Reply With Quote
Elliott was a much better all around player in his prime. Bruce was on more championship teams only because he played with Duncan more years. Exchange Bowen with Elliott in his prime and the spurs get more les.
key point, bowen couldnt make layup or 5 footer if his life depended on it, and he's always open..........how a man can make a shot from the arc, and not from 5 feet away ill never understand......
Elliott was a much better all around player in his prime. Bruce was on more championship teams only because he played with Duncan more years. Exchange Bowen with Elliott in his prime and the spurs get more les.
I know he was an underrated defender, but he was never a lock down defender on the wing like Bowen was or is. Bowen has been in the run for DPOY many of times and all first D team or second, he has literally played his azz off on D during our le runs. Sean did not have the success on D that Bowen has had, his D just has such a big impact on the game it's crazy. We need a Bowen on our team for our le runs.
If Sean stayed healthy his career he would have the better career, no question about that! Would he have been key on our le teams though? I am talking in his prime would he have hit the threes Bowen has hit in the playoff runs and played the lock down D on a Bron, Kobe (In 03 especially), Billups, Nash and so on? I just don't know.
THAT VIDEO KICKS AZZ, I remember them ALL WELL!
Sean hands down.
Bowen.
Bowen would lock down Sean
Bowen.
C´mon people!
Sean was a freakin´ All-Star!
I know about Bruce´s world permier D, but you need to look at all combined.
I'm partial towards Sean because he was my favorite Spur. He has more of an offensive game than Bowen, but Bowen is a better defender. Bowen could defend the likes of Dirk, Kobe, and Nash. I don't think Sean could defend those positions if asked. Who knows?
hhhmmmm Sean is my all time favorite too
a poll to settle this would have been nice
Wow! This is a very tough question.
In evaluating both, Sean was, no doubt, the better all-around player. While he wasn't the "lock-down" defender Bowen has been, he was the best perimeter defender on those Spurs teams that he played on. He was routinely a decent scorer (14 ppg), so he was the better offensive player. He was also lethal from the 3-pt line (37% career - bang!), a great FT shooter (80%) and he was an underrated rebounder (4.3 rpg).
Bowen, on the other hand, is one THE best perimeter defenders in league history. He could've and should've easily been DPOY at least once in the past 5-6 seasons. He's the 2nd best perimeter defender in Spurs history (Alvin Robertson being the first). Bowen's nightly responsibilities of locking down and shutting out the opposition's best perimeter player have been nothing short of phenomenal. His contributions are largely responsible for the success of the Spurs vaunted defensive schemes. Surprisingly, Bowen has the edge as a 3-pt shooter (40% career) and his midrange game has slowly become evident the past couple of seasons. Outside of that, he doesn't create much offense for himself or others (1.3 apg) and has been a very poor rebounder (3 rpg).
Overall, I'd have to give Sean the nod because of his all-around abilities. As many have stated, injuries and health issues shortened his career. However, anyone who questioned his heart or mental makeup need only look at the '99 championship season for a full-on display of a courageous athlete. One who kept his kidney illness a secret in pursuit of the larger team goal of winning a le and still performed admirably under such adverse health conditions. Bowen is a health nut and a physical freak-of-nature. Yet, only Alonzo Mourning and others who've had kidney aliments can truly understand or appreciate how poorly Elliott felt and what he had to overcome to persevere during that run.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 08-15-2008 at 05:07 AM.
Sean Elliott never had the luxury of playing with the caliber of teammates that Bruce Bowen has. For the majority of his career, he was the second best payer on the team (arguments for Terry mings, aside). Even in 1999, he was the third best player on the team. Bowen, as phenomenal of a defender as he is, has never been better than the 4th best player on the team. So, yeah, you give Bruce the edge for rings and for defense, but he never had the ball in his hands at the end of the game to win it. There's a huge difference in responsibility there.
You also can't underestimate the Memorial Day Miracle and its impact on franchise history. That was the biggest shot in team history by a landslide, and it changed the Spurs karma forever. Prior to that shot, we had endured playoff collapse after playoff collapse. We were the freaking Mavericks before he tiptoed the line and improbably nailed that three over Rasheed's outstretched hand. How do you quantify the impact that shot had?
Don't get me wrong.... I love me some Bruce. He's almost certainly the best perimeter defender in a generation and he deserves to have his number retired, but Sean Elliott was the better and more impactful player.
How do you quantify that shot? Good question. That was truly the shot heard around the NBA playoffs. I remember hearing several Spur players on that roster point to that shot as the moment they knew that team was destined to win it all.
Looks like it was ranked in the top 10 Greatest shots in NBA history!
http://www.nba.com/history/top10_shot.html
Sean would lock down Bowen.
Bowen would distrupt the entire team by the way he plays offense. Bowens skillset would be useless as the spurs become a more up tempo team built on offensive firepower. The interior defense of Robinson and Duncan would be enough defense with that offense.
I merged this thread with the spurs all time team thread but I would rather have Elliott on the all time team than Bowen so that answers the ? Bowen or Elliott.
Last edited by rascal; 08-14-2008 at 12:02 PM.
I'd pick Sean because of his versatility.
His skills and length over Bruce's def and durability.
Bowen for defense, team leadership and clutch shooting.
This from a guy who's posting less than three feet from a big Sean Elliott poster. I love the guy, but Ninja was a good nickname for him, because he could suddenly disappear without warning.
C'mon..it's not even a question. Elliott all the way. He was a very good defender, could get his own shot, could shoot and rebound. Bowen has had way more time with this team than Elliott had so the "Bowen has more rings, Bowen is a winner" talk is bull . You're telling me with Elliott in his prime on this team with Duncan, TP and Gino, we wouldn't have AS many if not more rings? Everyone is crying for an athletic SF to put on this team and when faced with having Sean Elliott on the team, some of you are picking Bowen? That's stooopid.
Wrong. Other than the year he was in Detroit, Sean played his entire career with the Spurs. That's about four more years than Bruce.
Good call.
7 for Bruce
11 for Sean
But how many with Duncan. The spurs could never get to the top until Duncan came.
Agreed. In the end, its all about #21 in the Spurs le era.
better player? Elliott, easily..
who I'd rather have on my team? Bowen..assuming I'd have 2 star players in my lineup, I'd love to have a Bowen on my team as a role player..the guy has been arguably the best perimeter defender of this generation..a smart player..consistent from 3's..a great veteran leader..
you can find A LOT of players that are "better" than Bowen..but there aren't many role players that I would take over Bruce..
LOL, you highlighted the very phrase that illustrates my point. I said THIS team...IE...Duncan, Gino, TP......come on man, can't you make sense of the things you read?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions