Contender with no title or suck 90% of the time with title?

[EuroPacer]

I'm used to European sports where coming second if you were projected to come tenth is actually considered a good achievement. I just want my team to do as well as they possibly can, I'd be really annoyed if the Pacers decided to tank, in fact, I wouldn't even watch them if that was the agenda.

There is an important nuance to be made though:
-In European sports there is an incentive to finish as high as possible with regards to international leagues. In football, the top x of each competition play Champions League, the remaining top x play Europa League. Then there's the matter of qualifying directly and having to play qualifying matches.
-There is no draft lottery.

Agreed, but my enjoyment of sport is firmly embedded in the European school of thought, I suppose it is handy for me to be able to supplant that onto my enjoyment of the Pacers (Lord knows it is needed!)

[NBAfan3024]

Depends on the franchise but these teams play to win championships.

[JVL]

I'm used to European sports where coming second if you were projected to come tenth is actually considered a good achievement. I just want my team to do as well as they possibly can, I'd be really annoyed if the Pacers decided to tank, in fact, I wouldn't even watch them if that was the agenda.

There is an important nuance to be made though:
-In European sports there is an incentive to finish as high as possible with regards to international leagues. In football, the top x of each competition play Champions League, the remaining top x play Europa League. Then there's the matter of qualifying directly and having to play qualifying matches.
-There is no draft lottery.

Agreed, but my enjoyment of sport is firmly embedded in the European school of thought, I suppose it is handy for me to be able to supplant that onto my enjoyment of the Pacers (Lord knows it is needed!)

Oh, don't get me wrong, I know exactly what you mean. Somehow I make a switch when watching the NBA :p

[Mich3006]

Can´t talk about it. I´m 28 year old Knicks fan so I´ve never have that championship feeling.

But if we talk of high expectations every single season and be disappointed most the time than we could start talking...

[The Penguin]

Tanking isn't that bad, at least you know what your team is trying to accomplish. As a Pistons fan (and I'm sure there are some other fan bases that can share the feeling) I've had no idea what the team has been trying to accomplish for the last half decade. I'll take being a fan of a team actively tanking over being a fan of a team actively trying to treadmill any day of the week.

[Rosque]

As an European -- overachieve and we're good. Finals and we're great. A ring and Imma marry you.

[ufsports]

I dislike the championship or bust mentality a lot of people have. I'd rather just be a successful team and have good memories to look back on than only have one or two good seasons to brag about. Even if the team was a contender, that doesn't mean that we would win the championship.

[Zion Wembanyama]

I want my team (Pelicans) to win "at least" one championship, in my lifetime. Other than that, just entertain me.

[TDotsfinest97]

Being in the mix every year is always good for the fans but it might get very frustrating after awhile. Winning a championship every decade is great but sucking for the most part of your franchise history sucks so I'd take being always in the mix but it depends if being in the mix means a bunch of first round exits then no thanks but if it's making the ECF atleast 2 times in a decade well that's not so bad.

[Scutt]

I'd prefer the option of being in the mix every year, but if you gave it away that we'd never win a championship, that defeats the purpose. You want to feel like you have a chance every year.

At the end of the day, sports are just for entertainment, and I'd rather be entertained and take pride in my team every year than do so for just one year and be living in the past the rest of the time.

Yeah, being a Suns fan I had more enjoyment from watching the KJ and Nash years regardless of not winning it all, than I would have if we tried to break it down and rebuild all the time and had won the championship once.

Also, the only team in my NBA viewing experience (about 25 years) that has ever even gotten close to winning a championship with the tearing down and sucking method is OKC and they still haven't won one. Sure, they are exciting, but they were also lucky in drafting who they did...smart draft picks but they still could have ended up with Oden and Beasley had their draft slots been even better.

Most teams that win championships either have a superstar, or trade for them after their commitments to their original teams anyway. LA and SA never really had a tanking mentality (OK, SA did the one year but only because Robinson was out and as a Suns fan it kind of pissed me off they got Duncan even though they were always a contender in the mix when Robinson was healthy).

