View Full Version : 1999 Spurs: 8th Best Finals Team (Hollinger ESPN article)
Ranking the NBA Finals teams
There have been 33 NBA Finals matchups since the NBA-ABA merger, so we at ESPN.com decided to rank all 66 teams that have played on the NBA's biggest stage in the modern era.
---
My premise was to look at three factors in rating greatness: regular-season performance, postseason performance and, finally, whether the team won a championship. See the box to the right for all the gory details.
----
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/9493/1999spurs.jpg
If the IMG doesn't work:
1999 Spurs:
A forgotten great team because of the lockout, the Spurs began the year 6-8 … and then went 46-7 the rest of the way, with nary a losing streak. An awesome defensive squad led by big men David Robinson and Tim Duncan, San Antonio's 84.7 points allowed per game is far and away the least of any of these 66 squads. That 15-2 postseason mark ain't too shabby either, including sweeps of the Blazers and Lakers. So stingy was the defense that only twice in 17 playoff games did San Antonio's opponent muster 90 points.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10
The 1999 Spurs were the highest ranked post-Jordan team on the list. It'd be interesting to see where the other Spurs team rank but the rankings below the top 10 are insider-exclusive. Nonetheless, San Antonio has been incredibly fortunate. :toast
greyforest
06-04-2010, 01:29 AM
05 spurs were comparably baller to 99 spurs
TD 21
06-04-2010, 01:29 AM
When he first released the list, I believe in '07, all of the other rankings were free. I can't remember exactly where the other three ranked, but they were all fairly high if I recall.
Speaking of post-Jordan, I know it's neither here nor there, but I honestly believe the '99 Spurs would have beaten the Bulls in '99 had they kept the vast majority of their team from '98 intact. People forget, but the '98 Bulls were running on fumes throughout much of that run and looked vulnerable. So much so that both the Pacers and the Jazz probably should have beaten them that year.
Now imagine them being a year older and having to go through a historically great defensive team playing at an incredibly high level. I can't see them pulling it off. I don't care how good a defender Rodman was, the reality is he's severely undersized compared to Duncan. It's hard for me to see that Bulls front court being able to matchup with the twin towers. Jordan, great as he was, the only other defense he had to go through that was comparable to the '99 Spurs was the early 90s Knicks. True, he got through them, but he was also much younger then.
I wish I had been older and understood the game better, but that team made me love defense. Or maybe it was the title, won through our defense, that made me love defense. :D
Probably both.
howbouthemspurs
06-04-2010, 01:56 AM
I was a freshmen in highschool when they won that first championship. I remember that first river parade and that march to the alamodome.. It was an amazing time for the city. 99 spurs will always be my favorite.
21_Blessings
06-04-2010, 02:29 AM
No way was 15-2 better than 15-1.
No way was 15-2 better than 15-1.
Nobody beats that 12 playoff game wins streak. Ever.
mingus
06-04-2010, 03:43 AM
been pretty much my opinion all along. nobody beats the '99 Spurs post-Jordan. Tim/Drob versus Gasol/ Bynum...LOL. it's too bad that that team never got a chance to repeat. still, they stand alone as the greatest Spurs team every assembled, and best post-Jordan team, for sure.
PublicOption
06-04-2010, 07:40 AM
2003
sjax
kerr
duncan
robinson
ginobili
rose
willis
parker
claxton
ferry
bowen
that team was absolutely our best team.
PublicOption
06-04-2010, 07:43 AM
Nobody beats that 12 playoff game wins streak. Ever.
:wow:flag::flag:
gospursgojas
06-04-2010, 09:05 AM
I was a freshmen in highschool when they won that first championship. I remember that first river parade and that march to the alamodome.. It was an amazing time for the city. 99 spurs will always be my favorite.
No you werent
galvatron3000
06-04-2010, 09:19 AM
2003
sjax
kerr
duncan
robinson
ginobili
rose
willis
parker
claxton
ferry
bowen
that team was absolutely our best team.
