Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : Ya gotta ask Duke that question. He's the only one old enough here to remember.
    Posted by lakersavenger[/QUOTE]
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Actually, there are at least two other Celtic posters that are older than me....one by almost 20 years...and he is extremely knowledgeable and witty.....I guess that makes me a kid huh? ....seeing as how I still think like I did when I was in my 20's....that is the beauty of sports....as you grow older you still have the great memories while also enjoying "today"......I just wish McCourt would sell the Dodgers to Mark Cuban.....love Kemp & Kershaw!! ...sorry if I got off track.....
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Actually, there are at least two other Celtic posters that are older than me....one by almost 20 years...and he is extremely knowledgeable and witty.....I guess that makes me a kid huh? ....seeing as how I still think like I did when I was in my 20's....that is the beauty of sports....as you grow older you still have the great memories while also enjoying "today"......I just wish McCourt would sell the Dodgers to Mark Cuban.....love Kemp & Kershaw!! ...sorry if I got off track.....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]
    Cuban as owner of the Dodgers is one thing you and I agree on, Duke. I actually used to be more a Dodger fan than a Laker fan, in fact I discovered pro sports as a kid through the Dodgers, keeping score and stats during the game. The Lakers and Celtics came along and that made me a Laker lover and Celtic hater forever. Eventually baseball became so ridiculously slow with all the specialization of players that I only care during the stretch run and playoffs now. Can you imagine a designated freethrow specialist coming off the bench if the NBA had baseball rules? I miss the days pitchers were measured in large part by how many games they completed. the NBA, now that, I follow all the time, even if the Lakers are not in contention, which is rare. And I always monitor the Celtics, nonetheless. I'll tell you something, those 22 years you guys were out of it with the Lakers closing the titles gap to make it this close, has put back a certain excitement about the game and the rivalry that I haven't felt in a very long time. To know we are the only ones that close to catching and overtaking the lead in that department is exciting. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Actually, there are at least two other Celtic posters that are older than me....one by almost 20 years...and he is extremely knowledgeable and witty.....I guess that makes me a kid huh? ....seeing as how I still think like I did when I was in my 20's....that is the beauty of sports....as you grow older you still have the great memories while also enjoying "today"......I just wish McCourt would sell the Dodgers to Mark Cuban.....love Kemp & Kershaw!! ...sorry if I got off track.....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Mark Cuban is not in play yet.  Let's not forget Selig (almost as bad as Stern, but not quite) didn't want him owning the Rangers.  Unless it's a fire sale, I don't see Cuban as the owner - although it would be fun, and have the radio idiots out here stop talking about koME's non-comment on Mike Brown!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    to Avenger and Red...I agree with both of you guys......Cuban is a winner....Dodgers need to come back into greatness....and I absolutely love the Celtic/Laker rivalry....I feel fortunate that I am old enough to have witnessed the many years of greatness that these three franchises have provided us....I'm also glad to see the BoSox being a contender every year....I'm a lifelong sports fan...and life is good....take care guys.....time for my nap!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Koberuls,

    The world knows that the laker fans cant do math. We all know the laker fans try to create there leagues of prof. bball like after the merger, teams who won back to back in the last 10 years...BUT YOU TROLLS THIS IS THE NBA...heres why your a hypocrite...YOU say the lakers have 16 rings...HOW MANY WERE WON IN LA?..........so you can have 16 but bostons russell rings dont count...Look at how bad that makes you look...THIS IS THE NBA...not anything else..Ill like all the NBA fans go by the league..not by the fools in 2nd place....OH which are the LAKERS...17 to 16...BOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...Ring in  1960 what ever means the same as a ring now....
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Maggicmvp,

    The nba is the NBA...not NBL or what ever..The nba was a new league started which didnt incorperate other leagues...The aba merged...THEY ARE THE ONLY LEAGUE TO DO IT...

    THE NBA makes the rules...NOT YOU....Ill take the NBA over you....If you think you know more than the nba...How come they havent changed there rules to accomodate you...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    magicmvp,

    The nba does not recognize ABA title winners...When leagues get re named and merged the title winners are recognized by THE NEW LEAGUE ONLY...Thats it...The nbl became the baa merged....

