Dynastic contemplations.

[Peter]

This season more is at stake than a championship. It's the one thing more important in sports: that is, the tag of "dynasty" from know-it-all sportswriters and pundits.

Should the Spurs win their 4th championship this June, that will make for 3 championships in the past 4 seasons, with the lone playoff exit without a ring due in no small part to 0.4*. Arguably the Spurs could've won 4 in a row.

But the Spurs are not the only franchise with the prize in its sights. The Pistons, should they win their 4th championship, will have won 2 of the last 3 championships, with the lone playoff exit sans rings due to an otherworldly performance by Robert Horry in Game 5 of the '05 Finals.

Just thought I would forewarn the forum, since so many care about what the talking heads have to say. If the Spurs don't bring home the prize this year, expect them to be dumped on like there's no tomorrow...

[timvp]

Yes, this season is all about the legacy. If the Spurs win this, they'll enter into the discussion as being one of the best teams ever. If not, they'll be a team who won championships when other teams faultered (Bulls, Lakers and then Pistons).

[Melmart1]

This is true. Most pundits will call them lucky, call for more asterisks, etc. Spurs will not be 'legit' until they repeat, instead of winning in odd years only.

Yes, the press will have a field day predicting the fall of a potential dynasty. They will announce the decline of Tim Duncan. According to the analysts, the sky will be falling for the Spurs.

Now ask me if I give a fuck. :)

[Cant_Be_Faded]

God the pistons are so lame

They fucking played the most overrated Laker team of all time (that only made it to the finals cuz Minny was severely injured in their previous round victory)

It's fucking pathetic

Spurs were about to own that Lakers team and they took away the single greatest MOST CLUTCH shot in NBA history from Tim Duncan that night (palmed one handed NO LOOK 22 foot swish with Big Shaq's Big Hand gripping Duncan's shooting forearm)

No other player in nba history could have made that shot

Shaq's arm grabbing your forearm? Lets see the strong palmer Billups make that shit

fucking posers

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Sadly, I don't give the historians that much credit. I think there's truth in the predictions of what will happen if the Spurs don't make it happen. People will point at Horry in game 5 and say they got lucky (while forgetting the insanity of .4). But should they win I'm still not convinced that it's going to get the Spurs the respect they deserve. If one of the more media friendly clubs had done what the Spurs have done so far ESPN classic would be running round the clock specials about all they've done and where it ranks in history.

And I'm cool with that. I've always liked that the rest of the world doesn't seem to realize what a great group this is. Makes me feel a little smarter than the rest of the world.

[leemajors]

and the spurs would never be a dynasty without tim duncan. you forgot to state the obvious while stating the obvious.

[Peter]

Whoever wins this one will have their past revised.

The upside is that if the Spurs win, 0.4* will turn into one of the greatest sports frauds of all time.

:smokin

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Whoever wins this one will have their past revised.

The upside is that if the Spurs win, 0.4* will turn into one of the greatest sports tragedies of all time.
:smokin


To us it already is the greatest sports tragedy, but I think you're a little too overoptimistic if you think a mere repeat will get the Spurs due props in the public spotlight

I wouldnt want them to get that credit anyways

Screw the public

[Peter]

It's pretty hard to argue with 3 titles in 4 seasons. The media was all over the Pats' jock after that.

Nobody can recall who won SB XXXVII.

[leemajors]

football fans remember the tampa bay defense.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

It's pretty hard to argue with 3 titles in 4 seasons. The media was all over the Pats' jock after that.

Nobody can recall who won SB XXXVII.


Yeah but I am just way too skeptical to imagine the media doing that with the San Antonio Spurs (even if it means 3 outta 4 with the 0.4)

They already had an espn special about how Derek Fisher's shot was like the 5th most clutch basketball basket of all time..

[Joepa]

Yeah but the Pats were in a large market and had a lot of East Coast writers all over them. The Spurs will never get that love.

[Joepa]

Yeah but I am just way too skeptical to imagine the media doing that with the San Antonio Spurs (even if it means 3 outta 4 with the 0.4)

They already had an espn special about how Derek Fisher's shot was like the 5th most clutch basketball basket of all time..

They need to stop calling it 0.4 and start calling it 1.2 because that's how much time he got to shoot it.

Still pisses me off.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Yeah but the Pats were in a large market and had a lot of East Coast writers all over them. The Spurs will never get that love.