Personally from a matchup standpoint against any team that has won, I agree because that '03 team matches up well with just about any team. Oh, steve Smith was on the bench with not much playing time but I thought a worthy mention. lol
ajh18
06-04-2010, 10:06 AM
Talent-wise there were plenty of teams better than that one. But that team just "clicked". They were SICK defensively. I think they would have beaten any of the other Spurs title teams because they had good close-out perimiter defenders that would have denied the three, and then they just SHUT DOWN the paint with a young Duncan and borderline-superstar level Robinson.
Despite all the talent that the 2003 Spurs had, most of those players were still young and hadn't reached their potential. That team still relied primarily on Duncan dominating the ball, and the '99 team would have made him work harder for every point than any team we've ever played against, with Robinson and Duncan rotating on him with the other coming with the occassional double team. He fought through the '05 Pistons front line, but they weren't at the level of the '99 Spurs' frontcourt. Elie and Sean were smart enough to deny players like Jackson and Manu at the 3 point line, and would make them rely on their inconsistant midrange games. I think people underestimate just how much better David Robinson was in '99 than in 2003.
The 2005 and 2007 title teams had similar talent levels, with Manu and Parker emerging as genuine stars. But again, against the '99 Spurs they would have struggled to get into and finish in the paint, and been denied the 3 point line. Duncan was slower than he was in '03 and I think the Spurs of those years would have struggled a lot more with the '99 Spurs on the interior (because BOTH Robinson and Duncan could score, unlike Ben Wallace) than the '99 Spurs would with containing either Manu or Parker on the perimiter.
BronxCowboy
06-04-2010, 10:48 AM
99 Spurs was the best team the Spurs ever had, even though I have to admit that the 03 team was loaded. 1999 Sean Elliott, 1999 Mario Elie, and 1999 Avery Johnson were all better perimeter defenders than anyone on the current Spurs team, or probably anyone since 99 other than Bruce Bowen. Both David Robinson and Tim Duncan in 1999 were better interior defenders than anyone in the league in 2010. I think it's easy to forget how good that team was because their brilliance was on the defensive end and they didn't score at lot. They held opponents below 85 ppg on 40% shooting for the season. Ridiculous.
FromWayDowntown
06-04-2010, 11:11 AM
Here's Hollinger's list ranking the Finalists since the Merger (doesn't include 2010 Finalists):
1. 96 Bulls
2. 87 Lakers
3. 86 Celtics
4. 91 Bulls
5. 97 Bulls
6. 85 Lakers
7. 92 Bulls
8. 99 Spurs
9. 09 Lakers
10. 08 Celtics
11. 83 Sixers
12. 89 Pistons
13. 01 Lakers
14. 98 Bulls
15. 90 Pistons
16. 07 Spurs
17. 00 Lakers
18. 93 Bulls
19. 05 Spurs
20. 02 Lakers
21. 81 Celtics
22. 03 Spurs
23. 82 Lakers
24. 04 Pistons
25. 80 Lakers
26. 84 Celtics
27. 97 Jazz (highest rated Finals loser)
28. 88 Lakers
29. 77 Blazers
30. 94 Rockets
31. 96 Sonics
32. 89 Lakers (highest ranked team to be swept -- injuries killed them)
33. 85 Celtics
34. 06 Heat
35. 06 Mavericks
36. 84 Lakers
37. 98 Jazz
38. 08 Lakers
39. 92 Blazers
40. 88 Pistons
41. 79 Sonics
42. 91 Lakers
43. 80 Sixers
44. 05 Pistons
45. 93 Suns
46. 03 Nets
47. 09 Magic
48. 94 Knicks
49. 82 Sixers
50. 95 Rockets
51. 95 Magic
52. 00 Pacers
53. 83 Lakers
54. 86 Rockets
55. 87 Celtics
56. 78 Bullets (lowest ranked Finals winner)
57. 04 Lakers
58. 90 Blazers
59. 07 Cavaliers
60. 01 Sixers
61. 77 Sixers
62. 02 Nets
63. 79 Bullets
64. 78 Sonics
65. 99 Knicks
66. 81 Rockets
Thanks, FromWayDowntown :toast
dbreiden83080
06-04-2010, 01:55 PM
05 Spurs beat 99 spurs in a 7 game series IMO
TheSpursFNRule
06-04-2010, 01:58 PM
05 spurs were comparably baller to 99 spurs
Agreed.
