PDA

View Full Version : Stein:Best Spurs ever? We'll see



Spurs Brazil
05-31-2007, 09:09 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-070531&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

Best Spurs ever? We'll see

By Marc Stein
ESPN.com

SAN ANTONIO -- Four more wins and you'll hear it plenty, whether you want to or not: This is the best Spurs team they've ever had down here.

You'll naturally also hear about how boring they are and how, uh, grabby they can be, but give San Antonio this:

The Spurs are the first to say that this might be the luckiest team they've ever had down here, too.

"Tonight we caught a break," Spurs coach Gregg Popovich quickly conceded Wednesday, "and we realize that."

It wasn't their first of the postseason, either, as you might have heard. The team from Dallas that Spurs coaches believe was "built to beat us" couldn't get out of the first round. There was a controversial suspension or two, as well as a famously bloody nose, that nudged them along in the second round. Then Wednesday, with Utah's best player forced to pull his sprained right foot out of a protective boot to play this Game 5, San Antonio surged to an effortless 19-point lead in the first quarter and closed the Jazz and a hobbling Deron Williams out with a 109-84 rout.

"They destroyed our will to want to play," Jazz coach Jerry Sloan said.

Lucky and really good.

It's a lethal combination.

You don't win championships without fortune, no matter what. That's probably why Popovich, just as in 2005 when the Spurs clinched their last trip to the NBA Finals, commemorated this victory with almost the same speech he made in Phoenix two years ago about the lottery blessing his franchise.

Asked to explain how the Spurs have positioned themselves to play for a third championship in five years and fourth in nine years, Pop said: "That's an easy equation. It is David Robinson followed by Tim Duncan."

It is a lot more than that, actually, but you know the Spurs. They're so annoying modest, which is yet another reason -- along with the alleged flops, chops and other Uglyball tactics that they use when necessary -- that this team gets tagged with all the boring stuff.

Take a closer look, though, and you'll note that the Spurs cracked 100 points on this night for the sixth time in the last two series, reinforcing their growing Play At Any Pace reputation. They have Duncan looking reborn at 31 -- dominating anew largely because he's as healthy as he's been in years -- and flanked by a seasoned Tony Parker (25) and an increasingly spry Manu Ginobili, who's healthier himself at 29 than he seemed just weeks ago.

Mix in the role players who snap together so nicely -- Bruce Bowen, Michael Finley, Robert Horry and Ginobili's increasingly effective countryman Fabricio Oberto -- and there's little mystery why San Antonio will be comfortably favored to take down whoever wins the East.

"I can't see anybody beating them," Williams said. "I'm not going to say they can't be beat, but they play so well together."

Said Sloan: "They have got guys that know what they can accomplish as soon as they step on the floor. They got a lot of great pieces to a great team."

Best Spurs Ever?

"That's a tough question," said Jazz guard Derek Fisher, who's a pretty qualified judge after numerous duels with San Antonio in his Laker years. "In terms of versatility and the ability to play different styles, I can see why people would say that.

"This team is different [than previous Spurs teams], I can admit that."

With one exception.

It has to feel a bit like 2005 all over again for the Spurs . . . and not just because of the potential Detroit rematch looming.

The Lakers, as they did in '05 with the re-hiring of Phil Jackson, are smothering the playoffs with their latest off-court dramas. As my old Dallas Morning News colleague David Moore joked, San Antonio bouncing a Utah team that took the Mavs' spot in the West finals -- a team that was never supposed to get this far -- ranks as maybe the fifth-biggest story in the league right now . . . behind all of Kobe Bryant's various Trade Me/Scratch That pronouncements.

We'll have to wait a whopping seven days before Game 1 of the Finals -- which can only help San Antonio, in Parker's estimation, because "we've got a lot of old guys" -- to see if these better-than-ever Spurs can win another odd-year championship and move up a spot or two.

"If we don't finish in the next round," Ginobili said, "no one will remember what we did against Denver, Phoenix and Utah."

Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here.

sa_butta
05-31-2007, 09:12 AM
I think our 99' team was our best team, that is just my opinion.
Depending on if and how they win this year will determine how they
rank against the other Spurs Championship teams.

michaelwcho
05-31-2007, 09:13 AM
You need good luck to win a championship, and so far we've had it in droves. Let's hope it keeps up!

smeagol
05-31-2007, 09:17 AM
This team had a lot of breaks. I agree with that.