    In football the afl titles are not recognized...The football it lists superbowl wins as what matters..

    In baseball they dont look at the league before mlb....

    Do we know what a dihatsu is or do we know it as nissan...

    So to say a merged thing still counts...makes you look stupid..look at our country...do we recognize the souths president...NOPE......
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from koberulz. Show koberulz's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    DoctorCO, please show me where I have ever said that none of the Celtics titles were valid?  The superior franchise is the team that wins on a consistent basis and has more DYNASTIES. The Lakers are worth more than the Celtics because they bring in more revenue, have more fans, and play in the wonderful city of L.A. The Celtic fans are all bandwagoners that were cheering for the Bulls in the 90's and Kobe and Shaq in the early 2000s. Heck, Celtic fans even chanted "MVP" for a certain guy named Kobe Bryant when the Lakers played in Boston. Pathetic and embarassing. Please tell me a time when Laker fans ever chanted "MVP" for any Celtic, former or not? I won't be holding my breath. LaughingIt has been 40+ years since the Celtics have won back to back titles. That is pathetic and embarassing. 1 title in the last 23 years is also pathetic and embarassing. Winning 15 games in a season is pathetic and embarassing. The Lakers win championships on a consistent basis, and will soon overtake the Celtics for most banners. These are just a few of the many reasons why the Lakers are the greatest franchise in the NBA.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    I no longer consider this an argument.....rather it is a topic where fans of each team have their opinions.....and those opinions will not change...my take on this...

    when all is said and done, I'll still take the Celtics......I'll vote for the 17 titles...

    I'll be very satisfied with the .809 Finals winning percentage...

    I'll point to the 9-3 record head to head vs our chief rivals....

    I'll know that the Celtics have a much better record (regular season and play-offs
    vs the Lakers head to head)

    I'll remember how Red assembled the team and, although leaving the coaching ranks at a very young age, has more titles with one team than anyone...

    Right now, the Lakers hold the edge over the last 25 years.....and I give them their due....we had the huge edge until the Big 3 faded along with the deaths of Bias (I saw him play and I think he would've become a superstar) and Lewis (an all star at age 27)....

    it's true that the Celts have 1 title in the last 25 years to the Lakers 5

    the Lakers went through the same stretch having won once in 25 years (Wilt's Lakers).....

    Laker fans point out the drought but don't like to acknowledge that the Celts have been contenders for the last 4 years.....and the teams are 1-1 head to head during this time....

    the future....? who knows with the new CBA...? ....but I think Boston is better off financially...and Kobe has very few miles (minutes) on those legs....in my opinion

    I think the Lakers are one of the greatest franchises all time in team sports....I just think that the Celtics are a notch above....but I'm a Celtic fan so, of course I would feel that way....I am also a huge Dodger fan (hence the name "Duke") and a huge BoSox fan.....but I know that neither are on par with the Yankees when you look at the big picture...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Actually, the Lakers have dominated for the last 31 years with 10 titles to the Celtics 4. And they have won 3 of the last 4 head-to-heads. Let's keep it honest now. The most telling difference I think is the Celtics inability to win back to backs in 42 years, while the Lakers have done it numerous times in just the last 23 years. Greatness is measured by repeats, and that train left Boston a long time ago.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    ok koberules ill go through your points 1 by 1....

    1. answering your titles are vaild question. Didnt you say ERAS are better?..The la tittles were won after the merger...yes you did...My answer to your eras point is ..THIS IS THE NBA...not the ERA LEAGUE...and any title won from 1950 what ever means the same as the mavs title and any other title before...ITS THE NBA...not when this team won back to back titles league..

    2. LA and Boston is a weired comparison. La has more people than boston. your looking at metros of boston at 400k. and LA at millions. So when you say more fans is it fair to say size of city. ITS NOT..because both cities have an NBA team. And Boston is owned part owned by the starter of bain capital. That is one of the biggest cap. funding firms in the world. So the celts will not be bankrupt any time soon.

