The Past 25 Years In The NBA - It's Fantastic For 6 Teams

[Gee!]

what i mean to say is, it will be Kobe and Lebron in the end and the powers that be in the nba will see it that way. Just like Jordon was allowed to travel and palm, Kobe and Lebron and their teams will get the break calls all the way to the finals.

I didnt disagree with you.. But I took it one step further and saids the NBA has predetermined that LeBron will win it all this year..

 

[Billy Bob]

I didnt disagree with you.. But I took it one step further and saids the NBA has predetermined that LeBron will win it all this year..

.

 

[devilalum]

I didnt disagree with you.. But I took it one step further and saids the NBA has predetermined that LeBron will win it all this year..

I think the plan is to get the Cavs a championship so Cleveland doesn't burn the arena to the ground when LBJ goes to NY.

 

[Billy Bob]

I think the plan is to get the Cavs a championship so Cleveland doesn't burn the arena to the ground when LBJ goes to NY.

LOL... the Clippers want to let Lebron pick the coach and gm....

 

[devilalum]

LOL... the Clippers want to let Lebron pick the coach and gm....

Why not just make him the commissioner?

 

[Milgod]

Well, it's not quite that simple. Star players have a lot of power in determining where they play. Abdul-Jabbar forced his way out of Milwaukee, O'Neal bailed on the Magic, Garnett made it easier for the Celtics to acquire him by agreeing to a below-market extension -- the list goes on and on. Except for Jordan, none of those top picks could have won titles without a major supporting cast, usually with another top-10 player. Stars gravitate toward each other because they know they'll have a better chance of winning; teams with winning reputations usually get the benefit of the officiating; and once you put enough stars together, the team will in fact be pretty good, especially with a little nudge from the referees. It's all self-perpetuating.

The league doesn't conspire to make certain teams good, but the system in place clearly reinforces the class divide between the "haves" and the "have nots."

So . . . . .like pretty much every other professional team sport in the World then?

 

[SunsTzu]

So . . . . .like pretty much every other professional team sport in the World then?

Star players in the NFL don't have the control to gravitate towards eachother since the team has so much control over them. Plus with the lack of guaranteed contracts they pretty much have to get what they can. MLB just has players going for the biggest payday and that means the best players choosing between a couple different teams that have outlandishly large budgets compared to their competition.


Basketball is my favorite sport but I prefer the NFL to the NBA largely due to how the leagues are run.

 

[elindholm]

So . . . . .like pretty much every other professional team sport in the World then?

Not even close. Do you even follow other sports? Just look at the diversity among the last ten World Series or Super Bowl winners.

What a weird comment.

 

[Milgod]

Not even close. Do you even follow other sports? Just look at the diversity among the last ten World Series or Super Bowl winners.

What a weird comment.

I imagine I follow more sports than you do, judging from your response where you name only two leagues (based in the USA). If that's what you call World sports then there is no hope.

The biggest sport in the World fits into my point perfectly. The bigger stars want to go to the bigger teams. The haves and have nots are usually a set group that is hard to break into.

I find it funny (as would a lot of people in the UK) that somebody who follows a US sport doesn't realise how much closer the competition is in the NBA. Parity in US sports is something that most soccer fans wouldn't understand. The fact that each year the best young players get to go to the worst teams is quite different to most of the World sports.

 

[elindholm]

I imagine I follow more sports than you do, judging from your response where you name only two leagues (based in the USA). If that's what you call World sports then there is no hope.

You're right, I overlooked that word. Yes, you're right, I don't follow international football/soccer, but I am dimly aware that there is even less parity than in the NBA.

On the other hand, there is a reason that most Americans don't follow UK football, and one is that, generally speaking, we like the idea of level playing fields. At least we say we do.

 

[TJ]

Why not just make him the commissioner?

I'd support this.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

With the exception of the Heat in 05-06 (that was a Shaq thing), the NBA has consistently crowned the same 6 teams.. And if you take out Jordans retitrement when the Rockets won 2, you get down to the NBA's 5 favorite teams.. Every year, year after year and year.. And is it any surprise that this all started right around the time Stern became comissioner? I can honestly say I am not excited for the NBA in any shape or form.. Then if you read Donaghey's book, he enlightens us even more how things go down behind the scenes.. NBA sucks..


YEAR CHAMPION
2008-09 Los Angeles Lakers
2007-08 Boston Celtics
2006-07 San Antonio Spurs
2005-06 Miami Heat
2004-05 San Antonio Spurs
2003-04 Detroit Pistons
2002-03 San Antonio Spurs
2001-02 Los Angeles Lakers
2000-01 Los Angeles Lakers
1999-00 Los Angeles Lakers
1998-99 San Antonio Spurs
1997-98 Chicago Bulls
1996-97 Chicago Bulls
1995-96 Chicago Bulls
1994-95 Houston Rockets
1993-94 Houston Rockets
1992-93 Chicago Bulls
1991-92 Chicago Bulls
1990-91 Chicago Bulls
1989-90 Detroit Pistons
1988-89 Detroit Pistons
1987-88 Los Angeles Lakers
1986-87 Los Angeles Lakers
1985-86 Boston Celtics
1984-85 Los Angeles Lakers
1983-84 Boston Celtics

All these teams except the 2004 Pistons featured one of the greatest players of all-time at their respective position. Great players win titles.

