The importance of Repeating.

[whitemamba]

Only the best of the best can do it.

thoghts ?

[ElNono]

thoghts ?

OP is a faggot

[RsxPiimp]

+10,000

[Thread]

I keep thinking about that time I lost count of our repeats and Kool had to tote 'em up proper for me.

[whitemamba]

OP is a faggot
El Salty

[whitemamba]

GTFIH Spurfan

[ElNono]

El Salty

:lol not at all, tbh... sup my nig...

[midnightpulp]

Doesn't mean anything until they start awarding additional trophies for repeats.

[Thread]

Doesn't mean anything until they start awarding additional trophies for repeats.

tee, hee.

[whitemamba]

:lol not at all, tbh... sup my nig...

:lol chillin - what a game tbh, Lebron was the goat minus offense.

[whitemamba]

Doesn't mean anything until they start awarding additional trophies for repeats.

It means everything.

[midnightpulp]

It means everything.

To who? Titles are titles. That's it and that's all, as the old man would say.

[ElNono]

:lol chillin - what a game tbh, Lebron was the goat minus offense.

caught the 4th quarter, thought the cavs were gonna choke, tbh... don't really care, tbh, if it's not my Spurs...

[RD2191]

It means everything.
Not really. What have the Lakers done since their recent repeat? What does their future look like?

[Chris]

Answer to OP: Yes you're off the hook

[whitemamba]

To who? Titles are titles. That's it and that's all, as the old man would say.
Only the greats repeat.

caught the 4th quarter, thought the cavs were gonna choke, tbh... don't really care, tbh, if it's not my Spurs...
Pretty much the same , enjoyed the drama while bbqing my chicken. Enjoying this nice Los Angeles evening.

Answer to OP: Yes you're off the hook
What hook ? I like the lakers. Our spot light is next week.

[Chris]

What hook ? I like the lakers. Our spot light is next week.

Warrior didn't repeat. Your country club still remains somewhat exclusive.

[offset formation]

It means everything.

As does a 20 year run of utter quality the league has never before witnessed. And counting...

[Thread]

As does a 20 year run of utter quality the league has never before witnessed. And counting...

They were selling your shit.

[whitemamba]

Warrior didn't repeat. Your country club still remains somewhat exclusive.
Christopher

[Caltex2]

That leaves us with only the Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets and Heat as the only franchises to repeat as champions in NBA history, Thanks to the Warriors' loss, only 4 teams in the NBA's 70 seasons have won 5 or more titles, one of them being an expansion team and the other an old ABA team. Only one team that won a title no longer plays (the original Baltimore Bullets).

[Thebesteva]

We wont see a 3peat for a loooong time my friend. People can sit and debate Shaq V Kobe but the reality is that team was light years ahead of everyone I have seen since. All bs aside, the ONLY team I have honestly felt could even realistically give that 3 peat Lakers team a hard time are the Spurs of 2014/Bulls any Jordan era/Celtics 2008

[TDMVPDPOY]

2 repeat lottery balls....lol laker fans

[daslicer]

We wont see a 3peat for a loooong time my friend. People can sit and debate Shaq V Kobe but the reality is that team was light years ahead of everyone I have seen since. All bs aside, the ONLY team I have honestly felt could even realistically give that 3 peat Lakers team a hard time are the Spurs of 2014/Bulls any Jordan era/Celtics 2008

The '03 Spurs gave them a pretty hard time especially in game 6 when they played in Staples.

[Sean Cagney]

Depends, I will take longevity too as it is something few teams have for as long as the Spurs have had. Repeating would have been nice and that is no lie, but I will have to settle as a fan with the 5 titles they got in 6 appearances and playoffs yearly since 98.

[Thebesteva]

The '03 Spurs gave them a pretty hard time especially in game 6 when they played in Staples.

I think any spurs team would give them a hard time but I think the 2014 spurs were the most complete version of themselves. I wanna say any era spurs would give them a hard time since Duncans arrival but there were a few years in there that were meh

[Killakobe81]

That leaves us with only the Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets and Heat as the only franchises to repeat as champions in NBA history, Thanks to the Warriors' loss, only 4 teams in the NBA's 70 seasons have won 5 or more titles, one of them being an expansion team and the other an old ABA team. Only one team that won a title no longer plays (the original Baltimore Bullets).

Yep. And we can thank "6" for adding the Heat to that list otherwise it's only 5.
More than Duncan not getting 6 or Lebron tying MJ or any other ring counts ... the chase for 16 and being one of the few to repeat are the "counts" that matter to me.
At the end of the day ... arguing if Lebron is greater than MJ if he gets to 5 based on his other accolades or any other player arguments ...they are fun ...but the banners are what matter to me most..

Repeating or going "backtoback" is nice but Mid is right, you do NOT get "double points" ... but it does speak to the dominance of a team.
The Lakers of 2009-2010 and the Clutch city rox are the weakest of the repeat teams ...but if they do not repeat, they are placed in a category of the one and done boys like the 2006 or 2011 Mavs. Repeating validates those teams as non flukes or lighting in the bottle teams.

As it pertains to the Spurs, obviously they are no flukes tor not even one and done boys ... they won 5 titles ...but it is strange they never repeated.

[Spurtacular]

I keep thinking about that time I lost count of our repeats and Kool had to tote 'em up proper for me.

LA Lakers went back to back twice and had a three-peat in the sixties. Of course, those were all losses. :lmao

[Thread]

LA Lakers went back to back twice and had a three-peat in the sixties. Of course, those were all losses. :lmao

See, you can be just as a big an a-hole as the next a-hole in the line.

[Spurtacular]

See, you can be just as a big an a-hole as the next a-hole in the line.

Better to be original than say the same sh** over and over like a minion though.

[Thread]

Better to be original than say the same sh** over and over like a minion though.

My ass. You and your fellows repeat shit the same as I do. It's just "Kobe related" shit. Then I come back over the top with my shit.

[Spurtacular]

My ass. You and your fellows repeat shit the same as I do. It's just "Kobe related" shit. Then I come back over the top with my shit.

You really complaining about people talking sh** about the Lakers/Kobe on a Spurs site? You're the outsider, dude. You have to take sh** in stride; and then, people will be fine if you're not the proverbial homer. But being a mindless stooge and complaining about sh** is something else.

[Thread]

You really complaining about people talking sh** about the Lakers/Kobe on a Spurs site? You're the outsider, dude. You have to take sh** in stride; and then, people will be fine if you're not the proverbial homer. But being a mindless stooge and complaining about sh** is something else.

I'm not complaining. Just stating the facts.

[Spurtacular]

I'm not complaining. Just stating the facts.

I don't mind the trolling, honestly. I just think you should try not sounding like a broken record.

[Thread]

I don't mind the trolling, honestly. I just think you should try not sounding like a broken record.

I ain't no different than the loyal opposition. They attack Lakers/Kobe like a broken record. I attack Spurs/Duncan like a broken record. (They) just don't want to take it. They only want to dish it.

[K...]

It'll be interesting with LeBron just getting one repeat and getting so many tries.

You'd have to imagine if Duncan, Dirk, or kg played in the weaker conference they'd have a better chance of repeating.

I feel l like even gasols repeat is kind of better than LeBrons.

Likewise Duncan's failure to repeat is the least pathetic failure because he went 3/5 which is close to a MF five peat! ! !

[whitemamba]

It'll be interesting with LeBron just getting one repeat and getting so many tries.

You'd have to imagine if Duncan, Dirk, or kg played in the weaker conference they'd have a better chance of repeating.

I feel l like even gasols repeat is kind of better than LeBrons.

Likewise Duncan's failure to repeat is the least pathetic failure because he went 3/5 which is close to a MF five peat! ! !

This post is so fuckin awful.

[The Gemini Method]

So the question shifts: Do the Cavs repeat to join this elusive club of repeating NBA champions? OR do they get fat and content off this title and lose next season to the West champion?

[140]

So the question shifts: Do the Cavs repeat to join this elusive club of repeating NBA champions? OR do they get fat and content off this title and lose next season to the West champion?
Bend over. I'll show you something fat and content

[Obstructed_View]

Makes you respect the greats like Shaq and Pau.

[The Gemini Method]

Bend over. I'll show you something fat and content Your mom coming with the BBC strap-on? Don't be over compensating, son. You ain't bringing anything "fat and content" other then maybe your Hot Pocket eating obese self.

[DMC]

OP is a faggot


+10,000

[Killakobe81]

It'll be interesting with LeBron just getting one repeat and getting so many tries.

You'd have to imagine if Duncan, Dirk, or kg played in the weaker conference they'd have a better chance of repeating.

I feel l like even gasols repeat is kind of better than LeBrons.

Likewise Duncan's failure to repeat is the least pathetic failure because he went 3/5 which is close to a MF five peat! ! !

:lol
In my RAW voice ...
That Eddie, sure IS funny

[whitemamba]

DMC GTFIH and spin why the cuck could never repeat chubz.

[Chris]

Makes you respect the greats like Shaq and Pau.

Don't forget Robert Horry.

[K...]

DMC GTFIH and spin why the cuck could never repeat chubz.

He (correctly) believes in non linear time. Only humans insist time obeys rules. Wizards See past that shit.

[ambchang]

Repeating means that the odds are stacked so much in favour of one team that it can sail through the issues throughout more than one full season and still ring. It is also no coincidence that outside of Detroit, all the teams that repeated (Celtics, Lakers, Miami, Chicago, Houston) are from big markets that can afford to carry extra personnel (luxury tax), and/or can attract the right players to play for them.

Detroit was still a relatively large city in the late 80s, and the fact is that they had to change the way people approach the game of basketball to win championships on the "cheap", but still carried multiple HoFers with a solid supporting cast.

[hitmanyr2k]

:lol
In my RAW voice ...
That Eddie, sure IS funny

:lol That's one of my favorite parts of RAW. I've been in that situation.

[Killakobe81]

:lol That's one of my favorite parts of RAW. I've been in that situation.

no doubt. all these years later still relevant.
Im sure many guys here have seen a TV show or movie where a guys cheats and then has to explain why we would not do the same ...
Or the situation where a girl tries to portray their not easy and makes you wait Leasing the pu$$y with an option to buy ...so much great stuff.
Eddie was in a dark place relationship wise ...but some brutally honest comedy.

[elbamba]

I am pretty happy with championships in each of the last three decades. Spurs got one in the 90s, 2000's and the 2010's. Noone else has had such sustained excellence during that run.

