UV Ray
06-18-2007, 07:08 PM
Dynasty talk spurs debate
Bob Young
The Arizona Republic
Jun. 17, 2007 10:42 PM
Judging from the ratings, there weren't a lot of you out there who watched the San Antonio Spurs sweep LeBron James and the Cardboard Cutouts in the NBA Finals.
However, being professional and all, we sucked it up and watched pretty much the whole thing.
We knew it was a bad series, though, when the Spurs were up 3-0 and conversation turned to whether San Antonio is a dynasty.
Please.
Look, everybody has his or her definition of what makes a dynasty, so if you're in the camp that believes that four Spurs championships in nine years qualify them, that's fine.
We're not buying what you're selling.
First, although we don't think a team necessarily has to successfully defend a title at least once during a dynasty, we do believe a team ought to at least make it to the Finals two years in a row.
The Spurs have never reached the Finals back-to-back.
Second, that first title in 1999 came in a lockout-shortened, 50-game season.
But most important, if you believe that four titles in nine years qualifies, then you'll have to concede that three in a row is a dynasty.
The Kobe Bryant-Shaquille O'Neal Lakers won three in a row between the Spurs' first title and their second.
So we ask: How can the Spurs have a dynasty when another team in their conference wins three consecutive titles on their watch?
They can't.
In fact, if you can go three seasons without even making it to the championship series within a dynasty, then that means you'd have to group the 1936-43 New York Yankees with the 1947-62 Yankees and two of the great dynasties in sports history would become one über-dynasty.
Anyway, this isn't to say the Spurs aren't becoming, um, is dynastic a word?
Their big three of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker still are relatively young, and they all are under contract for a long time. And they still listen to their coach, Gregg Popovich.
Yes, the Spurs will be a contender for several years to come, barring injuries or some weird Kobe-Shaq-type ego clash, which seems highly unlikely with that group.
If the Spurs defend next season, that would be four titles in six years, two in a row and make them a legitimate dynasty - but not yet among the all-time dynasties.
Which brings us to The Heat Index's Top 10 Sports Dynasties. Keep in mind these are team dynasties, and we're counting only North American sports, because it's our list, and that's how we want it:
10. 1974-79 Pittsburgh Steelers: Four Super Bowl victories during a six-season span.
9. 1990-1998 Chicago Bulls: Six titles in eight seasons, including two three-peats. The only thing that kept the Bulls from eight in a row was Michael Jordan's baseball “career.”
8. 1953-57 Oklahoma Sooners: Bud Wilkinson's football team won only two “mythical” national titles, but we'll take the record 47 consecutive victories as a dynasty any day.
7. 1954-60 Montreal Canadiens: Five consecutive Stanley Cup trophies.
6. 1936-43 New York Yankees: In seven of eight World Series, winning six championships.
5. 1979-89 Los Angeles Lakers: The Magic Johnson-era Lakers were in the Finals eight times in 10 seasons, winning five titles. And they did it when the Boston Celtics would have dominated the decade without the Lakers.
4. 1961-67 Green Bay Packers: Vince Lombardi's juggernaut won five NFL championships in seven seasons, including the first two Super Bowls.
3. 1964-75 UCLA Bruins: John Wooden and that rolled-up program were good for 10 championships and 11 Final Four berths in 12 seasons. It included a ridiculous, 88-game winning streak.
2. 1947-64 New York Yankees: Yes, most consider the dynasty over after the 10th title in 1962. But the Yankees returned to the World Series in 1963 and 1964, losing both times. That's 15 trips to the World Series and 10 championships in 18 years.
1. 1956-69 Boston Celtics: OK, so we like the NBA. The Celtics were in the Finals 12 times and won 11 championships in 13 seasons. The Celtics of Bill Russell and Bob Cousy. Now that was a dynasty.
Bob Young
The Arizona Republic
Jun. 17, 2007 10:42 PM
Judging from the ratings, there weren't a lot of you out there who watched the San Antonio Spurs sweep LeBron James and the Cardboard Cutouts in the NBA Finals.
However, being professional and all, we sucked it up and watched pretty much the whole thing.
We knew it was a bad series, though, when the Spurs were up 3-0 and conversation turned to whether San Antonio is a dynasty.
Please.
Look, everybody has his or her definition of what makes a dynasty, so if you're in the camp that believes that four Spurs championships in nine years qualify them, that's fine.
We're not buying what you're selling.
First, although we don't think a team necessarily has to successfully defend a title at least once during a dynasty, we do believe a team ought to at least make it to the Finals two years in a row.
The Spurs have never reached the Finals back-to-back.
Second, that first title in 1999 came in a lockout-shortened, 50-game season.
But most important, if you believe that four titles in nine years qualifies, then you'll have to concede that three in a row is a dynasty.
The Kobe Bryant-Shaquille O'Neal Lakers won three in a row between the Spurs' first title and their second.
So we ask: How can the Spurs have a dynasty when another team in their conference wins three consecutive titles on their watch?
They can't.
In fact, if you can go three seasons without even making it to the championship series within a dynasty, then that means you'd have to group the 1936-43 New York Yankees with the 1947-62 Yankees and two of the great dynasties in sports history would become one über-dynasty.
Anyway, this isn't to say the Spurs aren't becoming, um, is dynastic a word?
Their big three of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker still are relatively young, and they all are under contract for a long time. And they still listen to their coach, Gregg Popovich.
Yes, the Spurs will be a contender for several years to come, barring injuries or some weird Kobe-Shaq-type ego clash, which seems highly unlikely with that group.
If the Spurs defend next season, that would be four titles in six years, two in a row and make them a legitimate dynasty - but not yet among the all-time dynasties.
Which brings us to The Heat Index's Top 10 Sports Dynasties. Keep in mind these are team dynasties, and we're counting only North American sports, because it's our list, and that's how we want it:
10. 1974-79 Pittsburgh Steelers: Four Super Bowl victories during a six-season span.
9. 1990-1998 Chicago Bulls: Six titles in eight seasons, including two three-peats. The only thing that kept the Bulls from eight in a row was Michael Jordan's baseball “career.”
8. 1953-57 Oklahoma Sooners: Bud Wilkinson's football team won only two “mythical” national titles, but we'll take the record 47 consecutive victories as a dynasty any day.
7. 1954-60 Montreal Canadiens: Five consecutive Stanley Cup trophies.
6. 1936-43 New York Yankees: In seven of eight World Series, winning six championships.
5. 1979-89 Los Angeles Lakers: The Magic Johnson-era Lakers were in the Finals eight times in 10 seasons, winning five titles. And they did it when the Boston Celtics would have dominated the decade without the Lakers.
4. 1961-67 Green Bay Packers: Vince Lombardi's juggernaut won five NFL championships in seven seasons, including the first two Super Bowls.
3. 1964-75 UCLA Bruins: John Wooden and that rolled-up program were good for 10 championships and 11 Final Four berths in 12 seasons. It included a ridiculous, 88-game winning streak.
2. 1947-64 New York Yankees: Yes, most consider the dynasty over after the 10th title in 1962. But the Yankees returned to the World Series in 1963 and 1964, losing both times. That's 15 trips to the World Series and 10 championships in 18 years.
1. 1956-69 Boston Celtics: OK, so we like the NBA. The Celtics were in the Finals 12 times and won 11 championships in 13 seasons. The Celtics of Bill Russell and Bob Cousy. Now that was a dynasty.