LOOK AT ME! 🗣️ Mad Dog challenges Stephen A.'s Lakers-Celtics argument 🍿 | First Take
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- On First Take, Stephen A. Smith and Chris "Mad Dog" Russo go head-to-head debating which NBA franchise between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Boston Celtics is historically the most revered.
✔️Subscribe to ESPN+ espnplus.com/yo...
✔️ Get the ESPN App: www.espn.com/es...
✔️Subscribe to ESPN on UA-cam: es.pn/SUBSCRIBE...
✔️ Subscribe to NBA on ESPN on UA-cam: bit.ly/SUBSCRIB...
✔️ Watch ESPN on UA-cam TV: es.pn/UA-camTV
Stephen A just went against his OWN Jordan/Lebron debate point
Came to make the same point
So Lebron is the goat by your logic Stephen a
You’d have a point if that was the only argument for the goat debate
Bron the goat
I came here just to say that AGAIN!
😂😂😂😂😂 mad dog just took me out with that “LOOK AT MAE”
Finals appearances and WCF wins never mattered in LA until the Celtics passed them two days ago.
The cope from LA Laker fans is strong.
Lakers are #1
And there going to add more titles with this team and head coach for a good stretch …3 more NBA TITLE BANNERS will be added to this first one is my prediction, before the lakers get there next title 🏆 🏆 🏆
@@Me3ks89#1 crybabies, thats about it though
Bro no one is saying that winning the titles don’t matter. Clearly winning them then appearing is better. We are talking about what franchise has been able to create the most consistent contenders for the NBA title. And if you look at it in the NBA, that team has been the LA Lakers PERIOD. But of course the most successful winning those titles are now the Celtics. But they are not the best consistent franchise in creating consistent contenders.
So then Bron better than Jordan ? This man contradicts himself all the time 😂
Yes he is
Yes Lebron is better than Jordan
@@monteellis4436no he’s not
LeBron is not even top 3. Jordan, Kareem, Kobe, Magic are all greater than LBJ. Y'all are nuts
Omg thank you
5 championships in a place called Minneapolis , but now we are hanging your hats on final appearances and taking Ls ? You just made the Celtics point on why they are #1 franchise and the Lakers FIRMLY #2 . They are the Best runner ups !!
Winning 11 of their 18 championships in prehistoric times, plus winning the 2024 championship (as a result of the easiest path to the finals in NBA history, MAJOR asterisk *) hardly qualifies the Boston Celtics as the #1 franchise.
In the MODERN NBA, the Lakers have won more championships than the Celtics, & it’s not even close.
@@disintegrateallhumans3067you’re a 🤡
I came to comment this lol. Winning the bulk of your championships vs plumbers and firemen is not a flex.
Playing old geezers back in Prehistoric times don't count..Lakers had real players.. Kareem..Magic..Worthy..Mcadoo..Scott..Cooper..Kobe..Shaq
@@onellvanstory7648 LeBron and AD also. Lakers have 5 of the top 10-15 players of all time, Celtics have 1 (Bird) lol
It’s crazy that Stephen A sounds like us Bron fans make the argument against Jordan lol 😂.
He just goes against his own narrative about MJ VS LeBron lmao
No cause it’s not just about rings and finals appearances between bron and Jordan
@@breeezysmoove8981 but it is from Stephen A. Smith POV so this is just contradicting when he debates who's better between the Celtics and Lakers
id argue that the fact boston has 18 rings out of 23 finals appearences actually makes them better than the lakers they have a better ring goal percentage lmao
Boom ! 💯Fact
FACTUALS
That may be true, but it’s also true that the bulk of the Celtics championships (11 of their 18) were won in the 60’s.
In the modern NBA, the Celtics are the equivalent of the Houston Rockets (2 championships, minus the back to back).
@@disintegrateallhumans3067 and they were beating the Lakers then too....... 😎 9 were against the Lakers! ROTFL 😂
Loser take 🤣🤣🤣
Mad Dog absolutely cooked Stephen A here, as always.
I wouldnt say as always. I usually don't like Stephan A. Smith all the time but I don't like Russo about 90% of the time. He is right here for the first time ever. He actually said there were 5 centers better than Shaq...including Tim Duncan who everyone considers a power forward. They both suck and why are they yelling all the time! my 7 year old son was in the other room when I was watching First take and he says..Daddy....why is that man always yelling? Whats wrong with him?"
