Which spurs team is the best. 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Rank the best spurs teams from 1-5 with 1 being the best

[whottt]

1-5


You Bullz fanz aren't exactly the zharpezt toolz in the zhed...are yaz?

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Im not much of a spurs fan but here is my pick

1- 2003
2- 2007
3- 1999
4- 2005

[2centsworth]

2005 was the best. They beat an excellent Detroit team. Plus, Horry still had game.

1999- Big Dave could still play

2007- Tony coming into his own makes this team super good.

2003- Manu and Tony were not what they are today.

[whottt]

I rank them like this

2003, 1999, 2005, 2007 > 91,92,93,96,97,98 Bullz

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

2005 was the best. They beat an excellent Detroit team. Plus, Horry still had game.

1999- Big Dave could still play

2007- Tony coming into his own makes this team super good.

2003- Manu and Tony were not what they are today.
Seconded.

[ashrafabdeljaber]

this is how I rank it.

2003, 1999, 2005, 2007> 91,93,97 bulls

92,96,98 bulls > 2003, 1999, 2005, 2007 spurs

[whottt]

2005 was the best. They beat an excellent Detroit team. Plus, Horry still had game.

1999- Big Dave could still play

2007- Tony coming into his own makes this team super good.

2003- Manu and Tony were not what they are today.


That's funny, I rank the 2003 team as the absolute best. Their finals was knocking out the 3 time defending champ Lakers.

3 Time Defending Champs haven't been beaten a whole lot in NBA history...when their teams haven't been stupidly blown up by their FO I mean.

[sprrs]

Seconded.

Agreed. The 2003 team is the weakest of the three. The FO was just biding their time for DRob's contract to expire then they could load up the next season. Luckily they meshed and gave him an incredible farewell gift.

[sprrs]

That's funny, I rank the 2003 team as the absolute best. Their finals was knocking out the 3 time defending champ Lakers.

3 Time Defending Champs haven't been beaten a whole lot in NBA history...when their teams haven't been stupidly blown up by their FO I mean.

That Lakers team was on the verge of collapse anyway. They gave it one last shot in '04 and blew it up.

[whottt]

That Laker team was exactly one shot away from breaking our backs and winning another title....and they came back the next year and broke our backs and went to the finals.


If we had Nazr or Oberto instead of Drob we wouldn't have beaten them. Sorry but we wouldn't have.

[RC's Boss]

03, 07, 99, 05

[duncan228]

2005
2007
2003
1999

[RobinsontoDuncan]

everybody forgets how good malik rose was in 2003

[E20]

2005.

Although 2003 had to play the Lakers, but I think 2005 was a better team.

[sprrs]

That Laker team was exactly one shot away from breaking our backs and winning another title....and they came back the next year and broke our backs and went to the finals.


If we had Nazr or Oberto instead of Drob we wouldn't have beaten them. Sorry but we wouldn't have.

The next year they had Malone and Payton, minus an off his game Horry, not exactly the same team as in 2003.

I will grant you that if we replace DRob with one of our current centers, we wouldn't have won. That kinda helps prove my point though.

[barbacoataco]

I have changed my mind so many times on this topic I gave up. The 2003 team had Duncan at his best. The 1999 team had Duncan, Robinson in their primes, and great defense. The 2005 team had Ginobili at his best, and beat a great Pistons team and a very good Nash/Amare team. The 2007 had a lot of experience, and Parker was better than before. And each year their were various role players who added different strengths, so take your pic. I have seen people list any of the 4 years as the best Spurs team, and their is no consensus.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

That Laker team was exactly one shot away from breaking our backs and winning another title....and they came back the next year and broke our backs and went to the finals.


If we had Nazr or Oberto instead of Drob we wouldn't have beaten them. Sorry but we wouldn't have.

True dat. Horry could have killed us with his last second 3 in game five, just like Fish did a year later... freakin Lakers. :pctoss

Hmmmm, the 2003 team was probably the weakest of them all, yet they beat the nemesis Lakers which indicates otherwise... the 2005 team played tough series all the way, and beat our best Finals opponent by far in Detroit, but they only played 7 deep... the 2007 team basically rolled through three of the four series, and they always had an answer for anything that was thrown at them, but the opposition was weak (except the Suns)... and 1999 schooled everyone in the playoffs, but it was an odd season and it's hard to say they were better than 2003 or 2005... I SIMPLY CAN'T DO IT. I love them all. ;)

[L.I.T]

The 2005 team was probably the best. But it might be my sentimental nature coming to the fore, but I always think that 1999 team was the best.

Wasn't there a thread a while back where Insider rated the NBA champions?

[1Parker1]

The 2008 team may be the best yet. :smokin

[bobbyjoe]

I vote for the 2007 Spurs.

I think 2007 is the best I've seen Duncan play, better than the 05 version for sure, who struggled against Detroit and the obvious reason being that Parker of 07 is so much more complete and lethal of a PG than previous years.

Other Spurs teams had tougher roads to the Title, but the 2007 version had the most offensive efficiency to go with the steady Defense.

[Sense]

2003, 2005, 1999, 2007

[spurster]

1999.

The 1999 team swept two very good teams, the Lakers, who won three straight titles after 1999, and the Blazers, who should have won their 2000 series vs. the Lakers. No other Spurs team came close to 15-2 in the playoffs.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

2003, 2005, 1999, 2007

[dbreiden83080]

1999 and 2007 teams i think are equal. The 99 squad still had a very good D-Rob to go with a great Duncan and Elliot was still good as well. The 07 team featured a dominant Duncan, and all star type players in Manu and Tony. That team represents the height of the so called big 3. Lets face it you can't argue with a finals SWEEP!!!!

2005 team- Great team overcame a lot that year mainly Duncan's injuries and that 05 Piston team was a GREAT squad and i was never prouder of my Spurs for battling that one out to a 7 game finals win. Would have been over sooner had Tony been then what he is now that is why i put the 07 squad ahead of them.

2003 team- Really came out of nowhere, nobody thought the Spurs would win it that year. They figured they were too young and it was going to be a Lakers 4 peat or the Kings finally getting crowned. Young guys like Jackson, Manu and Tony came along faster than expected and great veteran leadership from guys like Kevin Willis and Steve Kerr helped a lot. the 03 season to me is when Duncan went from one of the best players in the league to an all time great. He was the MVP of the season, MVP of the playoffs and MVP of the finals he almost personally saw to it that D-Rob who was on his last legs would go out a CHAMP!!!!

[Baron Davis]

2007
1999
2005
2003

[lefty]

2008 and 2009

[TDMVPDPOY]

99 05 03 07

99 team toughest road to finals

05 same as above

03 weak team that overachieved

07 duncan exposing everyone

[lefty]

99 05 03 07

99 team toughest road to finals

05 same as above

03 weak team that overachieved

07 duncan exposing everyone

99 : 15 wins, 2 losses (including 2 sweeps)

03 : Didn't we destroy the Lakers by more than 20 points at Staples Center ????

[exstatic]

The 2003 team was an enigma. They occasionally lost focus, but when they were on, they just CRUSHED teams, like the huge comeback at Dallas in game 6, or destroying the Lakers to prevent a 4 peat. I think that team had the most talent, but the least focus.

My list:
1999 - the first, and at 15-2 the most dominant run
2007 - great run, and TP's debutant ball.
2003 - great talent, inconsistant
2005 - Nazr. Need I say more? Thank God for long haired Manu. :lol

[lefty]

The 2003 team was an enigma. They occasionally lost focus, but when they were on, they just CRUSHED teams, like the huge comeback at Dallas in game 6, or destroying the Lakers to prevent a 4 peat. I think that team had the most talent, but the least focus.

My list:
1999 - the first, and at 15-2 the most dominant run
2007 - great run, and TP's debutant ball.
2003 - great talent, inconsistant
2005 - Nazr. Need I say more? Thank God for long haired Manu. :lol

03 : I agree ; plus, at the begininning of the season, we were supposed to be in a rebuilding mode (new players, Robinson's last season) ; I was just an amazing run, and it was so great to watch Robinson retire with an unexpected ring.

05 : People make fun of that, but long-haired Manu is so agressive and confident; with shorter hair, it'S not the same ; weird, but true

[hsxvvd]

2003 was clearly the best of them all.

1. They beat the Kobe/Shaq Lakers, that everybody still goes on about, how they'd still be winning championships today had they not been busted up.

2. The Admiral & Duncan, two of the best players of all time together on one team. And before you get on about Robinson having nothing left, your kidding yourself! He'd still be killing it today.

3. Manu might have waiting, but Internationally Manu was already killing it.

4. Big Dogg!

[hsxvvd]

oh and 1999*

[exstatic]

4. Big Dogg!
That was 2005.

I gave 1999 a slight edge over 2003 because they were mentally tougher, and from the point of being 6-8 there was never a Spurs team that had the "on" switch in the "on" position for a longer, more dominant run. They finished out 31-5 and followed that with a 15-2 playoff run. That is some fucking dominance, playing .868 ball over a period of months at crunch time, when the games count.