[hitmanyr2k]

Repeating means that the odds are stacked so much in favour of one team that it can sail through the issues throughout more than one full season and still ring. It is also no coincidence that outside of Detroit, all the teams that repeated (Celtics, Lakers, Miami, Chicago, Houston) are from big markets that can afford to carry extra personnel (luxury tax), and/or can attract the right players to play for them.

Detroit was still a relatively large city in the late 80s, and the fact is that they had to change the way people approach the game of basketball to win championships on the "cheap", but still carried multiple HoFers with a solid supporting cast.

The 1st 3peat Bulls were built from the ground up...all from the draft and a couple of trades. They had no big free agent signings to speak of and really had no odds stacked in their favor except chemistry from 3+ seasons of playing together and knowing how to win at the highest level.

[ambchang]

The 1st 3peat Bulls were built from the ground up...all from the draft and a couple of trades. They had no big free agent signings to speak of and really had no odds stacked in their favor except chemistry from 3+ seasons of playing together and knowing how to win at the highest level.

Their odds was called Michael Jordan.

[whitemamba]

Repeating means that the odds are stacked so much in favour of one team that it can sail through the issues throughout more than one full season and still ring. It is also no coincidence that outside of Detroit, all the teams that repeated (Celtics, Lakers, Miami, Chicago, Houston) are from big markets that can afford to carry extra personnel (luxury tax), and/or can attract the right players to play for them.

Detroit was still a relatively large city in the late 80s, and the fact is that they had to change the way people approach the game of basketball to win championships on the "cheap", but still carried multiple HoFers with a solid supporting cast.

:sleepTerrible argument, the only big market team is LA on that list. Maybe Miami as of late, but its really NY and LA, Chicago hasn't signed 1 bigtime FA since the MJ days. Maybe Pau, but even he was past his prime and on the decline. Since the CBA has changed the spurs rang and failed to repeat, while the playing field is leveled.

[Killakobe81]

I am pretty happy with championships in each of the last three decades. Spurs got one in the 90s, 2000's and the 2010's. Noone else has had such sustained excellence during that run.

As you should be ...I wouldnt trade two in a row like the Rox over 5 in total.
But repeating is very cool and if I would still have 5 no matter what... I would prefer a repeat be in there somewhere.

[hitmanyr2k]

no doubt. all these years later still relevant.
Im sure many guys here have seen a TV show or movie where a guys cheats and then has to explain why we would not do the same ...
Or the situation where a girl tries to portray their not easy and makes you wait Leasing the pu$$y with an option to buy ...so much great stuff.
Eddie was in a dark place relationship wise ...but some brutally honest comedy.

My brother is a fuckin dog and cheated on girlfriend after girlfriend and whenever the family got together the girlfriend would always go to my wife asking for advice or to vent. My brother's stink started rubbing on me a bit because my wife started looking at me in a suspicious way and went into the hypotheticals :lol And let me tell you how far she went. I don't know shit about phones. My wife got my phone and somehow synced my GPS location on Google Plus to her phone so she could see where I was on Google maps all the time. It was like a tracking device and I had no fuckin idea for months. So whenever I went out alone and she called and asked where I was she would know if I was lying or not. Luckily I'm a good man so I was where I said I was. She finally got the guilty conscience and told me about it :lol

[Killakobe81]

My brother is a fuckin dog and cheated on girlfriend after girlfriend and whenever the family got together the girlfriend would always go to my wife asking for advice or to vent. My brother's stink started rubbing on me a bit because my wife started looking at me in a suspicious way and went into the hypotheticals :lol And let me tell you how far she went. I don't know shit about phones. My wife got my phone and somehow synced my GPS location on Google Plus to her phone so she could see where I was on Google maps all the time. It was like a tracking device and I had no fuckin idea for months. So whenever I went out alone and she called and asked where I was she would know if I was lying or not. Luckily I'm a good man so I was where I said I was. She finally got the guilty conscience and told me about it :lol

I wont even judge. Wives will look through your phone,email etc. Because even you are not a cheater, chances are she knows someone; her ex, brother, cousin etc was/is and so they will check. Plus, lots of women are insecure so they check not hoping to find anything but praying that they don't ...

[whitemamba]

My brother is a fuckin dog and cheated on girlfriend after girlfriend and whenever the family got together the girlfriend would always go to my wife asking for advice or to vent. My brother's stink started rubbing on me a bit because my wife started looking at me in a suspicious way and went into the hypotheticals :lol And let me tell you how far she went. I don't know shit about phones. My wife got my phone and somehow synced my GPS location on Google Plus to her phone so she could see where I was on Google maps all the time. It was like a tracking device and I had no fuckin idea for months. So whenever I went out alone and she called and asked where I was she would know if I was lying or not. Luckily I'm a good man so I was where I said I was. She finally got the guilty conscience and told me about it :lol

damn, is this true? Good thing you didnt slip my man.

[whitemamba]

I wont even judge. Wives will look through your phone,email etc. Because even you are not a cheater, chances are she knows someone; her ex, brother, cousin etc was/is and so they will check. Plus, lots of women are insecure so they check not hoping to find anything but praying that they don't ...

Bullshit, they have no fucking right. Whats the point of trust if your constantly mind fucking yourself?

[hitmanyr2k]

damn, is this true? Good thing you didnt slip my man.

Yep, if any would-be players out there have a Samsung Galaxy you better go in the Google Plus app and check to see if your location sharing is turned on and see who it's shared with. I'm pretty sure my brother's current girlfriend has his shit rigged so he's on trial right now and doesn't know it :lol

[hitmanyr2k]

Bullshit, they have no fucking right. Whats the point of trust if your constantly mind fucking yourself?

When I found out I was being spied on I should have been angry but I wasn't. I laughed it off and she felt really guilty about it anyway.

[Spurtacular]

I ain't no different than the loyal opposition. They attack Lakers/Kobe like a broken record. I attack Spurs/Duncan like a broken record. (They) just don't want to take it. They only want to dish it.

If you're fine with your sad state of affairs, what do I care, then.

[Caltex2]

Repeating means that the odds are stacked so much in favour of one team that it can sail through the issues throughout more than one full season and still ring. It is also no coincidence that outside of Detroit, all the teams that repeated (Celtics, Lakers, Miami, Chicago, Houston) are from big markets that can afford to carry extra personnel (luxury tax), and/or can attract the right players to play for them.

Detroit was still a relatively large city in the late 80s, and the fact is that they had to change the way people approach the game of basketball to win championships on the "cheap", but still carried multiple HoFers with a solid supporting cast.

Detroit is still a sizable market today. It's TV market is only slightly smaller than Houston's. The city has declined but the area has remaineed stable.

[Obstructed_View]

Don't forget Robert Horry.

Horry was a role player, like Kobe.

[Obstructed_View]

The importance of repeating: You have to make the playoffs first.

[whitemamba]

When I found out I was being spied on I should have been angry but I wasn't. I laughed it off and she felt really guilty about it anyway.

On the iphone there's an app that's basically the same thing, but i have it for my buddies when we are out at and shit, just in case someone dies we can track the body. But to use it to see if someone is cheating thats some trust issues tbh.. Your a bigger man my friend. :toast

[whitemamba]

The importance of repeating: You have to make the playoffs first.

What is your opinion on why they could never get it done. Is it because pop is really easy to out coach?

[Chris]

Horry was a role player, like Kobe.

Boiled down...

Big Shot Bob: 7

The Tired Old Shitbag Bryant: 5

[whitemamba]

Boiled down...

Big Shot Bob: 7

The Tired Old Shitbag Bryant: 5

Boil down the repeats for me chrissy.

[Chris]

Boil down the repeats for me chrissy.

Kobe not going the playoffs 2 seasons in a row was a dandy of a repeat amirite?

[Chris]

Boil down the repeats for me chrissy.

My mistake, Kobe managed to threepeat not going to the playoffs :lol

[whitemamba]

My mistake, Kobe managed to threepeat not going to the playoffs :lol


Must really sting that your deflecting this hard. This is what upsets me at Spur fan , can never admit they are wrong.

Boiled down

Kobe 2x Repeats
Spurs 0

[Obstructed_View]

What is your opinion on why they could never get it done. Is it because pop is really easy to out coach?

:lol I'm O_V, nice to meet you.

If Pop doesn't bench both of his centers in the 2006 playoffs, the Spurs walk to a threepeat. I've only said that maybe a thousand times on this message board in the last decade.

[whitemamba]

:lol I'm O_V, nice to meet you.

If Pop doesn't bench both of his centers in the 2006 playoffs, the Spurs walk to a threepeat. I've only said that maybe a thousand times on this message board in the last decade.

:toast

i dont go upstairs its forbidden, so i wouldnt know how you felt tbh. So we can agree he fucked up then?

[Obstructed_View]

:toast

i dont go upstairs its forbidden, so i wouldnt know how you felt tbh. So we can agree he fucked up then?

Yep. Most tragic three-pointer in the history of the team. By the end of that series, Horry was starting, Oberto was getting backup minutes, and Duncan couldn't stay out of foul trouble. People blame Manu for fouling Dirk, but don't question why a a shooting guard was guarding a 4 at the end of a game.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2BN3DeNO0U

To this day, in blowout games, I root for the Spurs to just dribble out the fucking shot clock.

[Obstructed_View]

Also, I'm pretty sure that Popovich actually bad mouthed Nazr to someone in the press after that game. It wasn't a joke, and he didn't think it was funny.

[whitemamba]

Yep. Most tragic three-pointer in the history of the team. By the end of that series, Horry was starting, Oberto was getting backup minutes, and Duncan couldn't stay out of foul trouble. People blame Manu for fouling Dirk, but don't question why a a shooting guard was guarding a 4 at the end of a game.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2BN3DeNO0U

To this day, in blowout games, I root for the Spurs to just dribble out the fucking shot clock.

Cant win them all my dude.

[Obstructed_View]

Cant win them all my dude.

If you actually believe that, maybe you can shut the fuck up about repeating.

[da_suns_fan]

You cant repeat if youre never dominant.

The Spurs won championships on the tail ends of Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasties.

05 was a transition year and they were the third best team in 07.

They get kudos for consistency and luck but you have to be dominant to repeat. They closest they got was winning one game against the Lakers in 2008.

[Arcadian]

"Repeating" is arbitrary. It just means you won two championships, and they happened to be in consecutive years. It's no more impressive than winning 2 titles in 3 years - or in the Spurs' case, 3 in 5.

[Clipper Nation]

You cant repeat if youre never dominant.

The Spurs won championships on the tail ends of Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasties.