PG - Magic, Zeke
SG - Jordan, Kobe, Wade
SF - Bird, Pippen
PF - Duncan, McHale, Garnett
C - Shaq, Kareem, Olajuwon

 

[mojorizen7]

. Great players win titles.

True, but great players on soft,jump shooting teams don't.

Where are the great SUNS,WARRIORS,KINGS,MAVS teams on that list?

 

[D-Dogg]

Not even close. Do you even follow other sports? Just look at the diversity among the last ten World Series or Super Bowl winners.

What a weird comment.

If you want to argue his point (and I do), the NBA is far more prone to those two items (star players/have and have nots) than the NFL or MLB, simply because of 5 starters vs 9 and 11 on offense and defense in those sports. ONE player can swing an NBA team much more than one NFL or MLB player. Grab a few stars in the NFL and you are a good team...grab a few stars in baseball and you are a decent team...grab a few stars in the NBA and you are a dynasty.

Not such a weird comment.

 

[elindholm]

If you want to argue his point (and I do), the NBA is far more prone to those two items (star players/have and have nots) than the NFL or MLB, simply because of 5 starters vs 9 and 11 on offense and defense in those sports. ONE player can swing an NBA team much more than one NFL or MLB player. Grab a few stars in the NFL and you are a good team...grab a few stars in baseball and you are a decent team...grab a few stars in the NBA and you are a dynasty.

Yes, that's pretty much my point.

Not such a weird comment.

There must be a misunderstanding as to what I was referring to.

 

[SactownSunsFan]

True, but great players on soft,jump shooting teams don't.

Where are the great SUNS,WARRIORS,KINGS,MAVS teams on that list?

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[mojorizen7]

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

 

[Divide Et Impera]

How many teams won the previous 25 championships?

 

[Brian in Mesa]

How many teams won the previous 25 championships?

Nine teams.

1982-83 Philadelphia 76ers
1981-82 Los Angeles Lakers
1980-81 Boston Celtics
1979-80 Los Angeles Lakers
1978-79 Seattle SuperSonics
1977-78 Washington Bullets
1976-77 Portland Trail Blazers
1975-76 Boston Celtics
1974-75 Golden State Warriors
1973-74 Boston Celtics
1972-73 New York Knicks
1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers
1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks
1969-70 New York Knicks
1968-69 Boston Celtics
1967-68 Boston Celtics
1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers
1965-66 Boston Celtics
1964-65 Boston Celtics
1963-64 Boston Celtics
1962-63 Boston Celtics
1961-62 Boston Celtics
1960-61 Boston Celtics
1959-60 Boston Celtics
1958-59 Boston Celtics

 

[Brian in Mesa]

So - the last 25 years = 7 teams
The 25 years before that = 9 teams

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Also - the last 25 years 15 different teams have lost NBA titles compared to only 10 in the 25 years before that, so more teams have had the opportunity to win titles in recent years.

 

[Cheesewater]

Also - the last 25 years 15 different teams have lost NBA titles compared to only 10 in the 25 years before that, so more teams have had the opportunity to win titles in recent years.

There are more teams in the last 25 years than in the previous 25.

From 1959 to 1983 there were an average of 15.8 teams in the league each year. So 9 different teams won the championships in those years which indicates great sharing of the wealth (well, from 1970 on anyway).

From 1984 to 2009 there were an average of 27.6 teams each year. Only 7 different champions? That is a big difference.

 

[elindholm]

Also - the last 25 years 15 different teams have lost NBA titles compared to only 10 in the 25 years before that, so more teams have had the opportunity to win titles in recent years.

You can spin the numbers however you want, but it's patently ridiculous to argue that the league has had more parity over the last 25 years than it did in the quarter century before that.

 

[Gee!]

Now that it seems the first part of my thread is running its course, here's part two. What goes behind the scenes with the refs and the league. And yes, there is a definite Suns theme to it. I didnt write it.

http://deadspin.com/5392067/excerpts-from-the-book-the-nba-doesnt-want-you-to-read

 

[Divide Et Impera]

Basically, 14 teams have won over the last 50 years - the Celtics taking 16 and the Lakers taking 10. Therefore, during the non-BOS/LAL championship years, 12 teams won the 24 championships. Ten of THOSE 24 championships were shared by the Bulls and the Spurs, thus leaving 10 teams sharing 14 championships. Obviously, this is a two-step paring of things, but it's interesting from an academic perspective, not a real perspective....