Hollinger: LA Lakers #1 Basketball Franchise ever, Bos #2.

[nickagneta]

Something I meant to bring up the other day in this discussion that I never got around to is that Hollinger didn't apply his usual not every win is an equal win mentality. What ever happened to strength of schedule?

I mean, doesn't that fact that the Lakers played in a vastly inferior and weaker conference for the better part of 40 years have any bearing on the fact that they had more wins, more playoff wins, and more playoff series wins? Since about the end of the Bulls dynasty the Western Conference has been the stronger conference but before that it can be argued that the Eastern Conference was the stronger conference going all the way back until the 40's. Through the 50's and 60's the East had great teams in Boston, New York and Philly almost every year. In the 70's the Celtics, Knicks, Bullets, Sixers and Royals had consistently great teams. In the 80's the C's, Sixers, Hawks, Bucks, Knicks, Pistons, and Bulls were the power of the league.

The Celtics coming out of the East and winning as many games, playoff games, playoff series and championships whil;e consistently coming out of the more powerful conference has to count for something.

I would figure a guy who does his weekly rankings based on strength of schedule and point differential would have taken at least one of those factors into account when determining the league's best franchise.

[Donoghus]

Something I meant to bring up the other day in this discussion that I never got around to is that Hollinger didn't apply his usual not every win is an equal win mentality. What ever happened to strength of schedule?

I mean, doesn't that fact that the Lakers played in a vastly inferior and weaker conference for the better part of 40 years have any bearing on the fact that they had more wins, more playoff wins, and more playoff series wins? Since about the end of the Bulls dynasty the Western Conference has been the stronger conference but before that it can be argued that the Eastern Conference was the stronger conference going all the way back until the 40's. Through the 50's and 60's the East had great teams in Boston, New York and Philly almost every year. In the 70's the Celtics, Knicks, Bullets, Sixers and Royals had consistently great teams. In the 80's the C's, Sixers, Hawks, Bucks, Knicks, Pistons, and Bulls were the power of the league.

The Celtics coming out of the East and winning as many games, playoff games, playoff series and championships whil;e consistently coming out of the more powerful conference has to count for something.

I would figure a guy who does his weekly rankings based on strength of schedule and point differential would have taken at least one of those factors into account when determining the league's best franchise.

Solid point there, Nick.  I'm in total agreement with you about consideration of the conference.  Just look at the battles and quality of teams that the Celtics had to face just to make it out of East over the years and contrast that to what the Lakers have had to face (2000s aside)  If you flipflop the teams and conferences, do you really think that the Lakers would've made 30 NBA Finals appearances?  No way.

[cornbreadsmart]

uggh. i loathe these stat fanatics.takes so much fun out of the game. hollinger would probably date a calculator.

[RebusRankin]

Boston has more tittles
A better head to head Finals record
A better regular season head to head record
More Hall of Famers
More players on the fifty greatest players list
More MVPs
A better Finals winning percentage

He picks LA? The comment about LA's all time starting 5 being better than anybody else's alone shows how terrible his arguments are.

Without picking Celtics:
PG: Robertson
SG: Jordan
SF: Pippen
PF: Duncan
C: Olajuwon

I'd take that team over LAs. Scoring and defense.

[cornbreadsmart]

whener they say the lakers have 14 titles they should be accurate and say the minneapolis/ los angeles lakers have 14 titles.