[sa_kid20]

the '99 team might not have been the most talented but they were the best TEAM. 15-2 with 2 sweeps, hard to argue with that

[whottt]

I just know I had no doubts the 2003 team was going to be the champion right about the time of the road trip...and that's the only one of the champion teams I've been 100% certain was going to win the title no matter what was thrown in their way.

I disagree that team was inconsistent...that team won every big game they played...usually in the 4th with about 5 mins left they'd just clampdown and strangle their opponents. They didn't lose a big game all year. They didn't lose a statement game all year.


They won 60 games which was the second best record ever for a Spurs team and they took out a 3 time champion, a 60 win team, and a returning NBA finalist.


Not other Spurs team took out that caliber of competition all in the same post season.

The closest would be the 2005 team...and it took them 7 games to win it.

[duncan228]

I just know I had no doubts the 2003 team was going to be the champion right about the time of the road trip...and that's the only one of the champion teams I've been 100% certain was going to win the title no matter what was thrown in their way.

I disagree that team was inconsistent...that team won every big game they played...usually in the 4th with about 5 mins left they'd just clampdown and strangle their opponents. They didn't lose a big game all year. They didn't lose a statement game all year.


They won 60 games which was the second best record ever for a Spurs team and they took out a 3 time champion, a 60 win team, and a returning NBA finalist.


Not other Spurs team took out that caliber of competition all in the same post season.

The closest would be the 2005 team...and it took them 7 games to win it.

I agree with your impression of the 2003 team but I put the 2005 team first for exactly the reasons you didn't.

The '05 team struggled, Duncan was hurt. They didn't win every big game, every statement game. There were questions about whether they could pull it out.

And they did. Against all odds, they pulled out a championship that lots of people thought they couldn't.

To me, that's a team that has it.

[Dave McNulla]

i have such a hard time ranking 2nd through 4th, but #1 in my mind is 1999. the opponents were shaking in their boots no matter how far ahead they were or how little time was left.

[bdictjames]

1. 2003 - Duncan was at his peak, it was great to see what he did in the court. Manu was great as a rookie, and beating the Lakers was like the icing on the cake.

2. 2005 - Manu was unbelievable, and Barry was still great.

3. 2007 - Sweep.

4. 1999 - I ranked this last, prolly because it was a lockout year.

[sprrs]

I just know I had no doubts the 2003 team was going to be the champion right about the time of the road trip...and that's the only one of the champion teams I've been 100% certain was going to win the title no matter what was thrown in their way.

I disagree that team was inconsistent...that team won every big game they played...usually in the 4th with about 5 mins left they'd just clampdown and strangle their opponents. They didn't lose a big game all year. They didn't lose a statement game all year.


They won 60 games which was the second best record ever for a Spurs team and they took out a 3 time champion, a 60 win team, and a returning NBA finalist.


Not other Spurs team took out that caliber of competition all in the same post season.

The closest would be the 2005 team...and it took them 7 games to win it.

Whereas I wasn't sure they would win the championship until they came back from 19 down vs. the Nets in game 6. That team was terribly inconsistent in that if they EVER built up a big lead, they got incredibly lazy and let the other team in the game. Think games 1 and 5 versus Dallas, games 3 and 5 versus the Lakers. There were moments in every series where they could have blown it and lost.

As a matter of fact, the safest bet for them to win a game was to have them fall into a huge deficit, rather than a huge lead. They always seemed to be able to fight back and win a close game if they had to claw their way back in. The 2003 team probably tore up my insides more than any other championship team.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

you guys really know how to overrate the 2007 team

[slayermin]

1. '03 Spurs - This team was versatile. If you watch the matchups against Dallas, Pop played Jack on Nowitzki. Nellie wasn't the first to do it. Not to mention Tim Duncan was absolutely at his best in 2003. He was a monster on both ends of the court, night in and night out.

2. '99 Spurs - The Admiral was on the decline but still played at an all-star level. This team would absolutely shutdown the paint and grind out games with hard nosed, physical defense. They were head and shoulders the best team that year.

3. '05 Spurs - Big Shot Bob came up huge and made up for his '04 debacle against the Lakers. Game Five against Detroit was one of the most grueling wars of attrition I have ever seen. Manu Ginobili became a full fledged superstar, imo.

4. '07 Spurs - The stars aligned just right. Cleveland and Utah replaced Dallas and Detroit as contenders. And it was obvious Phoenix wasn't ready. Tony Parker plays at a new level in the Finals and his MVP was well deserved.

[rAm]

1. '03 Spurs - This team was versatile. If you watch the matchups against Dallas, Pop played Jack on Nowitzki. Nellie wasn't the first to do it. Not to mention Tim Duncan was absolutely at his best in 2003. He was a monster on both ends of the court, night in and night out.

2. '99 Spurs - The Admiral was on the decline but still played at an all-star level. This team would absolutely shutdown the paint and grind out games with hard nosed, physical defense. They were head and shoulders the best team that year.

3. '05 Spurs - Big Shot Bob came up huge and made up for his '04 debacle against the Lakers. Game Five against Detroit was one of the most grueling wars of attrition I have ever seen. Manu Ginobili became a full fledged superstar, imo.

4. '07 Spurs - The stars aligned just right. Cleveland and Utah replaced Dallas and Detroit as contenders. And it was obvious Phoenix wasn't ready. Tony Parker plays at a new level in the Finals and his MVP was well deserved.


agreed

[whottt]

Here's the deal about the 99 team...which IMO, is the only other one in contention for best championship team...


I think any of our championship teams would have won a championship that year. 15-2? Probably not...but win it all? Yeah I think any of them would have. So while that one may have had one of the most impressive post season runs ever...IMO, it also had the easiest schedule of any of our champion teams.


I agree about the 07 team being over-rated...this past years team was the weakest of them all. It got lucky Dallas was taken out...I wouldn't say we got lucky against the Suns...more like our experience showed. They won't make those mistakes again.


It's a tossup between the 99 and 03 teams but I really don't think any of our other teams would have won the title in 03...


Forget inconsistent, that team was very consistent when it came to big games.

[Whisky Dog]

2007 16-4... hard to argue with results. The team this year didn't just win closeout games, they blew them open with no doubt. The team was an efficient beast all PO, I don't think they are overestimated.

[Whisky Dog]

I won't rank them because it's incredibly stupid to do so, like ranking your children. They're all equally great.

[lefty]

1. 2003 - Duncan was at his peak, it was great to see what he did in the court. Manu was great as a rookie, and beating the Lakers was like the icing on the cake.

2. 2005 - Manu was unbelievable, and Barry was still great.

3. 2007 - Sweep.

4. 1999 - I ranked this last, prolly because it was a lockout year.

Game 6 vs LA : perfect

[exstatic]

It's a tossup between the 99 and 03 teams but I really don't think any of our other teams would have won the title in 03...


Forget inconsistent, that team was very consistent when it came to big games.
Well, considering that EVERY playoff game is a big game, I don't agree with you on their consistency. They were very inconsistent, and in almost every series. They were also the ONLY one of the four teams to drop a home Finals game before the switch of venue. Yeah, they fought back, but most of the time it was from a hole that they dug for themselves by dropping a dumb game like NJ game 2 or Dallas game 1.

[thousandth]

2005 was the best. They beat an excellent Detroit team. Plus, Horry still had game.

1999- Big Dave could still play

2007- Tony coming into his own makes this team super good.

2003- Manu and Tony were not what they are today.

DUNCAN, bro. Duncan was great in 2003.



If we had Nazr or Oberto instead of Drob we wouldn't have beaten them. Sorry but we wouldn't have

I think if we had Nazr in last postseason we lost as 2006 :lol

2003
1999
2005
2007

[baseline bum]

1. 1999 Spurs - David was still in his prime, and completely cut off any interior scoring. They had a great bigman rotation with Robinson/Duncan/Perdue/Rose, were strong at the three with Elliott and Kersey, got good outside shooting at the two from Elie and JJackson, and AJ played the best season and playoffs of his career. David was still an NBA superstar who kept teams from being able to double Duncan.
.
.
.
.
2. 2007 Spurs - Not that deep of a team, but the team has never had three guys do what Duncan/Parker/Ginobili did this postseason. Plus, Bruce was a monster the whole playoffs.

3. 2003 Spurs - Incredible depth at every position.

PG: Parker/Claxton/Kerr
SG: Jackson/Ginobili
SF: Bowen/Jackson
PF: Duncan/Rose
C: Robinson/Rose/Willis

They were young though, and could go into some massive offensive droughts that almost cost them the title. Still, when they were hot they were completely untouchable, and Duncan was annihilating everyone that year.

4. 2005 Spurs - Duncan's injury kept this team from being as good as the 99 team. They owned the league until that game in Detroit when Tim turned his ankle, and with a healthy Duncan I think the series would have gone 4/4/5/6. Manu was insane, especially in that Denver series.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

My heart loved the '99 run because it was the first one and the Spurs were just clutch in every series and never took their foot off the gas.

