03,05,07

[SpursTillTheEnd]

which team is better?

[DesignatedT]

05

[Ditty]

03

[xellos88330]

Tough one. I would say '03.

[Juanobili]

03

[Duncan2177]

03

[Solid D]

Of those three, I would say '03...although of 1999, 03, 05, and 07...I would say 1999 because of their defense. The season was abbreviated but the playoffs certainly were not and the Spurs only lost 2 games during the playoffs.

[ShoogarBear]

Is this like the 3rd or 4th thread in the past month on this?

[Barfunk]

05 was the best imo, it was also my favorite run, most exciting for me at least

[blkroadrunners]

2005

[xtremesteven33]

2003 by far

[ploto]

2005
2003
2007

[TampaDude]

2003 team was most dominant...Duncan was unstoppable.

2005 Finals was fucking EPIC. Best Finals ever, IMHO.

2007 Finals was way too easy.

[Obstructed_View]

The '03 team would be the best team the Spurs ever had if they played more than 25 minutes a night.

[sananspursfan21]

i think the 03 team had more talent. the 05 team had the least amount of true talent but had by far the best team chemistry. the 07 team was great, but i think kinda lucky the warriors bailed them out. the only true test in the playoffs were the suns that year.

[ChuckD]

i think the 03 team had more talent. the 05 team had the least amount of true talent but had by far the best team chemistry. the 07 team was great, but i think kinda lucky the warriors bailed them out. the only true test in the playoffs were the suns that year.

You play who you play. If Dallas was a no-show at the ball in 2007, that's on them. That 07 team is often overlooked, but they had the second most dominant playoff run of any Spurs trophy team, going 16-4, second only to the 15-2 run by the 1999 team.

I think the team with the most raw talent was the 2003 team, but they let elimination games go, left and right on their somewhat wobbly 16-8 run.

2005 was probably my favorite team. I really had no hope for a trophy when Duncan went down with his second ankle injury and missed the end of the regular season.

[urunobili]

2003
2005
1999
2007

[urunobili]

2003
2005
1999
2007

[UnWantedTheory]

^^^ agree.

[rmt]

2005 - very deep and versatile, Manu & Bowen at their peak, Duncan - very slightly past his peak, Parker - not there yet. This team had everything - bigs (Nazr, Rasho), a great Horry, 3 point shooting (Barry, Bowen, Manu), passing (Barry, Beno, Manu), a bonafide 3 (Glenn Robinson) even though he didn't play much and Devin Brown.

1999 - defense from Twin Towers was awesome. Tough, seasoned players and a young, mobile Duncan.

2007 & 2003 - tie. 2007 was seasoned, gritty and mentally tough but not much talent (outside of the big 3). I thought they were lucky that year - GS took out DAL and the suspensions. Then the FO got complacent - trading away Scola and resigning the vets.

2003 was the very opposite - lots of young talent but mentally unstable. They gave up so many big leads :-( Duncan was at his absolute peak, but not much around him (rookie Manu, 2nd year Parker, streaky SJax, last year Robinson).

[rmt]

2005 - very deep and versatile, Manu & Bowen at their peak, Duncan - very slightly past his peak, Parker - not there yet. This team had everything - bigs (Nazr, Rasho), a great Horry, 3 point shooting (Barry, Bowen, Manu), passing (Barry, Beno, Manu), a bonafide 3 (Glenn Robinson) even though he didn't play much and Devin Brown.

1999 - defense from Twin Towers was awesome. Tough, seasoned players and a young, mobile Duncan.

2007 & 2003 - tie. 2007 was seasoned, gritty and mentally tough but not much talent (outside of the big 3). I thought they were lucky that year - GS took out DAL and the suspensions. Then the FO got complacent - trading away Scola and resigning the vets.

2003 was the very opposite - lots of young talent but mentally unstable. They gave up so many big leads :-( Duncan was at his absolute peak, but not much around him (rookie Manu, 2nd year Parker, streaky SJax, last year Robinson).