LIKE A GOOD OLE FASHION DOWN SOUTH BBQ!!!!!💯💯💯
Buddy smoked him with the Minneapolis statement
Post civil rights act Lakers 12 Celtics 11
Post aba merger Lakers 11 Celtics 5
NBA MVPs post civil rights acts Lakers 8 Celtics 5
@@Nightcrawler90210how does this factor the Minneapolis lakers
quickly lol
1. 18 titles.
2. LA Lakers DONT have 17 titles or 32 appearances as Smith claims. Only if he PRETENDS that Minneapolis titles and appearances go to LA. Make-believe la la land!
3. Head to head the Celtics vs LA Lakers in the Finals is 9-3 for the Celtics. Total head to head finals games record is 43-31 for the Celtics.
4. Lakers moved from one city to another. Celtics franchise has always been in Boston.
5. The First LA Lakers title was coached by a Celtics great Bill Sharman, a Red Auerbach guy. Chew on that.
I always thought it was the lakers but Mad Dog made some excellent points. The Celtics have beaten the lakers more than it’s been the other way around. Add to that, that the Celtics now have 18 titles vs 17 and that they’ve always been a Boston team vs the lakers who came from Minneapolis….it has to be the Celtics. Recent success favors the lakers but if you take the totality it’s the Celtics
This…Stephen A is cutting out half of the subject material starting in the Magic era, you can’t do that, should come down to total titles and then the head to head matchup, it’s not even a discussion, anything else is pure copium by Boston haters/Laker lovers☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️
"Look at me!" 🤣
How about this point: which organization is better run? It's not even close, it's Boston. Historically & Present Day it's been Boston.
Los Angeles doesn't like to talk about Minneapolis, their arm was twisted to retire George Mikan's number. Newspaper clipping during the Showtime years as they were going to the Finals even make it sound like anything before the move doesn't count. Might as well give the T-Wolves their records and accomplishments from that time because I'm sure they'll acknowledge it better
Except they'll claim Minneapolis titles as their own. 😅
Lala land!
@elroz1675 Are you guys slow? Its the same franchise. If you move to a different city, are you a different human?
@@silvershadow8405 its the weird behavior of LA fans - they celebrate the 5 chips of Minneapolis. Or pretend to.
@elroz1675 I mean, every Laker fan isn't an "LA" fan.
GET EM DOGGY 😂😂😂
Boston Celtics - 18
Los Angeles Lakers - 12
Minneapolis Lakers - 5
Still same Franchise
Boston won rings with 13 teams in the league 😭
@@LuisMoreno-xw8yt OKC need to start retiring jerseys then.
@@meechie5797 none of thosw other teams were winning
Celtics titles in the 1950's: 0
Lakers titles in the 1950's: 5
Stephen A pretty just said LeBron is better than Jordan because LeBron got more finals appearances than Jordan.
He gonna change the argument to fit his narrative every time.
Nah the comparison of two historic franchises and their history is a different argument than the one between the career of two individual players
@@manuelestevez3982 Not in this case because the argument he’s making is “one has been to more finals so they’ve won more and been more relevant and dominant for longer so they win.” Meanwhile, LeBron has been to 10 finals and 8 were consecutive. If we follow that logic, he’s the better player. The issue is since Stephen A prefers the Lakers, he twisted the argument to fit his narrative. Since he prefers jordan, his twisted the argument to fit his narrative in that debate. There’s no consistency which obviously means most likely there is bias present (and it obviously is).
Nice try😂 and I'm a Lakers fan. Jordan is the goat sorry.
@@Gk54493na bro it’s simply different also Jordan has 2 more rings and finals mvps than lebron not 1 like the Celtics and lakers lol
The Celtics are the best pre merger franchise while the Lakers are the best post merger franchise.
Very well put as a Celtic fan I respect this comment
All the post merger did was to integrate four new teams to the league. How can you point out this distinction as relevant to the point when both teams have to contend within the same conditions? Titles are titles.
@@mikotagayuna8494 The facts are the Celtics had less success after the merger. It was only 8 teams when they won most of their championships. Thats obviously different from having 20 to 30 teams with no bye week in the playoffs but I gave them credit for winning in that pre merger format. Post Merger and as the league kept expanding with more teams and globally with a salary cap and draft lottery the Lakers had more success.