The '07 team, however, reminded me of some of those old Bulls teams with Michael or Laker teams with Magic that just went out knowing they were better than the other guys and weren't going to lose 4 out of 7 to anybody. The big three could interchangeably step up whenever needed and were not going to be denied. Then there was Bruce Almighty to stop the other team's star.

My list is probably '07,'99,'03 and '05.

[urunobili]

2003/2007/2005/1999

[whottt]

Well, considering that EVERY playoff game is a big game, I don't agree with you on their consistency. They were very inconsistent, and in almost every series.

They were? They never trailed by more than 0-1 in any series. They went up 2-1 in every series. They were up 3-2 in every series. They won in 6 in every series. They also almost clinched on the road in every series...with the exception of the one with a different format.


On top of that, they opened the season with a win in LA. They knocked off LA and Sac back to back on the road at the start of the road trip. Countless other message games they won that year. They never lost a single one.





They were also the ONLY one of the four teams to drop a home Finals game before the switch of venue. Yeah, they fought back, but most of the time it was from a hole that they dug for themselves by dropping a dumb game like NJ game 2 or Dallas game 1.


Or Phoenix game 1..

I never sweat at any point in that playoff run other tham maybe game 5 VS the Lakers.

The only team that made me nervous? Phoenix...and that was because they beast us 3-1 in regular season.

That 03 team was methodical, it had no weakness, it was extremely poised, and it was extremely deep. I just don't see any of our other champion teams that would have won that year. I don't think any of others would have beaten that Laker team. The 99 Team did sweep the Shaq Kobe Lakers...but Phil wasn't there...and that team didn't have the swagger of a 3 time champ.

3 time champion...you don't face those in the post season every year. I don't see how anyone can say we faced a tougher team than that one. In any other series, in any other championship run.

[lefty]

My heart loved the '99 run because it was the first one and the Spurs were just clutch in every series and never took their foot off the gas.

The '07 team, however, reminded me of some of those old Bulls teams with Michael or Laker teams with Magic that just went out knowing they were better than the other guys and weren't going to lose 4 out of 7 to anybody. The big three could interchangeably step up whenever needed and were not going to be denied. Then there was Bruce Almighty to stop the other team's star.

My list is probably '07,'99,'03 and '05.

True.

But at the end, who cares which one was the best ?

We have 4 titles, and counting !!

Fuck Yeah :elephant :elephant :king

[dy-nasty21]

2007- steady and dependable duncan plus the best tony has ever played.
1999- timmy and d-rob disrupted everything defensively for everyone. one of the best defensive teams ever
2003- timmy in his prime
2005- short rotation, barry is starting, tony not his best, nazr starting, questionable

[Hoy]

Just as a principle, the last championship team is the best.
Probably because I am thinking mortality of a team.
Even a great team like the current Spurs, how long can they do this?

[spursreport]

you guys really know how to overrate the 2007 team


:rolleyes :rolleyes So should we put asteriks next to this years title then? I agree this wasnt the most thrilling ride to a title, but this team wasnt exactly chop liver either. One thing that they had that they didnt have in 03 or 05 was a killer instinct.

[Spurs Dynasty 21]

2007- Manu/Duncan/Parker all in prime and playing incredible

1999- this team only lost 1 damn game in the post

2003- lots of depth on this team, plus D Rob

2005- Manu was incredible

[Supergirl]

2003 was our best roster. But 2007 comes in second, then 1999, and then 2005.

[spursjustice]

Starting Lineup:

1999 - Tim Duncan, Sean Elliott, David Robinson, Mario Elie, Avery Johnson
2003 - Tim Duncan, Bruce Bowen, David Robinson, Stephen Jackson, Tony Parker
2005 - Tim Duncan, Bruce Bowen, Nazr Mohammed, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker
2007 - Tim Duncan, Bruce Bowen, Fabricio Oberto, Michael Finley, Tony Parker

Reserves:

1999 - Jaren Jackson, Malik Rose, Antonio Daniels, Steve Kerr
2003 - Manu Ginobili, Malik Rose, Steve Kerr, Speedy Claxton
2005 - Brent Barry, Robert Horry, Rasho Nesterovic,
2007 - Manu Ginobili, Robert Horry, Francisco Elson, Jacque Vaughn

Difficulty of path to NBA Title:

1999 - Minnesota (3-1), Lakers (4-0), Trailblazers (4-0), New York Knicks (4-1)
2003 - Phoenix (4-2), Lakers (4-2), Dallas (4-2), New Jersey Nets (4-2)
2005 - Denver (4-1), Seattle (4-2), Phoenix (4-1), Detroit Pistons (4-3)
2007 - Denver (4-1), Phoenix (4-2), Utah (4-1), Cleveland Cavs (4-0)


In my opinion, 1999, 2005, 2007 and 2003.

[Supergirl]

2003: We had our best C (David), our best back up PG (Speedy), and both Jax and Manu for explosive scoring. Plus the clutch services of Steve Kerr which saved our asses in a couple games. Plus Tony and Tim.

2007: We had the best C we've had since David (Oberto), our best man to man defender (Bowen), and the clutch defensive prowess of Robert Horry. And even though he didn't score much in 2007, his long history of clutch 3 pointers makes him an asset offensively - teams HAVE to guard him. Plus Tony and Tim.

IMO, it's hard to argue these weren't our two best lineups.

1999, we had David and Tim, but the rest of the roster was a bunch of scrubs, plus Sean Elliot, who was playing on one kidney.

2005, we won despite a glaring hole at back up PG and at the C spot.

[bigFUNDAMENTAL]

05
99
07
03

[exstatic]

Well, whottt, we're probably just never going to see eye to eye on this one. You see it as going up 3-2 on Dallas. I see it as going up 3-1, and dropping a stupid home game with a chance to close out. To me, the kicker is that the 1999 team never was in jeopardy at all. The 2003 had by far the most talent, but if Horry doesn't rim out the game five ender for LA, we'd be talking about coulda, shoulda, woulda for 2003, 2004 and 2006, and we'd be sitting on 3 trophies, maybe. If he hits that shot, maybe the Lakers don't let him go, so he's not here in 2005 to torture the Pistons.

[TMTTRIO]

1999- We had David and Tim and almost swept the playoffs. Also who can forget Sean's Memorial Day Miracle.

2005- With Tim struggling from his injuries, Manu decided to step up his game and played at a ridiculous level. It was awesome seeing him take over games. Also the Detroit series was an awesome series. Who can forget Robert Horry's clutch 3 pointer in game 5.

2003-First of all it was great to get rid of the Lakers. David Robinson leaves as a Champion. Our role players played well and Steve Kerr raining those threes on Dallas to send them home.

2007- It really wasn't a challenge other than the Suns but it was great to see Tim Duncan dominate games. It was really awesome to see Tony taking over games in the playoffs and Bruce's awesome defense.

[Texas_Ranger]

2003

[barbacoataco]

It is amazing that their in no agreement about this. All 4 championship teams have supporters, and you could make any argument for any of them.

[101A]

1999.

The 1999 team swept two very good teams, the Lakers, who won three straight titles after 1999, and the Blazers, who should have won their 2000 series vs. the Lakers. No other Spurs team came close to 15-2 in the playoffs.

16-4 is close, IMO.

[101A]

...2007- It really wasn't a challenge ...

And you use this as a reason to rank that team last?

[ashrafabdeljaber]

I don't think the 2007 team should be ranked as one of the top. First of all, they were down in the series against nuggets, they bypassed the Dallas mavericks who were beaten by Golden State. Who knows what would have happened if the spurs faced the Mavs. Also, game 5 of the suns/spurs series was very controversial. Who knows what could have happened if the suspensions of both Diaw and Stoudamire was different. Another thing, they swept the unexperienced Cleveland Cavaliers so that doesnt make them a great team just because they beat an unexperienced team. I think the best team was probably 2005 because it was their first title without David Robinson, or other players such as Steve Kerr and others who contributed to the titile. Also Tony Parker wasn't the same and neither was Ginoboli who both contributed greatly in the 2007 championship run. They somehow won 05 with all those obstacles.

[Tacker]

2005 > 2003 > 1999 > 2007

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

2005 was the only team that played a legit Champion in the Finals that actually played proven championship defense and championship rebounding against a loaded HOF team. We also had a great road to the championship with a deep West from end to end.

The rest of those finals series during the other 'ship years, we played bullshit J.V. teams.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

2003 was probably our most rawly talented, and youthful team however..

[baseline bum]

1. 99 - The 99 team was easily the most physical, got great production from its shooters, and Robinson completely shut down the paint.

2. 03 - Deepest team and toughest run out of the West. Duncan played the best ball of his career, Bowen was incredible, and they made the best opponent of any of the title runs cry like bitches.

3. 05 - Could have been higher if Duncan was healthy, especially with the monster runs of Manu and Rob.

4. 07 - Definitely the weakest of the title teams; their defense was nowhere close to the 99,03, and 05 teams. They might have been the best team offensively though.

[lefty]

2005 was the best overall team

2003 was the most talented

1999 had the most killer instinct of all

2007 was the oldest

[baseline bum]

The next year they had Malone and Payton, minus an off his game Horry, not exactly the same team as in 2003.

