul and the player fouled) instead of possession for the team that committed the foul.
To eliminate deliberate fouling and roughness That would have eliminated the Hack-a-Shaq.

[twilo73]

Another claim to fame... we have never lost a Finals series.

[BradLohaus]

Rochester (1)/Cincinnati/Kansas City (Kings)/KC-Omaha (Kings)/Sacramento (Kings) Royals - 1

Looks like its about time for the Maloofs and the Kings to move to Vegas.

[LakeShow]

Another claim to fame... we have never lost a Finals series.

Here's another one,

NBA Championship by franchise*

1. (and only) San Antonio Spurs


* - Strike shortened season. Regular season began in Feb, ended in April. 50 games out of 82 regular season played. :fro

[BradLohaus]

I've never understood the * talk. Everyone knows that at least the first 32 games of the regular season are almost meaningless. They should probably just play 50 games in the regular season, but they want to sell more tickets.

[LakeShow]

I've never understood the * talk. Everyone knows that at least the first 32 games of the regular season are almost meaningless. They should probably just play 50 games in the regular season, but they want to sell more tickets.

I can agree with that, but the bottom line was that it was an IRREGULAR season.

[FromWayDowntown]

I can agree with that, but the bottom line was that it was an IRREGULAR season.

But it's not like it was irregular season for just the Spurs. It was irregular for all teams. I could understand, perhaps, the asterisk talk if the Spurs had never contended for another title, but that didn't happen either.

The asterisk stuff didn't exist until Phil Jackson decided that it was better to disparage the franchise that took the title than to congratulate it. Since then, a bunch of Jackson sycophants and Spurs haters continue to spew that crap -- I suspect mostly to get a rise out of Spurs fans. I think it's garbage, but I don't care enough about what other people think to do much other than a response like this one.

I think championships are championships -- each means that the team winning the championship was better, when it mattered, than every other team in the league. The 1999 Spurs dominated the Western Conference in those playoffs. It's not as if, at the end, there was some question about the validity of the Spurs' run.

If you want to put an asterisk on it, so be it. I think it makes you look like pretty much petty, juvenile, and disrespectful; but if that floats your boat, there's not much I can do to change your mind about that.

[Extra Stout]

Hey meathead, Los Angeles doesn't have that many championships. Minneapolis won a few of those for ya.
Yes, indeed the Lakers have 9 in LA. 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987-88, 2000-02.

[Extra Stout]

I can agree with that, but the bottom line was that it was an IRREGULAR season.
So?

[Solid D]

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

Here is the official NBA records listing.

[LakeShow]

But it's not like it was irregular season for just the Spurs. It was irregular for all teams. I could understand, perhaps, the asterisk talk if the Spurs had never contended for another title, but that didn't happen either.

The asterisk stuff didn't exist until Phil Jackson decided that it was better to disparage the franchise that took the title than to congratulate it. Since then, a bunch of Jackson sycophants and Spurs haters continue to spew that crap -- I suspect mostly to get a rise out of Spurs fans. I think it's garbage, but I don't care enough about what other people think to do much other than a response like this one.

I think championships are championships -- each means that the team winning the championship was better, when it mattered, than every other team in the league. The 1999 Spurs dominated the Western Conference in those playoffs. It's not as if, at the end, there was some question about the validity of the Spurs' run.

If you want to put an asterisk on it, so be it. I think it makes you look like pretty much petty, juvenile, and disrespectful; but if that floats your boat, there's not much I can do to change your mind about that.

It is what it is! It was the same advantage and disadvantage for all teams as you say. It was a season thrown together to save face and dollars for the league. The spurs just played better during that short season than anyone else.

I'm just funning with you guys but the truth is if the Lakers would have won, I would be boasting 10 NBA titles in LA as well. Dont get your panties in a bunch!