PDA

View Full Version : Hollinger ranks the All-Time greatest Franchises



Chronz
06-11-2009, 12:26 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FranchiseRankings-Intro


Where does your team rank?

theuuord
06-11-2009, 12:43 PM
wow, he put a LOT of work into this.

And for the most part I agree with all of it.

(I just picked up Insider like a week ago - It's been useful.)

rmonte4
06-11-2009, 12:45 PM
was was upset that the Bulls weren't 3rd, but he made valid points.

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 12:50 PM
excuse my biased view

but shouldn't the Bulls be higher than the spurs


i mean we have the Greatest player ever

the arguably Greatest coach off all time will be known for his time here

also we had the greatest season statiscally ever (1996) 72-10

we are one of the oldest franchises ever

IDK i think we should be third

Chronz
06-11-2009, 12:53 PM
wow, he put a LOT of work into this.

And for the most part I agree with all of it.

(I just picked up Insider like a week ago - It's been useful.)

Yea I emailed him for this one, its amazing how all the big projects on ESPN are his. In about a month, let me know if youve used Insider for anything other than Hollingers work. I get it for the magazines, that alone makes it worth it but aside from Hollingers PER Diem and stuff like that I dont really use it. Maybe when NFL season starts.

Chronz
06-11-2009, 12:54 PM
was was upset that the Bulls weren't 3rd, but he made valid points.

Definitely, Bulls vs Spurs does seem to the biggest debate on the list, but Im shocked that the Rockets are so low. If a team has stayed in one location long enough they shouldnt be penalized for moving away since its obviously helped the team stay afloat.


PS Heres the complete list for those who dont want to click on links

TOP 10

* No. 1: Los Angeles Lakers
* No. 2: Boston Celtics
* No. 3: San Antonio Spurs
* No. 4: Chicago Bulls
* No. 5: Phoenix Suns
* No. 6: Philadelphia 76ers
* No. 7: Utah Jazz
* No. 8: Portland Trail Blazers
* No. 9: Indiana Pacers
* No. 10: Houston Rockets



* No. 11: Milwaukee Bucks
* No. 12: Oklahoma City Thunder
* No. 13: Detroit Pistons
* No. 14: Miami Heat
* No. 15: Orlando Magic
* No. 16: New York Knicks
* No. 17: Dallas Mavericks
* No. 18: Denver Nuggets
* No. 19: Cleveland Cavaliers
* No. 20: Golden State Warriors
* No. 21: New Jersey Nets
* No. 22: Atlanta Hawks
* No. 23: Washington Wizards
* No. 24: New Orleans Hornets
* No. 25: Sacramento Kings
* No. 26: Minnesota Timberwolves
* No. 27: Toronto Raptors
* No. 28: Charlotte Bobcats
* No. 29: Los Angeles Clippers
* No. 30: Memphis Grizzlies

Corey
06-11-2009, 12:55 PM
That must have taken him a really long time to complete.

theuuord
06-11-2009, 12:55 PM
excuse my biased view

but shouldn't the Bulls be higher than the spurs


i mean we have the Greatest player ever

the arguably Greatest coach off all time will be known for his time here

also we had the greatest season statiscally ever (1996) 72-10

we are one of the oldest franchises ever

IDK i think we should be third

the thing is that ALL of those great things that you mentioned happened in one time frame. That's it. The Bulls had the best run of any team since the Russell Celtics, but that was the only run they ever really had.

theuuord
06-11-2009, 12:57 PM
Yea I emailed him for this one, its amazing how all the big projects on ESPN are his. In about a month, let me know if youve used Insider for anything other than Hollingers work. I get it for the magazines, that alone makes it worth it but aside from Hollingers PER Diem and stuff like that I dont really use it. Maybe when NFL season starts.

Right now I'm using it for the draft stuff, although I'm waiting for Hollinger's draft numbers too. Most of what I've used it for has been Hollinger and the rumors page.

