8 Straight Finals Losses an NBA Record

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    Actually the General Manager builds the team, not the coach Jerry Krause built the Bull's and Jerry West Built the Lakers
    Posted by dirty52


    And Red Auerbach built the Celtics-  exactly my point!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dirty52. Show dirty52's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat



    Yes Red built the Celtics no one is denying that

    but Phil did not build the Bull's or Laker's
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    Yes Red built the Celtics no one is denying that but Phil did not build the Bull's or Laker's
    Posted by dirty52


    Of course not, because he is incapable of that.  Red was coach AND GM...Phil took teams that were already made and coached them to the top.  Certainly a skill, and he is the best ever at that, but IMO, a coach can take a young team (Bill Fitch) or and old team (KC Jones) and get the most out of them.  I'm not saying Phil can't, there is just no evidence to support it.  Quite the contrary, actually.

    Of course, we all know Phil wanted the lakers to draft Danny Granger, but they opted for Andrew Bynum..................shows how much they valued his opinion.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    OK Majic..... let me get this straight....missing the playoffs 16 more times over 60+ years..... is worse than losing 9 times in 12 Championship Finals against your chief rival.....?  (Boston)

    Having the most losses ever in the Finals (no team is close) is a good thing...? ....also most sweeps...most game 7 losses...?

    Having a losing record in the Finals (while in LA) and being a game over .500 (overall) is better than Boston's .809 winning percentage...?

    Having a losing record against the Celtics all time (both regular season and playoffs) is acceptable....?

    ....are you for real...?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    Regarding Phil Jackson.

    The Bulls could just have easily have fallen apart a year after he took control of the team. He'd been there for two years as an assistant, enough to build some familiarity with the team.

    However if Jordan wanted him gone, especially after 1990 it could have been done, very easily. Jackson had of course won nothing at that time. Collins took the team to the play-offs with some consistency, however he has never been able to get to the finals.

    Jackson was able to manage Jordan which raises his opinion with me as a coach. The performance of the Bulls team in 1994 was exceptional considering that Jordan wasn't with the team. They were still an extremely competitive team. I can't say that for any other Pippen led teams. But Pippen's 1994 bulls were a very decent team which were of true championship calibre.

    Pippen flourished under Jackson.

    However when giving credit to Phil Jackson one  has to acknowledge Tex Winter.

    Only time that Jacksons coaching and man management was at it's lowest point was in 2004. The Lakers had a very similar roster from 1996 to 1998. A coach of reasonable ability should have been able to take them to the finals but they could not. Jackson did. I think it's downplaying his ability when people say he inherited great teams. He did inherit great teams, but he won with those teams unlike the previous coaches.

    KC Jones inherited a great team, but he is acknowledged as a fine coach.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    Regarding Phil Jackson. The Bulls could just have easily have fallen apart a year after he took control of the team. He'd been there for two years as an assistant, enough to build some familiarity with the team. However if Jordan wanted him gone, especially after 1990 it could have been done, very easily. Jackson had of course won nothing at that time. Collins took the team to the play-offs with some consistency, however he has never been able to get to the finals. Jackson was able to manage Jordan which raises his opinion with me as a coach. The performance of the Bulls team in 1994 was exceptional considering that Jordan wasn't with the team. They were still an extremely competitive team. I can't say that for any other Pippen led teams. But Pippen's 1994 bulls were a very decent team which were of true championship calibre. Pippen flourished under Jackson. However when giving credit to Phil Jackson one  has to acknowledge Tex Winter. Only time that Jacksons coaching and man management was at it's lowest point was in 2004. The Lakers had a very similar roster from 1996 to 1998. A coach of reasonable ability should have been able to take them to the finals but they could not. Jackson did. I think it's downplaying his ability when people say he inherited great teams. He did inherit great teams, but he won with those teams unlike the previous coaches. KC Jones inherited a great team, but he is acknowledged as a fine coach.
    Posted by RUWorthy