I will grant you that if we replace DRob with one of our current centers, we wouldn't have won. That kinda helps prove my point though.

Payton was worse than Fisher. Payton was an absolute turnstile on D, and was a horrible fit on that team. All the Laker fans were so glad to get rid of him after the way Billups murdered him in the Finals.

[baseline bum]

LOL, I had 99,07,03,05 as my order last year. :lol

Must have been championship hangover.

[Budkin]

1999 by far.

[timtonymanu]

i'd say

2005 - The Spurs took out the defending champs that year. They didnt have enough talent: Parker wasnt in his prime. Udrih sucked. Nazr/Rasho werent that great. Barry had played back-up PG. And they won that year. I think Manu really made a case to win finals MVP that year.

2003 - The Spurs also took out the defending champs that year. They had a mix of young players and old guys. S-Jax/Manu were a killer shooting guard combo. Malik Rose was great that year. Claxton was the last decent back-up PG. Duncan was stellar that year.

1999 - It was hard to choose between 99 and 03, but i say 99 comes in third only because that was a lockout year so who knows how things would have been if the whole season was played. But the Spurs were excellent in the playoffs. they nearly swept the whole thing.

2007 - I liked this team but it wasnt the best. They really had no challenge that year except the Suns, who they own all the time. Things could have been harder if the Mavs didnt lose to the Warriors, but they did. One thing for sure is that we saw Parker evolve into a superstar that year. Manu and Tim also did great in the playoffs. Bruce was also great in the playoffs.

[TampaDude]

2005 was the best. They beat an excellent Detroit team. Plus, Horry still had game.

1999- Big Dave could still play

2007- Tony coming into his own makes this team super good.

2003- Manu and Tony were not what they are today.

^ this

The 2005 Finals against the Pistons was EPIC...one of the greatest Finals EVER! :toast

[Cant_Be_Faded]

07 was the weakest by far

05 was good but it took a freak shot by horry to keep us alive

99 crominating defense, noone was beating us that year

03 was best, Duncan set the bar for superstars gunning for a championship, our defense outside and inside was amazing, but the only bad point was that dallas had us on the ropes and we got bailed out by ginobili injuring dirk. But the huge plus -- we made Raper and Fishfuck cry like the punk ass bitches they are.

[spursnatic]

2005 most definitely!!!...Our defense was locking everyone down, the whole year...Then I would probably go 2003, Duncan was a fucking beast that year!!!...Then I would say 1999, the same here..Duncan was a beast but not as much as in the 2003 season..And then 2007, we was basically given that series!! Lebron didn't have any help that year, so it was extremely easy to stop him..Unlike today, you double or triple him, fucking Mo Williams is bombing 3's on you left and right, Sucks!!! But that is how I rank them.:lobt::lobt::lobt::lobt::lobt2::flag:

[Obstructed_View]

I had a big long thing written, complete with math, records, and observations. Thanks to Google Chrome, I accidentally closed the browser window with that tab open. Here's a shortened version for those of you that actually read my posts. :)

1. 1999 - In an 82 game season, that team would have won 65 games, even after starting 6-8. That's 70 win pace, folks, which is highly rarified air.

2. 2003 - So much talent it was embarrassing. They didn't have to play more than fifteen or twenty minutes a night to beat people. If they'd played to their potential we'd be talking about them with the '99 team, simply because Duncan was so much better by that point.

3. 2007 - They were playing so well by the western finals that the only thing that could slow them down was 8 days off before the finals, and it still didn't help the Cavs win a game.

4. 2005 - Up there with the '99 team as far as discipline and effort on both ends over 48 minutes. They needed every bit of it, as their road through the playoffs was the toughest of all the teams.

[DeadlyDynasty]

07 was the weakest by far

05 was good but it took a freak shot by horry to keep us alive

99 crominating defense, noone was beating us that year

03 was best, Duncan set the bar for superstars gunning for a championship, our defense outside and inside was amazing, but the only bad point was that dallas had us on the ropes and we got bailed out by ginobili injuring dirk. But the huge plus -- we made Raper and Fishfuck cry like the punk ass bitches they are.
congrats, now Pop is only 1-4 against Phil...you must be proud.

Of course 2003 was the best cause it's the one time you knocked off your nemesis

[Muser]

Any year with the Twin towers > 2004 onwards.

[kace]

2003 was a great team when you look at the cast: tim, D-Rob, tony and manu.

that' true that D-Rob wasn't the 99 one, tony wasn't the 07 one and manu wasn't the 05 one. but the 03 Tim was REALLY great. and having these fourth great spurs players in the same team is great.


i just can't imagine a team with tony at his actual level, the 2005 manu, the 2003 tim and the 90's D-Rob. with the bruce of few years ago (2003-2007). oh my god, that would be awesome.

[angel_luv]

1)2005
2)2003
3)2007
4)1999

[Fernando TD21]

2003 was a great team when you look at the cast: tim, D-Rob, tony and manu.

that' true that D-Rob wasn't the 99 one, tony wasn't the 07 one and manu wasn't the 05 one. but the 03 Tim was REALLY great. and having these fourth great spurs players in the same team is great.

Agreed.

I'd rank them:

2003
1999
2005
2007

But 2005 was my favorite.

[crc21209]

My favorite championship Spurs team will be the team of 2009. :toast Believe. Because thru all the ups and downs, the bs, the injuries, the shit-rotations...the Spurs managed to pull it off. Soon my friends....soon. :flag:

[HarlemHeat37]

1999 is the best without question for me..having Duncan and Robinson down low on both sides of the floor is just disgusting..

2007 was the worst IMO..it was definitely a great team, but not as good as the others..

2005 was very good as well..the fact that we managed to beat a great Pistons team with a hobbled Duncan in the finals, speaks volumes on how solid the rest of the team was..

2003 was the most youthful and athletic team we've had..it was an easier road than '99 and 2005 though..the key to that team was the fact that Duncan was easily the best player in the NBA at the time, and had one of the greatest individual seasons in NBA history..

[objective]

03 was best, even though they underachieved. But so much talent.

99 was good but under different rules. I still like them.

05 had it's pieces.

07 was least credible. They lucked out by avoiding Dallas, and then didn't have too much trouble with an unready Utah team and an overmatched incredibly thin Cavs team.

07's success unfortunatley laid the path for some unfortunate personnel moves to keep guys that shouldn't have been retained (like Oberto) and to reject Scola.

[AceProfits]

1. '99 - Do you guys remember how suffocating that defense was? I remember that teams had to change there plays because nobody was able to get into the paint with us.

2. '03 - Team was highly talented. Manu and Sjax we had balls of steel.

3. '05 - Good time I actually believe we were better in '04 even though we didnt win it.

4. '07 - 100% the weakest of the bunch. Seems like the league around us was just weaker.

[baseline bum]

3. '05 - Good time I actually believe we were better in '04 even though we didnt win it.

The '04 team is the one that really should have repeated. If they get anything whatsoever out of Turkoglu, they win that LA series in 5. I'm not sure if they beat Detroit in the Finals, but they'd have a great shot. That team was hot going into the playoffs and played incredible defense, but they got beat by Phil Jackson's pack the lane and dare everyone to shoot gimmick defense. I remember Tex Winters saying something to the effect that he was shocked they beat the Spurs in '04.

[Obstructed_View]

1. '99 - Do you guys remember how suffocating that defense was?

Anybody that puts the '99 team below second either wasn't a fan back then or doesn't remember how good they were.

[J.T.]

The '04 team is the one that really should have repeated. If they get anything whatsoever out of Turkoglu, they win that LA series in 5. I'm not sure if they beat Detroit in the Finals, but they'd have a great shot. That team was hot going into the playoffs and played incredible defense, but they got beat by Phil Jackson's pack the lane and dare everyone to shoot gimmick defense. I remember Tex Winters saying something to the effect that he was shocked they beat the Spurs in '04.

I am convinced that 2006 would have been my favorite championship if we'd beaten Dallas, because we would have owned Phoenix again and Bowen would've locked down Wade. And Wade was the only reason Miami won that year. But you see it in every sport's playoffs, if a team gets down in a series (or down by a lot of points in single elimination playoffs) and they end up coming back to win... there's no stopping that kind of momentum.

[HarlemHeat37]

I have absolutely no doubt that we would have won the title in 2006..we were the best team that year..I bet Manu still has nightmares about it..

[galvatron3000]

they were all great teams BECAUSE they gelled at the right time, except perhaps the '05 team who were focused because of the '04 season, but my favorite was the '03 team. Had the '03 team stayed intact minus David you could argue a 4 peat for the Spurs was highly likely. Duncan, Manu, Parker, Bowen and Jack were the mainstays surrounded by Horry, Barry, Nazr, Rasho, some pg and other role players but the core was set and gelled.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

congrats, now Pop is only 1-4 against Phil...you must be proud.

