Spurs potential legacy

[Reality]

Clear disclaimer:  I do not consider a win over Cleveland to be automatic, at all.  My biggest fear is a Pop ordered StallBall with Clevland winning two games by 74-73 en route to a Cavs title.
That having been said, if the Spurs triumph...

Where does that put their legacy?
2003 05 07.
3 of 5 for the team, 4 Champs for Duncan and Poptails.
3 of 1st 5 for SuperManu career.  Who else besides Celts have done that?  Pippen?
7 total for Bob Horry.

However, still no repeat.

[WayOutWest]

....still no repeat.

That pretty much says it all.

[spursfan-101]

Historically, I don' think we will be known as one of the most dominant teams of this era. And sorry Laker fans, not of the "softest" either. Most successful...absolutely, were the most successful franchise of ANY major league sport right now. 

Consistent
Classy
Internationally diverse
Team oriented
Egoless
Best defensive

Throw in winning a world title EVERY OTHER year, that tells me BAD ARSE!  All of the even years could easily have been repeats too. Take away Fishers .4; Manu's foul on Nowitski in Game 7, and we could have a back to back

[Reality]

....still no repeat.

 That pretty much says it all.

The no repeat may keep them out of other All Time team comparison conveersations.  Or will it?  What other teams have gone 3 for 5 without repeating?  Spurs are potentially the 1st team to go 3 for 5 without repeating.  So it's still a feat.  And their run stays alive for a 2008 repeat and 4 of 6.  That would definitely put them back into All Time conversations.

Must beat Cavs or they will certainly have the one n done "coulda woulda" label.

[WayOutWest]

....still no repeat.

 That pretty much says it all.

The no repeat may keep them out of other All Time team comparison conveersations.  Or will it?  What other teams have gone 3 for 5 without repeating?  Spurs are potentially the 1st team to go 3 for 5 without repeating.  So it's still a feat.  And their run stays alive for a 2008 repeat and 4 of 6.  That would definitely put them back into All Time conversations.

Must beat Cavs or they will certainly have the one n done "coulda woulda" label.

80's Lakers, and they cemented their argument GOAT status with a repeat.

[WayOutWest]

Throw in winning a world title EVERY OTHER year, that tells me BAD ARSE!  All of the even years could easily have been repeats too. Take away Fishers .4; Manu's foul on Nowitski in Game 7, and we could have a back to back

Could of, would of, should of.  Lakers could have had 5 in a row as well but it didn't happen so the "what if" chip isn't worth much.  The Spurs are definately a premire franchise right now, depending on how things go in the near future you could have an argument for one of the greatest but not right now, right now the claim is a consistent title contendor with three titles under their belt.

[Reality]

Must beat Cavs or they will certainly have the one n done "coulda woulda" label.

80's Lakers, and they cemented their argument GOAT status with a repeat.
[/quote]  the question was which team has gone 3-5 without a repeat.  The Lakers flukey titles in 87-88 was a repeat.  Besides, GOAT compared to the Celts rattling off 10-11   Plus that overated clown Magic got worked by Jordan in 91.  We now know the HIV was not affecting Mr Starbucks owners health at all.

[WayOutWest]

Plus that overated clown Magic got worked by Jordan in 91.  We now know the HIV was not affecting Mr Starbucks owners health at all.

Your memory is as bad as your basketball analysis.  Magic OWNED MJ, MJ looked like a little brother trying to play his big brother.  It wasn't until cousin Pippen got switched onto Magic that Magic had a hard time.  The Bulls dominated the Lakers after game 1 no doubt, but make no mistake about the success, or lack there of, MJ had defensively against Magic.  It wasn't even a fair matchup.

[westkoast]

I personally don't think a lack of a repeat will keep them from the 'Tim Duncan era Spurs' from being mentioned as one of the great teams in the NBA.  Certainly they are approaching the most consistent team status from 1999 on.  In 2 1/2 years it will be a decade.  Honestly I see the Spurs being able to hold on to stay a championship contender for the next few years.  Being one of the best teams for a decade is reserved for teams like the Celtics, Lakers, and Bulls.

