The TD Garden. The Boston Brewens also practice there.
There is no "best" team, as "team A" may have the best record but can't beat "team B" who has a worse record, but "team C" can always beat "team B." The point is, no team is the best, but some team is the best record wise. Those would be the Los Angeles Lakers, the Boston Celtics, and the New York Knicks all trading off best records throughout the 2009 season. Some may say that the team with the most championships is the best team, but that is not always true.
Here are more opinions from WikiAnswers users:
It is difficult to judge different Eras, but generally speaking the best basketball team to play was the Chicago Bulls of the 1990's which were able to win 6 rings in 8 years led by Michael Jordan and Scottie pippen.
Currently, the best teams in the NBA (2009 season) are the Boston Celtics, which are the current champions and the Los Angeles Lakers in the West, who played them in the 2008 NBA Finals.
The Cleveland Cavaliers and Orlando Magic are both also considered in the top 4 at the mid season mark of the 2009 campaign.
Minn-Los Angeles Lakers. If 3 Dynasties are not enough for you, than I don't know what YOU mean by "Best NBA Team."
I think LA Lakers and Boston Celtics are the top 2, cuz they have more championship than other team
the best team would have to be the celtics with bill Russel and bob cousy, they won 8 STRAIGHT championships and 11 of 13 championships, probably the best team in NBA history
Really, the best team in the NBA is your favorite team. The top three, the "A", "B", "C" teams would be the Boston Celtics, L.A Lakers and the Chicago Bulls, especially the Celtics and Lakers because half of the NBA's history is dominated by the two teams and both teams won more than 10 championships. The Bulls would become the third best out of the three, because they only six championships but if Jordan and Pippen had stayed longer it would be much longer.
In the modern era, there is still to be decided. If LeBron James worked with his teammates with the Cavaliers, they would have probably won seven championships and destroyed Jordan and the Bulls' record. What sickens me is people acted like the Cavaliers won titles, even though they didn't because James was a ball-hog back then. This became obvious in the 2007 Finals when they were beaten by the Spurs. There's Kobe Bryant and the Lakers, when they were swept by the Mavericks in 2011 and the Thunder in 2012 this kind of took Kobe's career a little downhill, but now that Dwight Howard is signed with the Lakers there is a little more hopes, because the Lakers have a really poor defense and they need someones like Howard. As for the Heat, the 2010-2011 was all disappointments. With James, Bosh and Wade everyone though the Heat would break the Bull's record of 72 wins. The Heat got swept by opponents they knew they could beat in the 2010-2011 season, 3-0 by the Bulls, 3-1 by the Celtics and 3-0 by the Mavericks. The 2011-2012 regular season fared much better, they beat Dallas 2-0 games, Bulls tied 2-2 games each team taking home wins, 3-1 against the Pacers but still struggled 3-1 against the Celtics.
It just all "depends" on your definitions of "best" whether it be "best" record. For best records, the Thunder, Bulls and Heat were the top three in the NBA in 2012. The NBA has attained much talent and never stopped, from the Jordan-era and the Larry Bird and Magic Johnson-eras, to an era where superstars like Dwayne Wade, Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose and LeBron James rise to stardom.
When it comes to championship legendaries, it is probably the Celtics, Lakers, Bulls and Spurs. Two from the Eastern Conference and two from the Western Conference.
In my opinion for 2011, it was the Bulls, Celtics and Mavericks. For 2012, it was the Thunder, Heat and Bulls. For 2013 I believe it'll be the Lakers, Heat and Thunder even throw in the Bulls there now that they've got Vladimir Radmanovic and Heat has got Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis.
Yes, his dad is dead.
It basically means that you will have general admission passes, with no specific row. You can just go there and get a good spot based on a first-come firs-serve basis.
The Boston bruins and the Jacobs family. The celtics pay a lease
Tony has recovered from his surgery and has worked hard to rehabilitate his leg. He should be ready for camp. He's working hard on getting stronger.
yeah, he plays in Orlando now
If you don't need it, you don't need to upgrade it. However, most modern homes are built with or retrofitted with 200 Amp main breaker services. Therefore, if you plan to sell, it's a good thing to do. The need for electricity isn't going down. It's going up.
How do you heat your home? How do you make hot water? How do you dry your clothes? How do you cook?
If you use gas to do all of those things, then no, you probably don't NEED to upgrade your service from 100 amps to something larger.
If you're considering adding loads like central air conditioning, or adding a lot of circuits to your house, then you might want to.
If you're going to replace the service anyway, you might want to go for the extra amperage because the cost difference between the 100 amps, and 200 amps often isn't that great.
Right now with the price of copper, and materials, here on Long Island, you're only looking at a difference of about $300 in materials, and the labor isn't much more for a 200 amp service.
Recently, we did two services, similar jobs, but one was 100 amps, and one was 200 amps. The 100 amp service cost $2300, and the 200 amp service went for $2700.
If there's even a possibility that you might need more capacity, it's silly not to go for the 200 amp service if you need to replace the service anyway.
It depends on the amount of power you use. If you trip circuit breakers a lot, the service needs to be upgraded. Also, sometimes the wiring in the walls deteriorates. An electrician can tell you if the service is adequate or not. Odds are, if the home has a gas stove, gas water heater, gas furnace, and gas clothes dryer, 100 amps is perfectly adequate, although some new circuits may need to be added to help spread the load around. When you make any of the above items electric, that's when you start eating up your power reserve. Also you may not have enough outlets available. This is especially true in kitchens with heavy draw items like toasters, coffee makers, and other heating appliances. Or in the living room, if you're into home theatre.
You are real power hungry. In this country you are lucky indeed if you can get a 40A supply for home use! Our office have 45A supply and my home 35A, and I cannot even afford that!
The simple logical answer is YES. The average life expectancy of your electrical equipment is about 30 to 40 years. So it may be time to replace your equipment! When you do this, upgrading your house wiring for future use is a good idea. I see the trend of using more electricity - and not less - to be a safe bet.
In the UK you get a 60 amp or a 100 amp supply, at 240 v. I think mine is 60 amps and off that I have a 10-amp lighting circuit, a 30-amp ring main and a 30-amp cooker circuit. But most of the time the load is much less than that because my air-to-air heat pump for space heating uses only 3-4 amps most of the time even in cold weather.
6 ft 9 215 pounds.
Extremely rarely. He has been known to only for charity causes, and only those he is associated with. All other comers are generally turned away.
Won 3 championships
2x Finals MVP
12x NBA All Star
over $10,000 easy...
The Philadelphia Warriors won the first NBA championship.
in the 2009-2010 season, he averaged 16
Lucky The Leprachaun
It depends on which team because some teams have played more than others, but most teams have eight to ten games left until the playoffs.
NBA teams can have a maximum of 15 players signed and practicing with them, but only 12 players ready to play per game. There are exceptions when 3 or more players are injured, though.
he won most nba chamipon chip awards and most nba champipn mvp awards
The Ohio State University has 7 national championships. When they beat the University of Miami in 2002 that gave them their seventh championship since 1952.
While Boston was established by the Puritans in 1630, it did not officially become a city until 1822.
6' 3 1/2"
Bill Russell, who was a player-coach for the Boston Celtics from 1966 to 1969. He was the first African-American head coach to win an NBA title, earning back-to-back championships in 1968 and 1969.