Spot Number 47 - Top 50 Spurs

[FromWayDowntown]

Make a case for Rodman. Shoot down the case I made in the previous thread. Rodman was a who ed this franchise over at a time they had a serious shot at a championship.

I've made that case a couple of times.

[baseline bum]

I've made that case a couple of times.

I was asking him to make a case. I've heard yours and I disagree with it because I believe two regular seasons do not at all begin to make up for quitting on the team in the playoffs in one of the only two times the Spurs had a chance to win a le in the post-Gervin/pre-Duncan era (the other being 1990). Chances to win les don't come around often, and the 95 championship was right there for the taking by the Spurs. Rodman decided his act was more important than his team, which is unforgivable when the stakes were that high.

[Kona]

The Big Dog

[FromWayDowntown]

I was asking him to make a case. I've heard yours and I disagree with it because I believe two regular seasons do not at all begin to make up for quitting on the team in the playoffs in one of the only two times the Spurs had a chance to win a le in the post-Gervin/pre-Duncan era (the other being 1990). Chances to win les don't come around often, and the 95 championship was right there for the taking by the Spurs. Rodman decided his act was more important than his team, which is unforgivable when the stakes were that high.

Fair enough. I disagree that Rodman was the sole culprit in the Spurs' loss in 1995, though I agree that he shoulders a significant amount of the blame for it. If Elliott drains free throws at the end of Game 1, the Legend of Robert Horry starts another day; if Del Negro and Person had been able to hit the broadside of a barn in any of the 4 losses, Rodman's antics would have been a minor distraction; if AJ and Doc had been able to keep Sam Cassell under 30 in Game 5, Rodman's crap might have been a humorous story to add color to the Spurs first Finals' appearance; if Bob Hill had tactically addressed the problems that Hakeem presented, his problems dealing with Rodman are probably footnotes in history as someone wonders why Rodman didn't start all 6 games in that series.

I get that you place the blame entirely (or mostly) on Rodman for that loss. I agree that he is a big part of the reason that the Spurs lost. But I also think that there are those who still hold places of lore in the history of this franchise who did things (or didn't do things) in that series that were substantially to blame for the outcome.

With that, Rodman's two-year numbers in SA were exceptional in the category that he was brought here to fill; he was recognized on a league-wide basis with honors (something that can't be said of most Spurs, ever); and the teams that he played on won a lot of games.

I think your view is understandable, but I disagree with it.

[Spooky]

Rasho

[baseline bum]

Fair enough. I disagree that Rodman was the sole culprit in the Spurs' loss in 1995, though I agree that he shoulders a significant amount of the blame for it. If Elliott drains free throws at the end of Game 1, the Legend of Robert Horry starts another day; if Del Negro and Person had been able to hit the broadside of a barn in any of the 4 losses, Rodman's antics would have been a minor distraction; if AJ and Doc had been able to keep Sam Cassell under 30 in Game 5, Rodman's crap might have been a humorous story to add color to the Spurs first Finals' appearance; if Bob Hill had tactically addressed the problems that Hakeem presented, his problems dealing with Rodman are probably footnotes in history as someone wonders why Rodman didn't start all 6 games in that series.

I get that you place the blame entirely (or mostly) on Rodman for that loss. I agree that he is a big part of the reason that the Spurs lost. But I also think that there are those who still hold places of lore in the history of this franchise who did things (or didn't do things) in that series that were substantially to blame for the outcome.

With that, Rodman's two-year numbers in SA were exceptional in the category that he was brought here to fill; he was recognized on a league-wide basis with honors (something that can't be said of most Spurs, ever); and the teams that he played on won a lot of games.

I think your view is understandable, but I disagree with it.

I don't put all of the blame on Rodman. Robinson got outplayed, Elliott choked, Hill lost the team with his tiff with Rodman, and Del Negro lived down to his talent... and yet, the Spurs had the series tied at 2-2 with homecourt and the upper hand in the series until Rodman decided it was more important to piss off the coach than to try to win the series. Rodman was an elite talent who said to with even trying. I can't be too mad at someone for being outplayed, but for not trying and for wasting the efforts of his teammates in what was until then an exceptional year for the Spurs? Absolutely. It's just an insult to everyone else on that team and every fan who supported him through all the antics until then.