    KC was very similar to Phil - he needed good players.
    I have to be a little sarcastic with the "managing" Jordan comment. 
    He managed the guy by letting him do whatever he wanted........and MJ flourished as well.  Collins had a lot of restrictions, but Phil turned him loose - and let him basically run the show.....
    I think Phil was a great coach, you'd have to be a fool to say anything else........and I always read and respect your posts....but this is about a laker fan named MajicMVP and his "logic"....we don't know how he can say Phil is better than Red because he won 11 titles to Red's 9, then go on to say that the lakers are better even though the count is 17-16........I made the mistake of voicing my opinion that I thought Red was still a better coach............he has taken that and run with it for months now...telling people I think 9 is bigger than 11.....................it's sick and twisted and stupid.  Phil is a great coach, the greatest in Bulls history, and AT WORST #2 in lakers history.........but Red was better!!!!!....:)
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    wait.....Majic.....you said that, even though I think 9-3 is good.....you say it's bad....ummmmm......ok.......I guess somehow that makes sense in your world....
    Posted by Duke4


    Of course, when you can't tell us where the Celtics were when the Lakers won 13 of the 16...

    The total is 16, not 3, and those 16 included the Celtics' failure.



     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : 14 is less than 17, right? 16 is also less than 17, right? You say the Lakers are the #1 franchise, go knock yourself out. But as of today, the Celtics are still the winningest team in NBA history. lol However, you have a point, the Lakers are the #1 defending NBA champ to lose to a foreign team. Ouch!
    Posted by 21st


    Winningest team? Depends on what you mean by winningest. The Celtics were 3028-2057, the Lakers were 3084-1891. So tell me which team is the winningest.

    Oh, you only mean winning the most titles? But then it's only the Celtics' 17-48 vs the Lakers' 16-47. That's a tie if you look at standings.

    Not to mention the most titles does NOT mean the #1 team, because you think only the title counts, nothing else, but many people who feel the Lakers were the #1 team don't just look at # of titles. Just ask your cohort RedRust why he feels that 9 titles is better than 11, or DoctorCO why 6 titles of the Steelers are better than the Packers' 13.

    So go ahead and fool yourself by the # of titles.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : You seem a bit off. I don't care about your Lakers' popularity, the fans want a champion, not a playoff team. Lakers #1 team in your book? Knock yourself out! But can you say the Lakers are the winningest team in NBA history? OF COURSE NOT! 
    Posted by 21st

    The fans don't just want a playoff team, because making the playoffs is no big deal.

    But then missing the playoffs is a big shame, because making it is nothing to write home about.

    You want to preach "making the playoffs is no big deal" == "missing the playoffs is no big deal"? who are you kidding?


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : The fans don't just want a playoff team, because making the playoffs is no big deal. But then missing the playoffs is a big shame, because making it is nothing to write home about. You want to preach "making the playoffs is no big deal" == "missing the playoffs is no big deal"? who are you kidding?
    Posted by MajicMVP


    Making the playoffs and getting swept, FACE FIRST ON THE GROUND!

    WHO ARE YOU KIDDING???
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    The Lakers only have 12 of these.

    WHO ARE YOU KIDDING???
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 21st. Show 21st's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    MajicMvp

    WHO ARE YOU KIDDING???
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tachometrix. Show Tachometrix's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    1970 New York Knicks       4-3   Los Angeles Lakers  - 8 Straight!
    1969 Boston Celtics         4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - 7-Peater
    1968 Boston Celtics         4-2 Los Angeles Lakers - 6-Peat
    1967 Philadelphia 76ers 4-2 San Francisco Warriors
    1966 Boston Celtics         4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - 5-Peat
    1965 Boston Celtics         4-1 Los Angeles Lakers - 4-Peat
    1964 Boston Celtics         4-1 San Francisco Warriors
    1963 Boston Celtics         4-2 Los Angeles Lakers - 3-Peat
    1962 Boston Celtics         4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - Back to Back
    1961 Boston Celtics         4-1 St. Louis Hawks
    1960 Boston Celtics         4-3 St. Louis Hawks
    1959 Boston Celtics         4-0 Minneapolis Lakers - Sweep!

    Who are you kidding? lol
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    Must be Sunday in Scotland! Guy posts garbage,

    No more garbage than this claim on Scotland. Are you that naive to think that every fan of a Scottish team lives in Scotland? Geez, Man U is the most popular team in the world, so all the Man U fans must live in England.