Really? How do you think teams end up with superstars? Having a top draft pick is by no means a guarantee at a superstar, but significantly increases the odds. Why simply ignore the draft? It's whole purpose is to help small franchises get a chance at the best talent.

The Rockets were bad and got Hakeem Olajuwon, they won rings.

The Bulls were bad and drafted Jordan, they won rings

The Spurs were bad and got Tim Duncan, they won rings.

The Heat were bad and got Dwayne Wade, which enabled them to get Shaq and later Lebron to... you guessed it, win some rings.

[Christine-In-AZ]

Given the choices, I have to go with winning it all once in awhile yet being bad most of the time. The 2nd option implies never winning it all and I've rode that horse for 45 seasons being a Suns fan. I probably would've voted for option one 15 or 20 years ago, but after the Diamondbacks won a (mostly purchased) championship, and I experienced that high, I REALLY want that (triple the effect) high the Suns, no matter the cost. Plus, I'm rapidly running out of seasons. It's approaching Cleveland teams or even Cubs bad for the Suns.

The Suns have been more often than not quite good and even legit contenders, I'd give up 8 or 10 of those "exciting and entertaining" teams for one title. Still, I do appreciate the fact that I get to follow a team with at least a punchers chance most seasons. If I just had one from the Suns I might have voted differently.

(spoken as a glassy-eyed junkie) I juust NEEEED one!!

[bape_lovers]

As a rap fan..I just want our team to go the second round at least once more

[whocurrz]

The premise of this post kind of dismisses the fact that teams can be competitive the whole 10 year period and win a championship of two. Spurs, Mavs, Lakers never really tanked besides Kobe injury years with a poor supporting cast and Heat were a treadmill team before they got Lebron and Bosh. Celtics have really been the only championship team successful with the championship or bust mentality in recent years. Many teams probably thought the Mavs were crazy rolling with a core of Dirk/ Terry and Kidd's corpse for a few years but they made a good trade, got hot and won a ship never tanking.

[jirojan]

I guess my big problem with this scenario is this: in what world is it realistic for championship teams to fall off the face of the earth?

heat post shaq/pre lebron...heat this year

[cochiseuofm]

If it was a title every ten years I think most fans would choose that but that isn't the scenario because most title teams don't suddenly win and then dissolve. The scenario is more like in a 30 year period, your team is terrible 25 years but for a five year period you have a superstar in his prime and a team capable of winning a title (no title is guaranteed though.)

[bwgood77]

If it was a title every ten years I think most fans would choose that but that isn't the scenario because most title teams don't suddenly win and then dissolve. The scenario is more like in a 30 year period, your team is terrible 25 years but for a five year period you have a superstar in his prime and a team capable of winning a title (no title is guaranteed though.)

Yeah, that makes more sense because typically you will be good for a 5-8 year stretch if you finally get that one star after tanking for 25 years, so I edited it to make it more realistic.

[Gmoney3]

Most fans probably say the title and being a Bulls fan I can tell you the title is an absolute ecstasy.


But, in reality if you are comparing the far end of each scenario (lets say one or two titles, no dynasty and pretty much 20+ crappy seasons in a 30 year stretch) to a team that (lets say zero titles, makes the playoffs 25 times in a 30 year stretch and has tons of memorable seasons) then I think most fans would have a hell of a lot better fan experience with the 0 title franchise.

Even if they say its all about the title, those fans are probably going to end up more invested and bleeding their franchise colors, also will probably watch a hell of a lot more games out of those 30 years and all in all a better experience.

The 2 title franchise will cling to those title years but in reality most the fans will probably still get pretty disgruntled with their teams constant losing and probably tune in to much less games over the course of that 30 year stretch than the fan of the 0 title but perennial contender franchise.

[choppermagic]

Any year without a championship is a failure for the Lakers regardless of their record. They don't hang division titles in the rafters.

This. The Lakers have been in 50% of the NBA Finals too, so even not making the Finals in a two year span is a let down as well!

[aIvin adams]

Winning isn't everything.

But trying to win is.

[aIvin adams]

this thread could be retitled:

"Being a Suns Fan: Does it Suck?"