    3. Celtic fans are bandwagoners?????....So the celtic fans who are in there 70s who saw russell dont count...Or the celtic fans who saw bird in there late 20's dont count. COME ON BRO THATS WRONG...HEres what happened to boston. And I hope it doesnt happen to la. But our DR. buss in MR. Gaston died. Dr. buss  will pass one day. We all will pass. its life anyway. Gastons son took over for him. Gastons son was one of those guys who didnt like sports. He looked at the cs as an asset. NOT a TEAM. Going through that era was hard and tough. Imagine when DR. buss passes. I hope for your lakers that you have a plan. Boston didnt. Is that the fans fault. PLus in 2001 when the pistons beat LA...all of you laker fans traded your kobe shirts for billips shirts. What about 2008 when kobe said he wanted to be traded. All of those season tix holders in LA wanted TO GIVE THERE TIX BACK...so do you want to go there about bandwagon. AND you guys show up in the 2nd quarter and leave in the 3rd..so talk about bandwagon....Dont blame boston for there owner passing and having a son. who didnt know crap. Look at the yankees. There introuble. And look at your team this year. Doc rivers little toy is your coach. Phill oh I can win 11 rings after coaching for 20 years retired...Why couldnt he win 11 rings in 13 or 14 years. or 15. While red won 9 in 11..and 16 as a GM....

    4. What does back to back titles mean???....look at the bulls a 3peat twice...sure great..BUT DO THEY EVEN HAVE 10 RINGS???....ill take 10 rings over 2 3 peats because your NAMED THE CHAMP MORE...its simple math. I love that its soon la will over take boston..lol....after this year boston has a ALOT OF CAP SPACE..and a COACH PLAYERS WANT TO PLAY FOR..and a GREAT YOUNG PG...its not going to 20 what ever years...look at miami..THEY GOT GOOD BECAUSE OF CAP SPACE..how did la trade for GASOL..CAP SPACE....so the key is cap space...players will come where the money is...regardless of local.

    5. your questions have just been answered
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Maggicmvp, The nba is the NBA...not NBL or what ever..The nba was a new league started which didnt incorperate other leagues...The aba merged...THEY ARE THE ONLY LEAGUE TO DO IT... THE NBA makes the rules...NOT YOU....Ill take the NBA over you....If you think you know more than the nba...How come they havent changed there rules to accomodate you...
    Posted by DoctorCO[/QUOTE]

    Yep, the fans of the NBA make the convention, that 6 rings is greater than 11 as the GOAT.

    Wait, you Celtics fans also make the same rule, that 9 rings as a coach is greater than 11 rings as a coach...

    So, what how come NBA fans don't believe in sheer numbers?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]magicmvp, The nba does not recognize ABA title winners...When leagues get re named and merged the title winners are recognized by THE NEW LEAGUE ONLY...Thats it...The nbl became the baa merged.... In football the afl titles are not recognized...The football it lists superbowl wins as what matters.. In baseball they dont look at the league before mlb.... Do we know what a dihatsu is or do we know it as nissan... So to say a merged thing still counts...makes you look stupid..look at our country...do we recognize the souths president...NOPE......
    Posted by DoctorCO[/QUOTE]

    The NBA recognize or not is NOT my concern. Only when Faul Fierce recognizes that NBL title, that's enough for him to paint himself into a corner. You can ask him to confirm this for you...
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]I no longer consider this an argument.....rather it is a topic where fans of each team have their opinions.....and those opinions will not change...my take on this... when all is said and done, I'll still take the Celtics......I'll vote for the 17 titles... I'll be very satisfied with the .809 Finals winning percentage... I'll point to the 9-3 record head to head vs our chief rivals.... I'll know that the Celtics have a much better record (regular season and play-offs vs the Lakers head to head) I'll remember how Red assembled the team and, although leaving the coaching ranks at a very young age, has more titles with one team than anyone... Right now, the Lakers hold the edge over the last 25 years.....and I give them their due....we had the huge edge until the Big 3 faded along with the deaths of Bias (I saw him play and I think he would've become a superstar) and Lewis (an all star at age 27).... it's true that the Celts have 1 title in the last 25 years to the Lakers 5 the Lakers went through the same stretch having won once in 25 years (Wilt's Lakers)..... Laker fans point out the drought but don't like to acknowledge that the Celts have been contenders for the last 4 years.....and the teams are 1-1 head to head during this time.... the future....? who knows with the new CBA...? ....but I think Boston is better off financially...and Kobe has very few miles (minutes) on those legs....in my opinion I think the Lakers are one of the greatest franchises all time in team sports....I just think that the Celtics are a notch above....but I'm a Celtic fan so, of course I would feel that way....I am also a huge Dodger fan (hence the name "Duke") and a huge BoSox fan.....but I know that neither are on par with the Yankees when you look at the big picture...
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]