@@mikotagayuna8494 if we're going to delineate LA/Minneapolis then I don't think pre/post merger is a bridge too far. When people talk post merger they mean modern NBA, no different than NFL/AFL merger🤷🏾
@@mikotagayuna8494”All the merger did was add 4 new teams to the league.” Ummm no. That’s simply just patently false incorrect and comparing bill russels 12 Mickey Mouse rings to lakers is a false dichotomy. He played in an era without salary caps, when the Celtics were the only team with the funds to nab all the best players but wilt, and at a time when they only had 4 teams in each playoff division and each round was a best of 3 until the finals. You really know nothing about basketball or life do you?
The Lakers won 5 titles in Minneapolis. George Mikan first repeated (1949 & 1950) and then three-peated (1952, 1953 & 1954). The Lakers moved to LA in 1960.
I think LA is a more popular city than Boston. But with the points Doggy made, I'm gonna side with Boston. I don't have a dog in this race, tho. (No pun intended)
If you have money to survive the high taxes.
So Jim Kelly and the Bills who went 0-4 in the superbowl but made it to 4 in a row should be one of the best teams of all times, as who else has gone to 4 straight superbowls. It aint about going, it's about winning.
You have also some entries for the Lakers
- George Mikan (5 titles in 6 seasons)
- Jerry West & Elgin Baylor went to 7 NBA Finals together in the 60s
- Jerry West & Wilt Chamberlain won in 1972 with 33 win streak in that regular season and together went to 4 NBA Finals
- Magic & Kareem won 5 titels together and went to 8 NBA Finals in the 80s
- After Kareem was retired Magic took the Lakers to the NBA Finals in 1991 against Jordan
- Shaq & Kobe three-peated in the early 2000s and went to 4 NBA Finals together
- Kobe & Gasol repeated and went to 3 NBA finals in a row together
- LeBron & Davis won together in 2020
The Celtics win percentage is higher
And 11 of their 18 championships were won before the NBA was the NBA.
@@disintegrateallhumans3067 and a lot of Lakers championships were in Milwaukee
@disintegrateallhumans3067 3 of those titles for the lakers came during a period that was used to put a ref in jail for rigging lakers games
@@brettt141an NBA ref literally just got fired for rigging games for the Celtics last summer??? The hyprocisy of Celtic fans 😂
People forget the Celtics drafted Len Bias. If he didn't pass away that drought most likely doesn't happen.
This was the perfect debate for Mad Dog agl 😂
11 of Bostons titles came when there were only 8 teams in the league. Let’s not forget that part.
That 8 teams included the Lakers, let's not forget that part either... Which beg to question?? How come the Lakers can't win against the Celtics in the 60s then??
Lakers 32 finals appearances and only won 17, Celtics 23 finals appearances and won 18. Give me the Cs
8 of those championships came when they were only 7 teams in the league.
@@louiehernandez1477 ok and that’s not they fault and like mad dog said 4 of them championships weren’t in LA
@louiehernandez1477 including the Lakers?
@@memphismadekeldojt matter they were still the LAKERS lol tf. Boston bought all the good players when the league first started & they're were 8 teams. Like be fr y'all be ignorant af.
@@MikkiChavez so it’s wrong of me to form the best possible team in order for me to win tf. Sounds smart to me.
im never not smiling and laughing when mad dog is on first take, dude is just so effortlessly funny lmao
That thumbnail with Stephen A. face is give me the willies 😆😅
Celtics did it more homegrown. Guys they drafted won Finals MVPs. Lakers benefitted by getting Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and LeBron. Magic, Kobe, and Worthy make up 6 Finals MVPs of the 12 championships won in LA. The other half came from Wilt (1), Kareem (1), Shaq (3), and LeBron (1).
The Celtics have a much greater runway to win multiple championships for the next 5 years. Tatum is only 26. Brown is 27. The Lakers look ready to rebuild once LeBron is gone. That rebuild could take another 5 years back to relevancy.
It’s understandable that the lakers titles in Minneapolis can be questioned by people, however nobody wants to acknowledge the fact that 11 of bostons 18 titles came from bill Russell in an era where there was no free agency and less teams. Since Russel’s last title, they have won 7 titles. The lakers have won 12. Not even mentioning the fact that the lakers have had far superior players play for them over the course of history.
