duncan228
12-18-2009, 06:29 PM
All-decade steal? It's not Parker (http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/buckharvey/2009/12/all-decade-steal-hes-a-spur-al.html#more)
By Buck Harvey
SI.com could have gone with either Kobe or Shaq when it named its player of the decade. Instead, the online site opted for Tim Duncan because, for among other reasons, he was "an active defender who chased pick-and-rolls out to the three-point line and yet hustled back to protect the rim and control the boards."
And they say the media is blinded by flash.
SI.com made some other nuanced choices when it named all-decade NBA winners and losers, and the Spurs were recepients again. For example, listing R.C. Buford as the best general manager, along with Gregg Popovich, goes against the norm. Buford is often ignored because of Popovich's franchise control. What they have done together has often been ignored, too. Not once in this decade were they named the NBA's executives of the year.
Still, SI.com missed when it named Tony Parker the biggest draft steal of the decade.
Parker was a great find, of course, and drafting him changed the franchise. Getting him at No. 28 was remarkable, too. All-Stars rarely come so late in the first round.
But scouts knew who Parker was. The Celtics nearly drafted him, and the Magic had considered it, and the Spurs sweated through every selection until he dropped to them. As it was with DeJuan Blair this past summer, the Spurs were lucky others missed what was in front of them.
Parker wasn't the only mistake in the 2001 draft, either. Kwame Brown went first overall, and Gilbert Arenas was drafted two slots after Parker was.
What happened in the 1999 draft was something else. Then, at the end of the second round, with the 57th selection, with the second to last pick of the entire draft, the Spurs found Manu Ginobili.
Upon announcing this choice, the Spurs misspelled Ginobili's name. The Associated Press later added a third spelling.
Years later, Buford said they had guessed. Still, they guessed on the right guy because they had done their homework, and because they were able to look past an unconventional background. Furthermore, they were among the first with a long-term strategy. Why not let these kinds of prospects play in Europe and see what happens?
All of which is another reason SI.com was right about the Buford/Popovich combination. To help the player of the decade, they found the top two steals of the decade.
__________
One more disagreement, albeit a minor one: For its signature play of the decade, SI.com named a Robert Horry 3-pointer that beat Sacramento in Game 4 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals. It was dramatic, certainly, and it's a shot that has come to define Horry for usually being in the right place at the right time.
But was it more dramatic -- or bigger -- than Horry's final 3-pointer against the Pistons in the 2005 Finals?
*********************
The SI.com piece.
http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-091119-20/weekend-dime-picking-decade-best
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3929663#post3929663
By Buck Harvey
SI.com could have gone with either Kobe or Shaq when it named its player of the decade. Instead, the online site opted for Tim Duncan because, for among other reasons, he was "an active defender who chased pick-and-rolls out to the three-point line and yet hustled back to protect the rim and control the boards."
And they say the media is blinded by flash.
SI.com made some other nuanced choices when it named all-decade NBA winners and losers, and the Spurs were recepients again. For example, listing R.C. Buford as the best general manager, along with Gregg Popovich, goes against the norm. Buford is often ignored because of Popovich's franchise control. What they have done together has often been ignored, too. Not once in this decade were they named the NBA's executives of the year.
Still, SI.com missed when it named Tony Parker the biggest draft steal of the decade.
Parker was a great find, of course, and drafting him changed the franchise. Getting him at No. 28 was remarkable, too. All-Stars rarely come so late in the first round.
But scouts knew who Parker was. The Celtics nearly drafted him, and the Magic had considered it, and the Spurs sweated through every selection until he dropped to them. As it was with DeJuan Blair this past summer, the Spurs were lucky others missed what was in front of them.
Parker wasn't the only mistake in the 2001 draft, either. Kwame Brown went first overall, and Gilbert Arenas was drafted two slots after Parker was.
What happened in the 1999 draft was something else. Then, at the end of the second round, with the 57th selection, with the second to last pick of the entire draft, the Spurs found Manu Ginobili.
Upon announcing this choice, the Spurs misspelled Ginobili's name. The Associated Press later added a third spelling.
Years later, Buford said they had guessed. Still, they guessed on the right guy because they had done their homework, and because they were able to look past an unconventional background. Furthermore, they were among the first with a long-term strategy. Why not let these kinds of prospects play in Europe and see what happens?
All of which is another reason SI.com was right about the Buford/Popovich combination. To help the player of the decade, they found the top two steals of the decade.
__________
One more disagreement, albeit a minor one: For its signature play of the decade, SI.com named a Robert Horry 3-pointer that beat Sacramento in Game 4 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals. It was dramatic, certainly, and it's a shot that has come to define Horry for usually being in the right place at the right time.
But was it more dramatic -- or bigger -- than Horry's final 3-pointer against the Pistons in the 2005 Finals?
*********************
The SI.com piece.
http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-091119-20/weekend-dime-picking-decade-best
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3929663#post3929663