Spurs Brazil
06-04-2010, 03:00 PM
05 Spurs beat 99 spurs in a 7 game series IMO
The 99 team would win in 5, maybe 6
The 99 team was fantastic on D. Very physical and you don't remember that team missing any rotations. The help were so great that allowed a very young Mali Rose to guard Shaq and wait for the help of TD and Robinson.
I had more fun watching the team with TP, Manu and Bruce in 03/05 and 07 but I believe the 99 team could play a decent series against the Jordan/Bulls
ajh18
06-04-2010, 03:38 PM
The 99 team would win in 5, maybe 6
The 99 team was fantastic on D. Very physical and you don't remember that team missing any rotations. The help were so great that allowed a very young Mali Rose to guard Shaq and wait for the help of TD and Robinson.
I had more fun watching the team with TP, Manu and Bruce in 03/05 and 07 but I believe the 99 team could play a decent series against the Jordan/Bulls
The '05 pistons took us to the fourth quarter of game 7 tied. The '99 Spurs were better than that Piston's squad, and matched up better with the '05 Spurs.
In '05, Duncan manned up against the Wallaces. Duncan and Robinson in '99 though were better, smarter defenders than that Pistons frontcourt. Plus, they could both go for 30 on any given night, and the '05 Spurs had no second defensive big man who could have covered either of them.
That Pistons team had Prince as a perimiter defender, but the '99 Spurs had both Ellie and Ninja. Parker wouldn't have been able to score in the paint against that team either. I agree, '99 Spurs win that series in 6.
DesignatedT
06-04-2010, 03:54 PM
99 and 05 Spurs teams were by far the best. Especially with Duncan not playing at 100% during the postseason. Manu was an absolute beast and Horry and Barry coming off the bench was killer.
baseline bum
06-04-2010, 04:13 PM
05 Spurs beat 99 spurs in a 7 game series IMO
No way; not with Duncan's ankle injuries that were causing him to fade in a lot of fourth quarters as those playoffs dragged on. The 99 Spurs would take that series in 5. David Robinson pretty much shut down all penetration in that playoff run and Mario Elie would body and frustrate Manu the same way Artest did in the 06 Sacramento series. Even though 05 Duncan was a more complete player, I'll take healthy 99 Duncan in that matchup too.
ffadicted
06-04-2010, 04:16 PM
How are the '07 spurs ranked higher then both '03 and '05?
And PublicOption, the Lakers had that streak, not the spurs lol
mingus
06-04-2010, 04:26 PM
No way; not with Duncan's ankle injuries that were causing him to fade in a lot of fourth quarters as those playoffs dragged on. The 99 Spurs would take that series in 5. David Robinson pretty much shut down all penetration in that playoff run and Mario Elie would body and frustrate Manu the same way Artest did in the 06 Sacramento series. Even though 05 Duncan was a more complete player, I'll take healthy 99 Duncan in that matchup too.
yeah, i'd take TD in '99 as well. Duncan was unblievable in the '99 Finals. he was hitting everything, and Kurt Thomas at the time was an elite post-defender. Kurt was ALL over him when he was defending him, but TD was just unstoppable.
he wasn't as good out of the double in '99, but he may have been at his best from scoring standpoint that season out of any other season.
How are the '07 spurs ranked higher then both '03 and '05?
And PublicOption, the Lakers had that streak, not the spurs lol
The 1999 Spurs did have a 12 game win streak (including a sweep over the Lakers) after starting the playoffs 1-1 . Finished 15-2.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/1999_games.html
galvatron3000
06-04-2010, 06:37 PM
'99 Duncan was a beast in the low post but wasn't nearly as good out of the double team, '03 Duncan was just a much better all around player that could still beast in the post. Robinson was surely better in '99 but wasn't a slouch in '03. The '99 bench was far superior than the '05 bench simply because Pop couldn't really play most of those guys or wouldn't. Barry struggled in his first season ('05) and Udrih would have been creamed by the '99 Spurs, just as he couldn't against the '05 Piston but IMO the '99 Spurs were far better than any of those Piston teams, with a fired up Jaren Jackson, Jerome Kersey, Steve Kerr etc, but the '03 team was just getting better and better as the season went on and had more weapons. They did however turn the ball over too much and would have destroyed Tony Parker, as far as Manu, he torched the Lakers and helped get Shaq in foul trouble by consistently attacking the rim even as a limited minute playing rookie who was just getting into the rotation, teams didn't know how to defend him or what he was going to do. '99 and '03 are my favorites but heck I love them all.
