Jump to content

Milwaukee Bucks to be sold


Muggens

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

It is hard to be STORIED with just one title in said city.

Since the Sixers are not a half owner in the Wells Fargo Arena, direct revenue does go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.

No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

Yea as a Pistons fan I'd have to put the Sixers and Knicks up there first.

Then the Pistons over the Spurs and Heat only because of chronology. It's like the O6 in the NHL. The Leafs haven't done squat in decades, but are considered a 'storied' franchise. The Spurs would be like the New Jersey Devils or Pittsburgh Penguins or Colorado Avalanche of the NBA. Not much history time-wise, but they've accomplished more in recent history. The Heat are still too early into their run to make a call. But the top 7 (argue the order after 3) are no doubt:

Celtics

Lakers

Bulls

Sixers

Knicks

Pistons

Spurs

sig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.

imagejpg1_zpsbdf53466.jpg
image.jpg1_zpswbnsopjp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.

3 winning seasons during their first 27 years in Detroit. They were good for a 6 or 7 year stretch with Isiah, and then again in the 2000's, but outside of that they don't leave much of a legacy on the NBA. I wouldn't put them in the same group as the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks.

Plus they play in a non-descript arena in the burbs and before that they played in a domed football stadium in the burbs. It's not Madison Square Garden or Boston Garden or the Forum.

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.

3 winning seasons during their first 27 years in Detroit. They were good for a 6 or 7 year stretch with Isiah, and then again in the 2000's, but outside of that they don't leave much of a legacy on the NBA. I wouldn't put them in the same group as the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks.

Plus they play in a non-descript arena in the burbs and before that they played in a domed football stadium in the burbs. It's not Madison Square Garden or Boston Garden or the Forum.

So you're going to pull up winning seasons, eh? Consider that the Pistons have won championships FAR more recently than the Knicks. Sure, New York had Pat Ewing and John Starks in the 90s, but they haven't won a championship since 1973. And last time I checked, three championships (1989,1990,2004) are better than two (1970, 1973). The Knicks may have the better arena in MSG, but the Pistons have a better history.

imagejpg1_zpsbdf53466.jpg
image.jpg1_zpswbnsopjp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.
3 winning seasons during their first 27 years in Detroit. They were good for a 6 or 7 year stretch with Isiah, and then again in the 2000's, but outside of that they don't leave much of a legacy on the NBA. I wouldn't put them in the same group as the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks.

Plus they play in a non-descript arena in the burbs and before that they played in a domed football stadium in the burbs. It's not Madison Square Garden or Boston Garden or the Forum.

So you're going to pull up winning seasons, eh? Consider that the Pistons have won championships FAR more recently than the Knicks. Sure, New York had Pat Ewing and John Starks in the 90s, but they haven't won a championship since 1973. And last time I checked, three championships (1989,1990,2004) are better than two (1970, 1973). The Knicks may have the better arena in MSG, but the Pistons have a better history.

The question was who are the most storied teams, not who's the best teams historically. I didn't include the Bulls either. The Pistons had the Bad Boys, but the 2004 title is essentially non-essential to the legacy of the NBA. It's a footnote in a time when the NBA was kinda boring. Does anyone outside of Michigan ever talk about that year? Outside of that what is there? Mostly irrelevancy.

I'm including the Knicks in the most storied teams level because it's New York City. It's Madison Square Garden. Even when they're bad they're still a story. There's more lore regarding the Knicks. Also they played in the first ever NBA game. If the NBA had a heralded original 6 in the way the NHL does they'd be one of the original 6.

If a player could play for the Knicks or the Pistons he'd choose the Knicks. They'll always have stars and/or personalities even if they aren't winning (Stephon Marbury?). When they are winning it's a bigger story than when the Pistons are winning.

I'd put the Pistons on a level with the Rockets, Bulls, Spurs, and 76ers in terms of what they mean for NBA history.

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, arenas are irrelevant in this discussion lol. I would group the Knicks, 76ers, Pistons and now the Spurs together as 2nd tier franchise.

The NBA`s flagships are definitely:

Boston

LA Lakers

Chicago

2nd Tier

New York

Philadelphia

Detroit

San Antonio

Miami

3rd Tier

Dallas

Houston

Phoenix

Portland

Indiana

Meh

Utah

Toronto

Washington

Orlando

Brooklyn

Atlanta

Cleveland

Denver

OKC

Bottom of the Barrel

Charlotte

New Orleans

Minnesota

Clippers

Golden State

Milwaukee

Memphis

Sacramento

sig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.
3 winning seasons during their first 27 years in Detroit. They were good for a 6 or 7 year stretch with Isiah, and then again in the 2000's, but outside of that they don't leave much of a legacy on the NBA. I wouldn't put them in the same group as the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks.

Plus they play in a non-descript arena in the burbs and before that they played in a domed football stadium in the burbs. It's not Madison Square Garden or Boston Garden or the Forum.

So you're going to pull up winning seasons, eh? Consider that the Pistons have won championships FAR more recently than the Knicks. Sure, New York had Pat Ewing and John Starks in the 90s, but they haven't won a championship since 1973. And last time I checked, three championships (1989,1990,2004) are better than two (1970, 1973). The Knicks may have the better arena in MSG, but the Pistons have a better history.

The question was who are the most storied teams, not who's the best teams historically. I didn't include the Bulls either. The Pistons had the Bad Boys, but the 2004 title is essentially non-essential to the legacy of the NBA. It's a footnote in a time when the NBA was kinda boring. Does anyone outside of Michigan ever talk about that year? Outside of that what is there? Mostly irrelevancy.