L.I.T
05-31-2007, 09:18 AM
Save the history talk until after the finals.

Jimcs50
05-31-2007, 09:18 AM
This is definitely the most serendipitous Spurs championship run ever.

Spurminator
05-31-2007, 09:28 AM
It happens.

But I don't really see why the Mavs losing is considered a "break" for us. It's not like the Mavs lost because of injury or illness or anything like that. They couldn't get past the Warriors. What does that have to do with us?

Furthermore, the Suns had by-the-book suspensions carried out because of their actions... it would be different if this was a new rule or a new interpretation, but it wasn't. That's not really a "break" for us either. We should reward the Suns the benefit of doubt because of circumstances they brought upon themselves?

The only two "fortunate" circumstances IMO are Nash's bloody nose, which happened in a game we were leading, and Williams' bum foot, which was during a game we were favored to win and with a 2 game cushion.

degenerate_gambler
05-31-2007, 09:30 AM
the biggest 'break' this year has been a healthy TD......I mean team.

<knock on wood>

twincam
05-31-2007, 09:34 AM
Interesting piece. San Antonio is on their peak level. Detroit/Cleveland are not playing to their optimal peak. Detroit gives the Spurs a good matchup vs the Cavs...but they are not at the level they must be in to win over San Antonio.

Mr. Body
05-31-2007, 10:36 AM
They do seem stronger than 2005. Finley replacing Barry, Barry on the bench. Oberto and Elson over Nazr. Horry perhaps was better in 2005, but he hasn't been called upon to do much lately. Oh, and the big three all healthy.

mullet
05-31-2007, 10:49 AM
'99 was the best year. We were dominant. We lost TWICE, the enitre playoffs.

It was like they knew they were going to win, every single game.

wildbill2u
05-31-2007, 11:57 AM
'99 was the best year. We were dominant. We lost TWICE, the enitre playoffs.

It was like they knew they were going to win, every single game.
I agree that the 99 team was superlative and had the confidence to come back in the 4th quarter to win. It was eerie.

This team doesn't quite have that same feeling, sometimes they seem to lose focus and lose atrociously (game 3 Utah and 2 in Phonix) but they may be better --because usually they aren't behind in the 4th in the games they do win.

Marcus Bryant
05-31-2007, 01:10 PM
The '03 team was the best overall in terms of talent and depth.

TP
Jackson
Bowen
TD
DRob

Claxton
Kerr
Ginobili
Ferry
Rose
Willis
Bateer

The '99 team was the best in terms of performance, blowing through the postseason at a 15-2 clip.

Cry Havoc
05-31-2007, 10:11 PM
I cannot understand ANYONE who says the 99 team wasn't the greatest.

Deepest? Probably not.

But they had not one but TWO of the ten greatest big men ever to set foot in the lane.

Not two All-stars.

Not two All-NBA players.

Two of the greatest. Ever.

It's not like the rest of the team sucked horribly. Johnson was MORE than serviceable at point, and we had a certain SF who played a bit of good b-ball, if memory serves.

Cant_Be_Faded
05-31-2007, 10:13 PM
The '03 team was the best overall in terms of talent and depth.

TP
Jackson
Bowen
TD
DRob

Claxton
Kerr
Ginobili
Ferry
Rose
Willis
Bateer

The '99 team was the best in terms of performance, blowing through the postseason at a 15-2 clip.


Bingo. That 2003 team had enough depth to field a certified Mavericks Killer when we needed him.

milkyway21
06-01-2007, 12:32 AM
Spurs team 2003 is the best for me.

L.I.T
06-01-2007, 12:45 AM
Two things stand-out about that 2003 team: 1. The Spurs rotation at the SG/SF position was flexible and deep. That 3-player rotation had a little bit of everything: a havoc creating two-way player, a ballsy shooter and an harassing, slightly insane defensive ace. 2. Their back-up point position was better than any other in the league during the playoffs.

But, the 1999 team could absolutely dominate any team at any moment. They had a ruthless killer instinct and were unafraid of any moment. Subconsciously, I'm always measuring every Spurs team against that one. They knew how to destroy other teams; especially in the 3rd quarter. For me, it's the will of that 1999 team that stands-out and makes it the best...so far.