galvatron3000
06-04-2010, 06:45 PM
The 1999 Spurs did have a 12 game win streak (including a sweep over the Lakers) after starting the playoffs 1-1 . Finished 15-2.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/1999_games.html
They swept Portland and LA that season, lost one to the Knicks and I believe Minnesota was the other team they dropped a game too game.
Spurs Brazil
06-04-2010, 06:48 PM
They swept Portland and LA that season, lost one to the Knicks and I believe Minnesota was the other team they dropped a game too game.
Yep, game 2 against the Wolves and game 3 at NY
How are the '07 spurs ranked higher then both '03 and '05?
And PublicOption, the Lakers had that streak, not the spurs lol
epic fail
baseline bum
06-04-2010, 06:52 PM
How are the '07 spurs ranked higher then both '03 and '05?
And PublicOption, the Lakers had that streak, not the spurs lol
Nope; the 89 Lakers and 91 Lakers were next with 11 straight wins. The 99 Spurs have the record for most consecutive wins in the playoffs.
LoneStarState'sPride
06-04-2010, 08:13 PM
My favorite all time title team has to be the '99 Spurs for so many reasons, but the primary reason was their defense. I was young and still learning the game (and hadn't bought into the Jordan hype in the mid-90s), and watching the rotations and the trust that that team had was unbelievable. They just refused to lose--they made me believe in the franchise. I mean, just think about it: Robinson, Duncan, Sean, Avery, Mario, Malik, even Will Perdue. Some of my favorite memories were just the looks of pure exasperation on the faces of opponents when the Spurs denied them from scoring time and again. I didn't even realize how many times that squad held opponents under 90 points in the playoffs. I don't care who you stack 'em up against, that's just unreal, suffocating D. Sweeping LA out of the Forum? Blanking a VERY scary Portland team? I remember being almost surprised when SA dropped Game 3 in NY--they just gave you the feeling that they couldn't lose during that playoff run.
On the other hand, I believe the BEST of the Spurs title teams has to be the '05 squad. They stood up to the stiffest competition of any of the Spurs' title teams and came away victorious. They took the hottest team after the all-star break in Denver and ripped off 4 straight wins after taking their best punch in game 1. They outdueled a Ray Allen-led Sonics team that was looking for blood. Then they blew everyone's minds and beat the Suns at their own run n' gun game. Then, the Finals. Oh, what a series. They faced a team that wasn't just hot ('99 Knicks) or maybe just happy to be there again ('03 Nets). They were going toe-to-toe with the defending NBA champions, who were fully healthy and had everything to play for. From the masterpieces in Games 1 and 2, to the heroics in Game 5, all the way to a heart-stopping 4th quarter of Game 7, that series and playoff run simply had it all.
Not to take anything from the '03 or '07 squads, but I honestly believe the '03 team surprised even themselves with how well they meshed down the stretch. Think about it: an unproven Tony Parker, a rookie wildcard in Ginobili, a loose cannon in Jackson, an aging Robinson on the brink of retirement, and though 2-time MVP Tim Duncan was always a respected threat, he's being backed up by........Kevin Willis? By the time the league knew how dangerous this team was in the postseason, it was already too late. As for the '07 squad, they were the beneficiaries of the Warriors taking down the Mavs. No doubt in my mind that the Mavs were the Spurs' superior that year, but SA was good enough to step through that open door.
