The NBA does...
But on topic, do you disagree with the assertion that the Thunder are one of the premier 10 franchises?
this list is basically correct. someone could maybe switch around the heat and pistons or sixers and knicks but thats about it. and rockets would definitely be rounding it outProbably not.
Celtics
Lakers
Warriors
Bulls
Spurs
Heat
Pistons
76ers
Knicks
...and I'm inclined to add Houston if only for their back to back championships.
Maybe I'm wrong but whatever.
You guys acting like Oklahoma the first franchise to move to a new place but have all the old history...
Just in the NBA:
•Grizzlies first 6 years were in Vancouver, the Memphis team retains all that history;
•Clippers first 8 years were in Buffalo, next 6 years in San Diego, the Los Angeles team retains those 14 years of history;
•the Nets first year was in New Jersey, next 9 years on Long Island, next 35 years back in Jersey, and yet the Brooklyn team retains those 45 years of history;
•the Kings first 12 years were in Rochester, their next 15 years were in Cincinnati, spent three years partly in Omaha and 13 years in Kansas City, and yet the Sacramento team retains that 40 years of history;
•the Wizards spent their first two years in Chicago, and the next 10 years in Baltimore, but the Washington team retains those 12 years of history;
•the Jazz spent their first 5 years in New Orleans, but the Utah team retains that history;
•the Hawks spent their first year between Buffalo and Moline, Illinois, the next 4 years in Moline, the next 4 years in Milwaukee, the next 13 years in St Louis, and yet the Atlanta team retains those 22 years of history;
•the Pistons spent their first 16 years in Fort Wayne, but the Detroit team retains that entire history;
•the Sixers spent their first 17 years in Syracuse but the Philadelphia team retains all that history;
•the Warriors spent their first 16 years in Philadelphia but the San Francisco team holds all that history;
•the Lakers spent their first year in Detroit, then the next 13 years in Minneapolis, but the Los Angeles team retains all that history...
This is just the NBA, this is commonplace in every major league. I don't know why yall come on here tripping bout normal shyt...
The Sonics have one championship in Seattle. The Lakers won 5 in Minnesota and claim all those. The Sixers have a title in Syracuse and claim it, the Warriors have two titles in Philly and claim em, etc...
But its too much to consider Sonics history part of the Thunder's. Its going back to Seattle if they get an expansion team but as it stands now, that Sonics history is Thunder history...
Sometimes you dudes get up here bytching bout the wrong shyt![]()
I get the argument you and others are making. But for many years, longer than the 17-year Oklahoma run, the Lakers didn't hang Minneapolis banners...It’s not too much to consider, but they do everything possible to distance themselves from the Seattle era and we know for a fact they’re only holding it until the inevitable Seattle expansion becomes a reality
The Warriors for example have players from the Philadelphia era’s jersey numbers retired and have a banner up from the championship that was won in Philadelphia.
You don’t see that in OKC. People treat it like two separate teams bc they act like it
For the sake of your argument tho:
Including Seattle all time they’re tied for 12th in championships, 10th in Finals appearances, 4th in Conf Finals appearances, 9th in regular season wins
I’d say they have an argument for top 10
I get the argument you and others are making. But for many years, longer than the 17-year Oklahoma run, the Lakers didn't hang Minneapolis banners...
Everyone thinks the Seattle expansion is an inevitability, including me....but what if it never happens?
Silver just said a month or two ago that as of now, a Vegas expansion is more likely than Seattle. And there are other cities that will put together bids when the expansion discussion gets real...
My guess is, if a Seattle expansion never happened, as unlikely as that sounds now, my guess is the Thunder would commemorate the Seattle era in some form or fashion...
If the Thunder ever tried to commemorate the Sonics or Sonics legends, they would receive an IMMENSE amount of backlash. It's never going to happen.I get the argument you and others are making. But for many years, longer than the 17-year Oklahoma run, the Lakers didn't hang Minneapolis banners...
Everyone thinks the Seattle expansion is an inevitability, including me....but what if it never happens?
Silver just said a month or two ago that as of now, a Vegas expansion is more likely than Seattle. And there are other cities that will put together bids when the expansion discussion gets real...
My guess is, if a Seattle expansion never happened, as unlikely as that sounds now, my guess is the Thunder would commemorate the Seattle era in some form or fashion...
This is fair and is a consistent theme with teams that move. Johnny Unitas deeply loved the city of Baltimore and the Colts, but had no care for the Ravens or city of Indianapolis. Oscar Robertson claims the city of Cincinnati, not Sacramento...That’s true and I suppose part of it is that Sonics legends don’t want to be acknowledged by OKC
I understand, but if the Sonics never came back, it wouldn't be their decision on if they are commemorated in Oklahoma...If the Thunder ever tried to commemorate the Sonics or Sonics legends, they would receive an IMMENSE amount of backlash. It's never going to happen.
Also, Gary Payton & Shawn Kemp want their jerseys retired in SEATTLE by a reborn Sonics franchise. They want nothing to do with Oklahoma or the Thunder.