Of course 2003 was the best cause it's the one time you knocked off your nemesis

LOL 10 year old laker fan. Did daddy buy you a basketball for your 10th birthday? Cuz for us normal adults, we remember sweeping your team of rapists in 1999, fishfucker. It's cool though. Bump this thread the next time you beat us in a series and make our boring superstar cry like a little spoiled bitch coatrider. Bump it. Okay?

http://fourhorsementattoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/kobe-crying.jpg

[Yuixafun]

2003 team made the Lakers weep on their home floor and made me roar vigorously so many times with glee during action packed games. I had neve been so thrilled about basketball before. I recall we got huge plays from seemingly everybody on the team at the most opportune times. Duncan at his most dominant. 2003 made me a Spurs fan for life.

2005 we were Witnesses (to SuperManu)

1999 my 3rd year living in SA, after moving here from Japan. I was just starting to enjoy basketball, and thought it was pretty cool to be champions..

2007 bleh we swept the Cavs in the Finals, TP did his thing

[clubalien]

keep in mind the best spurs team could not be in championship years too. Since from the years you look like rating campion ships i belive 99 we were unstopable so i give it #1. below or my 1-5


1-1999
2-2009
3-2005
4-2007
5-2003

[SPURS50]

2005
1999
2007
2003

[Ghazi]

2006 Spurs are the best Spurs team ever and the Mavs beat them.

[The Truth #6]

1999 was our most dominating squad. We steamrolled everyone. That was one of the best defensive teams of all time. We lost twice in the whole playoffs. We lost twice in every single round of the 2003 playoffs. Our 2007 path to the title was weak. 2005 was the hardest path arguably, but I still think the 99 squad was the most focused and intimidating.

[[email protected]]

2007 robert horry win his seven ring:lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lobt2::lob t2::lobt2:

[Toni61]

2003
1999
2007
2005

[Bukefal]

2005
2007
1999
2003

[DoKdynasty]

better delete this thread since the OP is using a posters real name :lol

[Leetonidas]

The 1999 Spurs fa sho, that defense was sick.

[Leetonidas]

better delete this thread since the OP is using a posters real name :lol

Fuck I didn't realize this was posted forever ago. :lol

[Muser]

lol thinking the 07 Spurs > the '99 Spurs.

[DoKdynasty]

Tbh I think 2005 Spurs.

That was the year that Duncan arguably had a top 15 player as a sidekick since Manu was top 15 that year (IMO). Duncan was still in his prime (2007 he was still a beast but slightly past his prime) as was Bowen, but the most underrated player on that team was Brent Barry. He and Horry made so many big plays for that team it was remarkable. Usually 3 pointers stop falling in the 4th quarter but Barry and Horry didn't flinch when taking big shots.

[elemento]

2005 Spurs

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Tbh I think 2005 Spurs.

That was the year that Duncan arguably had a top 15 player as a sidekick since Manu was top 15 that year (IMO). Duncan was still in his prime (2007 he was still a beast but slightly past his prime) as was Bowen, but the most underrated player on that team was Brent Barry. He and Horry made so many big plays for that team it was remarkable. Usually 3 pointers stop falling in the 4th quarter but Barry and Horry didn't flinch when taking big shots.

I agree with the Brent Barry statement. He's one of the most underrated role players the Spurs ever had.

[DoKdynasty]

I agree with the Brent Barry statement. He's one of the most underrated role players the Spurs ever had.

He had one game against the Suns in 2005 in the playoffs where he won the Spurs the game because he was making shots from like 5 feet behind the arc that were contested. He had one of the ugliest shots I've ever seen but it was effective as hell and it would always fall in the 4th quarter.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

He had one game against the Suns in 2005 in the playoffs where he won the Spurs the game because he was making shots from like 5 feet behind the arc that were contested. He had one of the ugliest shots I've ever seen but it was effective as hell and it would always fall in the 4th quarter.

:tu That's what made him different from the rest of the team. He had the balls to jack up crazy shots that if Manu or someone else shot, people would be like WTF. I still have that game on VHS.

[spursncowboys]

1-03.
2-99
3-05
4-01 -year of D. Anderson. If he didn't get injured We would have took it all.
5-07

[Muser]

Yeah, Barry was great for the Spurs. Horry gets a lot of the credit because of his reputation and for game 5 but Barry was so good.

[PublicOption]

2003 was the best

drob
duncan
sjax
parker
bowen
ginobili

[LeeRain]

2007- steady and dependable duncan plus the best tony has ever played.
1999- timmy and d-rob disrupted everything defensively for everyone. one of the best defensive teams ever
2003- timmy in his prime
2005- short rotation, barry is starting, tony not his best, nazr starting, questionable

[BUMP]

lol rank 1-5

1 2003
2 2005
3 1999
4 2007
5 lol

lol ashraf

[mountainballer]

2005. by far.
most versatile line up Spurs ever had. they could slow it down (Piston series) and they could run (Suns series).

Tim still a dominant double team magnet.
Manu was at a career best.
Bowen was the best perimeter defender in the league.
Rob delivered one last big PO run and played good defense.
Tony was far better than given credit. he struggled in the finals against Billups, but he wasn't the only one who was dominated by him in that season. (Billups was likely the best defending PG in that season).
Barry was one of the best outside shooters in the league.

1999
2003
2007 (I think the 2004 and 2006 team was far better than the 2007 team. less lucky, obviously)

[ohmwrecker]

1. 2005 ~ 63 wins, solid line-up, weaker West opponents, strongest finals opponent.
2. 1999 ~ bad start, but quickly gelled and blazed through the lockout shortened season and the playoffs. First one is always sweet. If they had accomplished this in an 82 game season, it would have been, without question, the best Spurs team ever. Phil Jackson can shove it up his asterisk.
3. 2003 ~ 60 wins, dethroned the Lakers, stiff competition in the West, weak finals opponent. Sent The Admiral out on top.
4. 2007 ~ Tony Parker, weak West opponents, dodged Dallas (glorious 1st round defeat), whipped Bron Bron's ass, Tony Parker.

2006 was a great team and if not for that fucking foul could have been the best ever. I have no doubt the '06 Spurs would have crushed the Heat.

[BUMP]

2005. by far.
most versatile line up Spurs ever had. they could slow it down (Piston series) and they could run (Suns series).

Tim still a dominant double team magnet.
Manu was at a career best.
Bowen was the best perimeter defender in the league.
Rob delivered one last big PO run and played good defense.
Tony was far better than given credit. he struggled in the finals against Billups, but he wasn't the only one who was dominated by him in that season. (Billups was likely the best defending PG in that season).
Barry was one of the best outside shooters in the league.

1999
2003
2007 (I think the 2004 and 2006 team was far better than the 2007 team. less lucky, obviously)

I'm surprised you have the 2003 team that low. I think you could switch them and the 2005 team, but I don't think they were better than 1999 team.

The 99 team was the best defensively without any doubt but as soon as Parker and Ginobli came to the team it added huge versatility on offense. I rank 2003 over 2005 because they knocked off the 3 peat Lakers and were stacked as far as talent goes. Duncan, Ginobli, Parker, Bowen, Jackson, Robinson (aging but still effective), Rose, Claxton.

I would cream my pants if I got the opportunity to coach that team

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

lol rank 1-5

1 2003
2 2005
3 1999
4 2007
5 lol

lol ashraf

:lol

[gospursgojas]

You said top 5 sooo...

Talent wise-
1.2003
2.2005
3.2007
4.2006
5.1999

Favorite teams-
1.2005
2.1999
3.2003
4.2006
5.2007

[mexpurs21]

In my opinion, the 2003 championship team is the most complete one of all four, it had Big Dave, Stephen Jackson and some great subs that completed the team.

[Muser]

When did BUMP get unbanned from this forum?

[Dex]

2005 - Big 4 in their prime, solid supporting cast including Big Shot Rob's heroics
1999 - Lock down defense of the Twin Towers spurs an amazing run through the playoffs
2003 - Duncan at his peak + Robinson in supporting role
2007 - Duncan showing signs of age, but Parker coming into his own

[spursncowboys]

2003 was the best

drob
duncan
sjax
parker
bowen
ginobili
speedy set it off that year too.

[mingus]

'99 - they dominated then and they would dominate now on the defensive end. this duo downlow lol's at the duo they have over in LA.
'05 - i wanted to put them in first, but you just can't. Duncan and Robinson down low would smuther Manu and Parker imo.
'03 - an underrateed team. maybe the best chemistry of all the teams.
'07 - the weakest one and on t heir last legs with that group.

[John Terry]

I think the 05 has to be the best of all four. They swept the Cavs 4-0 in 07 finals but it didn't suggest anything but the general poor competitiveness of other teams that season. IMHO in 04-05 the Pistons were still enjoying their best forms, they inherited the same gangsters that won the NBA championships the prior year.

[Spursfan 87]

2003
2005
1999
2007

[Bito Corleone]

everybody forgets how good malik rose was in 2003

:lmao

[rmt]

1. 2005 - Very versatile - could play any style - great defense (Duncan, Bowen), great passing (Manu, Barry, Beno), great 3 pt shooting (Barry, Bowen, Horry, Manu), good size (Rasho, Nazr), Bowen & Manu in their prime. Duncan slightly past his peak and Parker before his prime. And what a game 5 from Horry.