    Implication: the U.K. must be the most populous country in the world...

    Pat Riley is the best coach in lakers history, IMO.  While he ONLY won 4 titles in LA, that's 4 in a 9 year period when he had to go against Olajuwon just to FACE Bird!!

    Good that you keep refuting your cohorts' use of numbers (of titles) to claim relative merits. Now you have 4 is better than 6 along with the 9 is better than 11.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : OMG  - hey Fierce, he finally admitted something Call the media on this one Majic just said the Celtics have won 17, to the lakers 16 Oh, happy day...........................
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    Hey Fierce, did you see that? RedRust is refuting your claim of the Lakers' NBL title...

    Your lovers' quarrel is really exciting...

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : And Red Auerbach built the Celtics-  exactly my point!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    But we are talking about the great coach, not the greatest GM. If you want to brag about Red's GM ability, Phil is not your target. Jerry West is.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    OK Majic..... let me get this straight....missing the playoffs 16 more times over 60+ years..... is worse than losing 9 times in 12 Championship Finals against your chief rival.....? 

    Absolutely. Are you telling me a team missing the playoffs is better than a team reaching the finals?

    Boy, you are really good at arguing for losing.


    (Boston) Having the most losses ever in the Finals (no team is close) is a good thing...?

    Definitely better than missing the playoffs 16 times. You don't think you can use "losing is better than winning" to win an argument, do you?


     ....also most sweeps...most game 7 losses...? Having a losing record in the Finals (while in LA) and being a game over .500 (overall) is better than Boston's .809 winning percentage...?

    And pray tell, why only "in the Finals"? This qualification of "in the Finals" is exactly why your argument getting you nowhere. Why is "in the Finals" worse than not making the finals or missing the playoffs?

    Not to mention your "while in LA" qualifications. You like to cherry-pick facts to argue, so can I.


    Having a losing record against the Celtics all time (both regular season and playoffs) is acceptable....? ....are you for real...?
    Posted by Duke4

    Of course it's acceptable. It's more acceptable than missing the playoffs 16 times, won't you say?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : 17-48 and 16-47 WHO CARES, TROLL!!!
    Posted by 21st


    A lot of people here care. If not, this thread won't last for months...
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    17-48 = .261 16-47 = .254 26.1% is GREATER than 25.4%, right? Who are you kidding? lol
    Posted by Tachometrix


    In league standings, 17-48 and 16-47 are ties, as indicated by games behind. One team is ahead on percentage points, but that's meaningless. In league standings, they will eventually play equal # of games.

    So who are you kidding?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    1970 New York Knicks        4-3   Los Angeles Lakers  - 8 Straight! 1969 Boston Celtics          4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - 7-Peater 1968 Boston Celtics          4-2 Los Angeles Lakers - 6-Peat 1967 Philadelphia 76ers 4-2 San Francisco Warriors 1966 Boston Celtics          4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - 5-Peat 1965 Boston Celtics          4-1 Los Angeles Lakers - 4-Peat 1964 Boston Celtics         4-1 San Francisco Warriors 1963 Boston Celtics          4-2 Los Angeles Lakers - 3-Peat 1962 Boston Celtics          4-3 Los Angeles Lakers - Back to Back 1961 Boston Celtics         4-1 St. Louis Hawks 1960 Boston Celtics         4-3 St. Louis Hawks 1959 Boston Celtics          4-0 Minneapolis Lakers - Sweep! Who are you kidding? lol
    Posted by Tachometrix


    1946-47 22-38 Missed playoffs
    1948-49 25-35 Missed playoffs
    1949-50 22-46 Missed playoffs
    1969-70 34-48 Missed playoffs
    1970-71 44-38 Missed playoffs
    1977-78 32-50 Missed playoffs
    1978-79 29-53 Missed playoffs
    1993-94 32-50 Missed playoffs
    1995-96 33-49 Missed playoffs
    1996-97 15-67 Missed playoffs
    1997-98 36-46 Missed playoffs
    1998-99 19-31 Missed playoffs
    1999-20 35-47 Missed playoffs
    2000-01 36-46 Missed playoffs*
    2005-06 33-49 Missed playoffs
    2006-09 24-58 Missed playoffs

    * a 6-peat for missing the playoffs...

