I don’t know if Vegas established odds on it, but if I were a betting man, I would’ve bet the over on the number of times during the 2008 playoffs an NBA analyst has pointed out that the NBA would love to see another Los Angeles Lakers vs. Boston Celtics NBA finals pairing because of its historic value. Now that we have game one this Thursday in Boston, are these basketball experts correct? If you ask me, they’re half right.

The L.A. Lakers is a franchise dripping with history. The legendary players are too numerous to count. Magic Johnson, James Worthy, Kareem, Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor, and Pat Riley to begin. Add Phil Jackson, Shaq, and Kobe to that mix as well. Oh, and the NBA logo himself, Jerry West. No matter the era, the Lakers have consistently found themselves looking down on the rest of the league.

The Boston Celtics have been searching for a return to glory since the mid eighties, but their place in NBA history can’t be denied. In the 50s and 60s, a Celtics team led by Red Auerbach, Bob Cousey, and Bill Russell would win 12 NBA titles in a period of 13 years and their 20 NBA titles is most of any team in the league. With all-time greats like Pete Maravich, Bob McAdoo, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, Nate Archibald, and Larry Bird, the Celtics’ list of hall of famers holds its own when compared to that of the Lake show.

Here’s the question: does a matchup between two historic franchises who have established one of the all-time greatest rivalries mean that these current editions automatically deserve recognition with the others?

While the Lakers haven’t seen much post-season success since they sent Shaq to the Miami Heat, the fact that Kobe Bryant is still the face of the franchise and Phil Jackson is still seated on the bench allows this Laker team to be narrowly connected to the one that dominated the NBA at the beginning of the decade. In a few years, we may be calling Kobe the best to ever play the game and if Phil wins a couple more titles in Los Angeles, he may become more quickly associated with his teams in Hollywood rather than his 90s teams from the Windy City. These two individuals alone bring historic value to their team. Additionally, the team is constructed for success in years to come. It’s assumed that the most critical players on this year’s Laker team have several years of good basketball in them and if Andrew Bynum’s injury doesn’t derail his career, another LA dynasty isn’t out of the question.

This year’s Celtics, on the other hand, are the “american idol” of the NBA with their rapid rise to the top. Consider the fact that Boston finished the 06-07 season with the league’s 2nd worst record (worst in the eastern conference) and their current roster includes only 6 players who experienced that misery just one season ago. That’s right, 9 out of 15 of their players called a different city home less than 12 months ago. They do have a collection of good players. Nicknamed the “Boston Three Party”, Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce are all good talents, but only one of those three has spent more than one year wearing green. Are the Celtics built for long term success? Based on Allen’s aging before our eyes in these playoffs and the expectation that Lebron James will soon find some talent around him and begin his domination of the eastern conference, it seems unlikely that extended success will be had in Boston. Going from worst to first makes for a good story, but these Celtics are a team with no history representing a franchise steeped in tradition.

While I am excited about the matchup because it makes for a fun series, what we have is one great rivalry between two historic franchises in two completely different places.