05 was a transition year and they were the third best team in 07.

They get kudos for consistency and luck but you have to be dominant to repeat. They closest they got was winning one game against the Lakers in 2008.
http://i.imgur.com/ek71zzH.jpg

[whitemamba]

If you actually believe that, maybe you can shut the fuck up about repeating.

I dont :lol

[da_suns_fan]

http://i.imgur.com/ek71zzH.jpg

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-imitation-is-the-sincerest-form-of-flattery-that-mediocrity-can-pay-to-greatness-oscar-wilde-121-38-30.jpg

[whitemamba]

http://i.imgur.com/ek71zzH.jpg

begging again.. Smh

[da_suns_fan]

begging again.. Smh

Hes just trying to get even because he's obsessed with me. You should see how many of my "mentions" are strictly from CN. Its kind of creepy.

Ive hurt him too badly.

[hitmanyr2k]

Yep. Most tragic three-pointer in the history of the team. By the end of that series, Horry was starting, Oberto was getting backup minutes, and Duncan couldn't stay out of foul trouble. People blame Manu for fouling Dirk, but don't question why a a shooting guard was guarding a 4 at the end of a game.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2BN3DeNO0U

To this day, in blowout games, I root for the Spurs to just dribble out the fucking shot clock.

What's the story behind that? Did Nazr get put in the doghouse for the rest of the playoffs for shooting a garbage time shot?

[DMC]

You cant repeat if youre never dominant.

The Spurs won championships on the tail ends of Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasties.

05 was a transition year and they were the third best team in 07.

They get kudos for consistency and luck but you have to be dominant to repeat. They closest they got was winning one game against the Lakers in 2008.

Suns have repeated. They are zero and always, not even one year of missing that.

[daslicer]

What's the story behind that? Did Nazr get put in the doghouse for the rest of the playoffs for shooting a garbage time shot?

Yes pretty much. His minutes started to decline through out the Kings series and after game 1 of the Mavs series Pop decided not to play him at all. Instead the Spurs played this retarded small ball line up of Parker,Manu,Finley,Bowen,Duncan for that whole entire series.

[da_suns_fan]

Suns have repeated. They are zero and always, not even one year of missing that.

Dont get mad at me. Its not my fault the Spurs went 0-5.

[Caltex2]

"Repeating" is arbitrary. It just means you won two championships, and they happened to be in consecutive years. It's no more impressive than winning 2 titles in 3 years - or in the Spurs' case, 3 in 5.

Actually it is. Everyone is gunning for you after you win the title and if you snuck up on people the title year, you won't the second year. So it matters. The only time the Spurs so much as made the conference finals after a title year was in 2008, otherwise, they've won a combined 4 playoff series in the years after their title runs, including 2 first round exits.

[whitemamba]

Actually it is. Everyone is gunning for you after you win the title and if you snuck up on people the title year, you won't the second year. So it matters. The only time the Spurs so much as made the conference finals after a title year was in 2008, otherwise, they've won a combined 4 playoff series in the years after their title runs, including 2 first round exits.

Damn

[Killakobe81]

"Repeating" is arbitrary. It just means you won two championships, and they happened to be in consecutive years. It's no more impressive than winning 2 titles in 3 years - or in the Spurs' case, 3 in 5.

How convienent ...

[Chris]

:downspin:that shit :lol

5 rings faggots :bobo

[Donkeybong]

The only thing Jim repeated was getting cucked twice. Once by his wife and once by his financial advisor

[whitemamba]

The only thing Jim repeated was getting cucked twice. Once by his wife and once by his financial advisor

i guess I was wrong , Jim repeated as a cuck. Lucky you spur fan , you are off the hook.

[benefactor]

You motherfuckers sound like a bunch of Cowboys fans who still obsess about how great they were in the 90's.

:cry mah Acheman
:cry mah Emmet
:cry mah trofees

That and career losers like dsf who downplay the Spurs accomplishments because there's not enough mouthwash on the planet to get the taste of that silver and black cock out of his mouth.

Is repeating a tough? Sure. Does it deserve some level of recognition? Indeed it does. But just like that Cowboys fan who thinks his titles 20 years ago matter more than any other championship ever achieved, it's not on some grand pedestal above every other championship.

[UZER]

To me, if the team is relatively healthy. repeating has most to to with coaching. And Pop is a master over thinker. Just look at the nonsense clip about the Nazr 3.

That's why Phil >>> Pop.

[djohn2oo8]

Actually it is. Everyone is gunning for you after you win the title and if you snuck up on people the title year, you won't the second year. So it matters. The only time the Spurs so much as made the conference finals after a title year was in 2008, otherwise, they've won a combined 4 playoff series in the years after their title runs, including 2 first round exits.

Christ.

[ambchang]

:sleepTerrible argument, the only big market team is LA on that list. Maybe Miami as of late, but its really NY and LA, Chicago hasn't signed 1 bigtime FA since the MJ days. Maybe Pau, but even he was past his prime and on the decline. Since the CBA has changed the spurs rang and failed to repeat, while the playing field is leveled.

:lol Miami signed Lebron and Bosh, Chicago traded for Rodman and kept Jordan throughout despite his clashes with management, LA signed Shaq and got MVPau, Celtics got their repeats in the 60s.

The playing field is not level and never will. State taxes, and most importantly endorsement opportunities will always be a factor.

[hitmanyr2k]

Yes pretty much. His minutes started to decline through out the Kings series and after game 1 of the Mavs series Pop decided not to play him at all. Instead the Spurs played this retarded small ball line up of Parker,Manu,Finley,Bowen,Duncan for that whole entire series.

Wow, that's fuckin stupid lol. So basically Pop put himself over the team because a player shot a three in garbage time? I still remember Spurs fans begging to get Nazr in the games during the Mavs series because the idiotic small ball lineup was killing them. I think other coaches would have "gotten over themselves" and played the personnel to win rather than hold onto grudges.

[hitmanyr2k]

:lol Miami signed Lebron and Bosh, Chicago traded for Rodman and kept Jordan throughout despite his clashes with management, LA signed Shaq and got MVPau, Celtics got their repeats in the 60s.

The playing field is not level and never will. State taxes, and most importantly endorsement opportunities will always be a factor.

Let's not act like Rodman was some prized possession back then :lol The man was a headcase and the Spurs practically gave him away for a bag of chips because no other teams were going to put up with his shit. The Bulls needed an inside presence in a big-man heavy league and took their chances. Phil let Rodman be Rodman with his bullshit but still got what he needed out of him to get championships.

[ambchang]

Let's not act like Rodman was some prized possession back then :lol The man was a headcase and the Spurs practically gave him away for a bag of chips because no other teams were going to put up with his shit. The Bulls needed an inside presence in a big-man heavy league and took their chances. Phil let Rodman be Rodman with his bullshit but still got what he needed out of him to get championships.

It's true, and kudos to Phil for keeping rodman in check.

[whitemamba]

:lol Miami signed Lebron and Bosh, Chicago traded for Rodman and kept Jordan throughout despite his clashes with management, LA signed Shaq and got MVPau, Celtics got their repeats in the 60s.

The playing field is not level and never will. State taxes, and most importantly endorsement opportunities will always be a factor.

Are you high? I said as of late. I conceded that the lakers are a big market team. There is no excuse for the spurs especially after the * season.

[ambchang]

Are you high? I said as of late. I conceded that the lakers are a big market team. There is no excuse for the spurs especially after the * season.

Which one was the * season? According to Laker fans, any season that the lakers didn't win the championship is an * season?

[whitemamba]

Which one was the * season? According to Laker fans, any season that the lakers didn't win the championship is an * season?

the shortened season. stop acting like you dont know what im talking about

[ambchang]

the shortened season. stop acting like you dont know what im talking about

You mean like every season prior to 2003, when the league has the best of five in the playoffs?

Non-asterisks rings for Spurs according to you: 4.
Non-asterisks rings for Lakers according to you: 2

[whitemamba]

You mean like every season prior to 2003, when the league has the best of five in the playoffs?

Non-asterisks rings for Spurs according to you: 4.
Non-asterisks rings for Lakers according to you: 2

Good spin, but no. Since your IQ is lower than normal, i mean the lockout season. Or did you become a spur fan post robinson?

[K...]

Good spin, but no. Since your IQ is lower than normal, i mean the lockout season. Or did you become a spur fan post robinson?

Has there really only been one lockout season?

[ambchang]

Good spin, but no. Since your IQ is lower than normal, i mean the lockout season. Or did you become a spur fan post robinson?

I thought there were two lockout seasons.

Why were those asterisked?

Also, why are you being racist by saying my entire race has low IQ?

What does post Robinson have anything to do with low IQ or asterisk seasons?

[whitemamba]

I thought there were two lockout seasons.

Why were those asterisked?

Also, why are you being racist by saying my entire race has low IQ?

What does post Robinson have anything to do with low IQ or asterisk seasons?

Lockout season = *

Stupid people tend to be racist aka AmbChang

You mentioned not knowing when the lockout season was, so you must of not been watching the NBA pre robinson.

[whitemamba]

Has there really only been one lockout season?

2 that i know of.

[K...]

2 that i know of.

Then please give LeBron the astericks without fail. Two if you count Amy.


Thus LeBron didn't repeat. Sorry your rules.

[Chris]

the shortened season. stop acting like you dont know what im talking about

Question for you. If Phil and his Lakers win that season, does he still lodge the asterisk? Fuck no, because Phil Jackson is full of shit and a sore loser. The asterisk is for pussies and assholes. Thread

[DMC]

Dont get mad at me. Its not my fault the Spurs went 0-5.Better than 0 and forever.

[ambchang]

Lockout season = *

why?


Stupid people tend to be racist aka AmbChang

I know quite a few stupid people who are not racist, and I am not even sure how I am being tied to this.

I think what you meant was racists tend to be stupid people, otherwise, you just called yourself racist.


You mentioned not knowing when the lockout season was, so you must of not been watching the NBA pre robinson.

Robinson joined 1989, the two lockout seasons were 99 and 12, so i am not really seeing much of a correlation there.

And I never mentioned about not knowing when the lockout was, I commented there were TWO lockout seasons when you mentioned that the asterisk season was THE lockout season. You have pretty much shown over and over in this thread about your low IQ, and it appears that you just called yourself a racist as well.

[DMC]

Lockout season = *

Stupid people tend to be racist aka AmbChang

You mentioned not knowing when the lockout season was, so you must of not been watching the NBA pre robinson.
Playoffs werent locked out.

