AussieCeltic wrote:NoZoLakers wrote:Celtics had more $ and a team full of hall of famers, even the bench...i wouldn't count mpls 5 nor bos 11 because that era was easy or weak, simply cause there weren't enough teams compared to nba/aba mergerAussieCeltic wrote:
You do realize that the 5 Minneapolis Lakers rings came between 1949-54.
Celtics won their first in 1957......
If the 60’s were so easy, then why didn’t the Lakers win any titles then? Even with Wilt, Baylor, Jerry West
What if in 50+ years time, the league has expanded to 60 teams. Do we count the current era's titles or not? People like you saying this is a slap in the fact to the guys that paved the way for the players we have today.

This is the epitome of “reaching” haha. All good, especially since you have nothing, but nice try. Open your eyes because we are here and this is now.
It’s not the end of the world tho. Hey basketball may no longer be your thing but at least you still have great history in other ways. Battle of Bunker Hill? Boston Harbor with the Tea Party? That freedom trail is great. Y’all even got the famous clam chowda. If you take the orange or green line on the T you can exit Haymarket and get some great Italian food in the North End. Even the Southie area is gentrified and better now. Boston is a great City, let basketball go, you had your time but it’s time to wake up and accept reality. Have fun with your 17 titles but ewwww, don’t think that makes you great. In terms of franchises we put you at top 4 if it makes you feel better. You drafted Tatum and Brown but other than that don’t hold yourselves too high. Stick to those cannolis and pastries, those are great.
Strike 1 for baiting.