2. 1999 - Fantastic defense from the twin towers and a young, mobile Duncan.

3. 2007 - Not very talented but a well-oiled machine. Old (relatively) but mentally tough.

4. 2003 - Duncan at his peak but not much around him. Streaky but mentally fragile - lost a lot of leads. 2nd year Parker, rookie Manu, last year Drob, streaky Jackson. But Duncan was a beast.

[SouthTexasRancher]

2003
2005
1999
2007

[Venti Quattro]

2003 was the best team IMHO. Also the one that made me cry

[Silver&Black]

I see alot of people saying that the 03 Spurs were the worst of the four championships. I'll buy that...but 03 Timmy was better than 99,05,and 07 Timmy. And that's the reason I could not put the 03 Spurs last. Timmy was a beast that year. I think he barely missed a quad-double that Finals. He was single-handly winning playoff games that year.

1- 2005
2- 1999
3- 2003
4- 2007

[barbacoataco]

1999
2005
2003
2007

[20beastie45]

2007- Sweep in Finals(IMO almost impossible)
2005-Beat a very good defensive squad
1999- Twin Towers in New York
2003- One man wrecking crew in Duncan(Best Individual Performance)

[20beastie45]

I see alot of people saying that the 03 Spurs were the worst of the four championships. I'll buy that...but 03 Timmy was better than 99,05,and 07 Timmy. And that's the reason I could not put the 03 Spurs last. Timmy was a beast that year. I think he barely missed a quad-double that Finals. He was single-handly winning playoff games that year.

1- 2005
2- 1999
3- 2003
4- 2007

The question is best Spurs TEAM?

Not what was Timmy's best Playoffs?

[howbouthemspurs]

1999, 2005, 2003, 2007

[Brazil]

1999 is IMO the best. The duo Drob and Tim was unstoppable then 2003 2005 and 2007

[romain.star]

1. 05 (the most complete team, TD at his very best, Manu on fire, Tony better than most think, Horry as clutch as ever and loads of great role players, Bowen as a DPY)
2. 07 (Tony and TD at their very best, Manu being great when needed, great role players)
3. 99 (Drob and TD dominating the paint big time, great experienced role players like Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_, Ellie, Avery...)
4. 03 (TD at his very best, great mix of players on the rise: Tony, Manu, Jax, Rose and solid veterans: Drob, Kerr, Bowen)

[Killakobe81]

Defensively 1999 was the best ...

and though I agre duncan may have had better years in following seasons ...

Robinson actually allowed Duncan to play PF on defense and center when needed on offense ...for that alone '99 has to be their BEST team
Plus isnt that the squad that closed out the Forum IIRC?

Like many said David could still play and it's also pre-Duncan injury ...though Tim has obviously bounced back big time ...

1999 and 2005 are the best IMHO yes Parker was a noob but Manu was deadly and they beat a tough Pistons squad ..the other 2 years were average Finals teams ...

[Amuseddaysleeper]

1. 2005
2. 1999
3. 2003
4. 2007

[hitmanyr2k]

The 2005 Spurs team was by far the best. They had the most versatile team of all the Spurs title teams. They could beat you inside or outside. They could adapt and run in an uptempo game or a slow down grind it out game. They put together a COMPLETE title run not only going through a good Western Conference but also beating a quality East opponent in the Finals...probably the only West team in the 00's to do so.

And honestly that's the only Spurs title team that would have beaten that tough Piston team in 2005. The '99 Spurs had a cakewalk in the Finals beating a Knicks team that couldn't score. The '03 title team was fortunate to face a cupcake Nets team in '03. And the '07 Cavs team may be the worst Finals opponent in the last 20+ years. If any of those Spurs team faced the '05 Pistons they're going down.

[Spurs Brazil]

99
05
03
07

[ezau]

03 and 05 are tied

The 05 team beat a very good Pistons team that destroyed the Lakers (which broke our back) in five games.

07- A Spurs team that was still good, but no longer as dominant as before. TP's rise to super stardom was one of the reasons this team was excellent.

99- A rising Duncan and a still capable D-Rob.

[JustinJDW]

2005
1999
2007
2003

99 and 07 can switch spots, but I do think 05 was the best and 03 was the least. Everyone has crazy different opinions about the topic.

[LoneStarState'sPride]

If any of those Spurs team faced the '05 Pistons they're going down.

We can debate the merits of the title teams till the cows come home, but the above sentence really is the kicker for me. We're talking about a Pistons team that had everything to play for (not just happy to be there, like the '99 Knicks and the '03 Nets; and not burdened by a prima donna, like the '07 Cavs). They were proven winners--taking out the lakers in '04 even without home court advantage (one of only two teams in the decade to do so). In fact, they were the first team EVER to sweep the three games at home in the Finals, so to say they weren't intimidated going on the road against SA is an understatement. That Pistons team was built to win titles, and if it weren't for the '05 Spurs' uncanny ability to win playing ANY style, they'd have folded early in that series.

Face it, any other Spurs team (including '04 and '06), would've fallen to those Pistons in 6 games or less. That's what makes '05 the best, in my opinion.

[Darrin]

I didn't watch these teams throughout the whole year because I don't live in the San Antonio area and some of this was before League Pass. But my recollection, as flawed as it may be, is the following:

1. 2004-05--They beat the Suns and the Pistons at their own game. That's tough to do. They have a solid 9-man rotation that was frustrating to try and stop. I say that cheering for a team in the Finals that tried. I got to a point and said "there's no way to stop this team."

2. 2006-07--They were a much more efficient offensive team than any of these teams. They were a sound defenisve team and the two together made them all but unstoppable.

3. 1998-99--They were mentally tough and never-said-die. They were tough defensively and they could dominate. There's some real chemistry this season between Duncan and Robinson. Avery Johnson had perhaps his finest year for the Spurs. They got on a roll and that was that. They were great in the postseason. You couldn't put this team away.

4. 2002-03--I honestly don't like this team. They had no offensive chemistry, most of it was one-on-one play, and their defense, while effective, was very simple. Can we just admit that 2001-02 and 2002-03 were two of the worst years the NBA has ever put together? Most teams played bad basketball.

[spurs10]

I'm still hoarse from the 4th quarter of game 7 in 2005!

[alex_tru]

2005>2007>1999>2003

[carib]

03, 07, 99, 05

dude where is the link to all the nice pictures

[lefty]

2005 was the best overall to me, for the same reasons Darrin brought up

2003 was the most talented team; plus it was supposed to be a transition season, with D-Rob retiring and all the new players

1999...well the 1st title, plus the best defensive Spurs team

2007 was the sweetest; everybody wrote us off: too old, unathletic, Mavs are the shit, we need a trade....... lololololololololol

[CubanMustGo]

Here's the thing about the '99 team - they had to overcome the reputation, gained over the previous two decades - of being a playoff choker. Yes, before '99 the Spurs were basically the Mavs wearing black. On top of that, they destroyed everyone in the postseason, only losing two freaking games in the playoffs. I can put the '05 team over them but not the others.

[lefty]

Here's the thing about the '99 team - they had to overcome the reputation, gained over the previous two decades - of being a playoff choker. Yes, before '99 the Spurs were basically the Mavs wearing black. On top of that, they destroyed everyone in the postseason, only losing two freaking games in the playoffs. I can put the '05 team over them but not the others.
Adding Duncan obviously helped to overcome that;

Heck, I don't think we were choking before drafting him; it's just that the team around David Robinson wasn't good enough

No disrespect to AJ, Vinny Del Negro or even Sean Elliott (sacrilege :(), but Robinson wasn't going to win with those guys

Even in 98, if Timmy didn't get injured during the Jazz series, we would have lost to the Bulls in the Finals

But adding Steve Kerr and Mario Elie, who had already won multiple titles while making big big clutch shots respectively with the Bulls and the Rockets really helped us in crunch time

[Darrin]

Here's the thing about the '99 team - they had to overcome the reputation, gained over the previous two decades - of being a playoff choker. Yes, before '99 the Spurs were basically the Mavs wearing black. On top of that, they destroyed everyone in the postseason, only losing two freaking games in the playoffs. I can put the '05 team over them but not the others.

I didn't take them seriously when I was watching them. Now, I was all of 15-years-old and could barely tell you the playoff bracket system, but I remember the '95 Robinson-Olajuwon MVP Conference Finals. I really had no love for the Spurs back then. I wanted the Blazers to win that series, I laughed when they lost to Minnesota and thought the Regular-season beasts were going to blow it again. New York was my favorite in the Finals. I just couldn't see this second-year player, who I barely knew, and the Admiral, at his age, winning an NBA title. I agreed with Damon Stoudamire.

But they hit clutch-shot after clutch-shot. They would put the beat-down on teams and never let them off the mat. That's why Phil Jackson's comment about the asterisk, considering how many times he has seen mental toughness win basketball games, was baffling.

In later years now that I have gotten ahold of games, they were just tougher than any other team they faced. Teams could gear-up for a stretch or two, but San Antonio was always in their face. It was incredible.