My rankings:
1.) 2005 Spurs
2.) 1999 Spurs
3.) 2003 Spurs
4.) 2007 Spurs
Cant_Be_Faded
06-04-2010, 08:18 PM
Here's Hollinger's list ranking the Finalists since the Merger (doesn't include 2010 Finalists):
1. 96 Bulls
2. 87 Lakers
3. 86 Celtics
4. 91 Bulls
5. 97 Bulls
6. 85 Lakers
7. 92 Bulls
8. 99 Spurs
9. 09 Lakers
10. 08 Celtics
11. 83 Sixers
12. 89 Pistons
13. 01 Lakers
14. 98 Bulls
15. 90 Pistons
16. 07 Spurs
17. 00 Lakers
18. 93 Bulls
19. 05 Spurs
20. 02 Lakers
21. 81 Celtics
22. 03 Spurs
23. 82 Lakers
24. 04 Pistons
25. 80 Lakers
26. 84 Celtics
27. 97 Jazz (highest rated Finals loser)
28. 88 Lakers
29. 77 Blazers
30. 94 Rockets
31. 96 Sonics
32. 89 Lakers (highest ranked team to be swept -- injuries killed them)
33. 85 Celtics
34. 06 Heat
35. 06 Mavericks
36. 84 Lakers
37. 98 Jazz
38. 08 Lakers
39. 92 Blazers
40. 88 Pistons
41. 79 Sonics
42. 91 Lakers
43. 80 Sixers
44. 05 Pistons
45. 93 Suns
46. 03 Nets
47. 09 Magic
48. 94 Knicks
49. 82 Sixers
50. 95 Rockets
51. 95 Magic
52. 00 Pacers
53. 83 Lakers
54. 86 Rockets
55. 87 Celtics
56. 78 Bullets (lowest ranked Finals winner)
57. 04 Lakers
58. 90 Blazers
59. 07 Cavaliers
60. 01 Sixers
61. 77 Sixers
62. 02 Nets
63. 79 Bullets
64. 78 Sonics
65. 99 Knicks
66. 81 Rockets
This thread is over.
How the FUCK does hollinger put 2007 Spurs above the 2005 and 2003 Spurs? He must be basing this on relative competition in that given year or something. Because 2003 and 2005 >>>> 2007. We know this. Each and every one of us on this forum is now dumber for having read this list.
I award Hollinger no points....and may god have mercy on his soul.
ShoogarBear
06-04-2010, 11:19 PM
How can he possibly have the 83 Sixers that low? That team should probably be in the top 3.
pookenstein
06-05-2010, 03:28 AM
16. 07 Spurs
17. 00 Lakers
18. 93 Bulls
19. 05 Spurs
20. 02 Lakers
21. 81 Celtics
22. 03 Spurs
07 Spurs ranked higher than both 05 and 03 Spurs? Come on Hollinger. You can do better than that. At least I hope so.
howbouthemspurs
06-05-2010, 03:33 AM
No you werent
oh yeah! that was in 2000. I was in middle school in 99. i forgot.
The Truth #6
06-05-2010, 05:38 AM
99 team was on a mission from God, so to speak. Only lost twice in the whole playoffs. 2003 lost twice in every single round. 2007 wouldn't have beaten Dallas. 2005 had super Manu but they still weren't as determined as 99. 99 just wanted it more than everybody else in the whole league.
Obstructed_View
06-05-2010, 06:53 AM
How can he possibly have the 83 Sixers that low? That team should probably be in the top 3.
Easy.
Ice009
06-05-2010, 07:50 AM
Did anyone notice the 09 Lakers being 9th? lol
21_Blessings
06-05-2010, 11:34 AM
2010 Lakers > 99* Spurs
The Lakers currently are sitting at about -100+ free throw disparity in the playoffs. That has to be some of kind of record for a champion.
TDMVPDPOY
06-05-2010, 11:38 AM
07 spurs would be epic had the spurs face better eastern finals team
lebron was just weak sauce for the taking
TampaDude
06-05-2010, 02:31 PM
2010 Lakers > 99* Spurs
Uh...nope...the '99 Spurs were the best defensive team ever in the playoffs, hands down...they would've repeated, too, had Duncan not been injured...NFW the current Laker squad, even as good as they are, would take 4 of 7 from the 1999 Spurs...N-F-W.
