Robinson was an ANIMAL. Give him Duncan's supporting cast and your going to win some rings. Of course there's always the Jordan factor, to figure in..
Printable View
Robinson was an ANIMAL. Give him Duncan's supporting cast and your going to win some rings. Of course there's always the Jordan factor, to figure in..
Wish jordan would have came back. History would have been alot different. Would have been spurs bulls in 99 finals. The media would not no what to do. Spurs would still have won.
I always felt that the difference between the two came down to who they are: Tim burned for the game, and David didn't. My impression is that the game and $$$ was a means to an end for his charities and the Carver Academy for David.
This is the same view I have for both of those guys. Duncan to me was just hyper competitive that he took losses very hard while for Drob the losses hurt but they didn't burn his soul. I remember Shaq said something about Duncan during the playoffs after Duncan had a great game against the clippers that went something like this "I knew before the game started Duncan was going to play great because Duncan had two games where he was just average and since Duncan is a superstar there was no way he was going to have a third straight game where he wasn't going to be a dominant force. Duncan is a superstar he has that pride there was no way he was going to get punked tonight."Quote:
Originally Posted by exstatic
I felt Dave never had that competitive edge like Shaq mentioned in that quote.
Points and FG% aren't everything, these guys could all defend minus Tony. Some people on this site have argued this was one of the Spurs all time best teams and you are trying to tell me they aren't better than AJ, Elliott, Rodman, Del Negro? I don't think I can co-sign on that.... Robinson put in 13 pts and 17 Rbs to close out that series. This was against a Nets team that didn't even compare to that Rudy T/Hakeem Houston team.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
No one is saying Robinson>Duncan. Duncan has had a top 5, arguably top 3 career and is the greatest player since Jordan. The question is, would Robinson have had more success THAN HE HAD given Tim's career conditions? If David had 2 HOFer's next to him, he rings pre-Duncan. If Robinson wasn't constantly carrying scrubs they don't go from a 59 win team to a 20 win team (with Robinson participating in three of those wins). Some straight garbage in this thread.
Spurs 2003 version one of the best Spurs teams of all times?? I hope no one is seriously thinking that ...
Part of the blame for that GS series has to go to Larry Brown.Quote:
Originally Posted by south side spur
Don Nelson took him by surprise by playing small and fouling Robinson every time he touched the ball.
They had about five different undersized guys using their allotment of fouls on Robinson -- Mario Ellie even guarded him for long stretches just to foul him.
Brown never responded to Nellie's moves and the result was a disgraceful series loss. Brown gave up on Robinson after that and things didn't really get back on track until Tim arrived.
Yeah, 4 Hall of Famers is a pretty bad teamQuote:
Originally Posted by quentin_compson
For perspective, Lebron's first run Cavs win 61 games before he leaves, plummets to 19 wins after he leaves.
Well 2 of those are rookies and another one is on his last leg with a broken bag...Quote:
Originally Posted by SPURt
That playoff run ends all comparisons between duncan and any of the other bigs he often gets compared with.
That Cleveland team that was in the championship wouldn't have even finished .500 in The West.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPURt
Not they aren't, but it's not like Sean or Rodman couldn't defend either.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPURt
Avery and Sean provided more offense to that team than any of those 2003 players. Any of them.
People may have their opinion and I can respect it, but to me the 2003 team was Duncan's strongest year while having the weakest supporting cast. All the other championship years the Spurs had other guys helping the team way more. Like D-Rob in 99, Manu in 2005, Manu and Parker in 07 and the team overall greatness in 14.
Duncan carried that 2003 team all the way to the championship.
D-Rob did have a great final game, but Duncan put a close quad-double to finish that season (21/20/10/8).
And yeah, the Rockets team was better than the Nets team, but don't forget who the Spurs had to beat in the West in order to reach the Finals. It's not like that Shaq/Kobe coming off 3 straight titles was an easy task or the Mavs with Dirk, Finley and Nash.
Duncan put 28/12/5 @ 57%TS that series and the Lakers couldn't stop him, no matter who they had guarding him. And Duncan finished the Mavs with 28/17/6/3 @ 60%TS.
It was one of the greatest runs of all-time by a single player BAR NONE.
I totally agree Duncan had an all time great Finals MVP performance, really the best Finals in Spur's history. Duncan is the GSOAT, but Robinson couldn't have done more considering the cards he was dealt.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
Exactly, Russ. The nightmare is starting to come back to me again. I just remember feeling numb after that close out game like...what the fuck just happened? Do you agree that Duncan wouldve at least made a difference or was Browns stubbornness too much even for Timmy to make a difference? Duncan handles blitzes exponentially better than Robinson ever did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
David had to learn how to win during his career. He was an amazingly talented player that wasn't driven to win early on. It took a lot of playoff failures, but you could see it start to mean more to him as time went on. Duncan very well could have been that guy, because that's what he was at Wake Forest. I don't think you have one without the other.