MiamiHeat
06-11-2009, 12:58 PM
excuse my biased view

but shouldn't the Bulls be higher than the spurs


i mean we have the Greatest player ever

the arguably Greatest coach off all time will be known for his time here

also we had the greatest season statiscally ever (1996) 72-10

we are one of the oldest franchises ever

IDK i think we should be third

Hollinger gave a good explanation why the Bulls were ranked 4th and why not higher than that,
they weren't **** before Jordan and now they aren't **** after Jordan
Jordan alone gave them the 4th rank, and the great run they had, winning 6 championships. But now they haven't really done anything without Jordan

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 12:58 PM
the thing is that ALL of those great things that you mentioned happened in one time frame. That's it. The Bulls had the best run of any team since the Russell Celtics, but that was the only run they ever really had.

true but same with the spurs i mean

all their titles had been this decade besides 1999

i mean the only real great player they had before this run is gervin

ManRam
06-11-2009, 12:58 PM
If the Magic are 15th...there must be some ****** teams. I expected them in the 20s.

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 01:00 PM
Hollinger gave a good explanation why the Bulls were ranked 4th and why not higher than that,
they weren't **** before Jordan and now they aren't **** after Jordan
Jordan alone gave them the 4th rank, and the great run they had, winning 6 championships. But now they haven't really done anything without Jordan


what are you talking about they werent **** before


we had some great players i.e. jerry sloan, artis gilmore, bob love

29$JerZ
06-11-2009, 01:01 PM
Knicks at 16. Only 2 championships despite being one of the oldest franchises make sense I guess.

MiamiHeat
06-11-2009, 01:03 PM
what are you talking about they werent **** before


we had some great players i.e. jerry sloan, artis gilmore, bob love

yeah whatever
but did they win anything?

no.... and Hollinger is looking at wins

JordansBulls
06-11-2009, 01:04 PM
excuse my biased view

but shouldn't the Bulls be higher than the spurs


i mean we have the Greatest player ever

the arguably Greatest coach off all time will be known for his time here

also we had the greatest season statiscally ever (1996) 72-10

we are one of the oldest franchises ever

IDK i think we should be third


Well the Spurs this decade is what we were in the 90's just not as dominate overall. However the Spurs in the 90's were contenders every year as well. We were only contenders for a short time. Other than in the MJ era, how many times did we make it out of round 1?

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 01:05 PM
yeah whatever
but did they win anything?

no.... and Hollinger is looking at wins

gervin didnt win anything either so that shouldnt put the spurs over the bulls

theuuord
06-11-2009, 01:08 PM
gervin didnt win anything either so that shouldnt put the spurs over the bulls

The Spurs have more wins since 1968 than any team not named Lakers.

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 01:11 PM
The Spurs have more wins since 1968 than any team not named Lakers.

i thought we were talking titles

because you can win all you want in the regular season
but that doesn't mean anything compared to titles


i mean are people going to remember this season for the cavaliers having the best regular season record or the lakers/magic winning the title

theuuord
06-11-2009, 01:19 PM
i thought we were talking titles

because you can win all you want in the regular season
but that doesn't mean anything compared to titles


i mean are people going to remember this season for the cavaliers having the best regular season record or the lakers/magic winning the title

They may not have the tradition of the Lakers or Celtics, but in the two decades since they drafted David Robinson the Spurs have arguably been the most successful organization in sports. Nineteen of those 20 seasons resulted in playoff appearances, and an amazing 17 of them produced 53 wins or more (prorating for the 1998-99 season). The one season in that span when the Spurs weren't good (a 20-62 season in 1996-97 when Robinson went out with a back injury), they had the good fortune to win the lottery and draft Duncan.

Two years later they won their first title with one of the league's most underrated championship teams. With both Duncan and Robinson in their prime, it was virtually impossible to score in the paint against the Spurs, and over the final 53 games of the lockout-shortened season and playoffs they were a dominant 46-7.

San Antonio bracketed the Lakers' threepeat on the other side by winning again in 2003, and could have had a threepeat of its own if not for the infamous "0.4" shot by the Lakers' Derek Fisher in Game 5 of the conference semifinals a year later. The Spurs rebounded to beat the Pistons in seven tough games in 2005, and added a fourth title to their résumé with a four-game sweep of Cleveland in 2007. Again, they were one play from a possible threepeat -- a last-second three-point play by Dirk Nowitzki in Game 7 of the conference semifinals against Dallas in 2006 when the Spurs were up by three points.

