I watched the 2003 finals game 6 last night

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

BTW, while I love Jax, the Spurs weren't idiots for letting him go. They did win 2 titles after he was gone, while Jackson hasn't come close.

Anything else about repeats is just speculation.

---

:rollin

yeah, don't ever think about what could have been, don't ever re-evaluate decisions, just be happy with whatever you get.
and the arguement that because Jackson never won any titles since, he wouldn't have helped us get any... :lmao :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

:rollin

yeah, don't ever think about what could have been, don't ever re-evaluate decisions, just be happy with whatever you get.
and the arguement that because Jackson never won any titles since, he wouldn't have helped us get any... :lmao :lmao

---

The argument was that people know that the Spurs would have won in 04 and 06 if Jackson was still on the team. That's just conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

Fact is, Jackson ended up on the wrong end of that deal. Gino has 3 rings while Jackson has 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

No way the Spurs don't repeat in '04 if they re-sign Jack. No way they ever lose to Dallas if they still have Stephen Jackson.

---

I think the case could be made for Jack making a difference in both '04 and '06. But especially '06. That's the most bitter playoff loss in the Duncan era for me.

Weeee are the champions, my friends... yah, i remember that song. all the confetti falling, yeah, i was in the 7th grade. very gooooood times :D

If Jackson resigns for what he wanted, maybe the Spurs don't resign Gino who was a free agent in 04. Gino was a Finals MVP candidate in 05 and I think it's safe to say the Spurs don't win without him.

So signing Jackson meant losing Gino. How was keeping Jackson going to win titles in 06 and 07? The Spurs would have one less title if you think about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

The argument was that people know that the Spurs would have won in 04 and 06 if Jackson was still on the team. That's just conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

Fact is, Jackson ended up on the wrong end of that deal. Gino has 3 rings while Jackson has 1.

---

and the arguement that the Bulls would have won 0 titles without MJ, that's also just conjecture, and has no basis in fact, there's no way of knowing, there's never any way of knowing how or why teams did or didn't win championships. it's a total crapshoot, front offices might as well put the free agents up on a dart board to decide which to sign.


:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

and the arguement that the Bulls would have won 0 titles without MJ, that's also just conjecture, and has no basis in fact, there's no way of knowing, there's never any way of knowing how or why teams did or didn't win championships. it's a total crapshoot, front offices might as well put the free agents up on a dart board to decide which to sign.


:lol

---

Did you read my other post, you know, the one where it says that signing Jackson would have meant forgoeing the cap room necessary to sign Gino.

Therefore, after the 04 season, Gino goes somewhere else, probably Denver, and you can kiss the 05 and 07 titles goodbye.

And comparing signing Stephen Jackson to taking the greatest player of all time off a team is totally different and downright idiotic.

2003 was epic..that's the year you point at when it comes to defining Duncan's dominance..MVP and finals MVP in the same season..carried a team of role players to a title with averages of 25 PPG, 15 RPG, 5(!) APG, 3 BPG, leading the team in all those categories..IIRC, he set an NBA record for BPG in the finals..just an unbelievable run..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

...IIRC, he set an NBA record for BPG in the finals..

---

If I'm remembering right, Duncan's eight blocks in game six tied a Finals record. His 32 for the series set a record.

(I don't have it in front of me, I think it was 32).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

2003 was epic..that's the year you point at when it comes to defining Duncan's dominance..MVP and finals MVP in the same season..carried a team of role players to a title with averages of 25 PPG, 15 RPG, 5(!) APG, 3 BPG, leading the team in all those categories..IIRC, he set an NBA record for BPG in the finals..just an unbelievable run..

---

In 6 games no less. The previous record was set in 7 games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded

Was on nbatv. Let's take a quick stroll down memory.

I completely totally forgot how HORRIBLE Parker played in that game. I always remember him playing bad, but this was the most pitiful performance out of the young PG I've ever seen. He looked terrified. His spin move was as slow as if Rasho was doing it, and he let Kerry fucking Kittles force turnover after turnover.
If parker had a game this bad these days, he would be crucified, died, and buried. And his rep would be forever tainted. Its as if Pop had tried to pump him up before the game, and just ended up scaring the bejeezus out of him. It is absolutely amazing how much he has progressed.

As overrated as Speedy Claxton's tenure here was, could he have hit any less clutch long range jumpers?

Nothing will ever be funnier than watching Kevin Willis slip on those elbow pads with a big smile on his face, as he enters the game with about 30 seconds to go. Nothing.

And we are fucking idiots beyond all comprehension for ever lowballing Jackson and letting him go. Fucking. Idiots.

---

There was another Jackson that was money in the run to a championship. He stiffed as soon as he got paid. I'm sure the Spurs were thinking that when they made their offer. In hindsight, it looks like a no-brainer, but Jack had one half of one decent season, and a nice playoff run, and was asking for MLE money.