Lakers would have 11 without the minneapolis titles. The lakers played in the 60s too yet couldn't get it done. They're also backed by hollywood, the media, and they steal other teams great players. Celtics have built most of their teams through the draft.
@@mitchellmartinsky2299 you can sit here and tell me that the all time players of Boston beat the all time lakers in a series. That aside the lakers have been relevant in every decade and don’t have the majority of their success from a time where most of the earth wasn’t born yet.
@@FriesLight yes the all time celtics team would beat the all time lakers team
@@mitchellmartinsky2299😂 Alr brother, literally every player on the lakers roster is better than the Celtics alternative. Magic is better than Cousy or rondo, Kobe is better than Havlicek, bron is better than bird, Kareem better than Russell and so is Shaq. Lakers also have a much better bench in this scenario as well.
@@FriesLight The difference in talent isn't that far off. I'll give the edge to magic over cousy, kobe over havlicek, kareem, and shaq over russell but not lebron over bird. Bird is still the best small forward ever. Russell was better defensive player than kareem and shaq. Lakers don't exactly have a great power forward unless you put mikan there or another center or pau gasol. Celtics bench is better as well.
Wait a minute... now championships is lesser than finals appearance!? The INCONSISTENCY SAS
These two BARKING at each other is a rivalry in and of itself lol!
18>17
“Look at me” alongside Stephen’s smile should be a meme by now 😂😂😂
Los Angeles claiming titles won in Minneapolis is a historic level of cope.
And Boston using 11 prehistoric championships as a crutch is laughable 😂😂😂
@@disintegrateallhumans3067it was a long time ago but it was still the BOSTON Celtics, L.A. claiming a team from a different time zone is crazy
@@vynncenttryllian9959- The BOSTON Celtics won MOST of their 18 championships, BEFORE the NBA was the NBA.
And you don’t wanna have the Minneapolis/ Los Angeles conversation.
Championships won since 1980 (last 44 years in the MODERN NBA)
BOSTON Celtics- 5
LOS ANGELES Lakers- 11
@@disintegrateallhumans3067 lmfao cope harder
@@disintegrateallhumans3067 Those minnesota championships were pre civil rights my man
So much can be learned from these videos. Keep up the great work!
Why does SAS ALWAYS feel the need to put on knee pads whenever he's about to say sonething thats not favorable to the person in question. Thats a classic punk move. Max NEVER done that, J Rose DIDNT do that, Skip DIDNT do it, Perk DOESN'T do it, JJ Redick DOESN'T do it, Chennay DOESNT do it, Monika DOESNT do it...But none of them are Butlers either💯
Mad Dog STAYS speaking facts🗣️
😂 I love when Stevey and Mad dog start hollering at each other lol HILARIOUS
Lakers have 11 titles post-merger, Celtics have 5. Not even close. Boston did all their winning in the 60s before the modern NBA existed
Didn't the Lakers also existed in the 60s?? You kept downplaying the 60s and yet why didn't the Lakers won more in there then??
@@alexiscando2068 The point is competition and the evolution of the NBA. In the 60s there were 8 teams including the Lakers and the Celtics had a dynasty with a team that was head and shoulders better. But that's when they won 11 of 18 titles - when the majority of players were white lol. Once the merger of the league after 1976 which brought more teams into the NBA and created more parity, interesting how the Celtics never consistently won (only the 80s) while the Lakers had sustained periods of greatness in multiple decades (80s, late 90s/early 00s, late 00s)
Where is Shannon
The Minneaplois Lakers won 5 of the Lakers championships, not 4!
By SAS logic.. lebron should be his goat.. Levine has more finals appearances than MJ but has less wins..
Mj has more finals wins but less appearances… same exact things he’s stating for the lakers being better organization than the Celtics
a team is about business, relevancy, eyeballs, the best player is about performance, peak and awards...not the same.
"Look At Me"..!!!! 😂😂😂😂
Mad dog really passing the torch teaching SA MORE about th industry
If the amount of times playing in nba finals series = dominance and success, then why doesn't Stephen A. give much credit to the basketball career as players like Bill Russell (12 times playing in nba finals series, 11 chips), Jerry West (9x nba finals series, 1 finals mvp), Elgin Baylor (8x nba finals series, scored most points in a finals game in history), John Havlichek (won all 8x nba finals series), Bob Cousy, etc?
