Do you believe that your team could ever win an NBA championship? Title teams STAY OUT.

[GhostOfPoverty]

Really easy why they say that - They are jealous and they want to diminish what teams like the Lakers and Boston Celtics have done. Now let me ask a question

How many of the current owners in the NBA have one a title while owning the team? I think it would be more accurate to reset the clock every time the ownership resets. It's really just a retarded argument and a tired old one

Jealous? What? Did you miss the part where I said I don't view the extra title under the Twins franchise's belt that they got as the Washington Senators in the same light as the ones they won as the Minnesota Twins?

Also, as much as I want to see my teams of choice win, I'm an adult, so I don't get "jealous" when other teams win it. I'll admit it rubs me the wrong way initially when say the Packers succeed and the Vikings fail, for example, but I'm not concerned about it in the long-term. Furthermore, I've been one of the more vocal non-Pats fan supporters of the Patriots/Tom Brady on this forum. Not that I expect you to have noticed that given that this is the NBA sub, but my point is, it isn't about "jealousy". I'm willing to admit when something is earned/deserved, and once again, I wasn't discrediting the championships on a historical level, just that I think it's weak sauce for a fan base of the team as they are in their current location to take pride for what the franchise did under a completely different fan base in a different city.

Honestly, by your logic, I should be able to claim that the Timberwolves have some claim to those 5 Minneapolis titles, as it was Minnesotans/mostly people who would be Timberwolves fans today who backed and supported the Minneapolis Lakers through those titles. But I don't, because it doesn't make sense. But it doesn't make any less sense than acting like the city of L.A. had any involvement whatsoever in those same 5 championships.

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

Academic because the Lakers ain't moving bro, but here is something that you fail to understand: The Lakers own those championship - not Minneapolis and not Los Angeles. Seattle is the only time I can think of in which the team name was owned by the city, so when the current ownership bought out the organization - they purchased the assets and liabilities. The name was not for sale with that so effectively in the law of contracts, the new ownership purchased the contracts of the players, the equipment and then they moved everything to Oklahoma. Jerry Buss purchased the Lakers name, the assets, the liabilities and the rights to the titles and therefore they belong to the Los Angeles Lakers which is the same company as the Minneapolis Lakers - same team. So get over it that your beloved city lost the Lakers - it's ancient history

You're arguing semantics and hyper focusing on the "official" status of the titles. I already explained that I'm not arguing the official status of them, just pointing out that it's lame to speak of the Minneapolis Lakers titles in the same exact light as the titles won in L.A. when the media/L.A. Lakers fans talk about the titles. It's disingenuous and completely disregards the role of the original fan base in Minneapolis/the surrounding area that made up that fan base in those 5 championships.

Consider this: Lakers fans/the media love to talk about how they have "16 titles". Sounds alright when you consider the fact that they won 11 of those as the L.A. Lakers. But would you be bragging about them being a 5 title team - still good enough to tie for 5th place overall for teams with most NBA championships - if the Lakers had gone without winning any titles after the move to L.A.? No you wouldn't, because when you isolate them like that, it's clearly stupid to brag about those. And if that had been the case, the media narrative wouldn't be "the Lakers are a 5 title team", it would be "they haven't won anything since the move from Minneapolis".


Side note - leave it to L.A. Lakers fans to derail a thread that was supposed to be about teams with no/few championships and their hopes of winning one by turning it into a brag thread about themselves.

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

One could argue you are randomly selecting the Losers Timberwolves to root for

Please be trolling...

 

[flyerhawk]

How did a thread about teams that have never won a championship turn into a discussion about the freaking Los Angelas Lakers?

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Yes I do, I am just pointing out how stupid that statement is. I never lived in Los Angeles, and matter of fact most of the fan's don't live in Los Angeles. Los Angeles is not my home town and never was - It's a nasty, filthy and dirty town, so why in the hell would I pick the Lakers just because they are in Los Angeles? I will give you a hint - His name if Magic Johnson

You're a T-shirt fan

Nothing wrong with it

 

[WiggyRuss]

It doesn't matter where your team won their title. They still won it.

lol fuck that--- the Ravens won a super bowl after they moved from Clevleand but that whole organization can die of gonorrhea and rot in hell.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I know some people root for teams from different cities/states because of other members of their family rooting for them, but it can look bad depending on the group of teams someone roots for. Everyone has the right to root for who they want whether it's the home city/state team or not, but if you live on the East coast and just for a random reason root for the Lakers or live on the West coast and just randomly root for the Yankees it makes you look like a bandwagon fan.

amen. x1000

 

[Nosferatu]

What if you like a team because your dad loved them and taught you to as well? As in the city where he grew up but moved away from and had you. What's wrong with joining his tribe?

