Reply With Quote
Of course you would have. You don't remember any of the early spurs. The spurs began for you about 10 years ago.
Alvin Robertson
Artis Gilmore
Avery Johnson
Billy Paultz
Bob Bass
Bob Hill
Brent Barry
Bruce Bowen
Chuck Person
Dale Ellis
Dave Corzine
Dennis Rodman
Doug Moe
Fabricio Oberto
Gene Banks
Hank Egan
Johnny Moore
Larry Brown
Larry Kenon
Malik Rose
Mario Elie
Mark Olberding
Mike Budenholzer
Mike Gale
Mike Mitchell
Paul Griffin
Peter Holt
RC Buford
Red McCombs
Robert Horry
Robert McDermott
Rod Strickland
Stephen Jackson
Steve Kerr
Terry Cummings
Vinny Del Negro
Willie Anderson
Bruce is a top ten Spur in my opinion.
I would have voted for him earlier had I not missed polls # 8 & 9
Of course you would have. You don't remember any of the early spurs. The spurs began for you about 10 years ago.
Look dude, we know you don't want Bruce at #10. Give it a rest already.
And as someone who has followed SA since ABA days, Kenon was great but was never an integral part of a championship team. Without Bowen SA doesn't get to four Finals, let alone win them all.
If this was about "who are the Spurs with the greatest individual stats" you'd have a better point - but quoting the OP:
Sad to say, Kenon had little to do with the Spurs' success.
Given my knowledge, I think I have voted well so far.
Here's a question for the old-schoolers... We've already voted Silas in at #9. What does he have on Kenon, other than length of time with the Spurs?
Guess you weren't following too close....Bowen wasn't on the 99 team.
Kenon was great and while I voted for him here....Bowen is not a bad choice either and is worthy of consideration.
Much like Bowen, much of what Si did was not in the box score. His leadership, hustle and clutchness endeared him to fans and his teammates. Kenon had better stats but Silas was here longer and was more popular.
Going by that logic, only the original Chaparrals fans need vote, then.
Church of Goo Kennedy.
While I voted for Bruce here, I don't want to diminish Kenon's contributions. Just because the teams he played on didn't reach the Finals or the fact that he only played 5 years, doesn't mean he's not worthy of Top 10 status. The fact is he was an ALL-star caliber player and a consistent 20-10 player. How may Spurs can we say have those credentials?
Which is why I disagree with the idea of inserting coaches and executives (non-players) into the mix for consideration. In doing so, this pushes worthy players, like Kenon, down the list and devalues their career contributions in Spurs lore.
clutchness and at ude.
btw, these sorts of polls aways favor the most recent players. If Pop had to choose between Kenon in his prime and Bruce, Bruce would be playing in Isreal. Faulting Kenon for not winning a championship is unfair, give him Tim Duncan and I bet he would have some jewerly. This whole damn franchise needed Tim Duncan.
Where the is Kevin Willis and Dwayne Schintzus?
:lamo
If you are going on what they mean to the Spurs' Championship run, better put Kerr and Speedy on that list because we don't kick it off in 2003 without them.
I think that's a valid question; I think the responses that have been posted cover some of that ground. I also think, though, that Silas was the superior performer to Kenon in terms of accomplishment as well. While Kenon was a 2-time All-Star, Silas was named to a couple of All-League teams while he played for the Spurs, along with a couple of All-Star appearances (although all of that occurred while the Spurs were still playing in the ABA).
I suppose, ultimately, the distinction is one truly of perception, whether the perception is valid or not. Silas was the first player to have his jersey retired by the Spurs -- a distinction that he held alone for almost four years (2/28/84 through 12/5/87). The politics of the situation being what they were, for whatever reason, the powers that be in San Antonio believed Silas to be that significant to the franchise and never accorded the same level of respect to Kenon's career. I think, as time passes, more and more people realize that Kenon was among the more exceptional producers in Spurs history and that he was an integral part of the early contenders that the Spurs put together. But history for most Spurs fans will always exalt Silas over Kenon.
It's good to see that Larry Kenon is starting to come to more Spurs events -- he was in attendance for a halftime tribute at a game this past season (and may have been there for more than 1) and got a nice reaction from the crowd. And when the old-schoolers talk Spurs, they never forget to mention Kenon in the same breath as Gervin and Silas.
In addition to "clutchness" and "at ude", as 2CentsWorth has accurately pointed out, I would also add leadership. Silas was the Captain. He was the team Leader. In addition to being the scoring point guard, he had the ball in his hands the majority of the time, setting up guys like Ice and creating offense for himself. He was lethal once he got into the paint and was famous for his jump-stop in the lane and the short midrange shot over opposing centers.
While Gervin was an unstoppable offensive machine, it was Silas, whom the coaches, fans, and even opposing players feared n the 4th quarters. He built his All-ABA reputation because of his uncanny ability to get to whereever he wanted and whatever shot he wanted over any defender. He was Kobe-esque in his ability to continously pull off this feat. He was the original "Mamba" or "Snake" as he was affectionately named.
Former GM and head coach, Bob Bass, created the 1-4 offense specifically to take advantage of Silas' late game, offensive abilities. Imagine today, Ginobili dribbling at the top of the key in the 1-4 offense at the end of a game. Simply remove Ginobili and insert Silas. The other advantage in having the ball in Snake's hands down the stretch was that he was a perennial 88-90% FT shooter. Foul him and it's as good as a layup.
With Silas, the Spurs of the era, had THE best backcourt in basketball.
I voted Bruce for 9 and I'm doing it again
They didn't call him Captain Late for nothing. At the end of the game, even with Gervin and Kenon in the line-up, the ball always went to Silas for the last shot. His turnaround jumper from the free throw line was automatic.
He got my vote. Johnny Moore's name better show up soon.
The voting debates should start heating after #10. Should be fun.
I already weighed in on Kenon in the #9 thread. Immensely talented and superior stats, but lacked the extra toughness/clutchness that would have made him a truly great player.
In fact, he's about the only guy on the old Spurs for whom I can't offhand recall a single game winning play. That includes Billy Paultz, Olberding, Dietrick, Mike Gale. I'm sure he must have had some, but I don't remember them.
So if we're going off of a retired jersey then Moore > Bruce, AJ > Bruce.
Common sense.
Active players can get their jersey retired?
No kiddin.Common sense.
Active players can get their jersey retired?
But to hear you guys talk about Bruce like he set the world on fire is a little absurd don't you think?
Huh? I think you should go off of a cliff...
No. Seven All-Defensive teams. Five consecutive first team appearances. Multiple times running up for DPOY. Most consistent three-point shooter in Spurs playoff history. Fourth best player in three championships. Went five years without missing a game.No kiddin.
But to hear you guys talk about Bruce like he set the world on fire is a little absurd don't you think?
He has both the awards and the intangibles to be ranked as the 10th best. Easily.
If he was a first team offensive player five straight years, he'd probably be considered the second best player on the team. But because it's defense, he is overlooked ... even though everything about the Spurs winning is predicated on their defense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