Not only that but the Spurs are the only game in town. With the Patriots people were able to play up the idea of them completing some kind of Holy Trinity of the Red Sox, the Celtics, and the Patriots.

[Melmart1]

The media will be forced to give some love to the Spurs is they win this season. They will have no choice, 3 in 4 years can't be ignored unless they want to make total asses out of themselves and lose all credibility as analysts.

Oh wait...

[tlongII]

Pistons > Spurs

[Peter]

Again, it's hard to argue with 3 out of the past 4. That means you've won a back to back plus 1 at least. It automatically places the team who won the other in a different light. Two wins against the Pistons in the Finals plus 0.4* will cast suspicion upon the Pistons' title in '04.

Instead of the Spurs merely bookending NBA dynasties (or lucking out), they will be one.

The Spurs have yet to defend a title. Don't forget that. The pundits haven't.

[MoSpur]

You know, it use to bother me when the Spurs weren't given any type of credit, but now I prefer it that way.

[Dunc]

This is a great discussion. How many times in NBA history has there been a two-way race to decide a dynasty? Not to mention that it's two teams that except for a few stretches (like the pre-All Star break stretch of the Pistons with the 37-5 start and all) that nobody in the media likes to talk about. I'm not sure who made the point, but if it was Chicago, New York, or LA who was in the running for the title of "current dynasty", the media would be all over it. But since it's Detroit and San Antonio, why give a fuck? And I love it.

[Peter]

Another item which should give the Spurs some place in the history books is that they were the first champion on which international players had such a large role. Coincidental with the USA's loss of the gold in Athens in '04, the Spurs will epitomize this stage in the globalization of the game for future generations.

Man I wish the Spurs had bulked up up front this season.

[Peter]

Before I forget, 3 titles in 4 seasons would cement Duncan's name in the upper reaches of the all-time NBA greats, among those of Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, and Russell.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I agree with Pete.

Spurs need to. . .umm. . .re-Pete, in order to solidify themselves as a dynasty. Teams that can't go back-to-back don't seem to qualify in the "dynasty" category.

[101A]

Yeah, if the Spurs win the media will talk about the dynasty....for about 34 hours, when it is learned that KG is being traded to partner with Kobe.

Then ALL of the talk will be about THAT dynasty.

[Peter]

Perhaps, but this is a 'what have you done for me lately?' press culture. It'll have been 4 years since Kolby's won anything on the court (not in court, that's for another thread).

[Peter]

The media could very well jump on the Spurs' wagon with a repeat this season. They are a team which epitomizes team play, they have a modest superstar and a significant foreign element. It would give the pundits plenty of material to use to announce the death of the individualistic, hip-hop enfused American style. The US sports media likes to prop up individual players to great heights or to dump on something.

[ChumpDumper]

So Mike Monroe will call us a dynasty and the rest will qualify it, saying the Spurs are the most boring dynasty in NBA history. The most respect in the media we'll get is Sampras level. He could well be one of the best ever, but did anyone really even notice?

[Peter]

They'll have to notice. The only knock remaining on the Spurs/Duncan is the lack of a repeat. If that doesn't work, maybe Duncan needs to find a hotel clerk to impose his will on.

[ChumpDumper]

They'll have to notice.Any complimenet will be applied with the back of the hand. The "Boring" label is a sticky one. Permanent.

[Peter]

Dynasties aren't boring. Even the Pats were made to be thrilling.

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, an east coast team was favorably portrayed in the media?

Tell me more.

[Peter]

Well, they weren't the Bosox so they don't have that kind of 'perennial loser finally gets the nut' story. No national following either. Brady's the biggest star and he's got a Duncan-esque personna. They had the hardass no-nonsense coach and a solid D.

The Spurs can capitalize on the similar...a throwback style that's winning while the rest of the league is focused on scoring and what not. The anti-now. Sportswriters love to deep-six the present for not stacking up to the past. If the past creates a dynasty today, that makes for great copy.

[ChumpDumper]

San Antonio Spurs
Deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you know the truth. You know that for as much as you are supposed to appreciate the selfless, successful play of the San Antonio Spurs, as much as you are supposed to laud Tim Duncan as the best player in the league, this team is absolutely killing the popularity of the game. Can you ever remember a time when you had to get home to catch the Spurs game? Sorry, but Duncan banking in jumpers from 15 feet or Bruce Bowen draping himself over Vince Carter like an octopus doesn't get our blood flowing. But that's the Spurs' plan -- to play fundamentally sound ball on offense and make the game ugly on defense. And no one does fundamental better, more consistently, than the Spurs. And why not? That plan has won three titles in five seasons. But it's also a lot like eating dry, white toast. It gets the job done, but, man, is it dull.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/paul_forrester/02/28/progress.reports3/index.html

I'm sure another trophy will change this guy's tune, right?