Overall, the east was much better throughout the years. That's the reason why the lakers had more finals appearance and didn't manage to win it.
they’re talking about this instead of that bomb hockey game last night. the only reason SAS was in studio today and not in Cancun chilling was because of the passing of Willie Mays. both are equal franchises, the Celtics are in a much better place than the Lakers right now
Nobody care about the selltics championships from the prehistoric times
Stephen A Smith proved that he knows very little about hockey when he argued that the Miami Heats' winning streak was more impressive than the Blackhawks' point streak back in circa 2013 because the Blackhawks' streak included "ties" (there haven't been ties in the NHL since before the '03-'04 lockout). The producers avoid covering hockey because they fear that Stephen A will embarrass himself. The only player he knows on either team is Connor McDavid.
@@Maxjuliann History did not begin when you were born, kiddo. That's your entitlement speaking.
@@mikotagayuna8494 nobody cares about rings hat come from the league when it only had 13 teams . That’s why nobody says bill Russell the goat even tho he has 11 rings respectfully
@@Maxjuliann People do care. That's why they're debating about it in the first place. You don't care because it destroys your narrative. Modern events are not magically more important than the past just because you were there to witness it.
Masterful! I would honestly pay to watch these guys debate.
Boston won most of their chips in the 60’s. Straight plumber era with barely any black players. In modern basketball (3pt line) & in colored TV they’re behind the Lakers, Bulls, Spurs & GSW. Let’s be real.
I don't know if I have GSW over BOS but you're right with everything else for the most part.
Yeah and isn't the Lakers in the 60s as well so how come they didn't won more then??
@@alexiscando2068 They’ve won more in the modern era. Since the 80’s on they’ve won 11 to Boston’s 5. Lakers have been the premier basketball franchise for the last 45 years it’s not even debatable.
Head to head is what matters
Bill Russell has 11 of 18 rings..61% of the celtics rings came in the 50s-60s this is why the Lakers have passed them. From when the sport really took off the Lakers have been the best team.
Okay then by your logic, why did the Lakers NOT WIN more in the 50s and 60s then if it is so EASY... Oh right, because they had to go through against the BOSTON CELTICS...
@@alexiscando2068 u thought u had a gotcha moment lol but nothing u said negates what I said.
That brother SAS just mad his Knicks are not in the same category the Celtics #WEDIDITTTTT
No chance. Those 11 Russell titles were during an 8 team era. 8 teams is not a legitimate league.
for the record.... it was a 12 team league
@@hookseybaby No, it was eight until the mid 60s when the Baltimore Bullets (now Washington Wizards) joined. The original Bullets folded in the early 50s. About six other teams folded before that. The Bucks, Bulls and Suns were the next expansion teams in the late 60s. The early 70s were when about six other expansion teams came. Blazers, Sonics, Rockets, Braves (now Clippers), Cavaliers, Jazz. ABA teams Spurs, Nuggets, Nets, Pacers cam in ‘76. Mavericks in ‘80.
How does having only 8 teams make it irrelevant? All the teams are subject to the same conditions. Competition is competition.
@@mikotagayuna8494 Huh? Did you flunk math? The chances of winning in 8 team league are close to 15%. The chances of winning in 30 team league are 3%.
@@mikotagayuna8494 In 8 teams league the chance of winning is over 12% compared to just 3% when there are 30 teams. That's a huge difference
Doggie!!! Just like you said, take out Minneapolis from Laker history, AND WE DO NOT LOSE TO YOU 9 times! We beat you!!!! 🤬 F BOSTON!!!
TV talk. This why I mess w podcasts now
Lakers actually have only 16 that last one was a fake Mickey mouse bubble championship 😂😂😂😂
Subtract 5 from that 15 because five of those titles belong to Minneapolis 🤭
How was the 2020 championship fake?
If anything, the Lakers faced more adversity in that finals run, than the Celtics faced this year.
The Lakers had to forfeit home court advantage throughout the playoffs, were without their best perimeter defender (Avery Bradley), had a rookie head coach (Frank Vogel), & their 3rd best player was an aging Rondo.
Otherwise, they played under the exact same circumstances as every other team in the bubble.
