Reply With Quote
2002
2009
2010
To make this clear, this is not a troll thread, but a serious inquiry into the validity of one of the Lakers "NBA" les.
I don't understand how a le won when the league was clearly called the "BAA" can be considered an NBA le. 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 les and not 16.
2002
2009
2010
This isn't a troll thread. Those les were won in the NBA, therefore they count.
The 1949 le was not.
It is nowThis isn't a troll thread.
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 le was in 2001
You gots have no problem looking backwards when you're trying to match les with the Celtics.
Lol BAA le.
Not true playa, he is still the Champion of butthurt
If that's the case, technically, no NBA le should count before 1976-77 season. Take away 13 Celtics les 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 les before 1976 shouldn't count.
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 les all won with a full schedule…
Yeah the Spurs were the only team not to play 82 games in 1999
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.
No les 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.
It would seem an asterisk is in order.
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 gamesThis 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 les all won with a full schedule…
even though Phil slapped an asterisk on that '99 le, if our boys had won, I guarantee we wouldn't put an asterisk on that .
no Sherlock
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.
Mid, runnin' as fast as he can.
The you talking about.
Lakers have 15 NBA les. 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 les you won in Minny.
How'd the hair appointment go today?
Yep, yep.
How about if the NBA gives the Lakers one more le instead. 1948 NBL le 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 les:
16 NBA
1 NBL.
Nope. In that case, the Lakers have 15 NBA les, 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."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