    You are correct.  There has to be some give and take in an argument.  When one (majic) party refuses to adknowledge any info presented by the other party,  it becomes contradiction rather than arguing.  It's the old Monty Python sketch - "I came here for an argument.....no you didn't."
    It is also not arguing when you can't even comprehend the WAY the person is "arguing."  You  and I have been around a while, have you EVER heard any one argue the number of times a team LOST??  Very strange, Penny Lane!!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]magicmvp, The nba does not recognize ABA title winners...When leagues get re named and merged the title winners are recognized by THE NEW LEAGUE ONLY...Thats it...The nbl became the baa merged.... In football the afl titles are not recognized...The football it lists superbowl wins as what matters.. In baseball they dont look at the league before mlb.... Do we know what a dihatsu is or do we know it as nissan... So to say a merged thing still counts...makes you look stupid..look at our country...do we recognize the souths president...NOPE......
    Posted by DoctorCO[/QUOTE]

    Good argument, but unfortunately you are wasting your time!!  Watch how he twists what you have written into something you don't even recognize!!

    Good Luck!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoctorCO. Show DoctorCO's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    majjic mvp,

    There is an argument to be made..sure the wininng pct edge goes to red...But red didnt coach the sheer years that phil did...
    one writer said it right...there both number 1...but if you had to pick a greater among equals. it would go to phil. Where youd say 1. phil. 1a. red....Alot of people look at the coaching like that. In the end its rings won. but your looking at it personally. What is defined as the best. being called champ the most...not having back to back wins...is having back to back wins more than raising your hand the most..NOPE....

    you dont represent the nba..you represent a minority...HOW COME YOU WATCH THE NBA..but make your own rules....you should thank the internet for posting such crud. You can have your opinion...BUT THE FANS OF THE NBA....FOLLOW NBA HISTORY...not your made up after the era history. which is nonsense.

    Ill ask kobe no means no...when you ask paul...again..defunked entites or leagues are not recognized...YOU have your opinion..BUT ITS NOT WHAT THE LEAGUE THINKS...Ill take the league over you.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rampageimt23. Show rampageimt23's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Princeton didn't have most MLB titles, but knowing that you have no answers to the signifance of ancient time championships (like Princeton's college football championships), why not play dumb? I mean, what else can you do? "Failing less often are victories"? You mean you don't know you need victories to fail less often? Looks like you need more reading comprehension... Yep, Celtics had another victory this season. Glad that you have something to celebrate: a 1-4 drubbing by the Heat. I mean, for seasons that both of our teams flame out in the 2nd round, that should be cause for celebrations for a team with 21-year drought. Wow, you mean you have to know the top 20 players of college basketball in order to know UCLA's 11 basketball championships and Al Scates? Ummm... you don't have to showcase your weak logic again and again... Yep, keep bragging you win, game over, blah, blah, blah. For someone who was wimp out in many arguments, can't blame you for that... I mean, are you going to answer why Celtics only had 49 chances? No. Are you going to tell us howcome Princton weren't the #1 powerhouse in college football if you want to use the Yankees as example? No. Are you going to tell us why you emphasize on the Lakers' final record of 16-15 and .516 winning % if you dont' want to dwell on negatives? No But hey, declare it "I win", "game over" should be a good move. Sure, you still haven't had the guts to answer the questions. I'll ask again. What about "made the playoffs 49 times"? How many seasons did they play in the NBA? Are those 16 seasons they played in the NBA chances or not? Yes? then you lied when you said "The Lakers had 58 chances to win the NBA title and only did it 16 times.  The Celtics had 49 chances to win the NBA title and did it 17 times. " No? then you lied when you said "I never said the Celtics only had 49 seasons in the NBA." I don't have to count moral victories. That's for someone who needs to count the Celtics 4-1 drubbing as victory. Afterall, how many more rounds than the Lakers did the Celtics win? I see...
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    I will give you one last chance to redeem yourself and your pathetic arguments.