[whitemamba]

Then please give LeBron the astericks without fail. Two if you count Amy.


Thus LeBron didn't repeat. Sorry your rules.

Done.


Question for you. If Phil and his Lakers win that season, does he still lodge the asterisk? Fuck no, because Phil Jackson is full of shit and a sore loser. The asterisk is for pussies and assholes. Thread (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=19320)

Sore loser, did you see pop after the spurs got elimintated , he was so salty it was hilarious. Just go watch the post game presser. :lol tbh


why?

Again shortened season, your stupidity coming back into player here. You know what that means.


I know quite a few stupid people who are not racist, and I am not even sure how I am being tied to this.

How would you know, you are on the same level as them, so i dont trust your judgement.

I think what you meant was racists tend to be stupid people, otherwise, you just called yourself racist.

:lol


Robinson joined 1989, the two lockout seasons were 99 and 12, so i am not really seeing much of a correlation there.

And I never mentioned about not knowing when the lockout was, I commented there were TWO lockout seasons when you mentioned that the asterisk season was THE lockout season. You have pretty much shown over and over in this thread about your low IQ, and it appears that you just called yourself a racist as well.

This really isn't working amb. You not being able to differentiate which lockout season when the spurs won the championship eludes to the fact that you started watching Post Robinson, AFTER the lockout. If you didnt know what year your sperms won the chip thats on you rain man.


Playoffs werent locked out.
you smart

[da_suns_fan]

Better than 0 and forever.

Its not your fault either:

https://media.giphy.com/media/1dJatRrSGJAju/giphy.gif

[ambchang]

Again shortened season, your stupidity coming back into player here. You know what that means.

But why are they asterisked?


How would you know, you are on the same level as them, so i dont trust your judgement.

You have shown to be of a lower level, so you should listen up, son.


:lol

Disturbing that you find humour in being a racist.


This really isn't working amb. You not being able to differentiate which lockout season when the spurs won the championship eludes to the fact that you started watching Post Robinson, AFTER the lockout. If you didnt know what year your sperms won the chip thats on you rain man.

Did I say I didn't know. I am having trouble understanding your logic here, if there really is one at all. You seem to be going around in circles. When have I shown any indication that I cannot differentiate which lockout season the Spurs won in? I am simply saying why would that be asterisked.

[da_suns_fan]

Actually it is. Everyone is gunning for you after you win the title and if you snuck up on people the title year, you won't the second year. So it matters. The only time the Spurs so much as made the conference finals after a title year was in 2008, otherwise, they've won a combined 4 playoff series in the years after their title runs, including 2 first round exits.

All true.

[Arcadian]

Actually it is. Everyone is gunning for you after you win the title and if you snuck up on people the title year, you won't the second year. So it matters. The only time the Spurs so much as made the conference finals after a title year was in 2008, otherwise, they've won a combined 4 playoff series in the years after their title runs, including 2 first round exits.

That's the standard response, but I don't buy it. As good as the Spurs have been for 20+ years, everybody plays hard against them regardless. You really think opposing players are saying "They only made it to the conference finals last year, so let's only go at 80% tonight"? No fuckin' way.

Professional athletes always play hard. Fans infer a lot of nonsense.

[Thread]

Question for you. If Phil and his Lakers win that season, does he still lodge the asterisk? Fuck no, because Phil Jackson is full of shit and a sore loser. The asterisk is for pussies and assholes. Thread (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=19320)

Me

[Obstructed_View]

Yes pretty much. His minutes started to decline through out the Kings series and after game 1 of the Mavs series Pop decided not to play him at all. Instead the Spurs played this retarded small ball line up of Parker,Manu,Finley,Bowen,Duncan for that whole entire series.

Ugh. Finley at power forward. So terrible.

I think Rasho started game 4, and Horry was the starter by game 5 and both centers got almost no minutes from that point on. Oberto (8 mpg regular season) had more minutes in the Mavs series than either of them.

Remember when people thought DeSagana Diop was a good player? Spurs smallball made him look that way.

[whitemamba]

But why are they asterisked?



You have shown to be of a lower level, so you should listen up, son.



Disturbing that you find humour in being a racist.



Did I say I didn't know. I am having trouble understanding your logic here, if there really is one at all. You seem to be going around in circles. When have I shown any indication that I cannot differentiate which lockout season the Spurs won in? I am simply saying why would that be asterisked.

* season because it's shorter , really it isn't rocket science. Longer season = different result.
Me having to constantly explain everything really proves your at the bottom level, and I wouldn't expect a racist Texan to understand my logic , I told you I am above you, when I read your posts I am in fear of becoming less intelligent. I won't let you do that, so stop it. That being said , all these are but salty deflections of why your Spurs could never repeat as champs. Is it because pop is easily exposed ? Is it because Jim never had the guts to defend his title? First round exits , losing to lower seeds ? What's the reason.

[daslicer]

Ugh. Finley at power forward. So terrible.

I think Rasho started game 4, and Horry was the starter by game 5 and both centers got almost no minutes from that point on. Oberto (8 mpg regular season) had more minutes in the Mavs series than either of them.

Remember when people thought DeSagana Diop was a good player? Spurs smallball made him look that way.

The most infuriating part of the small ball line up was on the defensive end. I remember how hard it was for the Spurs to get defensive stops with that line up. Even after the Mavs would miss a shot Diop, Dampier,Dirk would get the offensive rebound and they would kill the spurs with second chance points.

[Obstructed_View]

The most infuriating part of the small ball line up was on the defensive end. I remember how hard it was for the Spurs to get defensive stops with that line up. Even after the Mavs would miss a shot Diop, Dampier,Dirk would get the offensive rebound and they would kill the spurs with second chance points.

Actually the worst part was Spurs fans on this board saying "Dirk's just better than Duncan. If the Spurs didn't run smallball Dirk would score 50 and Duncan would foul out in the first half."

[Caltex2]

That's partially true but there's nothing like being the team everyone is gunning for. Winning a title puts a bullseye on your back.

[DMC]

That's partially true but there's nothing like being the team everyone is gunning for. Winning a title puts a bullseye on your back.
Which the Phoenix Mercury know very well.

[da_suns_fan]

That's the standard response, but I don't buy it. As good as the Spurs have been for 20+ years, everybody plays hard against them regardless. You really think opposing players are saying "They only made it to the conference finals last year, so let's only go at 80% tonight"? No fuckin' way.

Professional athletes always play hard. Fans infer a lot of nonsense.

Are you really comparing a Spurs visit to a Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasty visit?

I PROMISE you, no one cares.

[Arcadian]

Are you really comparing a Spurs visit to a Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasty visit?

I PROMISE you, no one cares.

I'm not comparing anything to anything. You are. All I'm saying is, nobody takes the Spurs lightly given their reputation over the last 20+ years. I promise you that.

[ambchang]

* season because it's shorter , really it isn't rocket science. Longer season = different result.

So like I said, every single season prior to 2003 should be asterisked then. They only had a best of 5 series rather than a best of 7 in the first round.

Also longer season doesn't necessarily mean different result, it could be a different result, but that is true for a LOT more than just a shortened season. Injuries, officiating, the ball bouncing a certain way, weather conditions, cancelled games, they all could lead to a different result, so your rationale is basically saying all seasons should be asterisked.


Me having to constantly explain everything really proves your at the bottom level, and I wouldn't expect a racist Texan to understand my logic , I told you I am above you, when I read your posts I am in fear of becoming less intelligent. I won't let you do that, so stop it. That being said , all these are but salty deflections of why your Spurs could never repeat as champs. Is it because pop is easily exposed ? Is it because Jim never had the guts to defend his title? First round exits , losing to lower seeds ? What's the reason.

So many things wrong with that paragraph, I had to put it in point form:
1) You having to constantly explain everything could be attributed to the horrible logic you have, which I am really seeing so far
2) Not sure what a racist Texan would have to do with anything
3) You shouldn't expect anyone to understand your logic, because there is none
4) You claiming you are above me is hilarious at best. Your posts have constantly shown how illogical you are, with you putting your hypothesis as proof
5) You don't have to be in fear of becoming less intelligent, or you'd be a plant
6) I am not trying to make you less intelligent, it's not possible
7) Spurs could never repeat as champs have nothing to do with a season in 99, a season you somehow mysteriously put an asterisk on. I am having even more trouble understanding how asking questions on an asterisk has anything to do with the Spurs not being able to repeat.
8) I already showed the reason, teams that have the luxury of having multiple spare parts are the ones that can repeat. And the Spurs, a small market team is not one that can afford that. 00, Duncan got hurt, severe rule changes that stopped how the Spurs defend the perimeter. 04, Robinson retired, sever lack of outside shooting with Jackson gone. 06, Mavs was just a better team, 08, change in roster, 15, injuries. It really isn't rocket science to see that a team that can afford to get the spare parts to weather those injuries or can afford to sign back the right players would mitigate those risks, but then self-proclaimed intelligent beings like you like to attribute these things to "easily exposed", "heart" and "guts", because someone who lacks hearts and guts and can be easily exposed most certainly can win 5 championships.

[DMC]

Are you really comparing a Spurs visit to a Bulls/Lakers/Heat dynasty visit?

I PROMISE you, no one cares.
Yet here you are, on Spurstalk.com.

[da_suns_fan]

Yet here you are, on Spurstalk.com.

Its a great site. That doesnt mean anyone cares when the Spurs come to town.

Certainly not like the Lakers/Bulls/Heat dynasties anyway.

[whitemamba]

So like I said, every single season prior to 2003 should be asterisked then. They only had a best of 5 series rather than a best of 7 in the first round.

Also longer season doesn't necessarily mean different result, it could be a different result, but that is true for a LOT more than just a shortened season. Injuries, officiating, the ball bouncing a certain way, weather conditions, cancelled games, they all could lead to a different result, so your rationale is basically saying all seasons should be asterisked.