[Peter]

We'll see this summer. Then SI will be publishing sketches of TD's HOF plaque and calling him the greatest player today.

[ChumpDumper]

They already call him the greatest player today.

And boring.

It won't change.

[Peter]

Nah, Shaq, Kobe and LBJ are still mentioned in those discussions. Right now the league is seen as being in a state of parity by the average sports fan. Yeah, the Spurs have won 2 of the last 3, but those Pistons could win it all this year and last year's Finals was close, etc...

Winning this year changes that. It rewrites the history of the last 4 seasons. The Spur Dynasty ascendenth.

[ChumpDumper]

Even if they win it all again, I guarantee you this board will still include rants against articles that diss this Spurs as boring. "Dynasty" will just be another word to fill in the phrase "Most boring _____ ever."

And we'll take the bait again like so much flounder.

[timvp]

I'm not sure it changes people's perception, but I know it'd change the way history looks at this team. However, it could also change perception if they start to market the NBA differently. It could go from "Will Kobe or Shaq have what it take to win a championship?" to "Will Kobe or Shaq be able to stop the Spurs' dynasty?"

[Peter]

This is the first season that the Spurs are crossing over into the mainstream. TP's thing with Eva is up there with Angelina and Brad's at present.

[ChumpDumper]

So we have the undying respect of the readership of the Weekly Star?

[Peter]

Americans love a winner. In the NBA that usually means 'dynasty'...

[Peter]

So we have the undying respect of the readership of the Weekly Star?


Normally not important in these parts, but part and parcel of becoming a dynasty is moving to pages such as those.

[Guru of Nothing]

Well, they weren't the Bosox so they don't have that kind of 'perennial loser finally gets the nut' story. No national following either. Brady's the biggest star and he's got a Duncan-esque personna. They had the hardass no-nonsense coach and a solid D.

This as a bit of apples and oranges element to it in that the Super Bowl is infinitely more popular than the NBA finals .... for which the blame lies squarely on Tim Duncan's (boring-ass) shoulders. [/sarcasm]

[ChumpDumper]

I will also guarantee that another SA/Detroit series will produce articles saying everyone is just waiting for, say, Phoenix and Cleveland to save the NBA.

Then the league will adopt the trapezoid to help that along -- or something like that.

[T Park]

bringing in FIBA refs along with the tapezoid.

[Peter]

I think the response to SA/Det Part II will be that the 'back to basics' is winning and that the flashy hip hop part of the NBA (and US basketball) is in error. Sportswriters like to trash the present and in general, a certain segment of the US loves to hear how the traditional trumps that which spurns it. It's the same thing as with the Pats. Belicheck was the old school no-nonsense coach who mastered a league in love with something else. It's pretty hard to argue with 3 out of 4 titles in any sport.

I'd also say that TP has given the Spurs a star who is willing to embrace the spotlight. To the extent that still matters, the Spurs have that covered.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

The Pats also had that fat white dude that looked like Rodney Dangerfield

[Mixability]

I wish people would let 0.4 go already. It should've been 0.8 left anyway. They shouldn't have let it come to that point anyway. Never allow the refs a chance to beat you. It was best of 7 anyway, so why was Devin the only player that showed up for Game 6?

[Spurminator]

Writers say a lot of things.

Hell, I remember talk of the Bulls' dominance hurting the NBA, and the NBA needing a fresh Champion...

[ShoogarBear]

When it comes to the NBA, the general unwritten rule among the sports media is to tear it down no matter what the facts are.

The exact opposite of Major League Baseball. The last two World Series have been the most god-awful, boring, unmemorable championship events it has ever been my displeasure to witness. If the NBA ever had a Finals like those, the sports media would storm Congress to pass a constitutional amendment banning it forever.

Yet how much bad stuff got said about them as compared to the Spurs-NJ or Spurs-Pistons? I can't recall anybody ripping them.

[Extra Stout]

The Spurs could win seven titles and it doesn't mean they're going to get media love. The Detroit Pistons are forty-seven-and-fucking-nine and all the media talks about is LeBron! Kobe! AI! 47-9! They're going to finish like 68-14 and nobody cares!