The businesslike Spurs attract shockingly little attention despite their success, perhaps because it's so monotonous -- in 12 years with Duncan they've won at least 65 percent of their games every season and at least one playoff round 10 times.

Prior to that point they were almost the opposite, a franchise renowned for the scoring exploits of George "Iceman" Gervin but unable to win when it counted. San Antonio lost in the conference finals three times in the Gervin era, with the 1979 Eastern Conference finals loss against Washington the most painful -- the Spurs led 3-1 and had a lead in the fourth quarter of Game 7 but lost by two.

In their ABA days they also fell short, dropping a 1976 semifinal series in seven games to eventual champion New Jersey in the league's final season. That was one of only three ABA seasons they spent in San Antonio -- the others were in Dallas, where they were known as the Chaparrals and made the playoffs five times in six years.

The move down the highway earned them the relocation penalty, but in this case it had no effect on their ranking. With more wins than any other franchise except the Lakers since 1968-69, the Spurs are a comfortable No. 3 on this list.

masalex1205
06-11-2009, 01:20 PM
i thought we were talking titles

because you can win all you want in the regular season
but that doesn't mean anything compared to titles


i mean are people going to remember this season for the cavaliers having the best regular season record or the lakers/magic winning the title


Read the article, he factors in the regular season but weighs the postseason much more heavily in drawing his conclusions.

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 01:21 PM
They may not have the tradition of the Lakers or Celtics, but in the two decades since they drafted David Robinson the Spurs have arguably been the most successful organization in sports. Nineteen of those 20 seasons resulted in playoff appearances, and an amazing 17 of them produced 53 wins or more (prorating for the 1998-99 season). The one season in that span when the Spurs weren't good (a 20-62 season in 1996-97 when Robinson went out with a back injury), they had the good fortune to win the lottery and draft Duncan.

Two years later they won their first title with one of the league's most underrated championship teams. With both Duncan and Robinson in their prime, it was virtually impossible to score in the paint against the Spurs, and over the final 53 games of the lockout-shortened season and playoffs they were a dominant 46-7.

San Antonio bracketed the Lakers' threepeat on the other side by winning again in 2003, and could have had a threepeat of its own if not for the infamous "0.4" shot by the Lakers' Derek Fisher in Game 5 of the conference semifinals a year later. The Spurs rebounded to beat the Pistons in seven tough games in 2005, and added a fourth title to their résumé with a four-game sweep of Cleveland in 2007. Again, they were one play from a possible threepeat -- a last-second three-point play by Dirk Nowitzki in Game 7 of the conference semifinals against Dallas in 2006 when the Spurs were up by three points.

The businesslike Spurs attract shockingly little attention despite their success, perhaps because it's so monotonous -- in 12 years with Duncan they've won at least 65 percent of their games every season and at least one playoff round 10 times.

Prior to that point they were almost the opposite, a franchise renowned for the scoring exploits of George "Iceman" Gervin but unable to win when it counted. San Antonio lost in the conference finals three times in the Gervin era, with the 1979 Eastern Conference finals loss against Washington the most painful -- the Spurs led 3-1 and had a lead in the fourth quarter of Game 7 but lost by two.

In their ABA days they also fell short, dropping a 1976 semifinal series in seven games to eventual champion New Jersey in the league's final season. That was one of only three ABA seasons they spent in San Antonio -- the others were in Dallas, where they were known as the Chaparrals and made the playoffs five times in six years.

The move down the highway earned them the relocation penalty, but in this case it had no effect on their ranking. With more wins than any other franchise except the Lakers since 1968-69, the Spurs are a comfortable No. 3 on this list.

i read the article you dont have to post it for me

BTownTeamsRKing
06-11-2009, 01:24 PM
17 Championships.

and the Celtics are second. let me ask hollinger, how much would enjoy losing Championships?