People make their choices. Money was obviously more important to Jack than winning, and he got paid. When you're dead, though, no one remembers how much money you made, they remember your legacy. Jack's will be "Chucker on bad teams, was in that fight in Detroit", and will be lesser than Tony, Manu, and Bruce's multiple ring legacy, all of whom worked with the Spurs at one time or other and took less than they could have on the open market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Did you read my other post, you know, the one where it says that signing Jackson would have meant forgoeing the cap room necessary to sign Gino.

Therefore, after the 04 season, Gino goes somewhere else, probably Denver, and you can kiss the 05 and 07 titles goodbye.

And comparing signing Stephen Jackson to taking the greatest player of all time off a team is totally different and downright idiotic.

---

manu doesn't leave if we keep SJAX, that's just conjecture and has no basis in fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

manu doesn't leave if we keep SJAX, that's just conjecture and has no basis in fact.

---

Actually, that's fact. Is Jackson got paid, the Spurs couldn't afford to give Gino his money. There wouldn't have been room under the cap to do so. Check Gino's 05 salary and add Jackson's 05 salary and you'll see what I'm getting at.

The Spurs guessed that Gino would pay higher dividends than Jackson, hence why they lowballed Jackson and kept Gino later. That's the second time they guessed right in favor of Gino.

Can anyone name the first time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Actually, that's fact. Is Jackson got paid, the Spurs couldn't afford to give Gino his money. There wouldn't have been room under the cap to do so. Check Gino's 05 salary and add Jackson's 05 salary and you'll see what I'm getting at.

The Spurs guessed that Gino would pay higher dividends than Jackson, hence why they lowballed Jackson and kept Gino later. That's the second time they guessed right in favor of Gino.

Can anyone name the first time?

---

Trading his draft-mate Giricek.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

manu doesn't leave if we keep SJAX, that's just conjecture and has no basis in fact.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Actually, that's fact. Is Jackson got paid, the Spurs couldn't afford to give Gino his money. There wouldn't have been room under the cap to do so. Check Gino's 05 salary and add Jackson's 05 salary and you'll see what I'm getting at.

---

Damn, vander, he just beat your ass and took your lunch money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Uh, have you been following along in the last six years? Parker's rep has been forever tainted by that game. And he's still crucified to this day about it. Parker is connected to that game more than any player in Spurs history is connected to any game.

The number one reason Parker will never gain superstar status among Spurs fan is the lone game. He could play in five more All-Star games and Spurs fans will still connect him to Game 6 against the Nets.

No doubt he was horrible in that game but it's pretty amazing to me that the storyline from that series isn't how a first ballot Hall of Fame point guard at his absolute peak of performance couldn't handle a 20-year-old second year player ... to the point that the Nets were forced to put Kittles on him.

Going into that series, a lot of people were not only saying Kidd should have been the MVP but that he was actually better than Duncan. Parker basically outplayed him in the first three games but the only thing that will be remember is Parker sucked in Game 6.

I can't think of a scenario in which TP's rep ever fully recovers. Duncan's rep was hurt after his Game 5 performance against the Pistons but after the Spurs won the championship, the criticism he got for that game disappeared.

The closest rep destroyer in Spurs history is probably David Robinson losing to the Warriors in his second season. That loss hung over his head for a long time but it's mostly gone now ... but it took two championships to recover.

---

Wow I don't believe I've ever seen such a homer post by timvp. Are you being serious?

First of all, are we talking strictly in the opinions of Spurfan or the nation as a whole? Because that can change the core of what you or I are saying.


I fully agree about being tied to the game amongst spurfan, and spurfan giving him shit about it to this day, but I don't see that as the whole picture.

Parker gained a reputation for not being able to step up during the playoffs after that series, to the nbafan as a whole...no doubt. From the summer Pro's of acquiring Kidd, through to 2004. It somewhat faded in Parker's first 6 games of the 2004 playoffs, but returned when the Lakers dared him to shoot.
Parker fully killed this national view after 2005, and continues to show the nation he is a top 3 point guard in the league. All you hear on the national line is how amazing Parker is...and if you think they still hold back in their praise of him, you're just living too close to ground zero to get the big picture.

Parker also played shitty in game 5 IIRC.

I don't even know if I agree that spurfan forever gives parker shit for this game. I don't...I forgot it after game 4 of the memphis series in 2004. And I am hard on Parker. Is this true? I don't get to listen or watch much hometown media coverage...
And as for Spur rep destroyers, you really really R E A L L Y underestimate the impact on Robinson's rep his MVP award ceremony/Olajuwan raping performance had.

Basically I think you're exaggerating.
Parker's rep is leap and bounds beyond anything most spurfans would ever have imagined right now at this point in time.



BTW, more thoughts from that game I could not fit in cause of time constraints...

-Tom Tolbert was the most horrible broadcaster in nba history, and he almost ruined the game experience for spurfan and nbafan alike.

-the SA crowd made the nets choke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Actually, that's fact. Is Jackson got paid, the Spurs couldn't afford to give Gino his money. There wouldn't have been room under the cap to do so. Check Gino's 05 salary and add Jackson's 05 salary and you'll see what I'm getting at.