That of course counts but IMO it's still not the same, when you root for the teams that represent where you are from you get so much more from it. EX... I'll use my Vikings, if you are a fan of the team and from Minnesota, you get to experience it all, local media, other fans, sports radio, for me I grew up in a huge family, dad had 6 brothers and 1 sister and I had like 25 cousins and almost every Sunday we were all together to watch the game, I don't remember life before being a Vikings fan, it's just a part of you because they are Minnesota, by far the most loved team in the state (I am more a Twins fan and feel they should be, they gave us titles) Now if you are a Vikings fan in North Carolina or Oregon you can love the Vikings but it's not nearly the same as growing up in it.

Just my opinion...

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Then WTF are they doing under your avi?

Are they - I suppose I still favor the Dodgers more than the Angels, but I really like Sciosa - H

lol fuck that--- the Ravens won a super bowl after they moved from Clevleand but that whole organization can die of gonorrhea and rot in hell.

Well as far as I am concerned - I am a Lakers fan first and Lakers fan only, so any team that is not the Lakers - fuck them and let them rot in hell. I understand that some of these fans that are dumber then horses - Don't like the Lakers count on championships - but the players really won the championship any way. The continuity belongs to the name of the organization in which people have come and left, but represented the team you support.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

That of course counts but IMO it's still not the same, when you root for the teams that represent where you are from you get so much more from it. EX... I'll use my Vikings, if you are a fan of the team and from Minnesota, you get to experience it all, local media, other fans, sports radio, for me I grew up in a huge family, dad had 6 brothers and 1 sister and I had like 25 cousins and almost every Sunday we were all together to watch the game, I don't remember life before being a Vikings fan, it's just a part of you because they are Minnesota, by far the most loved team in the state (I am more a Twins fan and feel they should be, they gave us titles) Now if you are a Vikings fan in North Carolina or Oregon you can love the Vikings but it's not nearly the same as growing up in it.

Just my opinion...

I haven't seen any set of rules endorsed and supported by any one - says who can be a fan or who can't - the whole concept of dictating who is a fan and who isn't - is RETARDED.

 

[The Q]

Close to half of the 30 current NBA teams have never won a title, or have a title wins(s) that were strictly from previous locations of the franchise. My Minnesota Timberwolves are one of those teams. Feel free to include your thoughts on your own team if it has only 1 or 2 titles. Fans of teams with several titles feel free to add your thoughts on the teams of us who suffer title droughts.

As much as I want to believe, when I look at it logically, I just don't see an NBA title coming to Minnesota. Whereas it's at least feasible with the Vikings in the NFL if they could get over their choking ways, the culture of the NBA makes it almost impossible for small market teams like Minnesota to do anything. Anytime we draft or even trade for a high quality talent, they all eventually bail for teams and markets with legitimate chances to compete for championships, so we're constantly restarting anything good that does happen to occur here. The culture of the NBA is simply too heavily focused on name brands for the top superstars, and hardly any of them will pick a place like Minnesota over a place like L.A., Boston, etc. regardless of whether or not Minnesota could afford their NBA salary demands. This problem branches beyond trying to form a title contending core of players into making it difficult to attract legitimate coaching leadership, and it seems to require a local billionaire owner to even keep them in the state in the first place.

If only we had offered up Andrew Wiggins to Cleveland last year for Kyrie after Kyrie mentioned Minnesota as a preferred landing spot, maybe we could have had a big 3 of KAT, Kyrie and Butler to build on. Wouldn't have propelled them past the Warriors on its own, but now it's looking like Butler will bail, Wiggins probably won't ever live up to his hype, and who knows if KAT will even want to stay long-term whether or not his development continues.

*shrugs* I guess we can still blindly hold out hope that they get it together enough next season to convince Butler to stay and that a legit big 3 can come of KAT/Wiggins/Butler. I don't see it, though. Probably back to square one within a couple of years.

Even Wiggins for Paul George would’ve worked out well.

But Boston hasn’t had a big fa addition (before Horford) since a washed up Dominique Wilkins.

And Hayward only had Boston an option because Stevens was his college coach. Boston had no shot if anyone else was the coach.

Sometimes you just get lucky like that.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Please be trolling...

This is hilarious - THE TROLL THAT STARTED THIS THREAD IS ACCUSING ME OF TROLLING - STFU

 

[trojanfan12]

On the official record books, teams don't always retain the titles from their previous locations. See OKC for example, they didn't retain the banner for the 1979 championship won in Seattle, and the city retained it.