For their 2024 championship run, the Celtics had the benefit of maintaining home court advantage, & the added luxury of playing against teams who were missing their best players.
If the 2020 championship is the ‘Mickey Mouse’ championship, then 2024 is the ‘Tinker Bell’ championship.
@@disintegrateallhumans3067 I ain’t reading all that; pandemic rings don’t count.
But winning 11 titles in a league of 8 teams is considered real and impressive right?
@@lucillerose-davis7666- I understand.
Reading can be hard for smooth brains.
Maybe you can ask someone you know to read it to you..... Slowly....
Mad Dog is one of the few analyst that really listens to what the other person is saying then he responds
Franchise vs. franchise: Lakers
Los Angeles Lakers vs. Boston Celtics all-time: Celtics
Lakers vs. Celtics since Magic-Bird entered league: Lakers
Each side can win this debate.
Lakers buy all their rings C’s are home made…. I think this should be factored in every sport Boston doesn’t have the palm trees glamour and all the appeal to attract superstars like LA yet boston teams are always great
The Lakers only have 16 legitimate titles, not 17. You all keep counting that bubble championship which is not relevant. The 2020 Covid19 Champions?
😂🤣😂
Any reason it’s illegitimate? I’ll wait.
Stop with the BS... The Celtics was also in the bubble now is it??... Also, the Nuggets won the title as well last season further proof that the 2020 Bubble Nuggets are legit WHEN HEALTHY
You never disappoint!
as a person from the UK, Lakers are known by everybody unlike Celtics
Nobody cares.
As a guy from the UK, that is 100% incorrect
He is right.Down here in Brasil Lakers is God CELTICS is The evil.They don't love Lakers They hate Celtics.
As a guy from the UK, that's just total BS.
Well even if that's true imo you SHOULD know about LA and Hollywood and San Francisco WAY BEFORE Boston if you live in the UK
The Lakers have more recognition and honors for their numerous finals appearances, championships, and a roster of great and impactful players. On the other hand, the Celtics have been more efficient, achieving more championships with fewer finals appearances.
As much as I do not enjoy watching the Celtics play due to their offensive output and significant score differential (sometimes beating teams like kids), I do respect their game and team. It makes me wonder why they haven't won a championship in the last few years.
In the modern NBA era since the merger, the Celtics only got 5 rings and the Lakers got 10 and I didn’t even include the Mickey Mouse ring..
I’m just gonna say this. Boston has a winning all time record against LA in regular games and finals. Celtics have more hall of famers and have been very consistently relevant through history. Only the 90’s and 2010’s the Celtics didn’t win the title and in the 2010’s they made finals just didn’t close. Want to talk recent relevancy? Since 2010, who has been the more relevant franchise? Both have one title but Boston has 5 more conference finals appearances and one more finals appearance
If the Knicks had an identical finals/championship record as the Celtics, SAS would be claiming the Knicks are the greatest NBA franchise. He'd also would be the first to point out that 5 Minneapolis Lakers titles don't count for the Lakers. Smith has been envious of the Celtics for a long time b/c the Knicks haven't won a chip in 51 years.
he just explained what we say about the jordan era when we talk about lebrons competition being better
I’m from Boston. I agree with most of what Stephen A says here except that championships won in Minnesota should be credited to “Los Angeles Lakers.” The team was not in Los Angeles and the Buss family didn’t own the team then. Those championships belong to Minnesota.
3:16 Mad Dog with the Zoolander Blue Steel 😂😂😂😂😂
so LeBron gets beat up for making the finals without winning, but the Lakers are bigger then Celtics cuz they have more losses make it make sense😂hypocrites
If Stephen A considers the Celtic's dominance in the 60s less relevant, then why isn't Mikan's dominance in the 40s and 50s, when there were virtually no other big men to stop him, even less relevant to him? The Lakers 72 championship also occurred a few years after the Celtics run, and shouldn't be viewed any differently if we're going to denigrate certain championships. And if we are going down this ridiculous road, we might as well get into the officiating scandal that likely helped the Lakers in the early 00s, the validity of winning a championship in the bubble, etc.
The Laker franchise has 18 titles. You can't discredit the Minneapolis years.
Haha! The official title count is 17 for Boston and 13 for LA Lakers!Mad Dog hit it!
