9 champions the last 30 years

[Mediocre Man]

I thought I would share what someone very smart pointed out



MLB Champs since 1990 (13)
Reds, Twins, Blue Jays, Braves, Yankees, Marlins, Diamond Backs, Angels, Red Sox, White Sox, Cardinals, Phillies, Giants

Super Bowl Champs since 1990 (13)
49ers, Giants, Redskins, Cowboys, Packers, Broncos, Rams, Ravens, Patriots, Buccaneers, Steelers, Colts, Saints

NHL Champs since 1990 (13)
Oliers, Penguins, Canadiens, Rangers, Devils, Avalanche, Red Wings, Stars, Lightning, Hurricanes, Ducks, Blackhawks, Bruins

NBA Champs since 1990 (8)
Pistons, Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Celtics, Mavericks


And only one more (76ers) since 1980

 

[BBert]

I don't know if these numbers are correct, but someone I know said that four (4) teams have accounted for 23 of the last 30 championships. If true, that's a staggering indictment. If I hadn't felt the Blazers had an underdog's chance a couple of times in that span, I'd have thrown in the towel long ago. It was the 2000-2003 blatant Laker favoritism that really sealed my disgust and hopelessness regarding the NBA. Paul Allen's money has been my only hope. Now that leg up may be waning.

 

[Draco]

Lets get a hard cap and unguaranteed contracts like football!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't know if these numbers are correct, but someone I know said that four (4) teams have accounted for 23 of the last 30 championships. If true, that's a staggering indictment. If I hadn't felt the Blazers had an underdog's chance a couple of times in that span, I'd have thrown in the towel long ago. It was the 2000-2003 blatant Laker favoritism that really sealed my disgust and hopelessness regarding the NBA. Paul Allen's money has been my only hope. Now that leg up may be waning.

Since 1980 (Magic's rookie year)
Lakers--10
Bulls--6
Celtics--4
Spurs--4
Others--8 (Pistons 3, Rockets 2, Heat/Sixers/Mavericks 1 each)

So, 4 teams have 24 of 32 titles. This is primarily the Lakers' fault, as can be said about the majority of the world's ills.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Lets get a hard cap and unguaranteed contracts like football!

It's not about the hard-cap or unguaranteed deals. Football enables smaller market teams to succeed because the league had the foresight to build in a robust revenue sharing system that enables every team to compete financially. The NBA has basically dick.

 

[illmatic99]

TBH, I expected a larger difference between the leagues. Nice find.

 

[Mediocre Man]

2-1 is a pretty big difference, no?

 

[illmatic99]

8 vs. 13 is < 40% difference. Ya I guess so, especially taking into account that 2 more teams (TOR, NOR/CHA) have been added to the NBA in that same time period.

Still, I had always assumed that there was more parity in the NFL/NHL.

 

[BrianFromWA]

You can also add some caveats:

1) MLB has 8 teams that can win a championship (playoffs) each year out of 30. ~27%
2) NFL, 12 of 32 = 37.5%
3) NBA, 16 of 30 = 53%

 

[Mediocre Man]

You can also add some caveats:

1) MLB has 8 teams that can win a championship (playoffs) each year out of 30. ~27%
2) NFL, 12 of 32 = 37.5%
3) NBA, 16 of 30 = 53%

Hey Brian, aren't you just sorta pulling those numbers out of your backside?

 

[BrianFromWA]

I wasn't making commentary, I was just saying that there are 8 playoff teams in MLB (6 division winners and 2 wild cards), 12 in the NFL (8 divison winners and 4 wild cards) and 16 in the NBA (6 division winners and 10 others). Not which teams showed a preponderance of appearances or whatever. By definition you can't win the championship if you can't get to the playoffs.

Based on that tidbit alone, you'd think that NBA would have a more diverse spread. But that's not the case.

I should've phrased it better.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Ah. I get it. Sorry. No, it;s very clear. I am just a dumbass

 

[THE HCP]

^He sees the light....... he sees the light!

 

[Ed O]

What about championship appearances? I ask that without knowing for sure, but it seems like there's more diversity in the other two major leagues in terms of teams ALMOST winning the championship than in the NBA, although I might be wrong.

