2016 NBA Season

[Ben Kenobi]

Then how come San Antonio could even win it's division 8 time in a row. That's only 4 other teams.

Spurs have won 50 games for the last 19 years. Since 1989, they have won no fewer than 47 games, once - the year they drafted Duncan. That is 27 years of consistent excellence.

The Spurs are +792 in their overall franchise history. Celtics are +965, Lakers +1101. Bulls are +196.

So in all, there are three tremendous dynasties. The Lakers, Celtics and Spurs.

The Spurs are by far the most successful expansion franchise, ever. Bulls are number 2 because of the Ringz.

almost all of them have that Celt and Bull's teams 1 and 2 depending on the site but they usually list San Antonio THIRD. (again not definitive, except to show that not many people use your silly math to judge)

Franchise-wise, over their entire history it is Lakers, Celtics, Spurs and the Bulls.

[-Jrabbit]

I see that your use of convenient math and cherry-picked statistics to support meaningless sports assertions continues.

Have you learned nothing from your past pwnings over Flutie and Testaverde?

[Ben Kenobi]

JR, the stats are pretty clear that the Spurs are the better franchise over the long haul.

[EPW]

And obviously the Bulls and Celtics are disqualified for not being in Texas. It's a shame that such talent has gone to waste.

[Ben Kenobi]

Which is why I stated the Celtics are second? I don't see anyone contesting the teams on that list, only the order of the Spurs ahead of the Bulls.

[EPW]

Yes.

Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio have fewer combined championships than the Celtics...

[Ben Kenobi]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bill-russells-celtics-were-great-tim-duncans-spurs-have-been-better/

Hey look, an article that makes the same points I do.

It is interesting that he also states that the Spurs dynasty began in 1998. And continues as the longest dynasty in the history of the NBA. Even better than the Showtime Lakers and the Celtics.

[Ben Kenobi]

Also why would I care about the Mavs and Rockets? Spurs are where it's at.

[EPW]

So now we're supposed to judge teams based on an arbitrary formula with arbitrary starting points and cut off dates developed by none other than Nate "Trump has a 2% chance of winning the Republican Nomination" Silver? (To use your type of argumentation)

[Ben Kenobi]

So now we're supposed to judge teams based on an arbitrary formula with arbitrary starting points and cut off dates developed by none other than Nate "Trump has a 2% chance of winning the Republican Nomination" Silver? (To use your type of argumentation)

ELO isn't arbitrary. Not sure why you would think so. Chess uses it quite successfully.

[EPW]

You're only using it because it's the only measure that supports your very questionable assertion.

Also why would I care about the Mavs and Rockets? Spurs are where it's at.

I take this as your confession. It would be forgivable if you were actually from San Antonio.

[Ben Kenobi]

You're only using it because it's the only measure that supports your very questionable assertion.

Actually, I argued that the Spurs have only had one losing season since the 80s ended.

I take this as your confession. It would be forgivable if you were actually from San Antonio.

Well, given that the Grizzlies and the Supersonics moved away who should I cheer for? The Jailblazers?

[EPW]

Bandwagon fans should know better than to make spurious and grandiose claims about their current favorite team because it might come back to bite them on the ass later.

[Ben Kenobi]

Bandwagon fans should know better than to make spurious and grandiose claims about their current favorite team because it might come back to bite them on the ass later.

Been a fan since 2005. That makes me a bandwagoner?

[-Jrabbit]

JR, the stats are pretty clear that the Spurs are the better franchise over the long haul.

The whole "best franchise" thing is just bizarre -- your answer to a question no one was asking.