[timvp]

I had Rodman at #50 so I can't be too upset if he gets on at #47. He had some horrible moments, which is the reason why he's so low, but he also had some very good games. He played hard more than he created drama ... it is just that the drama came at the most inopportune times.

But 17+ rebounds per game over two seasons can't be denied. And surprisingly enough, he bonded with most of his teammates. I remember a story that AJ said from back then when one night on the road in the playoffs he got woken up by Rodman yelling in the middle of the night. He went to his room to tell him to STFU and when he did, he found out Rodman was actually watching game tape. And then the two stayed up the rest of the night discussing strategy. I've always thought that while Rodman was certainly a distraction, it was more hyped up by the media than it really was to the team.

And really, looking at that era of Spurs, from the '90 Portland playoff defeat until Rodman arrived, the Spurs weren't serious contenders. Rodman helped lift the team back up to being contenders. He was undoubtedly a stat and attention who at times did more harm than good, but when he was playing hard and playing smart, he was actually pretty damn good.

Right now as Spurs fans, we would all be ecstatic if the Spurs got someone who could average 17+ rebounds to put next to Duncan ... no matter what type of weird package it came in. If Oberto had to wear a dress, color his hair, date Madonna and disappear randomly to average 17+ boards, I'd be the first to sign on the dotted line.

I'll never like Rodman after his antics in the '95 playoffs but if someone like Steve Kerr can get on the list after playing all of like 30 quality minutes for the Spurs or Michael Finley can make it for being in the right place at the right time, Rodman making the end of the list due to his great stats during two very successful seasons with the Spurs isn't too much of a tragedy in my eyes.

[baseline bum]

But 17+ rebounds per game over two seasons can't be denied. And surprisingly enough, he bonded with most of his teammates. I remember a story that AJ said from back then when one night on the road in the playoffs he got woken up by Rodman yelling in the middle of the night. He went to his room to tell him to STFU and when he did, he found out Rodman was actually watching game tape. And then the two stayed up the rest of the night discussing strategy. I've always thought that while Rodman was certainly a distraction, it was more hyped up by the media than it really was to the team.

I wish this was the at ude he took in the 95 WCF, but there is no way to spin him jacking up threes to get the hook in game 2 and playing games with Hill by showing up 35 minutes late to the game 5 practice. Maybe he was frustrated about having another year on a contract he was underpaid on. Maybe Bob Hill was acting like a giant (more like probably). Maybe he didn't get along with Robinson. Still, you have to be professional and not throw away a chance at a le like that. Even a baby like Shaq never did that when it was clear the Lakers would be moving away from him during the 2004 playoffs.

Right now as Spurs fans, we would all be ecstatic if the Spurs got someone who could average 17+ rebounds to put next to Duncan ... no matter what type of weird package it came in. If Oberto had to wear a dress, color his hair, date Madonna and disappear randomly to average 17+ boards, I'd be the first to sign on the dotted line.

Absolutely, if he shows up in games that matter. People cracking on Rodman for wearing dresses, changing his hair color, wearing makeup, or talking to SI about sexual fantasies are full of . Rodman was loved in San Antonio until he told all of us to off by his quitting act in 95.

I'll never like Rodman after his antics in the '95 playoffs but if someone like Steve Kerr can get on the list after playing all of like 30 quality minutes for the Spurs or Michael Finley can make it for being in the right place at the right time, Rodman making the end of the list due to his great stats during two very successful seasons with the Spurs isn't too much of a tragedy in my eyes.

Finley being in the right place at the right time? He was one of the main reasons the 06 Spurs were even compe ive in the Dallas series. You can argue the lineup was stupid to be going 4 small against them, but that one's on Pop. I don't know how 94-95 can be considered a successful season for Rodman with how he treated the WCF like a big joke.

