If Gervin had won the #1 Spur poll I wouldn't have been offended....3rd is as low as George should go.
Gervin is at worst a top 5 shooting guard in NBA history...I consider him the second best.
Printable View
If Gervin had won the #1 Spur poll I wouldn't have been offended....3rd is as low as George should go.
Gervin is at worst a top 5 shooting guard in NBA history...I consider him the second best.
I would say it's a tossup between Gervin and Pop. I'm gonna give it to Pop though just because I'm admittedly too young to have seen Gervin play and Pop has been a huge reason for the 4 championships and the class and no-nonsense attitude he has given the team since he joined.
Un freaking believable some people still trying to put Manu, TP in this high.
Gervin easliy.
The Church of Manu has a much larger congregation than Ice's.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcrod
Yeah it's embarrassing for Manu or Tony to even get any votes in the Top 5. But they even got votes for #1 :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by jcrod
Yeah, I'm going with Gervin. He was the superstar the Spurs needed to survive early on. He helped the team go from the ABA to the NBA. He helped draw crowds early in the NBA days to keep San Antonio a viable place to play.
And really, his career stats are amazingly impressive. Even compared to Michael Jordan, Gervin's numbers aren't far off. They played almost the exact same amount of game (Jordan played 12 more career games). Jordan scored 5,697 more points in his career but he took 3,954 more shots. If Gervin was more of a chucker early in his career, he likely could have been right there with MJ in terms of career points.
The rest of their numbers are pretty close. In fact, Gervin shot better from the field, shot better from the line, had more had more offensive rebounds and more blocked shots. Jordan is the better player because he was a better defender and a better passer but Gervin can at least compare statistically ... unlike just about any other shooting guard in NBA history. And Gervin did that while playing for one of the poorest franchises in the NBA, without a Hall of Fame sidekick (Pippen) and he also didn't have the best coach of all-time helping him out (Jackson).
To show how good Gervin was, comparing Kobe's first 12 seasons to Gervin's first 12 seasons is a joke. Gervin dominates him in just about every category. In less minutes per game, Gervin averaged more points and more rebounds, while shooting more than 5% better from the floor. And again, Gervin never played with a player close to as good as Shaq.
Only one player in history has averaged 25 points per game for their career, while shooting over 50% from the field and 75% from the free throw line. George Gervin. And he shot damn near 85% from the line.
Pop should be #4 now then...
Spot 4 is going to be really interesting. I think it should be Pop or Drossos but I fully expect a big push from the Manu backers. We'll see how it plays out.
It took some consideration, but I had to go with Gervin.
Coach Pop is the other hard choice. But I still have to stick with my guns that players deserve higher consideration than coaches/management, and without Gervin there is no Robinson, without Robinson there is no Duncan, and without Duncan there is no Pop (at least, not as we know him).
Gervin was the first player to make the Spurs sparkle; the first face of the franchise. He deserves top 3 consideration for that.
He almost dropped a spot because of those awful Ancira commercials, but I decided to let it slide. :lol
I'm going Pop with #4.
Ditto. I think Drossos will make 5, if enough people will actually recognize the name.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
It will really start getting interesting to see if the old school (AJ/Elliott/Elie) will beat out the new school (Tony/Manu/Bowen), how the Rafter Jerseys will rank, and where Robert Horry or Steve Kerr will end up.
Silas for 4. Without him, does the experiment of moving the Chaps to San Antonio succeed? Or do they go back to Dallas and end up as a footnote in basketball history like teams such as the Oakland Oaks, Utah Stars, Miami Floridians, and so on? It's doubtful they'd even make it to the '75-'76 season, much less survive the merger in Dallas. On top of that, he was All-ABA first Team in '75 and '76, and our first superstar.
I have a hard time figuring out where to put the non players on the list. Drossos, Pop, McCombs, Holt, have all had a huge impact on the franchise (arguably larger than any player) so I'm interested in seeing how each of them gets slotted.
My top 5 Spurs Players- (on the court)
Duncan
Robinson
Gervin
Ginobili
Parker
I'm wondering though, since this is more about the impact on the franchise and who best embodies the characteristics that have become synonymous with being a "Spur", will players like Sean and Avery be slotted above players like Manu and Tony?
I think it's pretty clear cut that Manu and Tony are better players, but Sean and Avery(yes, the traitor :lol) you could argue have had a bigger impact on the team with what they've done on and off the court. The standard they set in the community (along with Robinson and others) helped to define what being a "Spur" is.
Gervin gets my vote at 3, but after that I have no idea which way I'm going to go. Do I vote for the best player, a lesser player who had more of an impact on the community, and how should I weigh the on/off contributions of each player?
It should be interesting to see how it all plays out. :toast