So many things wrong with that paragraph, I had to put it in point form:
1) You having to constantly explain everything could be attributed to the horrible logic you have, which I am really seeing so far
2) Not sure what a racist Texan would have to do with anything
3) You shouldn't expect anyone to understand your logic, because there is none
4) You claiming you are above me is hilarious at best. Your posts have constantly shown how illogical you are, with you putting your hypothesis as proof
5) You don't have to be in fear of becoming less intelligent, or you'd be a plant
6) I am not trying to make you less intelligent, it's not possible
7) Spurs could never repeat as champs have nothing to do with a season in 99, a season you somehow mysteriously put an asterisk on. I am having even more trouble understanding how asking questions on an asterisk has anything to do with the Spurs not being able to repeat.
8) I already showed the reason, teams that have the luxury of having multiple spare parts are the ones that can repeat. And the Spurs, a small market team is not one that can afford that. 00, Duncan got hurt, severe rule changes that stopped how the Spurs defend the perimeter. 04, Robinson retired, sever lack of outside shooting with Jackson gone. 06, Mavs was just a better team, 08, change in roster, 15, injuries. It really isn't rocket science to see that a team that can afford to get the spare parts to weather those injuries or can afford to sign back the right players would mitigate those risks, but then self-proclaimed intelligent beings like you like to attribute these things to "easily exposed", "heart" and "guts", because someone who lacks hearts and guts and can be easily exposed most certainly can win 5 championships.

:sleep

[DMC]

Its a great site. That doesnt mean anyone cares when the Spurs come to town.

Certainly not like the Lakers/Bulls/Heat dynasties anyway.
You cared, thus you came here.

[ambchang]

:sleep

Sort of a pointless reply from you, wasn't it?

[whitemamba]

Sort of a pointless reply from you, wasn't it?

Why do you let me get to you?

[ambchang]

Why do you let me get to you?

Why are you asking questions that are actually untrue statements?

[whitemamba]

Why are you asking questions that are actually untrue statements?

Please.

[ambchang]

Please.

Please what?

[whitemamba]

Please what?

you know.

[ambchang]

you know.

No, not really.

You have to be clear in your communications.

Perhaps something you can learn going forward, son.

[whitemamba]

No, not really.

You have to be clear in your communications.

Perhaps something you can learn going forward, son.

Lol you talikg about being clear.. That killed me. Kudos.

[ambchang]

Lol you talikg about being clear.. That killed me. Kudos.

Couldn't be more clear, but then again, it's could be me being unclear or you being stupid, and based no the back and forth, we both know what the reason is.

[whitemamba]

Couldn't be more clear, but then again, it's could be me being unclear or you being stupid, and based no the back and forth, we both know what the reason is.

:lmao what ever floats your boat old man.

[ambchang]

:lmao what ever floats your boat old man.

Clear communication does.

[djohn2oo8]

"Repeating" is arbitrary. It just means you won two championships, and they happened to be in consecutive years. It's no more impressive than winning 2 titles in 3 years - or in the Spurs' case, 3 in 5.

Yes it is impressive. Because only 5 franchises have ever done it.

[ambchang]

Yes it is impressive. Because only 5 franchises have ever done it.

And one of them are the Rockets, which just tells you how unimpressive it really is.

[140]

And one of them are the Rockets, which just tells you how unimpressive it really is.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/589434/robin-lopez-o.gif

[Killakobe81]

Yes it is impressive. Because only 5 franchises have ever done it.

This.
And dont let them hate on the clutch city titles.
No way MJ stops both titles.
he was mentally done, The cowards who murdred his father saw to that.
Even if he doesnt retire... I think the Rox get at least one title ... maybe both who knows?!

People forget they did not even have rodman or Horace grant in those years the Rox won titles ...who was going to defend front-court guys in the Bulls rotation? Hakeem would murder that Bulls front-court.

I do think MJ and Pippen would smother Drexler, Cassell and Kenny Smith though ...young Horry who had hops and pippen would be fun ...

[ambchang]

This.
And dont let them hate on the clutch city titles.
No way MJ stops both titles.
he was mentally done.
The cowards who murdred his father saw to that.
Even if he doesnt retire I think Rox get at least one title ... maybe both who knows?!

People forget they did not even have rodman or Horace grant in those years the Rox won titles ...who was going to defend front-court guys in the Bulls rotation?

I do think MJ and Pippen would smother Drexler, Cassell and Kenny Smith though ...young Horry who had hops and pippen would be fun

I always thought the Rockets match up well with the Bulls in those years, especially the 94 version. I think Maxwell, because as much of a nutcase as he was, would match up with Jordan well (better than Drexler), and Hakeem would just beast on the Bulls frontline. Horry and Pippen would be a great matchup like you said, but the Bulls will not have enough perimeter defenders to hone in on all those three point shooters. You double Hakeem and one of the three point shooters will be open, you don't double Hakeem and it's two points. On the other end, Hakeem shuts down the paint, and the perimeter defenders like Maxwell, Elie and Horry will stop pretty much anyone.

That said, those five with repeats are:

Heat - fantastic team, but great? Please.
Lakers - great great teams in 87 and 88, 00 to 02 (though 00 and 02 are slightly overrated due to 01), but 09 and 10 were some of the weaker champs in recent years. I mean MVPau is great and all, but he's not like Shaq or Duncan great.
Celtics - All of them were in the 60s, and besides, wasn't those Bird Celtics great? 08 Celtics were also better than 09 or 10 Lakers.
Pistons - Changed the way the game was played, but were they great? Kind of. They are, however viewed mostly as a bridge between the Celtics/Lakers and the Bulls
Bulls - great teams, no arguing that.

Repeats can be due to a number of factors:
1) Historically great teams, and you can see those with the Bulls and lakers, and to an extent the Russell Celtics
2) Weak competition, MVPau lakers, Heat to a degree
3) Changing rules and ability to adapt - Pistons, Heat, Lakers
4) Luck - Hurt Isiah, mysterious suspension of all types of Rockets and Mavs players when the entire league was doing drugs, injuries to Celtics, 20+ FTA in the fourth quarter, getting a foul by busting somebody's nose with your elbow, 6, Hamstring injuries

Out of all those repeat teams, I can only say that the Bulls and Celtics were the only ones who would repeat under almost any circumstances (other than plane crash and meteor hit the stadium events), the other teams had a lot of things that went right for them to repeat.

[Killakobe81]

I always thought the Rockets match up well with the Bulls in those years, especially the 94 version. I think Maxwell, because as much of a nutcase as he was, would match up with Jordan well (better than Drexler), and Hakeem would just beast on the Bulls frontline. Horry and Pippen would be a great matchup like you said, but the Bulls will not have enough perimeter defenders to hone in on all those three point shooters. You double Hakeem and one of the three point shooters will be open, you don't double Hakeem and it's two points. On the other end, Hakeem shuts down the paint, and the perimeter defenders like Maxwell, Elie and Horry will stop pretty much anyone.

That said, those five with repeats are:

Heat - fantastic team, but great? Please.
Lakers - great great teams in 87 and 88, 00 to 02 (though 00 and 02 are slightly overrated due to 01), but 09 and 10 were some of the weaker champs in recent years. I mean MVPau is great and all, but he's not like Shaq or Duncan great.
Celtics - All of them were in the 60s, and besides, wasn't those Bird Celtics great? 08 Celtics were also better than 09 or 10 Lakers.
Pistons - Changed the way the game was played, but were they great? Kind of. They are, however viewed mostly as a bridge between the Celtics/Lakers and the Bulls
Bulls - great teams, no arguing that.

Repeats can be due to a number of factors:
1) Historically great teams, and you can see those with the Bulls and lakers, and to an extent the Russell Celtics
2) Weak competition, MVPau lakers, Heat to a degree
3) Changing rules and ability to adapt - Pistons, Heat, Lakers
4) Luck - Hurt Isiah, mysterious suspension of all types of Rockets and Mavs players when the entire league was doing drugs, injuries to Celtics, 20+ FTA in the fourth quarter, getting a foul by busting somebody's nose with your elbow, 6, Hamstring injuries

Out of all those repeat teams, I can only say that the Bulls and Celtics were the only ones who would repeat under almost any circumstances (other than plane crash and meteor hit the stadium events), the other teams had a lot of things that went right for them to repeat.

Amb,

some of what you said makes sense, but ...
Spurs had some of the same competition as the Kobepau repeat, Shaqobe 3peat and Heat repeat yet still was not able to do it not once in 5 tries.

Spurs sure are unlucky after a title and very lucky when they rang?
MvpauLakers :lol ...so predictable :toast

[da_suns_fan]

Out of all those repeat teams, I can only say that the Bulls and Celtics were the only ones who would repeat under almost any circumstances (other than plane crash and meteor hit the stadium events), the other teams had a lot of things that went right for them to repeat.

The 2001 Lakers lost ONE GAME in the playoffs for their first repeat.

They curb-stomped the Spurs in the WCF, winning games 3 & 4 by a combined 70 points.

[Killakobe81]

The 2001 Lakers lost ONE GAME in the playoffs for their first repeat.

They curb-stomped the Spurs in the WCF, winning games 3 & 4 by a combined 70 points.

The shaqobe Lakers were the most dominant team since Mj's Bulls better than the heatles, 2014 Spurs, state in 2015 and the 2008 Celts tbh ...and of course the Kobepau Lakers.

[ambchang]

Amb,

some of what you said makes sense, but ...
Spurs had some of the same competition as the Kobepau repeat, Shaqobe 3peat and Heat repeat yet still was not able to do it not once in 5 tries.

Spurs sure are unlucky after a title and very lucky when they rang?
MvpauLakers :lol ...so predictable :toast

The Spurs really weren't that great of a team. Nobody really mentioned any Spurs team as all time great squads, with the exception of the 14 squad, which I really think is just a "got-hot-at-the-right-moment" team. The 99 Spurs is probably the greatest defensive squad of all time, but have glaring holes on offense. Besides, the MVPau Lakers were playing in a league more or less devoid of talent, including the Spurs. Richard Jefferson? Ime Udoka? Are you kidding me?

The Spurs have issues to deal with in each of those seasons, and I wrote them out in another post. The only year where the Spurs can't blame luck was 06, and maybe 15. But the Mavs matched up with the Spurs perfectly in 06, and the Spurs just didn't have it in 15. Spurs were really lucky in 07 as they didn't have to face the Mavs. Spurs got hot in 14, got the right players to step up in 99 and 03 in clutch moments (you have to get the right players as well), and got timely shots in the Finals from Horry in 05. You sort of put yourself in the position to win, but a few minor events could have been more or less championships for the Spurs. Like I said, the Spurs were never really so clearly better than every other team in those 5 championship years that minor events wouldn't impact the outcome (tweaked ankle for a role player, ball bouncing a certain way, the ref calling differently in crucial moments, etc ...). The only teams that can say that they will win no matter what due to their dominance (other than major injuries to key players) were the 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers, 92 Bulls, 96 and 97 Bulls, 01 Lakers, 82 Sixers and those Russell Celtics. 08 Celtics and 04 Pistons have a case, but I attribute those to weak competition more than anything. Notice two of those teams didn't repeat.