TampaDude
06-05-2010, 02:32 PM
07 spurs would be epic had the spurs face better eastern finals team
lebron was just weak sauce for the taking
Yup...the 2007 Finals was all too easy.
wildbill2u
06-05-2010, 03:17 PM
There was something metaphysical about the 99 team. They had a will to win that you could feel from the stands or through the TV screen when it clicked in. It didn't matter if they were behind in the last quarter or not, all of a sudden you'd see them tighten up and simply start to take the other team apart. You KNEW they were going to win.
The hair on the back of my neck still rises up when I think about watching them do that. It was awesome.
galvatron3000
06-05-2010, 03:20 PM
Uh...nope...the '99 Spurs were the best defensive team ever in the playoffs, hands down...they would've repeated, too, had Duncan not been injured...NFW the current Laker squad, even as good as they are, would take 4 of 7 from the 1999 Spurs...N-F-W.
agreed
21_Blessings
06-05-2010, 03:28 PM
Mario Elie trying to defend Kobe :lmao At least the Lakers can match 99*'s size.
99* isn't repeating and they aren't beating the 2001 or 2010 Lakers.
DPG21920
06-05-2010, 03:33 PM
Mario Elie trying to defend Kobe :lmao At least the Lakers can match 99*'s size.
99* isn't repeating and they aren't beating the 2001 or 2010 Lakers.
Link?
baseline bum
06-05-2010, 04:19 PM
Uh...nope...the '99 Spurs were the best defensive team ever in the playoffs, hands down...they would've repeated, too, had Duncan not been injured...NFW the current Laker squad, even as good as they are, would take 4 of 7 from the 1999 Spurs...N-F-W.
I doubt they would have gotten through Portland, but I think they'd have taken LA in 2000.
Agloco
06-05-2010, 04:39 PM
Mario Elie trying to defend Kobe :lmao At least the Lakers can match 99*'s size.
99* isn't repeating and they aren't beating the 2001 or 2010 Lakers.
And that's about it. Duncan is in his prime then and D Rob was still at all star level. Putting Gasol, Bynum and Odom on the court with those two in 99 gets you arrested for child abuse.
And I've gotta agree, the Spurs repeat in 2000 if Duncan isn't injured.
mingus
06-05-2010, 05:07 PM
I don't expect lakers fans to have an ounce of objectivity after what the spurs did to la in '99. That was the lowest point in that fanchises history. They never have and never will be emberassed in that fashion again. The circumstances around it - the last game at the historic, landmark Forum only hightens their sense of emberassment.
Mr.Bottomtooth
06-05-2010, 05:44 PM
2005>>>>2007 Spurs
TheSullyMonster
06-05-2010, 06:07 PM
07 Spurs ranked higher than both 05 and 03 Spurs? Come on Hollinger. You can do better than that. At least I hope so.
I think he's counting the sweep for something.
Cant_Be_Faded
06-05-2010, 07:12 PM
2007 was our easiest path to a championship. We were good, but the main reason was the competition was meh.
The AI-Melo Nuggets prior to Billups arrival was total jackass. Those guys were a joke.
Phoenix still had only one hair on its sack and there was no real doubt we were going to rape them that series.
The Jazz posed somewhat of a rebounding and size threat, but Derron fell off towards the end of the series even though we were giving him whatever we wanted, and their role players basically did to us what they did to the Lakers this year.
The Cavs had no chance in hell of beating any of the top 4 or so western teams that year.
We were good but were fortunate we did not have play those lil boys from big D. The Golden State Warriors were just as responsible for that championship as anything.
So I'd say theres a real discussion over which is better: 2003 or 2005.
One thing we'd have to figure out is if by "2005" we mean that in our fantasy thought experiment is Duncan still on two hobbled ankles like he was that entire playoffs? Or for argument purposes do we assume everyone is healthy?
If we talk about "as is" give me 2003. Bruce and Jack put their men on LOCK down, and Robinson had a huge reserve in his tank he saved for that finals series.
If we talk about in a perfect world, give me 2005. We had two good centers, a ridiculously unstoppable Manu Ginobili, and Big Shot Rob.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.