Reality no matter how many times you attend Prof. WOW's Lakers class you still cannot pass the class.  I suggest you stop being schooled 

[WayOutWest]

Reality no matter how many times you attend Prof. WOW's Lakers class you still cannot pass the class.  I suggest you stop being schooled 

I'm thinking of transferring Reality to the University of fanhome.com, there is no grading nor checking of facts at that school so he should flourish.

[Reality]

MJ outrebounded, outscored and out assisted Magic in the near sweep but you two keep bending over at the Magic statue with frothy Starbucks in each hand. 

Magic worked MJ in game one.   Well i know WOW will at least view tape.

Tragic got 5 *titles* in 12 years, Dunkin is working on 4 of 9 and if that gets bagged 5 in 10 in 2008.  Tim didn't need a death by overdoze of an opponent to grease him thru a couple titles.


2007 Lakers reminicing festival at Newport Beach and L.A. Starbucks owned by Magic.

[Lurker]

IMO it is not time to discuss this.  IF the Spurs win this year then it will be 3 titles in 5 years.  Then I think it is fair to open this discussion.  To include the 99 title in ranking this team is like including Showtime with the Shaq/Kobe titles...2 different teams.  The real determination of where this team(Duncan/Parker/Ginobili) ranks in history should wait another 2-3 years.  Since those three are 31/25/29 years old and are under contract for 3 more years; that will be the time to evaluate where they stand.  However I have started on a more detailed analysis that I will post in the off season (maybe we can get some discussion when things are slow).

On a related note...many refer to those guys as the Spurs Big Three.  In an article this weekend (about Finley being in his first finals) the local writer renamed them Tres Grande which fits with the local culture soooo much better.

So...

Go Spurs.  Arriba Tres Grande!

[westkoast]

IMO it is not time to discuss this.  IF the Spurs win this year then it will be 3 titles in 5 years.  Then I think it is fair to open this discussion.  To include the 99 title in ranking this team is like including Showtime with the Shaq/Kobe titles...2 different teams.  The real determination of where this team(Duncan/Parker/Ginobili) ranks in history should wait another 2-3 years.  Since those three are 31/25/29 years old and are under contract for 3 more years; that will be the time to evaluate where they stand.  However I have started on a more detailed analysis that I will post in the off season (maybe we can get some discussion when things are slow).

On a related note...many refer to those guys as the Spurs Big Three.  In an article this weekend (about Finley being in his first finals) the local writer renamed them Tres Grande which fits with the local culture soooo much better.

So...

Go Spurs.  Arriba Tres Grande!

Lurker the team in 99 was a different team but they were pretty close in time.  The Kobe/Shaq era was over 10 years after the last Showtime championship.  The Spurs still had Tim Duncan, the result of all these titles, so I think it is fair to compare them as far as the franchise itself dominating a decade.  The Lakers squad in

[Lurker]

ESPN Page 2 does a good job of summarizing the dynasties since the NBA-ABA merger (1976)...

Here is the opening...

Magic to Bird to Isiah to Jordan to Shaq to Duncan.

With the Spurs on the verge of their fourth NBA championship in nine seasons (or third title in five seasons if you prefer to discount the lockout-season title of 1999), it's safe to discuss Tim Duncan and company as a dynasty, the fifth in the NBA since the league merged with the ABA in 1976.

(And, yes, we offer apologies to Hakeem Olajuwon's mid-1990s Rockets, who won back-to-back titles but only reached the conference finals one other time.)

Of course, dynasties aren't built overnight. Let's take a look at how each franchise was transformed into a winner … and how it fell apart. In determining dynastic years, we considered championship seasons and seasons surrounding those championship years in which a team reached the conference finals.

the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=dynasties/070612

[WayOutWest]

The Pistons and Celtics don't belong on the list.