    I will answer your questions.  I have no problem answering your questions.  You answer my questions with Princeton is the best MLB team.  Obviously you don't want to answer that question because your answer will contradict your whole arguement.  If you weren't such a p u s s y then you would simply answer the question and back up your answer.  I said Princeton has the most college football championships. I answered your question and I backed up my answer that they are the most successful team in college football history because they have the most championships.  But see you are comparing apples to count chocula there.  I am talking about professional sports and you are talking about college.  You should have rephrased your question and asked what colleage football team is the most relevant right now or the last 10 years.  Then my answer would have been different.  But if you want to know who the most successful college football team of all time is then it is Princeton hands down.  The proof is in the history books.  History doesn't pose the question what have you done for me lately.  History looks at all time numbers not a time period that you think is relevant.  But I digress......so as I was saying.....

    The Celtics played 65 seasons.  They made the playoffs 49 times and won 17 championships.  So when the Celtics got to the playoffs they made the most of their chances.  Obviously you have to make the playoffs to have a chance to win the championship.  Is that not a true statement?  Last I knew you can't win a championship unless you are in the playoffs.  Is that a false statement?  Yes those 16 seaons count as chances to make the playoffs but they didn't.  The Lakers have a better pecentage of making the playoffs than the Celtics....congratulations.  However, that means they failed more times in the playoffs....ouch.  That means the Celtics failed more times in the regular season.  Congratulations another moral victory for you Laker fans.  The Celtics were not in the Finals against the Lakers in those other 13 championships they won.  I mean that is obvious because if the Celtics were there they would have probably won at least half of them or more.  I mean where were the Lakers for 9 of the championships the Celtics won.  Oh that's right they were in the Finals getting r a p e d by the Celtics.  So again I pose another question to you that you won't answer.  Would you prefer the Lakers to not make the playoffs or make the playoffs and not win a championship?  I will give you a hint.  If you are a true fan it doesn't matter if you make the playoffs or not because anything short of a championship is a failure.  Maybe not for every franchise in the NBA but for teams like the Celtics and Lakers if you don't deliver a championship then the season means nothing.  I gurantee you Kobe would say the same thing.  Do you think Kobe considered this past NBA season a success?  I am guessing you already know the answer to that question.  So keep counting the moral victories and I will countine counting championships.  By my count it is still 17-16 in favor of the Celtics.  Same as it was yesterday and the day before and the day before that.    So did you have any other questions I can answer?  I believe I covered all of yours.  Now would you care to answer my questions?  I am guessing I know the answer to that question.  You will cut and past a few of my lines and then circumvent my questions by asking more questions.  Patheitc.  You know what they say about people who won't answer a question.  They know they are wrong.  Case in point.  Game over.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject : There you go again trying to compare apples and count chocula.  11 rings is greater than 6 rings.  That is simple math d i c k h e a d.  Michael Jordan is the greatest player of all time.  You are comparing players not teams.  Again a totally different conversation.  But I wouldn't expect anything less from you.  Red Auerbach won 9 rings as a coach for the Celtics and 16 overall, an unmatched feat in the NBA.  Phil Jackson won 5 rings as coach of the Lakers.  So now you Laker fans are taking credit for the 6 rings Phil won in Chicago?  Again I wouldn't expect anything less.
    Posted by rampageimt23[/QUOTE]