[ambchang]

The 2001 Lakers lost ONE GAME in the playoffs for their first repeat.

They curb-stomped the Spurs in the WCF, winning games 3 & 4 by a combined 70 points.

Winning in 2001 counts as a repeat now?

[da_suns_fan]

The shaqobe Lakers were the most dominant team since Mj's Bulls better than the heatles, 2014 Spurs, state in 2015 and the 2008 Celts tbh ...and of course the Kobepau Lakers.

Yes. Shaq was too dominant.

I remember after Portland's 2000 disaster the Blazers went out and got a couple more bigs to try and send "wave after wave" against Shaq. After 2001, though, everyone said "Fuck it".

[da_suns_fan]

Winning in 2001 counts as a repeat now?

WTF?

Yeah. They won in 2000. They won in 2001. How is that not a repeat?

[ambchang]

WTF?

Yeah. They won in 2000. They won in 2001. How is that not a repeat?

Then you would clue in that what I was saying above was that the 00 and 02 Lakers were not so ridiculously dominant that they would have won the championship in almost all situations like the 01 lakers would.

[Killakobe81]

The Spurs really weren't that great of a team. Nobody really mentioned any Spurs team as all time great squads, with the exception of the 14 squad, which I really think is just a "got-hot-at-the-right-moment" team. The 99 Spurs is probably the greatest defensive squad of all time, but have glaring holes on offense. Besides, the MVPau Lakers were playing in a league more or less devoid of talent, including the Spurs. Richard Jefferson? Ime Udoka? Are you kidding me?

The Spurs have issues to deal with in each of those seasons, and I wrote them out in another post. The only year where the Spurs can't blame luck was 06, and maybe 15. But the Mavs matched up with the Spurs perfectly in 06, and the Spurs just didn't have it in 15. Spurs were really lucky in 07 as they didn't have to face the Mavs. Spurs got hot in 14, got the right players to step up in 99 and 03 in clutch moments (you have to get the right players as well), and got timely shots in the Finals from Horry in 05. You sort of put yourself in the position to win, but a few minor events could have been more or less championships for the Spurs. Like I said, the Spurs were never really so clearly better than every other team in those 5 championship years that minor events wouldn't impact the outcome (tweaked ankle for a role player, ball bouncing a certain way, the ref calling differently in crucial moments, etc ...). The only teams that can say that they will win no matter what due to their dominance (other than major injuries to key players) were the 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers, 92 Bulls, 96 and 97 Bulls, 01 Lakers, 82 Sixers and those Russell Celtics. 08 Celtics and 04 Pistons have a case, but I attribute those to weak competition more than anything. Notice two of those teams didn't repeat.

I think the 2005/2006 Spurs were pretty damn great ...not all time GOAT level but definitely capable of repeating.

[da_suns_fan]

Then you would clue in that what I was saying above was that the 00 and 02 Lakers were not so ridiculously dominant that they would have won the championship in almost all situations like the 01 lakers would.

I have no clue what youre stupid theory is nor do I care.

The Lakers repeated in 2001 and 2002. "What if" time machine/different-era bullshit is for insecure douche-bags.

[ambchang]

I think the 2005/2006 Spurs were pretty damn great ...not all time GOAT level but definitely capable of repeating.

I think so too. I think out of all the Spurs team, the 05 team was the greatest. That said, their one great flaw was defending the mid range, and the Mavs were that team.

[ambchang]

I have no clue what youre stupid theory is nor do I care.

The Lakers repeated in 2001 and 2002. "What if" time machine/different-era bullshit is for insecure douche-bags.

So did the 94 95 Rockets, and nobody would ever rate them as greater teams than the Bird Celtics or Walton Blazers.

And :lol about insecure, :lol ratings smack.

Honestly, I would probably even rate the 93 Suns over the 94 Rockets, too bad the Suns didn't win a championship. But if the 94 Rockets deserved a parade, the 93 Suns sure did as well.

[Killakobe81]

Yes. Shaq was too dominant.

I remember after Portland's 2000 disaster the Blazers went out and got a couple more bigs to try and send "wave after wave" against Shaq. After 2001, though, everyone said "Fuck it".

No doubt Shaq was a bully on the block especially 2000 all year and 2001 playoffs.

[Thread]

Yes. Shaq was too dominant.

I remember after Portland's 2000 disaster the Blazers went out and got a couple more bigs to try and send "wave after wave" against Shaq. After 2001, though, everyone said "Fuck it".

Except for Colangelo. He convened that blue ribbon committee to address Daddy. It was the beginning of the end. He, more than anything conducted the end of the NBA big man as we knew him.

[djohn2oo8]

And one of them are the Rockets, which just tells you how unimpressive it really is.

Well the Spurs have had 5 chances to defend their title, and never could. So that shows you just how impressive it is.

[Killakobe81]

Well the Spurs have had 5 chances to defend their title, and never could. So that shows you just how impressive it is.

:lol

[djohn2oo8]

What's funny is, Ambchang and his crew will say MJ would have 8 peated had he not retired, yet will say repeating is unimpressive when it comes to the Spurs.

[ambchang]

Well the Spurs have had 5 chances to defend their title, and never could. So that shows you just how impressive it is.

It shows you how meaningless it is.

[ambchang]

What's funny is, Ambchang and his crew will say MJ would have 8 peated had he not retired, yet will say repeating is unimpressive when it comes to the Spurs.


I always thought the Rockets match up well with the Bulls in those years, especially the 94 version. I think Maxwell, because as much of a nutcase as he was, would match up with Jordan well (better than Drexler), and Hakeem would just beast on the Bulls frontline. Horry and Pippen would be a great matchup like you said, but the Bulls will not have enough perimeter defenders to hone in on all those three point shooters. You double Hakeem and one of the three point shooters will be open, you don't double Hakeem and it's two points. On the other end, Hakeem shuts down the paint, and the perimeter defenders like Maxwell, Elie and Horry will stop pretty much anyone.

Don't let the vinegar blind you.

[Clipper Nation]

The shaqobe Lakers were the most dominant team since Mj's Bulls better than the heatles, 2014 Spurs, state in 2015 and the 2008 Celts tbh ...and of course the Kobepau Lakers.
I don't recall a "Shaqobe Lakers" or a "Kobepau Lakers." I remember the Shaqorry Lakers and the Pauodom Lakers, though.

[Killakobe81]

I don't recall a "Shaqobe Lakers" or a "Kobepau Lakers." I remember the Shaqorry Lakers and the Pauodom Lakers, though.

They have vitamins that help with that ...

[Thread]

I don't recall a "Shaqobe Lakers" or a "Kobepau Lakers." I remember the Shaqorry Lakers and the Pauodom Lakers, though.

I'll just bet you do.

[djohn2oo8]

It shows you how meaningless it is.

If it was meaningless, the Warriors wouldn't have gone for the 73 win record if they knew it would mean not repeating. If it was meaningless, then no other team ever would have accomplished this feat. It's okay that the Spurs have failed the most times at this.

[ambchang]

If it was meaningless, the Warriors wouldn't have gone for the 73 win record if they knew it would mean not repeating. If it was meaningless, then no other team ever would have accomplished this feat. It's okay that the Spurs have failed the most times at this.

I thought the Warriors were focusing on the title, I didn't know that they said to themselves last year, "guys, we want to repeat, it's not about this year, it's about next". I thought players just want to win as many championships as possible

As for your second "point". I don't even know what you were talking about.

Btw, Duncan's better than Hakeem all time, because he won 5 vs 2 for Hakeem. Nobody ever ranks players based on repeats.

Edit: the Spurs didn't fail the most times. The Celtics failed on 8 occasions.

[tonight...you]

I keep thinking about that time I lost count of our repeats and Kool had to tote 'em up proper for me.
Alzheimer's truly sucks. Just wait til you wake up and some black face you can't recognize is injecting something up, or is it out of(?) your ass, telling you to "Relax, sir," and- shit bro, you got no choice. You're already hooked up.
You recognize the drool dribbling off your chin, but for some reason, you don't really care- there's a giant plunger sucking things from your ass right now and things are getting fuzzy anyways... And what's connected to your dickhead?! Sweet Jesus!

Ah... look forward to it, bud. You're almost there. Good times.

[Thread]

Alzheimer's truly sucks. Just wait til you wake up and some black face you can't recognize is injecting something up, or is it out of(?) your ass, telling you to "Relax, sir," and- shit bro, you got no choice. You're already hooked up.
You recognize the drool dribbling off your chin, but for some reason, you don't really care- there's a giant plunger sucking things from your ass right now and things are getting fuzzy anyways... And what's connected to your dickhead?! Sweet Jesus!

Ah... look forward to it, bud. You're almost there. Good times.

Hey, sweetheart...

They were selling your shit.

[tonight...you]

Hey, sweetheart...

They were selling your shit.
And I was smart enough to not buy. Now come over here and give someone smart a smooch, babycakes.

[Thread]

And I was smart enough to not buy. Now come over here and give someone smart a smooch, babycakes.

How bout you, tonite,,,what does your mother look like naked? Got a big, hairy bush? Seriously, you every think about fucking her, your mother?

[tonight...you]

How bout you, tonite,,,what does your mother look like naked? Got a big, hairy bush? Seriously, you every think about fucking her, your mother?
She been dead for 4 years, but you can plow. I don't care about the corpse, you sick fucker.
Since you brought it up, why don't you send a pic of your momma? You like to think about them...

I bet she was a looker.

[Thread]

She been dead for 4 years, but you can plow. I don't care about the corpse, you sick fucker.
Since you brought it up, why don't you send a pic of your momma? You like to think about them...

I bet she was a looker.

Well, when she was topside did your mother have a nice, chubby ass, tonite? You ever think about it,,,even now 4 years later?

[tonight...you]

Well, when she was topside did your mother have a nice, chubby ass, tonite? You ever think about it,,,even now 4 years later?
You needing a fix, baby? We can go PM. I have a sexy voice. Even for a guy... I bet you'd like that too.

[Thread]

You needing a fix, baby? We can go PM. I have a sexy voice. Even for a guy... I bet you'd like that too.

First things first,,,tell me about your dead mother's ass, when it was alive?

[tonight...you]

First things first,,,tell me about your dead mother's ass, when it was alive?
Ah, I see... you can't read since I already informed you of that.
Your shallow attempts are gorgeous. I want to lick your face and I'm not even gay.

[Thread]

Ah, I see... you can't read since I already informed you of that.
Your shallow attempts are gorgeous. I want to lick your face and I'm not even gay.