LakersIn5
06-11-2009, 01:36 PM
^its not "most championship rankings" its the "all time nba franchise rankings" and hollinger based it on other stuff not just championships. plus 15 to 17 championships isnt that big of a difference. and the celtics had a number of terrible seasons unlike the lakers who are consistently making the playoffs and i think missed the playoffs only twice in the last 20 years

what54!?
06-11-2009, 01:37 PM
^its not "most championship rankings" its the "all time nba franchise rankings" and hollinger based it on other stuff not just championships. plus 15 to 17 championships isnt that big of a difference. and the celtics had a number of terrible seasons unlike the lakers who are consistently making the playoffs and i think missed the playoffs only twice in the last 20 years
its still 14 for now ;)

LakersIn5
06-11-2009, 01:52 PM
^for now, after tuesday it would be 15 LOL

Greaser1
06-11-2009, 01:56 PM
Los Angeles #1 As it should be!

what54!?
06-11-2009, 02:00 PM
miami heat #14. 1 finals appaernce and one 1 title. But the heat have had some good records over the years so sounds good to me :clap:

Ray_R
06-11-2009, 02:20 PM
Definitely, Bulls vs Spurs does seem to the biggest debate on the list, but Im shocked that the Rockets are so low. If a team has stayed in one location long enough they shouldnt be penalized for moving away since its obviously helped the team stay afloat.


PS Heres the complete list for those who dont want to click on links

TOP 10

* No. 1: Los Angeles Lakers
* No. 2: Boston Celtics
* No. 3: San Antonio Spurs
* No. 4: Chicago Bulls
* No. 5: Phoenix Suns
* No. 6: Philadelphia 76ers
* No. 7: Utah Jazz
* No. 8: Portland Trail Blazers
* No. 9: Indiana Pacers
* No. 10: Houston Rockets



* No. 11: Milwaukee Bucks
* No. 12: Oklahoma City Thunder
* No. 13: Detroit Pistons
* No. 14: Miami Heat
* No. 15: Orlando Magic
* No. 16: New York Knicks
* No. 17: Dallas Mavericks
* No. 18: Denver Nuggets
* No. 19: Cleveland Cavaliers
* No. 20: Golden State Warriors
* No. 21: New Jersey Nets
* No. 22: Atlanta Hawks
* No. 23: Washington Wizards
* No. 24: New Orleans Hornets
* No. 25: Sacramento Kings
* No. 26: Minnesota Timberwolves
* No. 27: Toronto Raptors
* No. 28: Charlotte Bobcats
* No. 29: Los Angeles Clippers
* No. 30: Memphis Grizzlies


Agrees idput bobcats 30th doe they havent been in the league that long

abe_froman
06-11-2009, 02:38 PM
excuse my biased view

but shouldn't the Bulls be higher than the spurs


i mean we have the Greatest player ever

the arguably Greatest coach off all time will be known for his time here

also we had the greatest season statiscally ever (1996) 72-10

we are one of the oldest franchises ever

IDK i think we should be third
yes you are tainted by bias(read the rest of your posts in this thread)
no he wont(the longer phil stays with the lakers the more he's remembered as a laker...which he already starting to be right as we speak),that and oh yeah spurs have one of those all time great coaches to
and lastly no we arent one of the oldest,we started in the mid/late 60's

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 02:58 PM
yes you are tainted by bias(read the rest of your posts in this thread)
no he wont(the longer phil stays with the lakers the more he's remembered as a laker...which he already starting to be right as we speak),that and oh yeah spurs have one of those all time great coaches to
and lastly no we arent one of the oldest,we started in the mid/late 60's


i believe we were the tenth franchise(dont quote me im not sure)

surely that is a pioneer franchise

and as for phil the only reason you think that is because he is with them now
but say he retires in about 2 season and we let time roll on, people will remember the jordan years more than Kobe and shaq

what54!?
06-11-2009, 03:06 PM
lol the clippers should be last

abe_froman
06-11-2009, 03:07 PM
i believe we were the tenth franchise(dont quote me im not sure)

surely that is a pioneer franchise

and as for phil the only reason you think that is because he is with them now
but say he retires in about 2 season and we let time roll on, people will remember the jordan years more than Kobe and shaq

not counting defunct one's, yes.and either way dont see it as a pioneer franchise

also doubt you on that,we'll see..