We could have three teams each win 65 games this season. None of them get media attention. Nobody cares. They care about three players each scoring 30 ppg. Individuals get attention. Teams don't.

30 years from now the Spurs are going to get respect regardless of what happens from here on out, because the only people who care about what happened 30 years ago are students of the game, and they already love the Spurs. Popular fans are never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to care. The league markets itself around individuals because it has to. There aren't that many people outside the inner city hip-hop culture who give a flip about pro basketball as a game in this country. Unless there is some big name scoring a lot of points for a high-profile team, nobody cares, nor have they ever cared. When the Boston Celtics were winning eight championships, fans cared about Wilt Chamberlain because he put up great stats. That's how it has always been.

They're not going to watch just to see Eva Longoria's boyfriend either, unless and until he gets caught cheating on her with Eva Mendes or something, and then they'll care for about a week.

[doldrums]

If this Spurs team were located in NY, every other kid in town would be wearing a #9 jersey(with his every move being chronicled in Page 6 of the Post), the older crew sporting a #21(and proclaiming him the new Willis Reed), , every Latin american(and many others) sporting a #20 , while Bruce B would be held up as a classic NY'er while the media falls over itself to praise them. Amazing what a little geography will do a a team's rep.

[Peter]

Dominance is dominance. 3 of 4 with 0.4* in the mix is enough to bring new "Spurs fans" into the fold.

[Melmart1]

Dominance is dominance. 3 of 4 with 0.4* in the mix is enough to bring new "Spurs fans" into the fold.

As long as they are not like Shawn Michaels, I am OK with that.

[Phenomanul]

As long as they are not like Shawn Michaels, I am OK with that.


:lol :lol

[boutons_]

Let's beat Mavs and successfully get thru this plantar-fasciitis-cursed season.

[aaronstampler]

First off, I know some people have said this already, but the .4 thing was bullshit. The clock operator started it when he landed on the floor instead of when the ball touched his hands, when he was in mid-air. It should have never ever counted. But we all know this.

Anyway, count me among those firmly on the record that the '04 team would have lost to the '04 Pistons. That Detroit team was hungrier than we were, period. Our team wasn't ready that year. Manu and Tony weren't as good, and two softies, Rasho and Turkoglu, were prominently involved. And we didn't have nearly the size or the rebounding to deal with them since Malik was our main back up "big" guy and we didn't have Nazr. The Pistons would have killed us on the boards as badly as they did the Lakers. Oh, and also, Rob flat out sucked in '04. No way he was putting on one of those '05 performances in '04. No way.

I kind of think we'll be one of those franchises that never repeats because we're too nice. We've got talent, we've got heart, we have desire, but it's not the same after you win. To repeat, you need five hard, stone-cold assholes on your team, bottom line. Look at the Bulls, the Lakers, the Celtics dynasty, whoever. You need more than pride, you need contempt for all those who dare challenge you. I don't think we're that type of team, personally. And honestly, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I think one of the fun things about rooting for the Spurs is after we win we don't make a spectacle about how underappreciated we are and nobody likes us and nobody respects us, and championship belts and all that. We just don't have the inherent meanness in us to repeat. But I'd be happy to be wrong.

[polandprzem]

I kind of think we'll be one of those franchises that never repeats because we're too nice. We've got talent, we've got heart, we have desire, but it's not the same after you win. To repeat, you need five hard, stone-cold assholes on your team, bottom line. Look at the Bulls, the Lakers, the Celtics dynasty, whoever. You need more than pride, you need contempt for all those who dare challenge you. I don't think we're that type of team, personally. And honestly, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I think one of the fun things about rooting for the Spurs is after we win we don't make a spectacle about how underappreciated we are and nobody likes us and nobody respects us, and championship belts and all that. We just don't have the inherent meanness in us to repeat. But I'd be happy to be wrong

That's why the spurs must repeat.

I agree with extra stout and Peter.

But I think that the title this year can change what people think. Although the media and the occasional fans will be all abuot LeBron. But we have got some experts in the tv and in the NBA world. They would appreciate the spurs team I tell you taht.

And making 3 titles in 4 years with the 0.4 thing makes the spurs one of the elite teams in NBA history. And then we can start a real conversation about Duncan being better then Bird in the disccusion about all time best forwards.