L.A Lakers 16 championship farce

[slightly biased bias fan]

Do you know what really grinds my gears?

Moronic Lakers fans that say they are the most dominate franchise in NBA history with their supposed '16' championships.

For the very few out there who don't know the Lakers were the Minneapolis Lakers from 1947-1960, hence the name Lakers. During this span the team won 5 championships but when the team moved the championships some how migrated with them.

When Seattle relocated to Oklahoma they left the Championship behind because they know its Seattle's not OKC's. If god forbid Boston's owners decided to move to Kentucky, The Kentucky Celtics aren't 17 time NBA champions, the city of Boston was.

Another stupid point commonly made by Lakers fans is they have been more dominate recently and Boston haven't even contended through the 90's-00's. Again being uneducated fans they don't know that if it wasn't for the tragedy of my main man Len and Reggie Lewis we may have won several more titles or at least competed through all the 90's and lets not for get our great friend David Stern who did not allow Celtics to remove Reggie's contract after his passing, from our salary cap. Many credible people (including Mike Wilbon) said that Len Bias was the best college player he had ever seen and he could have been comparable to MJ the way his career was progressing and with Larry in his ear for a few seasons I'm sure he would have been amazing.

[D.o.s.]

I don't want to defend the Lakers, but franchise championships are franchise championships. Also, you just called Mike Wilbon a credible person. I need to take a shower.

[Roy H.]

I'm with DOS.

If the Celtics moved to Foxborough and became the New England Celtics, should they give up their titles?

[GratefulCs]

I don't mind that as much as i mind HOW they got their championships.


2010 was rigged (18 free throws in the fourth quarter)


2002 WCF against the kings was rigged


Kobe forces his way there on DRAFT DAY


They always SIGN the most dominant centers in the league


MAGIC forced his way there on draft day







If they were playing on the same playing field as us, we'd have at least twice as many championships

[slamtheking]

titles belong to the franchise, not the city.  they still have less than the C's (hopefully permanently but they're too close for my comfort)

[slightly biased bias fan]

I'm with DOS.

If the Celtics moved to Foxborough and became the New England Celtics, should they give up their titles?

I understand what your saying and no they wouldn't because its still within the same community Detroit Pistons don't play in Detroit anymore but that has to do with stadium arrangements like the Pats but Lakers move was half way across the country to a new state new city and brand new franchise. Like with OKC there should be an asterisk where Seattle won their title.

If the original Charlotte Hornets had won a title then when they moved to New Orleans does the Pelicans have the Championship or does the new Charlotte Hornets team have it? (Should be neither lol be you see my point)

[D.o.s.]

So that's a weird one, but you've cited two examples where the franchise has undergone a rebranding upon relocation -- the Thunder and the Pelicans. The Thunder, by the way, still hold the rights to the banners and the championship trophies and any retired numbers, so it's not like they're not clinging onto the Seattle legacy, they just don't display it because, you know, they stole the team and don't want people pointing that out.

For the Pelicans + Jordan's Hornets, the agreement is that the history of the team in NO belongs to the Pellies, while Charlotte can lay claim to everything that happened in North Carolina... but that's an amicable split, and as a result, it's the exception to the rule.

[fairweatherfan]

Do the Kings still lay claim to the title they won in Rochester?

[D.o.s.]

Yes:
http://www.nba.com/kings/sacramento_kings_history_timeline.html

Although their website is comically bad.

[Donoghus]

It's a petty argument.  It's the Lakers "franchise".   They have 16 titles.  The only reason its even brought up most times is the fear that they're so close to the Celtics in titles won.

It's a silly argument. 

And to even play this game, where do you draw the line on geographical moves?  30 miles?  Same state? Same region?  I mean, c'mon. 

[hwangjini_1]

I don't mind that as much as i mind HOW they got their championships.


2010 was rigged (18 free throws in the fourth quarter)


2002 WCF against the kings was rigged


Kobe forces his way there on DRAFT DAY


They always SIGN the most dominant centers in the league


MAGIC forced his way there on draft day







If they were playing on the same playing field as us, we'd have at least twice as many championships

two small points. one, the lakers have 16 championships, as others have stated.

second, the bolded above is not accurate and falls into the category "urban legends" around here. (e.g. danny hates international players, doc never plays rookies, etc.) the lakers did not sign dwight howard, he voluntarily left them high and dry. good. 

[dreamgreen]

I think they should take away all the Lakers championships and throw the city in the ocean!

[Donoghus]

I think they should take away all the Lakers championships and throw the city in the ocean!

Well, I think nature will end up doing that anyways in the next millennium or so.

[djbilly33]

Let me make it clear that I am a huge Celtics fan, with that being said I feel the Lakers have been the better franchise in the past 50 years. We won a lot of titles through the 40s-60s, the Lakers won more since. Yes the titles belong to the franchise so we are still ahead of them but I would say in the next decade or so they will take over and have more. Even ask Doc who coached us, he said it himself the Lakers are the best franchise.

[D.o.s.]