On a more figurative level, you can view it how you want I guess. Like with L.A., they retain the titles won as the Minneapolis Lakers on an official level, and they are always counted whenever their total title count is brought up. If I were a Lakers fan, I wouldn't ever be able to view the titles won in the 40's and 50's in Minneapolis in quite the same light as the titles won in L.A. That's not to delegitimize those championships by any means, but I would think that titles won when they were actually the L.A. Lakers would mean more to the fans than ones they won when they were located in Minneapolis. I put my money where my mouth is on this too. I don't say the Twins have 3 MLB titles instead of 2 just because they won a World Series in 1927 as the Washington Senators that's still technically retained by the current team. It feels disingenuous to view it in the same light as the ones they won in Minnesota.

Again, just my 2 cents. Feel free to hold your own opinion on the matter. Obviously you're going to be a lot more inclined to count old location championships in the same light as current location ones when your team won 5 of them their previous location.


Edit: You are one cheeky fellow, m8.

I think a lot depends on what the team takes with them when they leave. When the Lakers left Minneapolis, the kept the team name, colors,records, titles, etc.

When the Sonics moved to OKC, they left the team name, colors, etc. behind.

As for titles won in the 40's and 50's when they were in Minneapolis, those titles were from before I was born, so other than being counted as part of the 16 the Lakers have won, they don't mean as much to me as the 11 I've seen them win.

They still wouldn't mean as much, even if they were won in LA because I wasn't alive to see them.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

You're arguing semantics and hyper focusing on the "official" status of the titles. I already explained that I'm not arguing the official status of them, just pointing out that it's lame to speak of the Minneapolis Lakers titles in the same exact light as the titles won in L.A. when the media/L.A. Lakers fans talk about the titles. It's disingenuous and completely disregards the role of the original fan base in Minneapolis/the surrounding area that made up that fan base in those 5 championships.

Consider this: Lakers fans/the media love to talk about how they have "16 titles". Sounds alright when you consider the fact that they won 11 of those as the L.A. Lakers. But would you be bragging about them being a 5 title team - still good enough to tie for 5th place overall for teams with most NBA championships - if the Lakers had gone without winning any titles after the move to L.A.? No you wouldn't, because when you isolate them like that, it's clearly stupid to brag about those. And if that had been the case, the media narrative wouldn't be "the Lakers are a 5 title team", it would be "they haven't won anything since the move from Minneapolis".


Side note - leave it to L.A. Lakers fans to derail a thread that was supposed to be about teams with no/few championships and their hopes of winning one by turning it into a brag thread about themselves.

You're arguing retarded bullshit about the count of trophies that belongs to specific teams - GTFO already with your bullshit. The Lakers have 16 titles, the Celtics have 17 and Minnesota have none - Get over it already loser

 

[Nosferatu]

I haven't seen any set of rules endorsed and supported by any one - says who can be a fan or who can't - the whole concept of dictating who is a fan and who isn't - is RETARDED.

Where did I do that?

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I think a lot depends on what the team takes with them when they leave. When the Lakers left Minneapolis, the kept the team name, colors,records, titles, etc.

When the Sonics moved to OKC, they left the team name, colors, etc. behind.

As for titles won in the 40's and 50's when they were in Minneapolis, those titles were from before I was born, so other than being counted as part of the 16 the Lakers have won, they don't mean as much to me as the 11 I've seen them win.

They still wouldn't mean as much, even if they were won in LA because I wasn't alive to see them.

The former ownership of the Seattle Supersonics owned the team contracts, and assets, but not the Seattle Supersonics name. Therefore when they sold out - the new ownership purchased the rights to operate a franchise in the NBA, the equipment, the contracts to the players but had a choice - Stay in Seattle or find a new venue - therefore Supersonics ceased to exist. In Reality - The Charlotte Hornets today is not the same team that was there before. They also are different.

The Lakers did not change name or ownership at the time they moved to Los Angeles. They changed location only and took their trophies with them

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Where did I do that?

That's really what the ghostofpoverty is trying to say - I know you're not doing that

 

[True Lakers Fan]

lol fuck that--- the Ravens won a super bowl after they moved from Clevleand but that whole organization can die of gonorrhea and rot in hell.

So now the question I have is -do you still maintain that LeBron is the GOAT or are you going to turn on him?

 

[trojanfan12]

What the fuck man?

TLF gonna TLF.

 

[broncosmitty]

It doesn't matter where your team won their title. They still won it.

I'm very prideful of Ft. Wayne's success.


And aware the Lakers true dominance was in Minnesota.