You ever think about fucking your mother, when she was alive?

[tonight...you]

You ever think about fucking your mother, when she was alive?
About as much as you do. Hold on. This is good. I'm having a good time, but I have to walk my dogs. Stay here, my man. You're giving me energy.

[Thread]

About as much as you do. Hold on. This is good. I'm having a good time, but I have to walk my dogs. Stay here, my man. You're giving me energy.

lmvictoriousao!!!

[tonight...you]

You ever think about fucking your mother, when she was alive?
And then we can get to the real nitty gritty. What makes Dale tick?

[Thread]

And then we can get to the real nitty gritty. What makes Dale tick?

Forget it. I ain't in the mood. You win.

[tonight...you]

Forget it. I ain't in the mood. You win.
That easy? After "lmvictoriousao!!!"?
I was getting turned on!

All bluster, no meat.

[tonight...you]

Forget it. I ain't in the mood. You win.
That's why you're not a writer.

[tonight...you]

lmvictoriousao!!!
No. lmvictoriousao!!!

When you're ready to choose to fight an uncomfortable fight with someone ready... then you might be able to write something someone might actually read, besides message boards.
Until then... you're a nobody. Now go. Continue shepherding the stoopid kids you do so well.

May that fulfill you.

[Silver&Black]

Forget it. I ain't in the mood. You win.

I better not catch you in my reading room...

There will be hell to pay.

[tonight...you]

I better not catch you in my reading room...

There will be hell to pay.
He enters a reading room? He cannot stand real struggle in his narratives. How can he write anything compelling?
He uses simple garbage to pull people into arguments via MS boards, but shows no substance other than being a Manson style manipulist.
Probably writes porn. Simple, teenage shit.

I hope he's proud of pulling in the small minded of the world. On a tiny scale MS board. Great job. Could be so much more, but apparently he retired from life a long time ago.

I could have done something with him.

[Thread]

I better not catch you in my reading room...

There will be hell to pay.

They were selling your shit.

[tonight...you]

Forget it. I ain't in the mood. You win.
Oh... and my sweet, sweet girl.... I'm not going anywhere. My eyes are upon you and you interest me. I like how you came after me. I'm going to hang around for awhile. See what you got going on inside them guts of yours.
This should be fun for the both of us.

[tonight...you]

They were selling your shit.
Beautiful. I look forward to the 1st parrot so I can point at them.
Probably that guy who says the exact same thing as you afterwards with the Kawhi avi and you act annoyed over it because...
Well, why do you act annoyed over it?

[Silver&Black]

He enters a reading room?

Well....he used to.

He lost it to me in a bet the other week. Now it's my reading room, tbh.

[tonight...you]

They were selling your shit.
Are you married? If you are, does your wife give you any attention anymore?
If not... why? Why does your woman not give two shits about you any longer?

Age? You two just looking at others now? If you are, she is...
Is she going shopping more than usual lately? Games of cribbage with "the girls", more than they used to be?

You're on here to get your dick hard, aren't you?

[tonight...you]

Well....he used to.

He lost it to me in a bet the other week. Now it's my reading room, tbh.
Dear God, for the better, I'm sure. I almost thought about looking for it for a second, but I'm going to be honest- I'm not going to read anything there.

Who knows... Maybe tomorrow I'll change my mind. Weirder things have happened and I sure feel better about walking into something run by you over that fraud.

[djohn2oo8]

I thought the Warriors were focusing on the title, I didn't know that they said to themselves last year, "guys, we want to repeat, it's not about this year, it's about next". I thought players just want to win as many championships as possible

As for your second "point". I don't even know what you were talking about.

Btw, Duncan's better than Hakeem all time, because he won 5 vs 2 for Hakeem. Nobody ever ranks players based on repeats.

Edit: the Spurs didn't fail the most times. The Celtics failed on 8 occasions.

Hakeem kept Shaq ringless (along with many others) until Duncan didn't. No Duncan isn't better.

[tonight...you]

Hakeem kept Shaq ringless (along with many others) until Duncan didn't. No Duncan isn't better.
God, remember when Shaq was young and lean? That guy, if he would have wanted to, could have been... man. Shaq with Kawhi's demeanor would have been the biggest conundrum in the league.
Ridiculously dominant and improving year by year, but no personality, that gave Shaq so much of his aura, like Mohammed Ali.

That guy would have been considered over MJ as the GOAT.

[ambchang]

Hakeem kept Shaq ringless (along with many others) until Duncan didn't. No Duncan isn't better.

That's so stupid. It's like saying bird kept Hakeem ring less until jorda. couldn't so bird is better than Jordan. How about Allen iverson kept Lebron ring less and Durant couldn't so iverson is better than Durant? So many different levels of stupid.

And Duncan is on another level as an all time great as Hakeem now. Just accept it and move on.

[Caltex2]

That's so stupid. It's like saying bird kept Hakeem ring less until jorda. couldn't so bird is better than Jordan. How about Allen iverson kept Lebron ring less and Durant couldn't so iverson is better than Durant? So many different levels of stupid.

And Duncan is on another level as an all time great as Hakeem now. Just accept it and move on.

LOL, I realize what website I'm on but LOL. Hakeem never had the longevity Duncan has had but he was still great the majority of his career with a peak much, much higher than Duncan's.

[ambchang]

LOL, I realize what website I'm on but LOL. Hakeem never had the longevity Duncan has had but he was still great the majority of his career with a peak much, much higher than Duncan's.

Much mich higher? Based on what?

[djohn2oo8]

That's so stupid. It's like saying bird kept Hakeem ring less until jorda. couldn't so bird is better than Jordan. How about Allen iverson kept Lebron ring less and Durant couldn't so iverson is better than Durant? So many different levels of stupid.

And Duncan is on another level as an all time great as Hakeem now. Just accept it and move on.
What's stupid is using the rings argument to determine who was the better basketball player. Duncan was in a better situation and environment with a great front office all of his career. Hakeem was not.

[djohn2oo8]

LOL, I realize what website I'm on but LOL. Hakeem never had the longevity Duncan has had but he was still great the majority of his career with a peak much, much higher than Duncan's.
Well, the Reason Duncan had the longevity was because Duncan started playing less minutes around the age of 28, while Hakeem was playing near 40 minutes a game from 27 until he was 34. Or let's put it another way...Duncan has played 19 seasons and Hakeem 17 seasons. Yet Hakeem is only 3000 minutes, (or the equivalent of one season) behind Duncan in minutes. Which indicates Tim never had to carry his team for a long stretch of time like Dream did.

[Thread]

What's stupid is using the rings argument to determine who was the better basketball player. Duncan was in a better situation and environment with a great front office all of his career. Hakeem was not.

That's how we started,,,and that's how we'll conduct ourselves onward.

[ambchang]

What's stupid is using the rings argument to determine who was the better basketball player. Duncan was in a better situation and environment with a great front office all of his career. Hakeem was not.

That's why he acted like a diva until he refound Allah.

[ambchang]

Well, the Reason Duncan had the longevity was because Duncan started playing less minutes around the age of 28, while Hakeem was playing near 40 minutes a game from 27 until he was 34. Or let's put it another way...Duncan has played 19 seasons and Hakeem 17 seasons. Yet Hakeem is only 3000 minutes, (or the equivalent of one season) behind Duncan in minutes. Which indicates Tim never had to carry his team for a long stretch of time like Dream did.

Which explains why simpletons would view how Hakeem had a "much higher peak" than Duncan, without even looking at minutes played and pace of game, not to mention the league moving to a perimeter friendly game where big men were not being used to the same extent.

Yeah, Hakeem's peak was 27.8 ppg, 14 rpg, 3.6 apg, 2.6 stls and 4.6 blks (have to admit, the last two are ridiculous) while Duncan's was "only" 25.5, 12.9, 3.9, 0.9 and 2.9, but if you look at per 100 possessions, those numbers became:

35.8/18.8/4.7/3.3/5.8 vs.
33.5/18.3/5.7/1.6/4.5

Then when you look at advanced stats, Hakeems' best ORtg - Drtg season was 114-96, or 18, Duncan is 112-93 = 19
Advanced stats for OWS/DWS/WS/WS48/OBPM/DBPM/BPM/VORP are:
7.9/8.7/15.8/.234/3.0/5.9/8.4/8.5 vs.
10.7/7.2/17.8/.257/3.9/5.1/7.6/8.1

You can make an argument for either of those stats, but Duncan did it for much longer, much better consistency, and didn't have that diva stage. It's stupid to say Hakeem had the better career, and totally inaccurate to say that Hakeem had a MUCH higher peak.

[djohn2oo8]

Doesn't change the fact the Spurs were a better organization than the Rockets.

[djohn2oo8]

Which explains why simpletons would view how Hakeem had a "much higher peak" than Duncan, without even looking at minutes played and pace of game, not to mention the league moving to a perimeter friendly game where big men were not being used to the same extent.

Yeah, Hakeem's peak was 27.8 ppg, 14 rpg, 3.6 apg, 2.6 stls and 4.6 blks (have to admit, the last two are ridiculous) while Duncan's was "only" 25.5, 12.9, 3.9, 0.9 and 2.9, but if you look at per 100 possessions, those numbers became:

35.8/18.8/4.7/3.3/5.8 vs.
33.5/18.3/5.7/1.6/4.5

Then when you look at advanced stats, Hakeems' best ORtg - Drtg season was 114-96, or 18, Duncan is 112-93 = 19
Advanced stats for OWS/DWS/WS/WS48/OBPM/DBPM/BPM/VORP are:
7.9/8.7/15.8/.234/3.0/5.9/8.4/8.5 vs.
10.7/7.2/17.8/.257/3.9/5.1/7.6/8.1

You can make an argument for either of those stats, but Duncan did it for much longer, much better consistency, and didn't have that diva stage. It's stupid to say Hakeem had the better career, and totally inaccurate to say that Hakeem had a MUCH higher peak.

Good Lord, no one is saying Hakeem had the better career. It is true he is the better player. And yes, Hakeem did have a MUCH higher peak. The fact you have to use "per 100 possessions" means it's not as close as it should be on raw numbers. Hakeem had those numbers without playing in the Pop's system. Because he was the system, dominant, and couldn't be stopped those two years. Though, he had many years like those. Duncan started playing less minutes at 28 when Parker and Ginobli hit their primes. Hakeem was playing near 40 minutes a game.

[djohn2oo8]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.

[Thread]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.

Ouch!!!