Who has more sale out games?
Love mad dog, ALWAYS comes with 🔥 energy
"Look at me" love when Mad Dog does that.
So Lebron is better than Jordan? Come on Stephen you can’t do that. The answer is Boston.
nothing that comes from SA has veracity
I think if Celtics gets to 20 championships, I would call them the GOAT franchise. At this point, it’s debatable. Lakers won 11 since 1980. Celtics won 7 since 1970 and only 5 since 1980. Lakers won 6 since 2000. Celtics won 2 since 2000. But if Celtics gets to 20 championships first, they will be regarded the GOAT NBA franchise.
Lakers have more stars. If you take all the greatest Lakers in their prime, they would beat all the greatest Celtics in their prime. But Celtics do have the better H2H record against the Lakers. The East was tougher during the 80s than the West. The Celtics also have the most retired numbers.
If we aren’t looking at the 1960s as seriously, then why count the Lakers’ championships in the 1950s when they were still in Minneapolis? At least Celtics won all their championships in Boston. Lakers really only have 12 banners won in LA. Should the Thunder hang their 1979 banner they won as the Seattle Supersonics? How about the Atlanta Hawks when they won in St. Louis?
They just need something to cover
Its not even comparable on who’s the bigger franchise.
In my era, Paul Pierce was the most notable Celtic I can think of. The Shaq and Kobe combo in the 2000s took that brand to another level imo. I know Garnett got a chip in Boston but I still tie him to Minnesota
History did not start when you were born, kid. Past titles do not suddenly become irrelevant just because you have no formative memories of them.
The los angels Lakers doesn't have 17 tittles!!! The Lakers do but not LA! La lakers has 12 championships and Minneapolis Lakers has 5 championships!
Mad 😡 Dog 🐕
Is always spitting facts that makes the other person squirm in their chair is funny. 😅
4 of the best 5 players of all time have worn a Lakers jersey in their career:
Lebron
Kobe
Magic
Kareem
9 more appearances and 1 less win make it make sense. flexing losing is nasty.
Any title won before the merger (1976) is taken with a grain of salt, whether it’s the Lakers or the Celtics.
This whole argument about how many chips The LAKERS won in Minneapolis is ridiculous. Is it the same franchise or not?? The Celtics did the heavy lifting of this debate SEVERAL YEARS ago. There was a significant gap in which they were insignificant.
The Western Conference was WEAKER than the East in the 1980's. The East was a 3 headed BEAST, with the Celtics, 76ers, and Bucks. Then, the Pistons joined the party in 1987. The Lakers spent most of the decade with a virtual FREE PASS to the finals.
Anyone who considers that "Bubble Championship" as legitimate truly doesn't know basketball.
One Decade (1960s) does not diminish the Lakers at the expense of the Celtics.
Lakers were a Dynasty in the 1950s, 1980s (beat the Celtics 5-3, and 2--1 head to head) and in the 2000-10 run (5 Titles, 1-1 head to head).
Even in the 2020s, they are tied 1-1 (2020 vs 2024).
Lakers are the better franchise, as they are consistently competitive snd better overall.
It's a competition and titles are the only valid argument. The Celtics have more and five of the Lakers' came from Minneapolis, not LA.
The Lakers in Minneapolis same franchise now doesn’t matter that they moved to Los Angeles they were the FIRST dynasty period before the Celtics won in the 1960s I don’t understand why Mad Dog thinks it’s a stark contrast between two cities
In my lifetime (born in 1981) the Lakers have won more rings than the Celtics and they're the most successful of the two teams when it comes to winning titles.
Lakers titles since 1981:
4 with Magic
5 with Kobe
1 Lebron
Celtics titles since 1981:
3 with Bird
1 with Pierce
1 with Tatum
If Len Bias was alive the late 80’s and early 90’s would’ve made a difference for the Celtics
This math ain’t mathing. The WIN PCT doesn’t reflect the head to head nor the finals appearances to titles
Celtics have more chips but the Lakers have been more relevant in the last couple of decades. Boston has two rings in the last 25 years. Lakers have 6 and more trips to the finals.
They’re both great franchises and had legends play for them. Boils down to what team you just prefer lol can’t go wrong with either. I personally like the Lakers more but admit Boston is a great franchise/team
Having more finals loses doesn’t make you better 😂