The Spurs guessed that Gino would pay higher dividends than Jackson, hence why they lowballed Jackson and kept Gino later. That's the second time they guessed right in favor of Gino.

Can anyone name the first time?

---

we're not under the cap now either, OMG how did that happen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded

Wow I don't believe I've ever seen such a homer post by timvp. Are you being serious?

First of all, are we talking strictly in the opinions of Spurfan or the nation as a whole? Because that can change the core of what you or I are saying.


I fully agree about being tied to the game amongst spurfan, and spurfan giving him shit about it to this day, but I don't see that as the whole picture.

Parker gained a reputation for not being able to step up during the playoffs after that series, to the nbafan as a whole...no doubt. From the summer Pro's of acquiring Kidd, through to 2004. It somewhat faded in Parker's first 6 games of the 2004 playoffs, but returned when the Lakers dared him to shoot.
Parker fully killed this national view after 2005, and continues to show the nation he is a top 3 point guard in the league. All you hear on the national line is how amazing Parker is...and if you think they still hold back in their praise of him, you're just living too close to ground zero to get the big picture.

Parker also played shitty in game 5 IIRC.

I don't even know if I agree that spurfan forever gives parker shit for this game. I don't...I forgot it after game 4 of the memphis series in 2004. And I am hard on Parker. Is this true? I don't get to listen or watch much hometown media coverage...
And as for Spur rep destroyers, you really really R E A L L Y underestimate the impact on Robinson's rep his MVP award ceremony/Olajuwan raping performance had.

Basically I think you're exaggerating.
Parker's rep is leap and bounds beyond anything most spurfans would ever have imagined right now at this point in time.



BTW, more thoughts from that game I could not fit in cause of time constraints...

-Tom Tolbert was the most horrible broadcaster in nba history, and he almost ruined the game experience for spurfan and nbafan alike.

-the SA crowd made the nets choke.

---

Robinson's legacy was forever tarnished after the 95 series with Houston.

Parker more than made up for 2003's performance with 2007's Finals MVP trophy.

That crowd in Game 6 was so loud you could barely hear the announcers at one point.

Finally, Vander, you've been dealt with and are now grasping at straws. I'm done with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

Trading his draft-mate Giricek.

---

Good to see people know their trivia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

Damn, vander, he just beat your ass and took your lunch money.

---

really? or are the both of you enjoying the same ignorance?
:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

If Jackson resigns for what he wanted, maybe the Spurs don't resign Gino who was a free agent in 04. Gino was a Finals MVP candidate in 05 and I think it's safe to say the Spurs don't win without him.

So signing Jackson meant losing Gino. How was keeping Jackson going to win titles in 06 and 07? The Spurs would have one less title if you think about it.

---

Jackson wasn't asking for much; he just wanted 5 years and Pop only wanted to give 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

The closest rep destroyer in Spurs history is probably David Robinson losing to the Warriors in his second season. That loss hung over his head for a long time but it's mostly gone now ... but it took two championships to recover.

---

That sucks; hard to blame David for that series, when his stats were:

GAMES: 4
PPG: 25.8
FG%: 68.6
3FG%: 0.0
FT%: 86.8
RPG: 13.5
APG: 2.0
SPG: 1.5
BPG: 3.8
TOPG: 3.8
EFF: 37.5

To put it in context, Duncan's 03 playoff efficiency was 34.9 and Olajuwon's 95 playoff efficiency was 33.8 (using NBA.com's efficiency stat)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

The argument was that people know that the Spurs would have won in 04 and 06 if Jackson was still on the team. That's just conjecture, and has no basis in fact.

Fact is, Jackson ended up on the wrong end of that deal. Gino has 3 rings while Jackson has 1.

---

The Spurs were knocked out in '04 because Bowen went cold from the arc and Turkoglu could not hit a pressure shot no matter how wide open he was (and he was consistently left with no one within 5 feet of him the whole series).

Jackson is the greatest clutch shooter this team has ever had, so it's no stretch to say the Spurs likely beat LA at the least with Jack instead of Turkoglu. As for '06, the Spurs lost that series because they didn't have anyone big who could keep up with Dirk and hold him in check... someone like... hmmm, Stephen Jackson, the guy who made Dirk shit all over himself in the 07 playoffs in that massive choke-job. Maybe Detroit still wins in '04, but no way the Spurs are losing to Phoenix or Miami in '06.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scanry

It wasn't just that we won the championship, Duncan literally carried the Spurs in Game 7.

---

Sometimes when I need a lift I watch the third quarter of that game and the way Duncan struggles and struggles and struggles but carries us back into the game all on his own, then Manu takes over - that game exemplifies persistence, and then team.

As for reputations, the fact that any of us questions the reputations of guys like Parker, who have brought so much success and basketball joy to this franchise, is absurd to me. WTF more do you want??? Some people are never satisfied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

we're not under the cap now either, OMG how did that happen?

---

Ginobili had only been under contract for 2 years, and therefor had no Bird rights. We had to use cap room to re-sign him, cap room that we wouldn't have had if Jack were signed to a large deal like he wanted. Are you following any of this?