[ambchang]

99, no question.

The best defense there ever was, coupled with ample outside shooting, inside scoring, strong rebounding, a true sense of teamwork, and clutch shooting.

That team is one of the top ten teams of all time.

[Arcadian]

1. 2003 - MVP Duncan
2. 1999 - Young Duncan
3. 2005 - almost-MVP Duncan
4. 2007 - post-MVP Duncan

As Duncan goes, so go the Spurs.

[sehui]

The 2007 championship team was all luck guys. The Spurs stopped being a dominant contender 2006, when we lost to the Mavs in a 7 game thriller (Ginobili...I still love you though).

We weren't better than the Suns (Donaghy refed along with the controversial suspensions that saved our ass), Dallas was knocked out by GSW due to mismatching and possible "cheating" by Don Nelson, and we faced against mediocre playoff teams (young Jazz, the AI-Melo Nuggets, and Cleveland).

[spursince#99]

2003, 2005, 1999, 2007

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[therealtruth]

The 2007 championship team was all luck guys. The Spurs stopped being a dominant contender 2006, when we lost to the Mavs in a 7 game thriller (Ginobili...I still love you though).

We weren't better than the Suns (Donaghy refed along with the controversial suspensions that saved our ass), Dallas was knocked out by GSW due to mismatching and possible "cheating" by Don Nelson, and we faced against mediocre playoff teams (young Jazz, the AI-Melo Nuggets, and Cleveland).

Definitely felt 2007 was more about luck. The 2008 team might have been good enough if the Lakers hadn't got Gasol. Basically the Spurs stopped being dominant when Pop started getting outcoached by guys not named Phil Jackson.

[Blake]

2003 would beat the three others in seven game series, imo

[slick'81]

prob 03 over 99 still had 5-0 and timmy together plus manu and tony

[Cant_Be_Faded]

1-2005: Almost perfect. They could lock down teams or run them out of the gym. Plus they played one of the best finals ever (I like defense)
2-2003: insanely deep and skilled roster
3-1999: a gritty team with a killer defense
4-2007: a great team with no competition

You might remember him
As Joe the policeman
From tha What's Going Down episode of That's My Mama
Aaaladies and gentleman
Aaaaaput ya hands togetha
FAA mista
RANDYYY WWWWWATSON

[Kuestmaster]

2005, 2003, 1999, 2007

[roycrikside]

Hate to say it but I think the 99 team is the best just because the defense was so impenetrable. Nobody was gonna score on those guys.

After that, I'd go with 2005, because big three was at the height of their powers.

Then 2007. Pretty underrated group.

Finally 2003. Very deep team, but less than the sum of its parts because Robinson was too old and Tony and Manu were too young.

[baseline bum]

The 05 Spurs would have easily been the #1 Spurs team of all-time had Duncan not turned both ankles. That was a 65 win team if they stayed healthy. Also, I think the 04 team would have completely destroyed the 07 team in a series.

[Obstructed_View]

2003 would beat the three others in seven game series, imo

I agree, but it depends on what day you caught them on. The 1999 team was very consistent. The 2003 team was brilliant in stretches, but they played themselves out of almost as many games as they played back into.

[rascal]

1999 team was the best. You have to compare the team with the other teams in the league at the time and the Spurs were clearly the best team in 1999 and destroyed everyone in the playoffs with Duncan and Robinson on the frontline.

[Barfunk]

The 05 Spurs would have easily been the #1 Spurs team of all-time had Duncan not turned both ankles. That was a 65 win team if they stayed healthy. Also, I think the 04 team would have completely destroyed the 07 team in a series.

Agreed. The 2004-2005 Spurs still won 59 games, despite the big three missing 26 games combined. They were definitely a 65+ win team that year. Like it was said before they could win 80-65 or 121-117, take your pick.

In my opinion the list is:

1) 2005

1b) 1999

2) 2003

3) 2007

[FkLA]

Everytime this question is asked the majority seems to go with 2003 and it always baffles me tbh. Timmy absolutely dominated, but team wise despite some big names the Spurs werent all that talented. Manu, Tony, and Jack were still very green and Robinson was on his last wheels. Theres a reason so many people compare Timmys dominance in 03' to Dreams in 95', because both of them carried their respective teams on their back. I think if the Spurs were to have faced a dominant defensive frontline that year and Timmy was held to under superhuman numbers like they did in the 05' Finals, the Spurs wouldve been in deep shit.

Also a stat about the 99' team that always sticks with me is the fact that they started 6-8 and ended up with a 37-13 record. Those niggas won 31 of their last 36 games. Add their 15-2 playoff record and the Spurs finished off the season 46-7 after the poor start. Thats kind of good tbh. Id go:

1a.2005
1b.1999


3.2007
4.2003

[Spurtacus]

2005 (59-23, 16-7 playoffs)
1999 (37-13, 15-2 playoffs)
2003 (60-22, 16-8 playoffs)
2007 (58-24, 16-5 playoffs)

[Arcadian]

Everytime this question is asked the majority seems to go with 2003 and it always baffles me tbh. Timmy absolutely dominated, but team wise despite some big names the Spurs werent all that talented. Manu, Tony, and Jack were still very green and Robinson was on his last wheels. Theres a reason so many people compare Timmys dominance in 03' to Dreams in 95', because both of them carried their respective teams on their back. I think if the Spurs were to have faced a dominant defensive frontline that year and Timmy was held to under superhuman numbers like they did in the 05' Finals, the Spurs wouldve been in deep shit.

My reasoning is that Duncan in 03 outweighs everything else. Also, Ginobili wasn't really a true "rookie" as he had already played professionally before the NBA. Even Parker played like a veteran in the 03 playoffs. And their defense was just as good as any other year.

[FkLA]

My reasoning is that Duncan in 03 outweighs everything else. Also, Ginobili wasn't really a true "rookie" as he had already played professionally before the NBA. Even Parker played like a veteran in the 03 playoffs. And their defense was just as good as any other year.

03' was probably Duncans best year, but he was still one of the if not the best players on the planet during the other three titles as well. I dont think theres a big difference between any of the Duncans. The difference between 03' Manu&Parker and 05'/07' Manu&Parker is pretty big. Sure they had their moments, but they were nowhere close to being all-stars at that point in their careers.

[ViceCity84]

2007 Spurs
Spurs most efficient killing machine on both sides of the ball.They also had best chemistry.:flag:

[TampaDude]

They all have their pros and cons, but 2005 was the best NBA Finals EVER.

[Rapper]

1999

Because we had the young Tim Duncan

[TampaDude]

1999

Because we had the young Tim Duncan

Yeah...a fresh Duncan and DRob still in his prime...that defense was SICK!!! :toast

[Obstructed_View]

2007 Spurs
Spurs most efficient killing machine on both sides of the ball.They also had best chemistry.:flag:

It's really sad that they had such a long wait after the WCF. That team was hot.

[buujness]

1. 1999, for both on-court reasons and off-court reasons.

On-court: the defense of that team was ridiculous; I remember being shocked if the other team scored 90 points. The other championship teams had good D too (obviously), but not THAT good: that was the NBA's version of the '85 Bears, tbh. Plus, the Twin Towers were at their height (sorry), and just owned everyone that year.

Off-court: the team had to overcome their reputation as playoff chokers at the time, and one of the key contributors was literally DYING on the court (unbeknownst to us at the time).

Also they were the first, so they're my sentimental favorite.

2. 2005 - Most versatile team, and Duncan was still the Finals MVP despite playing against a great defensive team while on two bad ankles

3. 2003 - Very good defensive team, and a lot of big names, but that team had a habit of giving up leads and really increasing the collective blood pressure of Spurs fans everywhere...

4. 2007 - Least talented of the group, but had some really good chemistry (and some luck too)

I love all of them though. :)

[101A]

'99 - and it's not that close.

That team had two players who were better than any other player on any Spurs team since not named "Duncan". Duncan was already a beast, and Robinson was still very, very good.

oh, and:

16 -2

[mountainballer]

2005 can't remember that a team ever outgunned the leagues best offensive team AND then outdefended the leagues best defensive team in two consequitve series.

1999 Twin Towers at their best

2003 Tim at his best

2007 Spurs got a lot of help and some luck. (Warriors beat Mavs, Cavs beat Pistons, Amare+Diaw suspension).
the 2004 and 2006 teams were significantely better teams IMO

[ViceCity84]

2007 Spurs had best ppg diff among 4 champshiop teams. +8.4
But they did get alot of luck.weak competition
The finals sweep was overrated on Cavs.They played games 3&4 no better than games 3&4 vs Pistons in 05 finals.They played like shit,but Cavs played shittier.That's how good the Pistons were and hot shitty the Cavs were.

[ViceCity84]

2003 Spurs were my favorite and their most talented team.
Strong solid 8- Parker Manu Bowen Duncan D-Rob Rose Speedy Capt jack
I even loved their veteran quartet on back end-Kerr Willis Ferry Smith

I loved that team:flag:

[lefty]

2012

[Spur84]

2014, 2003, 1999, 2005, 2007

[spursistan]

2014>>1999>2005>>2003>>>2007

[Marcus Bryant]

2003.