    Sure, you can tell me missing the playoffs is better than losing in the finals, but who are you kidding here?




     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : The Celtics missed the playoffs 16 times and they still have more championships than the Lakers. What were the Lakers doing in the playoffs all those years?  Are you telling Celtic fans that you get an extra championship banner if you make the playoffs? Who are you kidding?
    Posted by Fiercest34

    Amen, brother!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : No more garbage than this claim on Scotland. Are you that naive to think that every fan of a Scottish team lives in Scotland? Geez, Man U is the most popular team in the world, so all the Man U fans must live in England. Implication: the U.K. must be the most populous country in the world... Good that you keep refuting your cohorts' use of numbers (of titles) to claim relative merits. Now you have 4 is better than 6 along with the 9 is better than 11.
    Posted by MajicMVP


    It is indeed rare to encounter an individual who is a complete addlepate.  Rare indeed.  For a person to interpret opinions in such a way is either a gift or a curse and a betting man would bet the latter.  Published no where on this site are the words "9 is better than 11".  What IS published is "Red is better than Phil as a coach (and Jerry as a GM, although Mr. West certainly ranks as #2)."

    How immature to continually repeat something one knows is wrong and was never stated.  Ah, lakers fans - it must be really slow, for this thread has long outlived its' usefulness, and people should stop responding to one who:
    1. Invents facts no one cares about and has never heard of
    2.  Says he comes on here just to antagonize Celtics fans
    3.  Never stands by any other fact than his

    Boycott Majic!!!  It's lockout time, baby!!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat....

    Red, I am done even trying to have a discussion with this guy......he makes no sense....not one Laker fan that I know of even backs him up....he thinks his team is better because they have the most regular season wins in history along with the most finals appearances...when we point out that Boston has beaten the Lakers more times in the regular season and the playoffs....has more championships...a huge head to head advantage....when we point out that the winning percentages are lopsided....that we have more banners, hall of famers, etc......his reply is....yeah but more trips to the finals (and by far the most finals losses in history...no team is close....) trumps the Celtic domination of the league in general and the Lakers in particular...when we ask how the Lakers could have ten more finals appearances and still be behind Boston, he won't answer the question......the answer is, of course, obvious.....because the Celtics have owned the Lakers to the tune of 9-3 in the finals.....take the Celtics out of the equation and the Lakers would be number one.......the problem is, it doesn't work that way does it...?...it's just a joke man...he is back on ignore...time to move on.....there are way too many great posters representing many franchises that we can converse with....it's just too bad...to go to another team's forum and try to convince their team's fans is pretty funny when you think about it huh...? ...then again, maybe it is just pathetic...
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    according to some laker fans they have won the last 3890128039823908129038901283901283901283098129038230470238947890475894758934765847589347589047589037348927389012378912738971234897612478906
    9478490238490849083490238904820938490384904283904823908429023
    48768904789017418923738974890374893748374937849379847
    92290384902384092382490234823490234803923084093840928390384092
    439084-902380-948234902348240-2384-02398243-09823490348340-2348
    They means the laker fans think they have won these many titles in a row..and the celtics have never won any title...Let these people think this...and the celtics and reality have the nba..
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Laker 8-peat

    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat:
    In Response to Re: Laker 8-peat : Wow! This thread is still alive. Keep posting, Majic. The more this thread is alive the more people are reminded of who holds the record for 8 straight Finals losses. Ha Ha
    Posted by Fiercest34


    As compared to 15 missed playoffs + 6 straight?

    And why are 8 straight final losses bad? Look no further than 9 straight years not getting out of the 1st round:

    1992-93 Lost first round
    1993-94 Missed playoffs
    1994-95 Lost first round
    1995-96 Missed playoffs
    1996-97 Missed playoffs
    1997-98 Missed playoffs
    1998-99 Missed playoffs
    1999-00 Missed playoffs
    2000-01 Missed playoffs

    You know what a true hat trick is? Your team have the honor of a TRUE 9-peat...

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share