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also,

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan w

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03,

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he was

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he was at

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he was at his

[Spurs7794]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he was at his least

[Spurs7794]

Wow, that glitched out on me....can someone delete everyone of these?

[rascal]

Did you even follow the team in 1999?

[galvatron3000]

'03 would have destroyed the '05 and '04 Pistons, although the '04 Piston could have perhaps beaten them, the '03 Team was much deeper than the '05 Piston and Robinson would have creamed Ben Wallace as would Duncan would have done to Rasheed. Bowen was still at his peak and would have been on Hamilton as would Jackson would have been on Prince. Parker would have been the weak link but Claxton off the bench with Ginobili would have crushed the Pistons even when Manu was just emerging plus Parker was the weak link in '05 too. Kevin Willis, Steve Kerr, Malik Rose that '03 team wasn't a punk they just turned the ball over too much thus losing leads but that was mostly due to Parker. The Piston struggled to score as the Spurs did but the Spurs had far more scoring weapons and the match ups favored the Spurs the team that dethroned the Lakers, not the '04 Pistons.

[LoneStarState'sPride]

2005, and it's NOT close. The 2003 team was stacked, but moreso when we look at it in retrospect. That team had young, unproven guards on the wings in Manu and Tony, and a wildcard in Steven Jackson. Plus, Robinson was far past his prime. That team's chemistry wasn't near as good as '05--one only needs to look at the way they gave up so many leads late in games. People quickly forget that save for an out-of-nowhere performance from Steve Kerr, the '03 Spurs might well have been remembered for blowing a 3-1 lead against the Dirk-less Dallas Mavs in the WCF.

The '05 team, on the other hand, was a fucking amoeba. Win slow and with D? Check. Win physical matchups? Check. Win playing uptempo? Check. It didn't matter how you played the '05 team, they'd beat you at your own fucking game. Throw in the fact that the postseason run in '05 presented the toughest competition before or since (Denver, Seattle, Phoenix, and defending champ Detroit), and there's really no doubt in my mind that the '05 team was the best of the post-1999 title teams.

[Spurs7794]

'03 would have destroyed the '05 and '04 Pistons, although the '04 Piston could have perhaps beaten them, the '03 Team was much deeper than the '05 Piston and Robinson would have creamed Ben Wallace as would Duncan would have done to Rasheed. Bowen was still at his peak and would have been on Hamilton as would Jackson would have been on Prince. Parker would have been the weak link but Claxton off the bench with Ginobili would have crushed the Pistons even when Manu was just emerging plus Parker was the weak link in '05 too. Kevin Willis, Steve Kerr, Malik Rose that '03 team wasn't a punk they just turned the ball over too much thus losing leads but that was mostly due to Parker. The Piston struggled to score as the Spurs did but the Spurs had far more scoring weapons and the match ups favored the Spurs the team that dethroned the Lakers, not the '04 Pistons.

No way was 2003 team mentally tough enough to beat the Pistons in that brutal 05 series. This is the team that lost a 12 pt lead in game 1 against Phoenix, lost a 10 point lead in game 4 against Pho, lost a 15 point lead in game 4 against LAL, lost a 25 point lead in game 5 and nearly blew the series, lost an 18 point lead in game 1 against Dallas, let a 29 pt lead dwindle down to 7 in game 2 against Dallas, lost a 20 point lead against Dallas in game 5...

Sure they had big crunchtime performances at times but they were too all over the place. The Pistons were cohesive and would have beaten us.

[Solid D]

There are many who believe the best indicator of the best teams, stat-wise, is Point Differential. The 5 best regular season point diff teams in the Tim Duncan/Gregg Popovich era were (* = championship season:
1. 2006-07 +8.4 *
2. 1998-99 +8.1 *
3. 2004-05 +7.8 *
4. 2000-01 +7.76
5. 2003-04 +7.2

[rmt]

2005, and it's NOT close. The 2003 team was stacked, but moreso when we look at it in retrospect. That team had young, unproven guards on the wings in Manu and Tony, and a wildcard in Steven Jackson. Plus, Robinson was far past his prime. That team's chemistry wasn't near as good as '05--one only needs to look at the way they gave up so many leads late in games. People quickly forget that save for an out-of-nowhere performance from Steve Kerr, the '03 Spurs might well have been remembered for blowing a 3-1 lead against the Dirk-less Dallas Mavs in the WCF.