The thing is that I don't know that anything can be done about this. One or two dominant players can make such a bigger difference in the NBA than they can in the NFL or MLB. Take the best hitter and the best pitcher in baseball and put them on the same team and... they aren't very good (as a team) if they're surrounded by average players. Take the best QB and the best, say, LB in the NFL and surround them by average talent... and the team isn't very good.

Take the two best players and put them on the same team in the NBA and you can win an NBA title much more easily with a few breaks. There are only 5 players on the floor at a time and only 12(ish) on a roster. One or two dominant players are more important in basketball.

Ed O.

 

[Mediocre Man]

^He sees the light....... he sees the light!

That's funny, I heard voices from inside Mrc HCP saying the same thing

 

[Draco]

Take the best QB and the best, say, LB in the NFL and surround them by average talent... and the team isn't very good.

Peyton Manning disagrees with you!

 

[Nikolokolus]

Peyton Manning disagrees with you!

The assertion that the Colts in 07 were an average team with just one great QB and a one great defensive player is just plain wrong. That team was loaded with playmakers: Dwight Freeney, Joseph addai, Bob Sanders, Dallas Clark, Reggie Wayne and the list goes on. That team had talent, the reason the Colts suck now is that most of that talent got old and new pro-bowl level players haven't been added.

 

[PapaG]

The assertion that the Colts in 07 were an average team with just one great QB and a one great defensive player is just plain wrong. That team was loaded with playmakers: Dwight Freeney, Joseph addai, Bob Sanders, Dallas Clark, Reggie Wayne and the list goes on. That team had talent, the reason the Colts suck now is that most of that talent got old and new pro-bowl level players haven't been added.

I think he was saying that the Colts are dogshit this year w/out Manning, rather than asserting that the '07 Colts team was Manning and a bunch of scrubs. You read to much into his flippant (and funny) comment.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Simple solution: contraction. Get rid of the Lakers.

 

[julius]

Simple solution: contraction. Get rid of the Lakers.

Now that is something I can get behind.

 

[RR7]

What about championship appearances? I ask that without knowing for sure, but it seems like there's more diversity in the other two major leagues in terms of teams ALMOST winning the championship than in the NBA, although I might be wrong.

The thing is that I don't know that anything can be done about this. One or two dominant players can make such a bigger difference in the NBA than they can in the NFL or MLB. Take the best hitter and the best pitcher in baseball and put them on the same team and... they aren't very good (as a team) if they're surrounded by average players. Take the best QB and the best, say, LB in the NFL and surround them by average talent... and the team isn't very good.

Take the two best players and put them on the same team in the NBA and you can win an NBA title much more easily with a few breaks. There are only 5 players on the floor at a time and only 12(ish) on a roster. One or two dominant players are more important in basketball.

Ed O.

This kind of says it all. The importance of one individual player and the impact they can make on a team is much greater in the NBA than in any other sport. I don't think, otherwise, the list gives us any insight into a broke system, since you have the NFL with a hard cap and unguaranteed deals, and MLB with no cap and guaranteed deals with the same number of champions.

I will try to find it again, but I do recall seeing a breakdown where baseball had a bigger diversity in teams making the playoffs than the NFL or NBA have. I feel like the NBA had a higher change than the NFL also, but I could be wrong. Just to go along with the you can't win it if you don't make it comment from above.

 

[THE HCP]

Now that is something I can get behind.

First thing I thought to myself after meeting Mrs. BeerBoy! BAM!

 

[Draco]

The assertion that the Colts in 07 were an average team with just one great QB and a one great defensive player is just plain wrong. That team was loaded with playmakers: Dwight Freeney, Joseph addai, Bob Sanders, Dallas Clark, Reggie Wayne and the list goes on. That team had talent, the reason the Colts suck now is that most of that talent got old and new pro-bowl level players haven't been added.

Who the hell is talking about 2007? The Colts won 10 games, their division and were a contending team with super bowl hopes last year in 2010! Besides Peyton that team is very much the same and they don't have a single win. Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark now appear to be scrub NFL players while Peyton made them look like they belonged in the hall of fame.

 

[Sinobas]

Some of this has been due to dominant teams, but there's also been resurgences in certain franchises that seem to be coincidence. like the 80's Celtics and 00' Celtics. The Pistons in the 90's....and now the Heat seem to be on track to continue this trend.