Le Blog de Doruk Akan

I had a discussion today about marquee franchises in the NBA and realized it’s a difficult set to define. In fact, it’s difficult in any sport. In football, I think of the Steelers, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, and Raiders. But cases could be made for the Chiefs, Patriots and Dolphins as well. You could come up with a good set of parameters like history, success, market size, dynasties, players and fan support. But I’m going to dispense with trying to make it scientific because it takes too much effort. Let’s just go with a gut feeling.

In the NBA, there are only two truly marquee franchises: the Lakers and the Celtics. There aren’t any other teams that come close. But let’s talk about that second level, the level where it’s marquee but it’s not sublime. The aforementioned discussion was sparked by my comment that it’s difficult to think of the Knicks as a marquee franchise and, in fact, I had never considered them as such. The indignant reply was - “Well, who would you put above them?” Good question. I guess there aren’t very many teams I’d put above them but here are the ones I’d place on the same level, what I’ll call the non-sublime marquee level.

1. Philadelphia 76ers - They’ve been around for a while (started as the Syracuse Nationals), won two titles in two different eras, and have had five of the true greats in or close to their primes (top 30): Wilt, Julius Erving, Moses Malone, Charles Barkley and Allen Iverson.

2. Detroit Pistons - They’ve also been around for a while (started in Fort Wayne) but they’re harder to justify since they haven’t had success until the 1980s. But the sustained success of that Bad Boys team and the current team are such (despite “only” three titles) that they must be considered a marquee franchise.

3. New York Knicks - One of only two teams to still be in their original city (Celtics are the other one), the teams is blessed with being in the largest market in the country. Two titles and a dearth of world-class players speaks against them but you can’t deny that most people think of them when you think marquee or that I can’t think of who else to put here. I think they have had maybe one legitimately top 30 player in Walt Frazier.

A note on Patrick Ewing: one of the most overrated players in league history. During the prime years he played, here are the other centers I would have rather had on my team: Olajuwon, David Robinson, Alonzo Mourning, Shaq and Rik Smits. Well, maybe not Smits, but the point is I never thought Ewing was that great in the pros.

There are plenty of original teams that have had so many bad years you can’t consider them marquee: the Kings, Hawks, Wizards and Warriors. Then there are two teams that have had plenty of recent success that you might consider the marquee but really aren’t.

1. Chicago Bulls - They lay claim to six titles, the greatest player ever and a large market. But because of a relatively poor history, you never get the feeling that Chicago is a basketball town. It’s more of a football and baseball town. You’d have to consider them because of Jordan if nothing else.

2. San Antonio Spurs - The most successful franchise in the last decade, the Spurs don’t have much history to speak of. Originally an ABA team, they did have one of the all-time greats in George Gervin but would never be successful in the post-season. It’s hard to consider a small-market team with a decade of success as marquee, especially when you’re not sure how the fans will react when the wins eventually dry up.