The '05 team, on the other hand, was a fucking amoeba. Win slow and with D? Check. Win physical matchups? Check. Win playing uptempo? Check. It didn't matter how you played the '05 team, they'd beat you at your own fucking game. Throw in the fact that the postseason run in '05 presented the toughest competition before or since (Denver, Seattle, Phoenix, and defending champ Detroit), and there's really no doubt in my mind that the '05 team was the best of the post-1999 title teams.

Totally agree. Even Horry called them an amoeba. Very versatile. They had the bigs to play traditional and ball movement/passing to play small ball.



There are many who believe the best indicator of the best teams, stat-wise, is Point Differential. The 5 best regular season point diff teams in the Tim Duncan/Gregg Popovich era were (* = championship season:
1. 2006-07 +8.4 *
2. 1998-99 +8.1 *
3. 2004-05 +7.8 *
4. 2000-01 +7.76
5. 2003-04 +7.2

1. 07 - lucky GS beat Mavs
2. 99 - pre Phil Jackson LAL
3. 05 - a bit low as Duncan missed a lot of games at the end of the season with sprained ankle
5. 04 - unlucky - .4

03 is the worst championship team - not even in the top 5 RS point differential. Peak Duncan and (young, talented) players at that point in their careers. Duncan did a lot of heavy lifting. Blew a lot of leads/mentally unstable - diametrically opposite to 07 (composed/mentally tough) where if they were close, they'd clamp down/grind it out and usually won.

[Solid D]

I will never understand people when they say 03 was the best. They gave up every big lead they got. I think 99 was the best followed closely by 05. The 03 team would not have beaten the Pistons in 05...too mentally weak.

Also, I may be in the minority here but while Duncan was at his physical peak in 03, I think he was at his least

After looking back in more detail, the 2004-05 team certainly was statistically better than 2002-03. I enjoyed watching that 2002-03 team more and I had more highs and lows with that team, especially with Jack as the starting 2-guard. I still think, although 1998-99 was not part of the criteria for this thread, the first championship Spurs team was the best. Since the 2006-07 championship team had a +8.4 point diff., with different defensive rules than were present in 1998-99, I'm less certain about who was the better team of the 03, 05, 07 choices.

[ALVAREZ6]

'05

[Solid D]

1. 07 - lucky GS beat Mavs
2. 99 - pre Phil Jackson LAL
3. 05 - a bit low as Duncan missed a lot of games at the end of the season with sprained ankle
5. 04 - unlucky - .4


99 - pre Phil Jackson LAL? lol, how about 05 - post Shaq LAL, Pre Pau LAL aka the year Pau Gasol went to the playoffs but the Lakers didn't? Your reasoning is not relevant to this discussion.

Just a reminder, the Spurs ability to beat other teams in their respective years is not a part of the criteria here (i.e. "lucky GS beat Mavs"). It is a simple question: 03, 05, 07 Which team is better?

[Obstructed_View]

Wow, that glitched out on me....can someone delete everyone of these?

Yes, that someone would be you. Choose edit post and then the option to delete is there.

[Ginobili2Duncan]

05, Duncan led the Spurs to a title on 2 sprained ankles.

[024]

the 05 team was built to last in the playoffs. ginobili, bowen, and horry were at their best to compliment a still prime tim duncan. the 03 team had the young talent but was not as balanced as the 05 team because they depended way too much on duncan. the 05 beat a very good pistons team that were the defending champions. i doubt the 03 team could have withstood a 7 game final series claw out with the 05 pistons.