D_Rose1118
06-11-2009, 03:10 PM
not counting defunct one's, yes.and either way dont see it as a pioneer franchise

also doubt you on that,we'll see..

yes the second is one we have to wait for

Hellcrooner
06-11-2009, 03:12 PM
Sheer BS.

he may talk all the crap he wants but a title is a title

so Titles should Rule the list and other considerations only matter when two teams have the same number of rings.

then with ringless teams yeah you can talk about how many finals or conference finals or team wins etc etc .

1 Celtics 17

2 Lakers 14 hopefully 15

3 Bulls 6

4 Spurs 4

5 Pistons 3

6 Sixers 3

7 Warriors 3

8 Rockets 2

9 Knicks 2

theuuord
06-11-2009, 03:16 PM
Sheer BS.

he may talk all the crap he wants but a title is a title

so Titles should Rule the list and other considerations only matter when two teams have the same number of rings.

titles are weighted as being way more important than anything else on the list. Your franchise isn't automatically greater than another one if it won a title like 30 years ago and has sucked since.

kozzer
06-11-2009, 03:16 PM
lol the clippers should be lastYeah, the Grizzlies have a couple more decades of failure to get through before they dethrone the Clips.

abe_froman
06-11-2009, 03:19 PM
titles are weighted as being way more important than anything else on the list. Your franchise isn't automatically greater than another one if it won a title like 30 years ago and has sucked since.

or if they all come from one guy instead of a linage of great players/teams

say be basement of the league get a great draft(player or two) win say three rings and so your automatically better than a franchise thats consistently near the top but only have two.(the argument of some people which i dont get)

theuuord
06-11-2009, 03:26 PM
lol the clippers should be last

They've always been in the shadow of the Lakers but they have had a few good years...

nipo10847
06-11-2009, 03:28 PM
Definitely, Bulls vs Spurs does seem to the biggest debate on the list, but Im shocked that the Rockets are so low. If a team has stayed in one location long enough they shouldnt be penalized for moving away since its obviously helped the team stay afloat.


PS Heres the complete list for those who dont want to click on links

TOP 10

* No. 1: Los Angeles Lakers
* No. 2: Boston Celtics
* No. 3: San Antonio Spurs
* No. 4: Chicago Bulls
* No. 5: Phoenix Suns
* No. 6: Philadelphia 76ers
* No. 7: Utah Jazz
* No. 8: Portland Trail Blazers
* No. 9: Indiana Pacers
* No. 10: Houston Rockets



* No. 11: Milwaukee Bucks
* No. 12: Oklahoma City Thunder
* No. 13: Detroit Pistons
* No. 14: Miami Heat
* No. 15: Orlando Magic
* No. 16: New York Knicks
* No. 17: Dallas Mavericks
* No. 18: Denver Nuggets
* No. 19: Cleveland Cavaliers
* No. 20: Golden State Warriors
* No. 21: New Jersey Nets
* No. 22: Atlanta Hawks
* No. 23: Washington Wizards
* No. 24: New Orleans Hornets
* No. 25: Sacramento Kings
* No. 26: Minnesota Timberwolves
* No. 27: Toronto Raptors
* No. 28: Charlotte Bobcats
* No. 29: Los Angeles Clippers
* No. 30: Memphis Grizzlies

WTF!!!...spurs over bulls????,,,,suns over 76'ers????????????No Way!!!...Hillinger is a stupid.

HoosierDaddy
06-11-2009, 03:36 PM
Pacers should be higher.

And where are the Oklahoma City Thunder??!?!!

theuuord
06-11-2009, 03:38 PM
WTF!!!...spurs over bulls????,,,,suns over 76'ers????????????No Way!!!...Hillinger is a stupid.

this post is dripping with hilarious irony.

J-Relo
06-11-2009, 03:39 PM
WTF!!!...spurs over bulls????,,,,suns over 76'ers????????????No Way!!!...Hillinger is a stupid.

READ...


actually it's a good list

theuuord
06-11-2009, 03:39 PM
Pacers should be higher.

And where are the Oklahoma City Thunder??!?!!