[Caltex2]

Forget staring only at the numbers, remember the 1995 playoffs? You're a Spurs fan, you should know all too well what went down. And not just that but from about 1993-97, Olajuwon was on another level.

[spurraider21]

oh, another thread about repeats? a championship is about being the best team in a given year

[Thread]

oh, another thread about repeats? a championship is about being the best team in a given year

That's just because you're born ignorant and you ain't been nurtured otherwise in the intervening temporal.

You don't know. You eked yours out one at-a-time, piss pot style. You had your chance, but, were too busy pre nupin' - custodying, divorcin', stabbin' each other in the back.

Big shots.

[daslicer]

Nice to see Laker fans living in the past again now that the LA Warriors have been dethroned.

[da_suns_fan]

Good Lord, no one is saying Hakeem had the better career. It is true he is the better player. And yes, Hakeem did have a MUCH higher peak. The fact you have to use "per 100 possessions" means it's not as close as it should be on raw numbers. Hakeem had those numbers without playing in the Pop's system. Because he was the system, dominant, and couldn't be stopped those two years. Though, he had many years like those. Duncan started playing less minutes at 28 when Parker and Ginobli hit their primes. Hakeem was playing near 40 minutes a game.

This.

The best posters like ambchang can do is say that if you extrapolate Duncan's numbers out you would have similar results. But we dont know if there would be diminishing returns as Duncans was asked to carry a larger work load.

Duncan was a good PF/C hyrbrid but he was never dominant like Shaq or Hakeem.

[da_suns_fan]

Nice to see Laker fans living in the past again now that the LA Warriors have been dethroned.

As if the Spurs are the champions. They lost to the team who lost to the team who lost to the Champions.

Last year they lost in the first round.

[daslicer]

As if the Spurs are the champions. They lost to the team who lost to the team who lost to the Champions.

Last year they lost in the first round.

As long as the Spurs are not a lottery team I'm good.

[spurraider21]

That's just because you're born ignorant and you ain't been nurtured otherwise in the intervening temporal.

You don't know. You eked yours out one at-a-time, piss pot style. You had your chance, but, were too busy pre nupin' - custodying, divorcin', stabbin' each other in the back.

Big shots.
go fuck your mother some more

[Thread]

go fuck your mother some more

Gotcha!

[Thread]

Nice to see Laker fans living in the past again now that the LA Warriors have been dethroned.

And you're there in the past with us. Now, quit talkin'---start shinin'.

[ambchang]

Good Lord, no one is saying Hakeem had the better career. It is true he is the better player. And yes, Hakeem did have a MUCH higher peak. The fact you have to use "per 100 possessions" means it's not as close as it should be on raw numbers. Hakeem had those numbers without playing in the Pop's system. Because he was the system, dominant, and couldn't be stopped those two years. Though, he had many years like those. Duncan started playing less minutes at 28 when Parker and Ginobli hit their primes. Hakeem was playing near 40 minutes a game.

I out in raw and per possession stats and neither are that far off. Just that per 100 accounts for pace and Duncan played at a much lower pace during his prime than Hakeem did in his. Neither of those numbers show Hakeem was much better at their respective peaks, per 100 showed them to be equals and advanced stats showed them to be equal too. If you don't use per 100 stats, you are basically saying Michael Adams at his prime was as good a scorer as Chris mullin or Tim Duncan at their primes.

And Duncan was also the system, he was four down, he he four downed the Spurs to a championship. The highlight of Hakeem's career was 94 when he led a team with underwhelming talent to a ring. Duncan did that in 03.

And with Duncan playing less minutes he still dominated. Duncan sacrificed his stats in the system for the benefit of winning and longevity and STILL put up similar numbers as Hakeem's peak, so thanks for that one.

[ambchang]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

[ambchang]

Forget staring only at the numbers, remember the 1995 playoffs? You're a Spurs fan, you should know all too well what went down. And not just that but from about 1993-97, Olajuwon was on another level.

Yeah, I remember how the rockets spaced the floor with actual shooters rather than a point guard that hit one playoff three pointer his entire career who also happened to be the best Spurs point guard in the 90s.

I remember how rodman left horry opened possession after possession and allowed him to shoot 43% from three, averaged 14 ppg, have an offensive rating of 119 and ts% rating of 58%

[ambchang]

Ouch!!!

Shut up old man, this debate is for people to have original ideas rather than parroting the same illogical bullshit over and over again.

Stop trying to coattail like your hero. And you aren't even coattailing the right side.

[ambchang]

That's just because you're born ignorant and you ain't been nurtured otherwise in the intervening temporal.

You don't know. You eked yours out one at-a-time, piss pot style. You had your chance, but, were too busy pre nupin' - custodying, divorcin', stabbin' each other in the back.

Big shots.

Shut the hell up you hypocrite. If you want to repeat, repeat about how it is only about making the playoffs and winning the last game.

[ambchang]

This.

The best posters like ambchang can do is say that if you extrapolate Duncan's numbers out you would have similar results. But we dont know if there would be diminishing returns as Duncans was asked to carry a larger work load.

Duncan was a good PF/C hyrbrid but he was never dominant like Shaq or Hakeem.

Per 100 possessions isn't about extrapolating. It's about normalizing. You are thinking of per 36 minute stats.

Advanced stats showed Duncan to be as or even more dominant than shaq and Hakeem. You are just really stupid without realizing it.

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.

Here you go with the per 100 stats. I get it you can't make a case for Duncan's raw stats against Hakeem's. He just simply had to do more than Tim and he still elevated his game in the playoffs.

[djohn2oo8]

Amb is melting down.

[spurraider21]

Can you explain your objection to per possession stats?

[da_suns_fan]

Can you explain your objection to per possession stats?

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.

[spurraider21]

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.
his per possession stats have been better on houston, so i'm not even sure where you're going with that

https://i.gyazo.com/e23df920dc5b3f5e23052bacc29be502.png


besides, you're clearly confusing per minute stats with per possession stats

[ambchang]

Here you go with the per 100 stats. I get it you can't make a case for Duncan's raw stats against Hakeem's. He just simply had to do more than Tim and he still elevated his game in the playoffs.

Did you read the first line or are you just stupid?

[ambchang]

Amb is melting down.

:lol any time someone roasts your ass you go :cry dude melting done :lol.

[ambchang]

Well look at James Harden. His per possessions stats were ridiculous in OKC, IIRC, but he couldnt maintain them when asked to play 40+ night in and night out.

Its not Duncans fault Pop played him so "little", but whos to say his production wouldnt drop off if he was asked to play more.

Again, you are thinking per 36 stats. Per possession stats is normalization taking pace into factor.

[djohn2oo8]

Did you read the first line or are you just stupid?
I read it and you still can't substantiate that Hakeem's peak wasn't much better than Tim's. It was. You lose.

[djohn2oo8]

:lol any time someone roasts your ass you go :cry dude melting done :lol.
You're the one lashing out at Cully because he doesn't agree with you :lol meltdown

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.
Is that why Hakeem's PPG, steals, FT%, FG&, and Blks per 100 possessions are higher averages than Duncan's in the playoffs? :lmao you are not good at this

[djohn2oo8]

Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. .
Duncan shot 45% during that first run. He actually shot in the mid 40 percent 3 times in the playoffs during his prime, so Hakeem was obviously the better shooter in the playoffs, just like the regular season.

[ambchang]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.


Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.


I read it and you still can't substantiate that Hakeem's peak wasn't much better than Tim's. It was. You lose.

Read it again then. You are being intellectually dishonest.

[djohn2oo8]

Read it again then. You are being intellectually dishonest.

:lol ignoring the stats i posted that dispute your claims. You lose.

[djohn2oo8]

"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

[Thread]

"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

A. He's never wrong.

B. He's never wrong.

[ambchang]

You're the one lashing out at Cully because he doesn't agree with you :lol meltdown

Cully has been hiding away from me for months, I'm just publicly humiliating him to see if he has the guts to stand up for himself. Seems like he's just tucking his tails between his legs again.

[ambchang]

Also loved how you left out Hakeem's playoff numbers from those two years

28.9/11/4 blocks
33.0/10.3/2 blocks

And how Dream was one assist away from recording two quadruple doubles in the same season, all while fasting during Ramadan. Top 10 in steals, and blocks. Has a higher FG% and FT% than Tim. Hakeem > Tim.


Duncan out up 27.6, 14.4, 5 and 4.3 in 02, 24.7, 15.4, 5.3 and 3.3 in 03. You act like Duncan puts up 18 and 10 every playoffs. In per 100 stats Duncan out up similar scoring, rebounding assist and blks number as Hakeem, often times better stats. You can't talk about the system and ignore pace. You are being a total hypocrite.
To say Hakeem is MUCH better than Duncan without listing any Duncan stats is just being dishonest.


Is that why Hakeem's PPG, steals, FT%, FG&, and Blks per 100 possessions are higher averages than Duncan's in the playoffs? :lmao you are not good at this

That's much better? It's like rebounding and assists are no longer important even though YOU first posted the rebounding numbers as some king of argument.


Duncan shot 45% during that first run. He actually shot in the mid 40 percent 3 times in the playoffs during his prime, so Hakeem was obviously the better shooter in the playoffs, just like the regular season.

So FG% is that important now? I guess shaq is the greatest of them then.


:lol ignoring the stats i posted that dispute your claims. You lose.

What have you won?

I have consistently included every single stat.


"intellectually dishonest" must be amb's way of countering when someone else is statistically honest.

Like how Duncan is better in two out of five categories is him being much worse than Hakeem?

[whitemamba]

Ambchang must have a shit ton of time on his hands , he has to be in the social security age.

[dbreiden83080]

I'd rather win 5 over the long run then 2 in 1999 and 2000 and never again.. The Rockets went back to back in 94 and 95 and were never heard from again..

[djohn2oo8]

That's much better? It's like rebounding and assists are no longer important even though YOU first posted the rebounding numbers as some king of argument.
You are the one who brought up per 100 stats to make Duncan's numbers in his peak seem closer to Hakeem's, which his per 100 stats are still better than Duncan's. You lose here.



So FG% is that important now? I guess shaq is the greatest of them then.
You bring it up when Kobe had bad shooting performances. So NOW it's not important because it pertains to Tim?




What have you won?

I have consistently included every single stat.
You can't win on raw stats so you moved to per 100 stats which you still lose.




Like how Duncan is better in two out of five categories is him being much worse than Hakeem?
And one of those categories, Duncan is only better by 0.3. It simply shows Hakeem had to do more for his team.