L.A. the best sports city of all time?

[Spider-Dan]

So I remember a while back, after the Bruins won their first Stanley Cup since the invention of the VCR, one of our resident Patriot fans wondered if Boston's 7 titles in 10 years meant they were the best sports city of all time.

Friday's Stanley Cup title gives LA 9 titles in less than 15 years (Lakers x5, Kings x2, Angels, Ducks).  And they don't even have a football team.  So I am forced to wonder...

Los Angeles: great sports city, or the greatest sports city?

Boston fans, feel free to chime in.

[Phishfan]

As a Lakers fan I say LA.

[Sunstroke]

7 titles in 10 years is a little bit better win rate than 9 in 15...but I think both cities suck my salty chocolate balls.

[Dave Gray]

Boston is still better.  No football team in L.A., but multiples in other sports to more than make up for it.

7-10 > 9-15. 

[Brian Fein]

Not a fair comparison.  Cities with more teams have more opportunity to win titles.

Plus, LA sucks.

[Phishfan]

I would just like to add this stat to the mix. Since soccer has an average attendance higher than hockey & basketball, I really think those championships should be added to our discussion. By doing so the LA Galaxy add four more championships to LA's total (three of those would have still fallen into the totals back when we had this original discussion). So should we be calling it 13 championships is 15 years which is really damn impressive?

[Spider-Dan]

Not a fair comparison.  Cities with more teams have more opportunity to win titles.

If we are to judge based on "more teams = more opportunities," then San Antonio is the best (recent) sports city, and it's not even close.

Since 2000, San Antonio has 4 titles in 15 chances, or a 26.6% championship percentage.  In the same time frame, Boston has 8 titles in 59 chances (minus the '04 NHL season), for a 13.5% championship percentage.  (LA is 9/88 for 10.2%.)

[Spider-Dan]

Since soccer has an average attendance higher than hockey & basketball

You mean per game, not per season, right?

[Phishfan]

^^^ Yes. Hockey & basketball play more games so they average more per season but soccer averages putting more people in the seat per game.

[Spider-Dan]

With the inexplicable exception of baseball, it seems like the more games you play, the lower your per-game attendance is.  With MLS playing less than half as many games as the NBA and NHL, I'm not entirely surprised they have higher per-game attendance.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Boston fans, feel free to chime in.

I think they are both great sports cities.  I would say the biggest knock on LA is that the second largest metro area in country ought be able to keep a football team.  I can understand if someone moves the Bills out of Buffalo, Buffalo is a minor market, that the fans of LA couldn't generate enough interest to keep either the Rams or Raiders in LA shows a real softness in their fandom.   

[Spider-Dan]

The Rams and Raiders moved out in the same offseason.  LA went directly from 2 NFL teams to 0.

[bsmooth]

LA fans are notorious for being far weather. Just look at the Dodgers fans. LA is a great sports city with a lot of championships...but I would not call it the greatest.

[EDGECRUSHER]

Angels won their title as the Anaheim Angels and have been overspending suckers ever since they "moved" to LA.

LA may be a successful city right now, but their fans only rival Florida's in terms of being fair weathered and indifferent. Aside from the victory riots, they don't care unless their team is winning. Hell, Heat fans leave in the 4th if their team is down by 10 and they have Lebron James.

[Spider-Dan]

The Lakers aren't winning right now and I would hardly call the local media's treatment of that team "indifferent."

Unless you mean that LA fans don't make it a pastime to point out to everyone else how Knowledgeable the fans of their city are, and to point out repeatedly how many past championships their team has during years when it sucks?

Oh, and the "Boston" Patriots won 3 titles as the New England Patriots, so Anaheim is probably not the best example to cite.