Women's National Basketball Association - All-Time Franchise History

All-Time Franchise History

Team Years Attendance
Avg.
W L PCT Playoffs Playoffs W Playoffs L Playoffs PCT Titles
Atlanta Dream 2008–present 6,730 80 90 .471 4 8 9 .471 0
Charlotte Sting 1997–2006 6,851 143 179 .444 6 6 13 .316 0
Chicago Sky 2006–present 4,328 89 149 .374 0 0 0 .000 0
Cleveland Rockers 1997–2003 8,885 108 112 .491 4 6 9 .400 0
Connecticut Sun (total) 1 1999–present 7,375 266 202 .568 9 18 18 .500 0
Connecticut Sun 2003–present 7,154 206 134 .606 8 17 16 .515 0
Detroit Shock 1998–2009 8,463 210 186 .530 7 30 19 .612 3
Houston Comets 1997–2008 9,592 241 149 .618 9 20 14 .588 4
Indiana Fever 2000–present 8,192 232 204 .532 9 17 20 .459 0
Los Angeles Sparks 1997–present 9,190 318 208 .605 12 30 24 .555 2
Miami Sol 2000–2002 8,556 48 48 .500 1 1 2 .333 0
Minnesota Lynx 1999–present 7,719 219 249 .468 4 8 5 .615 1
New York Liberty 1997–present 11,340 279 247 .530 12 24 29 .453 0
Orlando Miracle 1999–2002 7,927 60 68 .469 1 1 2 .333 0
Phoenix Mercury 1997–present 9,321 256 270 .487 7 21 17 .553 2
Portland Fire 2000–2002 8,321 37 59 .385 0 0 0 .000 0
Sacramento Monarchs 1997–2009 8,287 224 200 .527 9 24 19 .558 1
San Antonio Silver Stars (total) 2 1997–present 7,865 240 286 .456 8 10 19 .345 0
San Antonio Silver Stars 2003–present 8,184 153 187 .450 6 8 13 .381 0
Seattle Storm 2000–present 7,915 233 203 .534 10 18 16 .529 2
Tulsa Shock (total) 3 1998–present 7,760 228 270 .458 7 30 19 .612 3
Tulsa Shock 2010–present 4,948 18 84 .176 0 0 0 .000 0
Utah Starzz 1997–2002 7,334 87 99 .468 2 2 5 .286 0
Washington Mystics 1998–present 11,956 191 307 .384 6 4 12 .250 0


Read more about this topic:  Women's National Basketball Association

Famous quotes containing the words franchise and/or history:

    Many famous feet have trod
    Sublunary paths, and famous hands have weighed
    The strength they have against the strength they need;
    And famous lips interrogated God
    Concerning franchise in eternity....
    Philip Larkin (1922–1986)

    To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.
    —J.L. (John Langshaw)