12, because it counts the Sonics years.

abe_froman
06-11-2009, 03:39 PM
WTF!!!...spurs over bulls????,,,,suns over 76'ers????????????No Way!!!...Hillinger is a stupid.

spurs have a better winning %,more playoff appearances,better showing in playoffs,more div titles and never had long stretches of sucking(unlike the bulls who have)

azkarraga
06-11-2009, 03:51 PM
an amazing piece of work. how long did it take to write it?

you may argue the rules he laid down to make the calculations, not the calculations themselves. it makes no sense to argue the final position. If you agree to play by his rules, then spurs are a better franchise than bulls.

JMKnick33
06-11-2009, 04:23 PM
Hi, can somebody with Insider please post the Knicks review? Thanks.

I agree with the whole thing, except for the Thunder (Sonics), Heat, and Magic being ahead of the Knicks. Yes, I do sound biased, but cmoonnnnnn. We've had 2 Championships, 9 Finals appearances (more than all 3 combined), and more All-Stars than all combined (I believe, until somebody can post the entire review) with Willis Reed, Walt Frazier, Bernard King, Earl Monroe, Dave Debusshere, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Walt Bellamy, Bill Bradley, Jerry Lucas, Dick Barnett, and not to mention Houston and Sprewell. I'm also pretty sure we've had more regular season wins than all 3, being one of the first teams in the history of the NBA.

kntresistheheat
06-11-2009, 04:46 PM
How the hell is the thunder 11th on that list????:confused:

what54!?
06-11-2009, 04:52 PM
How the hell is the thunder 11th on that list????:confused:it counts as their time as the sonics too

ko8e24
06-11-2009, 05:02 PM
17 Championships.

and the Celtics are second. let me ask hollinger, how much would enjoy losing Championships?


Cool to wake up from a coma after 22 years

LAKERRS24
06-11-2009, 06:05 PM
Detroit should be higher....other is OK

JordansBulls
06-12-2009, 12:38 PM
It's amazing the top 3 franchises on this list are the last 3 champions. Spurs in 2007, Celtics in 2008, soon to be Lakers in 2009

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:14 AM
Funny, cause this subject came up a year ago, and lazy people just counted the Celtics' championships and picked them.

Hollinger clearly gave it more thought.

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:17 AM
I'm shocked that the Clippers aren't last.

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:18 AM
true but same with the spurs i mean

all their titles had been this decade besides 1999

i mean the only real great player they had before this run is gervin

Gilmore

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:22 AM
Knicks at 16. Only 2 championships despite being one of the oldest franchises make sense I guess.

http://tinyurl.com/ox6w2s

"The biggest myth in basketball is that the Knicks matter."

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:28 AM
gervin didnt win anything either so that shouldnt put the spurs over the bulls

The Spurs were in the WCF several times in the 80s.

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:30 AM
i thought we were talking titles

because you can win all you want in the regular season
but that doesn't mean anything compared to titles


i mean are people going to remember this season for the cavaliers having the best regular season record or the lakers/magic winning the title

Both. They'll remember the champions first, but they also tend to remember 66-win teams.

MickeyMgl
06-13-2009, 12:39 AM
Hi, can somebody with Insider please post the Knicks review? Thanks.

I agree with the whole thing, except for the Thunder (Sonics), Heat, and Magic being ahead of the Knicks. Yes, I do sound biased, but cmoonnnnnn. We've had 2 Championships, 9 Finals appearances (more than all 3 combined), and more All-Stars than all combined (I believe, until somebody can post the entire review) with Willis Reed, Walt Frazier, Bernard King, Earl Monroe, Dave Debusshere, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Walt Bellamy, Bill Bradley, Jerry Lucas, Dick Barnett, and not to mention Houston and Sprewell. I'm also pretty sure we've had more regular season wins than all 3, being one of the first teams in the history of the NBA.

The Sonics ahead of the Knicks doesn't surprise me, but the Heat and Magic does.

Greaser1
06-13-2009, 12:43 AM
http://tinyurl.com/ox6w2s

"The biggest myth in basketball is that the Knicks matter."

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

jimm120
06-13-2009, 01:19 AM
god damn espn locking people out of their articles just so they can get extra cash.

can anyone post each team (after #11, obviously) over here. Specifically, I'd love to see the New York Knicks.

