*** Why there should be an asterisk ***

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mtrax. Show mtrax's posts

    *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    When Boston won all 11 of their championships in the 1950's and 1960's they only had to win between 8 to 12 playoff games to win the championship. It was relatively easy to win championships back then. It is hard to survive 4 long rounds in modern basketball.
    Boston has not been very successful since the champions had to win 4 playoff series.
    Their 1950's and 1960's championships should have an asterisk.
    Boston hasn't even been to the Finals many times in the last 20+ times. In fact in more then 20 years they have been to the NBA Finals the same amount of times as the NJ Nets.

    The same lower amount of playoff games to be the champion can be considered for the Yankees too, but at least they have 5 championships in the last 15 years.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Jealousy, thy name is lakers fan!!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Jimmy42Jack0. Show Jimmy42Jack0's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    i dont think there should be any kind of an asterik

    but i do think it was easier to win back in the days when there were alot less teams and less games to be played

    but im glad the sport has evolved and that more people than ever can enjoy watching their home town team and not jumping on the bandwagon of a team hundreds of miles away
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tayshawn. Show Tayshawn's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    great post mtrax!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbrann. Show mbrann's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Might not have been easier to win it all...remember that less teams means a greater concentration of talent per team.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jtkl. Show jtkl's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    In Response to *** Why there should be an asterisk ***:
    [QUOTE]When Boston won all 11 of their championships in the 1950's and 1960's they only had to win between 8 to 12 playoff games to win the championship. It was relatively easy to win championships back then. It is hard to survive 4 long rounds in modern basketball. Boston has not been very successful since the champions had to win 4 playoff series. Their 1950's and 1960's championships should have an asterisk. Boston hasn't even been to the Finals many times in the last 20+ times. In fact in more then 20 years they have been to the NBA Finals the same amount of times as the NJ Nets. The same lower amount of playoff games to be the champion can be considered for the Yankees too, but at least they have 5 championships in the last 15 years.
    Posted by mtrax[/QUOTE]


    And we always won them over the Lakers !!!!!!!

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    So, Wilt Chamberlain would be a stiff in today's NBA??

    That's like saying Babe Ruth would hit .240 in the MLB if he were playing now!!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from cofj. Show cofj's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Again, I'm not into taking away accomplishments. 

    If it were really 'that' much easier to win a championship back then, why was it only Boston winning them? 

    It's 17-16 titles.  The two best franchises in bball.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Laker-Nation32. Show Laker-Nation32's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    In Response to Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***:
    [QUOTE]Might not have been easier to win it all...remember that less teams means a greater concentration of talent per team.
    Posted by mbrann[/QUOTE]

    No international player base back then and alot of black athletes were still excluded. No salary cap either, so much easier to keep your players!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Excellent thoughts. Especially when you consider that Russell today would be a nothing more than a backup power forward with todays giants. So an asterisk for the franchise that got their ASSterKICKED 3 years in a row and will soon return where they were 4 years ago.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jtkl. Show jtkl's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Boohoo our window has closed. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tayshawn. Show Tayshawn's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    In Response to Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***:
    [QUOTE]Boohoo our window has closed. 
    Posted by jtkl[/QUOTE]

    Yes it closed in 2004 when this picture was taken, but it re-opened in 2009 and 2010.  Cool
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jtkl. Show jtkl's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    He was getting his crying in early. It's all over for the lakers. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jaytf25. Show jaytf25's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    This has got to be one of the most rediculous posts ever. Do we take away NFL titles before the Super Bowls? Before the AFL? World Series winners without playoffs before 69?? Where do people come up with this stuff? So the Packers only have 4 championships?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    mtrax..........asterisks..........?

    You're absolutely correct....

    one for the five titles won prior to the modern NBA......you know, before the shot clock......did you see my two examples of basketball prior the shot clock era?  ...if not here they are:

    Lakers lost a game to the Pistons by the score of 19-18 as the Pistons outscored the Lakers 3-1 in the 4th quarter...

    Rochester and Indianapolis played a 6 overtime game....there was one shot taken in each overtime....you read that right!

    That is the era that your team won almost one third of it's titles (in another city I might also add....and wearing the blue and white....not the purple and gold...at least they kept the name)

    The other asterisk is for the 2001 Champs......were you around to witness the fiasco that was game 6 against Sacramento....?  ....that game was brought up several times on ESPN just last week in speculating how the LA/Dallas series would be officiated when the Lakers went down 0-2 at home...

    Don't try to downplay the Celtics 17 titles, .809 Finals winning percentage, or their 9-3 lead head to head against your team.......you just had to get me going didn't you?...I apologize to the great Laker fans that visit this board...but this guy just pissed me off!!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from genaro008. Show genaro008's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Duke even Magic and Jerry West are disgusted with there old franchise.

    http://www.lataco.com/taco/magic-johnson-lakers-loss-embarrassed-the-organization

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-mavericks/headlines/20110510-jerry-west-embarrassed-lakers-forgot-how-to-lose-with-class.ece
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Number6Fan. Show Number6Fan's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    Take the 100 best b-ball players in the world, and place them on 8 teams instead of spread among 30 teams, and tell me how much easier it would be to win a championship.  No asterisk.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mtrax. Show mtrax's posts

    Re: *** Why there should be an asterisk ***

    .809 Finals winning percentage?
    That is like saying the Marlins winning percentage is 100%. (2 for 2). Ok, bad example but how many wins are in the modern era?
    What happened to all the other seasons that Boston couldn't get out of the eastern conference?

    Yes, there were good players back in the 1950's but Boston still only had to win 8 playoff games to win the  championship.
    I would rather have a 1 in 8 chance of winning the championship then a 1 in 30 chance likes teams have in modern basketball.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share