Knocked off the Lakers in the afternoon and made them cry.
42-15 run in the WCF in Dallas to clinch, Jack brought them back and Kerr finished them off.
Malik climbing Mt. Mutombo.
The introduction of Ginobili to the NBA playoffs.
Jack icing it in Game 6 at home.
Duncan with like a near quad double in Game 6.
DRob walking off the court for the last time having won a championship.
And I was there.

Such a great roster. TP/Manu/TD/DRob/Jack/Kerr/Rose/Bruce/Speedy/Ferry/Willis/etc

[SupremeGuy]

I'd probably go...

2014 > 2003 > 2007 > 2005 > 1999

Maybe switch 2003 and 2014.

[sharkenleo]

2014
2005
2003
1999
2007

[Spur84]

2003.

Knocked off the Lakers in the afternoon and made them cry.
42-15 run in the WCF in Dallas to clinch, Jack brought them back and Kerr finished them off.
Malik climbing Mt. Mutombo.
The introduction of Ginobili to the NBA playoffs.
Jack icing it in Game 6 at home.
Duncan with like a near quad double in Game 6.
DRob walking off the court for the last time having won a championship.
And I was there.

Such a great roster. TP/Manu/TD/DRob/Jack/Kerr/Rose/Bruce/Speedy/Ferry/Willis/etc


Yeah 2003 was great and Robinson really did go out right but 2014 was the revenge year....it was the first time I felt like they beat a "real" opponent in the Finals and truly legitimized that they are the class of not just the NBA but of all pro sports.

[lmbebo]

I'd go 1999 > 2014 > 2005 > 2003 > 2007.

99 - Sentimental reasons. Incredible run that season, incredible post season record.
14 - Demolished the Heat, Game 3 on, Spurs just out classed the heat.
05 - Tough opponent in the Pistons. Toughest series we've had in the finals (aside from 13 loss to heat).
03 - Very bipolar team.
07 - weak team, but weaker opponent in finals.

[Horse]

1999,2014,2003,2016,2005,2007

[Spur84]

1999,2014,2003,2016,2005,2007
If the Spurs fail this season, it was because of this jinx!

[Horry Hipcheck]

2014, needs no explanation.
1999, first chip, Memorial Day Miracle.
2003, Robinson's farewell title, beating the Lakers, Game 6 comebacks in the WCF and Finals.
2005, Manu at his finest, knocking off the defending champs, Horry's Game 5.
2007, Parker going ham on Cleveland, otherwise nobody cares. I enjoyed the Warriors/Mavs series more than the Finals that year.

[dbreiden83080]

Yeah...a fresh Duncan and DRob still in his prime...that defense was SICK!!! :toast

Yeah but without Manu and Tony the offense was pretty bad. In the finals they had long stretches of not scoring on the Knicks, who were down Ewing. I like the 2005 team..

[Arcadian]

14 > 05 > 03 = 99 > 07

[Obi Juan Kenobi]

1999 is still my favorite since it was my first season as a Spurs fan...that 6-8 start had me worried though...they looked bad in that last defeat to Utah...

[ajh18]

I think 2005 was the most talented team. All 3 of the big-3 were in or near their prime, as was Bowen. Epic finals against the Pistons, who were a phenomenal team that year.

2014, playing the way they did against Miami, probably would beat any of these teams. That's not saying much though, as I'd put that team playing that way against any team I've seen in the 90s or 00s and give them a good shot of winning. The revenge factor, beating Lebron and breaking up the Superfriends... definitely my favorite title, because I never, ever thought it could happen after '13.

2003 was the weakest team overall, imo. Lots of great players who either hadn't even come close to reaching their peak or were way past their prime. But this was Duncan at his very best, almost single-handedly ending LA's three-peat (with some help from them), and I have a sentimental spot for seeing David go out a champion as he deserved.

1999 was great to finally get the monkey off our back. "Did the Utah Jazz win the championship??? For them, it's ok to say hell no!" Memorial Day Miracle, AJ overcoming the doubters, David being crowned champion and writing "Who's Soft Now" in Sports Illustrated. I loved it.

2007 was fun, but my least favorite of the titles. Beating Phoenix that year was more fun than beating Cleveland, tbh. Although beating Lebron is always fun.

[barbacoataco]

I have been thinking about this for years and still don't have any conclusions. I could list something but it could change at any time. The 2007 team was the weakest, but after that who knows? The 2003 team is underrated, as a couple posts in this thread demonstrate.

[PublicOption]

2003

[Janko]

2014 best TEAM

1999-2005 best roster (99 two real superstar, 2005 big three)

[San Antonio Slayer]

2014 best team ever!

[EVAY]

2014 was the best win ever. And the first championship series that I watched from my couch instead of being there.

1999 was the second best because I like defense and defense won that series

2005 because that team seemed unstoppable.

2003 because it was DRob's final series and game.

2007 was fine but was less exciting because it was so one-sided.

[Mal]

2014 > 2003 > 2005 > 1999 > 2007

[daledondale]

2014
2005
2003
1999
2007

[hitmanyr2k]

My opinion still hasn't changed from 5 years ago lol. The 2005 Spurs team was perfection. They could run you out of the building with Parker and Ginobili or slow it down and play the inside game with Prime Duncan. They had shooters galore (Ginobili, Horry, Barry, Bowen) to space the floor for Duncan to operate in the post and also open up driving lanes for Ginobili and Parker in the half court. Their defense was always good, if not great with Duncan as their anchor in the paint along with help from Nazr Mohammed and their perimeter shut down guy in Bruce Bowen. Ginobili was no slouch on the defensive end either.


The 2005 Spurs team was by far the best. They had the most versatile team of all the Spurs title teams. They could beat you inside or outside. They could adapt and run in an uptempo game or a slow down grind it out game. They put together a COMPLETE title run not only going through a good Western Conference but also beating a quality East opponent in the Finals...probably the only West team in the 00's to do so.

And honestly that's the only Spurs title team that would have beaten that tough Piston team in 2005. The '99 Spurs had a cakewalk in the Finals beating a Knicks team that couldn't score. The '03 title team was fortunate to face a cupcake Nets team in '03. And the '07 Cavs team may be the worst Finals opponent in the last 20+ years. If any of those Spurs team faced the '05 Pistons they're going down.

[TXstbobcat]

2014 team!!!!

Out of the other choices I would say the 2005 team that beat Detroit in 7 games in the finals.

[Johnny RIngo]

My opinion still hasn't changed from 5 years ago lol. The 2005 Spurs team was perfection. They could run you out of the building with Parker and Ginobili or slow it down and play the inside game with Prime Duncan. They had shooters galore (Ginobili, Horry, Barry, Bowen) to space the floor for Duncan to operate in the post and also open up driving lanes for Ginobili and Parker in the half court. Their defense was always good, if not great with Duncan as their anchor in the paint along with help from Nazr Mohammed and their perimeter shut down guy in Bruce Bowen. Ginobili was no slouch on the defensive end either.

The only flaw I can find with that team is Duncan's injury decreasing his effectiveness a bit. Still, it's the best Spurs team of the 2000s. I still have the 2014 run as the best overall but 2005 is close.

[wildbill2u]

2014 was the sweetest because of 2013 and because we were so dominant. The next best was 1999 because it was he first and we knew we had finally broken through. There was something about that team, call it professionalism or whatever, but there was a sense of inevitability about their play in games. We could be behind in the4th by double digits and somehow you KNEW they would rally and win. And they usually did. Sean's magical shot was just an example.

[barbacoataco]

Another good question is whether the championship teams were really the best spurs teams. 2004 and 2006 were maybe just as good but didn't have favorable match ups/ didn't make enough shots.

[Jdspur20]

1999( just because they were so solid on D, they would have won 60 games if not for the lockout)
2014
2005
2003
2007

[Diego20]

2016

[Leetonidas]

2014 Spurs would shit on 99% of NBA championship teams if you're assuming them being in god mode continues in any hypothetical series. That team was more than the sum of their parts, their offense was otherworldly, and their defense was very good. 2014 > all others

[Johnny RIngo]

Another good question is whether the championship teams were really the best spurs teams. 2004 and 2006 were maybe just as good but didn't have favorable match ups/ didn't make enough shots.

2004 team is actually pretty overrated. Historic defense but the offense was terrible at times. Duncan was the only true star on that team and he was nowhere near as good as he was in 2003 when he was able to carry the entire team to a title. A really crappy Tony Parker was their second option(ended up sinking the team with his historically bad series vs the Lakers). Spurs fixed this issue when a superior player like Manu became the second option the year after. 2005 Manu is easily the best teammate Duncan's played alongside besides 1999 Robinson.

2006 team was pretty good too. TD and Manu played like badasses vs the Mavs. Parker disappointed like usual. The bench completely disappeared vs the Mavs though. The Dallas bench all playing out of their minds didn't make things any easier.

[Horse]

If the Spurs fail this season, it was because of this jinx!

Good thing they won't I don't believe in the jinx and kiss my balls.