    I have argued that Phil is not even the greatest LAKERS coach of all-time.  That would be Pat Riley!  4 rings, and I believe in fewer years!  1981 - 1990
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from JamLock. Show JamLock's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]I am sick of these dumb Laker trolls on here claiming the Lakers are the best and the Celtics suck, they are chokers and blah, blah, blah.  I am going to break everything down here in this this thread just to shut these morons up hopefully once and for all.  Obviously it won't stop them from posting but there is a saying "Don't feed the trolls."  If we don't respond to any of their posts or responses eventually they will just go away.  So without any further ado..... NBA Titles Celtics - 17 Lakers - 16 Hall of Famers Celtics - 28 Lakers - 18 All Star Selections Celtics - 135 Lakers - 129 Number of Jerseys Retired Celtics - 21 Lakers - 7 Number of players in the Top 50 All Time Greats Celtics - 10 Lakers - 8 (I will give you Kobe and that brings the total to 9) NBA MVP Awards Celtics - 10 Lakers - 8 Most Consecutive Championships won in a row Celtics - 8 Lakers - 3 Head to Head in NBA Finals Celtics lead Lakers 9-3 (Rivarly?  Seems more like domination.) Overall Record Celtics - 3028-2057 - .595 Winning Percentage Lakers - 3084-1981 - .620 Winning Percentage NBA Finals Record Celtics - 17-4 - .809 Winning Percentage Lakers - 16-15 - .516 Winning Percentage Playoff Appearances Celtics - 49 Lakers - 58 Head to Head All Time - Regular Season Celtics lead Lakers 153-121 - .558 Winning Percentage Division Titles Celtics - 20 Lakers - 22 So there you have it people.  There were 13 categories and the Lakers were able to eek out 3 of them.  In theory the fact that we have more championships should be the only thing that matters but I figured I would try to cover as many bases as possible in case some Laker troll tries to argue the facts.  I am sure their best argument will be "How many of those titles did you actually see?"  Which obviously makes sense because you have to witness a title for it to count in the history books right?  Anywho from this point on I will no longer feed the Laker trolls.  The season will be here before you know it and looking forward to a productive off season from DA and company.
    Posted by rampageimt23[/QUOTE]

    You might also have mentioned that the CELTICS have won all 17 titles in BOSTON, while the FAKERS have won 5 titles in Minnesota and only 11 in LA.

    As Always,


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    Avenger.....you stated that greatness is measured in repeats....I guess there haven't been many great teams in the NFL lately?

    since 1990 (21 years) there have been three repeat winners in the SB...

    Dallas ('92/'93)
    Denver ('97/'98)
    New England (Boston and all of New England's team) ('03/'04)

    only three great teams.....in fact, in the entire 45 years the SB has been played, only seven have repeated...along with the above teams, this list would include San Francisco, Pittsburgh (twice in a six year span), Miami, and Green Bay....

    do you agree that the rest of the NFL franchises all lack the term "greatness" throughout this time frame...?   ...just asking....
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject

    In Response to Re: Celtics vs. Lakers - Thread to end all Threads on this subject:
    [QUOTE]Avenger.....you stated that greatness is measured in repeats....I guess there haven't been many great teams in the NFL lately? since 1990 (21 years) there have been three repeat winners in the SB... Dallas ('92/'93) Denver ('97/'98) New England (Boston and all of New England's team) ('03/'04) only three great teams.....in fact, in the entire 45 years the SB has been played, only seven have repeated...along with the above teams, this list would include San Francisco, Pittsburgh (twice in a six year span), Miami, and Green Bay.... do you agree that the rest of the NFL franchises all lack the term "greatness" throughout this time frame...?   ...just asking....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]
    Who the heck was referring to football? Apples and oranges. It's a lot tougher to win back to backs in football (and college basketball, for that matter) because those playoffs are all sudden death, in pro basketball, you got 7 chances to win 4, but even given that, it has proven to be exceedingly difficult to accomplish that. 3 titles in a row is...well it just doesn't happen. The Bulls and Lakers are the only ones to do that since the Cs, and that was when the competition was a lot less and you didn't have to go 4 full rounds. Dallas is one team, if they stay intact, might be able to do it, but that's what everybody thinks about the reignning champs, and then s**t happens, year after year and decade after decade. That's why I say greatness is measured in repeats.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share