Blah Blah Blah
06-13-2009, 03:54 PM
The Bulls should be number 3. The dominance the Bulls had during those ten yeras is almost unmatched by any team. Spurs I don't feel should even have a chance at number 3.

MVPedroia
06-13-2009, 04:06 PM
The Bulls should be number 3. The dominance the Bulls had during those ten yeras is almost unmatched by any team. Spurs I don't feel should even have a chance at number 3.

the 60's Celts match it very well

Bucks24226
06-13-2009, 04:25 PM
of course it cuts to insider for my team the Bucks:cry:

effen5
06-13-2009, 04:38 PM
Bulls should be third...


We did more in that decade then most teams will do EVER (besides Lakers and Celtics)

bbcmillionaire
06-13-2009, 04:39 PM
yeah whatever
but did they win anything?

no.... and Hollinger is looking at wins

lol damn heat fan starting up shyt. fellow bulls fans, disregard this duchebag

bbcmillionaire
06-13-2009, 04:40 PM
besides, as a bulls fan we should be 2rd but eh... the spurs are very great also

bbcmillionaire
06-13-2009, 04:42 PM
the 60's Celts match it very well

lmmfao dude your sig is one of the funniest ones i have ever seen mad props bro

ko8e24
06-13-2009, 07:23 PM
Bulls should be third...


We did more in that decade then most teams will do EVER (besides Lakers and Celtics)

Bulls should be top 10, but definitely not in the top 3. Are you kidding me? Don't you remember how everyone imploded after the 98 championship. cuz jerry krause and phil couldn't get along. it was krause vs phil, krause vs jordan, krause vs pippen (who was aggravated cuz he wanted more money and felt underappreciated, dude had a really big ego), etc. they havent done anything significant until 09, where they took boston to 7 games (by the way, i was pulling for them, that team is one all star, 1 good role player and a competent coach away from being a championship contender)

chitownbulls
06-13-2009, 07:36 PM
Well the Spurs this decade is what we were in the 90's just not as dominate overall. However the Spurs in the 90's were contenders every year as well. We were only contenders for a short time. Other than in the MJ era, how many times did we make it out of round 1?

We were pretty good in the early 70's

JWO35
06-13-2009, 08:13 PM
Really the Detroit Pistons are 13???
How are the Pacers and the Bucks ahead of the Pistons???
(IMO, the Pistons should be 5)

And, how in the world did the Bobcats surpass two teams already!!
(They haven't even made it to the playoffs)

Pran Raznor
06-13-2009, 08:35 PM
How many people worldwide would reconize the Spurs? I think the Bulls are a little bit more popular. But, idk. I've never been around the world.

Raoul Duke
06-13-2009, 09:21 PM
He gives Phoenix extra points for playing an exciting style, and then penalizes Detroit for being "boring". He also took points from the Pistons for the 2004 brawl, but didn't penalize Indiana at all.

Baller1
06-13-2009, 09:25 PM
I really repsect Hollinger for still putting the SEATTLE SUPERSONICS at #12. I think if we were to have won 1-2 more championships, we would be top 10, but I think #12 isn't too bad.

JDizzle
06-13-2009, 10:47 PM
suns number 5?...i like how he puts it best team to never win a ship... idk about 5 tho maybe a lil lower they have been a very good franchise tho

JordansBulls
06-14-2009, 02:58 PM
We were pretty good in the early 70's

One year we were.

DODGERS&LAKERS
06-14-2009, 03:08 PM
One year we were.

Actually, it was 4. But yeah, Jordan put that franchise on the map.

superkegger
06-14-2009, 04:12 PM
huh, would have thought the pistons would have been top 10.

But I have a real problem with this


Intangibles matter too, and I created a separate category for special circumstances. For instance, the Blazers of the early part of this decade were perfectly respectable in terms of wins and losses, but few were eager to admit rooting for that team because of all the scoundrels littering the roster. This is the one part that's completely subjective, but for several teams I subtracted or added 50 to 150 points based on playing styles, player behavior, superstars and other major factors.

Basically, that alone makes the whole thing completely subjective and matter a whole lot less to me.