I've always said the Spurs would have beaten them. Kerr damn near admitted as much a year or two ago on a podcast with Simmons. The Bulls were on the fumes of their fumes in '98.Quote:
Originally Posted by RayTdropout
Based on the way both series played out, the Pacers and Jazz should have beaten them. Throw in another year of mileage, plus a Spurs team that was clearly superior to those two and was most equipped to exploit their biggest weakness and that probably would have been the death knell for their unblemished Finals record.
Ehhhhhh...give him a better coach & Manu Ginobili, and MAYBE he wins Ring(s). I'm not convinced otherwise. He was not the leader Tim is and didn't spend nearly as much time trying to improve. He wasn't capable of being the offensive focus of the team. When the Spurs needed a basket, he was not a go-to-guy. I contend that David became one of the Top 50 NBA players of all time almost on physical talent alone. -- Which is very impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poolboy5623
Had Dennis Rodman not been a selfish nutcase, his Championship experience may have helped David get to the next level.
This. Honestly, Robinson had laughable teams. There wasn't enough talent in San Antonio to reasonably expect rings during the early to mid 90's. He is penalized unfairly due to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBoy
All other things being equal, I'd say Duncan would've dominated in the Robinson era as well because the teams had the pieces that meshed with his offensive talents. Conversely, Robinson may have thrived with a second banana like Ginobili.
I think those early to mid nineties Spurs teams were good enough to win a finals. But a significant problem with those teams is the lack of a second all-star level player that championship teams typically possess. That's why Sean E. (ST editing Sean's last name into asterisks for some reason) disappointed me. I had him pegged as that type of player coming out of college. He still ended up being a serviceable starter at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaBigFundamental21
What's up Spurstalk longtime lurker here. I love me some Robinson talk so I'm going to weigh in with my two cents. First, let me say that TD in my mind is a top 3 player of all time. MJ, Russ, TD in no particular order I would take to start a franchise. Now, that said I've always believed Robinson to be one of the most underrated players of all time. I didn't read this question as whether or not D-Rob would have been greater than TD had they switched careers. Rather would D-Rob have accomplished more than D-Rob actually accomplished. Which I believe wholeheartedly yes.
If national pundits will argue up and down that Lebron hasn't had enough "help" throughout his career then I can certainly make an arguement for Robinson. San Antonio was a terrible franchise when David arrived. Truthfully, it is surprising that Robinson didn't opt out to go to the Lakers. Cummings was the best player Robinson had and while he was very good he only lasted the first 3 years of Robinsons career. Sean was D-Robs main running mate and honestly he should have never been a Spur. Had the Spurs taken Glen Rice, I think he and David would have won at least one ring (of course we probably don't get Tim because Rice's 96-97 was monstrous). Rodman was more a distraction than anything else and he and Robinson clashed constantly. As for Avery, I seriously wonder if Cory Joseph would have been better. As for ownership, the FO, and coaches they were all very unstable as well as just being bad, and had it not been for 5-O there probably is not a team in SA today.
Next, I look at what it would mean for Robinson to change eras. The 90s were stacked with great post players. Ewing, Dream, Mutombo, Malone, early Shaq, Mourning, Barkley, early C-Webb Kemp. Hell Rik Smits would be a top 3 center in the league today. Dirk, Shaq, KG, Howard, Stoudemire, Gasol, Wallaces, don't quite stack up ( Lakers Shaq and Dirk are all time). And the recent batch of bigs outside of AD and Aldridge (he's a Spur now I got to) would be 2nd or third tier compared to that group. A lot has to do with guys leaving college early, much more detrimental for a big to leave early than a guard or forward and rule changes that have been made to encourage a more up tempo guard dominated league.
Robinson would have fit right into the modern NBA. In fact a more interesting question is what would David's career be if he came in sometime in the last decade. The biggest critisim D-Rob received was that he was soft. This was because he didn't play back to the basket, well that's 90 percent of bigs today. Prime Robinson in the league right now would be a terror. He would be a bigger star than Bron. He could run with any guard, was one of the most versatile scoring bigs the league has ever seen, incredible defender; dude averaged 2.3 steals one year (as many as Kawhi just did) while blocking 4.5 shots a game. 4.5. He took Navy to the elite 8. As a college player Robinson is probably all time top 10. Because of his military service two prime years of his career were erased. Robinson in the league right now would be this unguardable machine on offense and I don't think there is a player today who could score on him. I love TD. Like I said I think he's all time top 3. But I don't think it's disrespectful at all say that Robinson was the most talented player ever to wear a Spurs uniform. At the end of the day though regardless of circumstance TD got it done and that's the difference.
Who was David Robinson's Spurs best 2nd option.
Great first post! I'd also add the change in defensive rules as well. Guys could camp in the lane when David was in his prime before the defensive three seconds, which helps him on defense, but clogs the lane on the other side. D Rob also lived in the hand/forearm checking era. He would have eaten today's NBA for breakfast and pooped All NBA awards a few hours later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Join'orDie