[timvp]

I wish this was the at ude he took in the 95 WCF, but there is no way to spin him jacking up threes to get the hook in game 2 and playing games with Hill by showing up 35 minutes late to the game 5 practice. Maybe he was frustrated about having another year on a contract he was underpaid on. Maybe Bob Hill was acting like a giant (more like probably). Maybe he didn't get along with Robinson. Still, you have to be professional and not throw away a chance at a le like that. Even a baby like Shaq never did that when it was clear the Lakers would be moving away from him during the 2004 playoffs.

When Shaq is upset or faces adversity he just gets swept. Like a half dozen times or whatever it has been.

Absolutely, if he shows up in games that matter. People cracking on Rodman for wearing dresses, changing his hair color, wearing makeup, or talking to SI about sexual fantasies are full of . Rodman was loved in San Antonio until he told all of us to off by his quitting act in 95.

If Oberto only showed up to half of the games at a random interval, but when he showed up he'd average 17+ rebounds per game ... would you take it?

Finley being in the right place at the right time? He was one of the main reasons the 06 Spurs were even compe ive in the Dallas series. You can argue the lineup was stupid to be going 4 small against them, but that one's on Pop. I don't know how 94-95 can be considered a successful season for Rodman with how he treated the WCF like a big joke.

Trade '06-08 Finley for '93-95 Rodman and how well does that '95 team do? JR Reid starting at power forward is not something I ever want to see again. The reason the Spurs stuck with Rodman through everything was because the players behind him were worse playing at 100% than Rodman was playing at 50%.

Hypothetically, if Rodman was on his best behavior during the playoffs and the Spurs won the '95 championship, how high would you put Rodman on this list? I'm guessing he would have gone top 15 ... maybe top 12. His meltdown due to him battling and not respecting Hill (plus Pop supposedly reneging on the contract he was promised) cost him about 35 spots. That sounds decently fair to me.

[baseline bum]

Hypothetically, if Rodman was on his best behavior during the playoffs and the Spurs won the '95 championship, how high would you put Rodman on this list? I'm guessing he would have gone top 15 ... maybe top 12. His meltdown due to him battling and not respecting Hill (plus Pop supposedly reneging on the contract he was promised) cost him about 35 spots. That sounds decently fair to me.

Top 10. That's a big hypothetical though.

[T Park]

I'm gonna say about 40% of the problems with Rodman in 95 was on Bob Hill.

[ShoogarBear]

Hill and Rodman should share the #50 spot.

Good gawd. I can't believe spot 47 is going to come down to a 7 foot pile of Slovenian worthlessness or the 6'9" Clown of Rebound.


I cast my vote already for George Johnson.
.
.
.
Dave Corzine was twice as good of a center as Rasho and he hasn't sniffed a vote yet.

The older players are getting screwed, except for oddities like . . . Rich Jones????

[T Park]

Rasho is actually getting votes??!!?

Seriously??

Dear god.

[timvp]

The older players are getting screwed, except for oddities like . . . Rich Jones????

Odd like an All-Star.

[barbacoataco]

Coby Dietrick is #7 on the all time list of games played for the Spurs. That puts him in the company of the franchise greats. Of course he wasn't a great player, but I am told he was a gamer. He played a role on quite a few good teams that made playoff runs. For longetivity at least, he should be on this list.

[samikeyp]

Hill and Rodman should share the #50 spot.



The older players are getting screwed, except for oddities like . . . Rich Jones????

Amen.

[Obstructed_View]

BB, I don't think you remember how badly the Spurs needed a rebounder in the years before Rodman arrived. The Spurs routinely got outrebounded so badly that Larry Smith made a huge difference with his ability to get boards. Rodman's ability to secure the ball was huge for the team. There's a lot of blame to go around for '95. Unfortunately David gets most of it from the idiots of the world, and that's the biggest black mark I can put on Rodman. Doesn't change the fact that he belongs on the list somewhere in this area.

That said, I probably won't vote for Rodman, even if it means the stupid ass Rasho voters get their way. Having that ing lump of on this list will forever remind us how little fans of the Slovenians know about basketball.