Reply With Quote
Spurs.
IMO, best team assembled in this decade was the 07-08 Celtics.
Lakers
Spurs
I'm a new poster on here but I've been a fan of this board for a few years. I hope it's okay to make a thread about this. I've just been thinking a lot about who has been the best team of this decade. I have down to two teams: Lakers and Spurs. Some people could say that it's the Spurs because they played in 3 Finals and won all of them. Some could say that it's the Lakers because they played in 5 Finals and won 3 of them but they won 3 championships in a row. So who has been the best team of this decade: Lakers or Spurs? I know that the decade technically isn't over yet but since there is only year left, I figured it would be okay to ask the question.
Spurs.
IMO, best team assembled in this decade was the 07-08 Celtics.
this is a spurs board...
Doesn't matter. The correct answer is the Spurs, and should be on any board.
idk... those Shaq-Laker teams were so good. We have to see how this year plays out.
I suppose if the Lakers win this year, you have to re-evaluate. Right now, though, the Spurs have to be team of the decade. They've competed at a very high level for many years straight now. The Lakers had a 3-year dip in the middle of the decade.
Lakers and with a le this year will close the door if there are any doubters.
True. Could someone pull up records, stats, awards? That would be pretty interesting to see.
Close debate.
Same # of les, 2 more appearances for Lakers thugh.
But Spurs have won 55+ every year whereas the Lakers had a dip of 34-48, 45-37, and 42-40.
X, you're my fav Sun fan. And, I really do hope the Suns make the playoffs.
Not that I don't think the Spurs will beat them, but I'll miss seeing the whole drama of it played out. Hope your Suns can pull it out for a spot.
Best Franchise of the decade would be Spurs.
Who do you guys think was the best team for any given year?
I think the best team was the 00-02 Lakers. The best of those teams being the '01 Lakers who went 15-1 in the postseason. But one can argue because they coasted through the regular season and didn't dominate in the regular season.
After them I'd put the '05 Spurs next, followed by the '07 Celtics
the Lakers havent even ben the same team this decade, the only person on all teams was kobe. the shaq-kobe lakers team was completely different than the '05-'08 lakers teams and the current kobe-gasol lakers is itself a completely different team. the spurs have had the same core (been the same team)pretty much all decade and have been THE STANDARD of consistency, winning 55+ games every single season
first off decade means last ten years and we have been to 4 finals and won 4, so spurs easily
1999 doesn't count. Thats MJ's decade
It's the Spurs. Same # of les but Spurs have been more consistent throughout. Obviously if the Lakers win it all this year the Lakers become the better team.
no its not...he retired before that. a decade is a period of ten years, does not mean it has to be say 2000-2010, it can be 1999-2009 which is what we are currently in. you cant say best team of this decade when the year is 2009 and not count 1999.
spurs as of now, lakers will take the lead if they win the le this year, if spurs win the le than they clinch the team of the decade even if the lakers win it in 2010 because of the lakers 2-3 building years.
Spurs have the edge being the more consistently great team of the decade and tied with the Lakers with 3 les.
But the decade ain't over yet.
lets see, lakers have three rings in the last decade and the almighty spurs have four. if they win this year it will make them the best bc of the repeat but until then GO SPURS GO
what do yall people not understand about decade being 10 years?
When you look at NBA decades, you have the 80's, 90's and 2000's. The Spurs '99 championship belongs in the 90's.
80's - Laker/Celtics
90's - Jordan - 6 championships
00's - Spurs 3 championships/Lakers 3-peat
Lakers...after this year (the last of this decade) the Lakers will have 4 rings in 6 appearances w/ a 3-peat to boot.
80's belong to LA...Boston had 3 les, but LA had 5 les and EIGHT appearances...f'n amazing.
3 rings + 2 final appearances > 3 rings. Lakers already have it wrapped up without even counting this post season.
but when you are in 2009 a decade means last 10
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