I'm including the Knicks in the most storied teams level because it's New York City. It's Madison Square Garden. Even when they're bad they're still a story. There's more lore regarding the Knicks. Also they played in the first ever NBA game. If the NBA had a heralded original 6 in the way the NHL does they'd be one of the original 6.

If a player could play for the Knicks or the Pistons he'd choose the Knicks. They'll always have stars and/or personalities even if they aren't winning (Stephon Marbury?). When they are winning it's a bigger story than when the Pistons are winning.

I'd put the Pistons on a level with the Rockets, Bulls, Spurs, and 76ers in terms of what they mean for NBA history.

A footnote? A FOOTNOTE??? The Pistons shocked everyone by defeating a star studded Lakers team with a group of mostly “good" players. It was the year that they learned that they had gotten the better half of the Grant Hill deal in Ben Wallace. It was the year that Rasheed Walllace redeemed himself. It was the year that Chauncey Billups carried them through the postseason. It was far more than just a footnote in history!

imagejpg1_zpsbdf53466.jpg
image.jpg1_zpswbnsopjp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sixers are probably one of the five most storied franchises in the NBA, and combined with a top notch arena I can't see them moving.

Please explain who the other four are.
Celtics

Bulls

Lakers

Pistons

An argument for the Heat can be made.
No the pistons should not be there the Knicks should. The heat??? Please not yet, wait 15 years and see how it goes.
I agree that the Heat aren't even close to being a storied franchise, but please explain your reasoning as to how the Pistons aren't either.
3 winning seasons during their first 27 years in Detroit. They were good for a 6 or 7 year stretch with Isiah, and then again in the 2000's, but outside of that they don't leave much of a legacy on the NBA. I wouldn't put them in the same group as the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks.

Plus they play in a non-descript arena in the burbs and before that they played in a domed football stadium in the burbs. It's not Madison Square Garden or Boston Garden or the Forum.

So you're going to pull up winning seasons, eh? Consider that the Pistons have won championships FAR more recently than the Knicks. Sure, New York had Pat Ewing and John Starks in the 90s, but they haven't won a championship since 1973. And last time I checked, three championships (1989,1990,2004) are better than two (1970, 1973). The Knicks may have the better arena in MSG, but the Pistons have a better history.
The question was who are the most storied teams, not who's the best teams historically. I didn't include the Bulls either. The Pistons had the Bad Boys, but the 2004 title is essentially non-essential to the legacy of the NBA. It's a footnote in a time when the NBA was kinda boring. Does anyone outside of Michigan ever talk about that year? Outside of that what is there? Mostly irrelevancy.

I'm including the Knicks in the most storied teams level because it's New York City. It's Madison Square Garden. Even when they're bad they're still a story. There's more lore regarding the Knicks. Also they played in the first ever NBA game. If the NBA had a heralded original 6 in the way the NHL does they'd be one of the original 6.

If a player could play for the Knicks or the Pistons he'd choose the Knicks. They'll always have stars and/or personalities even if they aren't winning (Stephon Marbury?). When they are winning it's a bigger story than when the Pistons are winning.

I'd put the Pistons on a level with the Rockets, Bulls, Spurs, and 76ers in terms of what they mean for NBA history.

A footnote? A FOOTNOTE??? The Pistons shocked everyone by defeating a star studded Lakers team with a group of mostly “good" players. It was the year that they learned that they had gotten the better half of the Grant Hill deal in Ben Wallace. It was the year that Rasheed Walllace redeemed himself. It was the year that Chauncey Billups carried them through the postseason. It was far more than just a footnote in history!

I stand by what I said.

Relax, I put your favorite team in my second tier of most storied franchises.

Why are arenas irrelevant? If I'm talking about the most storied baseball franchises then I'm including the Red Sox and Cubs because of their arenas (or ballparks in this case). Anything and everything about a team is in play for this discussion.

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Bulls are a flagship franchise of the NBA, how come the only free agents who want to come to Chicago are guys like D.J. Augustin?

Bulls are on the same level as the Knicks, Hawks, Warriors, 76ers: storied pasts, major cities, teams that should amount to more but never will again.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even storied franchises have down periods where they aren't as attractive to free agents.

Why are arenas irrelevant? If I'm talking about the most storied baseball franchises then I'm including the Red Sox and Cubs because of their arenas (or ballparks in this case). Anything and everything about a team is in play for this discussion.

True enough. Not the foremost consideration, but certainly in the mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this down period has a 205-107 record. Who's coming here to play for Thibodeau with Rose (in theory) and Noah? Oh, that's right, Mike Dunleavy. Flagship!

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, arenas are irrelevant in this discussion lol. I would group the Knicks, 76ers, Pistons and now the Spurs together as 2nd tier franchise.

The NBA`s flagships are definitely:

Boston

LA Lakers

Chicago

2nd Tier

New York

Philadelphia

Detroit

San Antonio

Miami

3rd Tier

Dallas

Houston

Phoenix

Portland

Indiana

Meh

Utah

Toronto

Washington

Orlando

Brooklyn

Atlanta

Cleveland

Denver

OKC

Bottom of the Barrel

Charlotte

New Orleans

Minnesota

Clippers

Golden State

Milwaukee

Memphis

Sacramento

I'd put the Warriors in the "Meh" category WAY before I'd consider the Nuggets, Raptors, or Cavs.

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.