Reply With Quote
No matter what that was LA era ...
Edit: The article appears in the LA Times with a different headline.
Spurs attained their elite status the old-fashioned way: They earned it
Their style hasn’t been spectacular, far from it, but the results have been — four les in 11 years for Coach Gregg Popovich, star Tim Duncan and a changing supporting cast. And they’re not done yet.
By Mark Heisler
Spurs-Lakers rivalry bound for final showdown?
Kobe Bryant and the Lakers, Tim Duncan and the Spurs are tied at four NBA les apiece. Whoever wins No. 5 gets an era named after them.
Mark Heisler
Shaq & Kobe & Timmy . . . as the tagline for "Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice" went, imagine the possibilities.
It only seems as if Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal, the Lakers, the Spurs and whoever Shaq is with have been duking it out with each other forever.
It's actually just 11 years, since the spring of 1999 when the Spurs won the first of their four les, after which the Lakers won the first, second and third of their four les in the decade . . . with the grand showdown yet to come?
Kobe, Timmy, Shaq, the Lakers and the Spurs are now tied at four les. Whoever wins No. 5 gets an era named after them.
Even Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich, who cares less than anyone in the NBA, or the world, about popular opinion, acknowledges feeling the rivalry.
"It has gone through my head, sure," Popovich said recently. "I'm human. I sit there, I watch the silly shows you guys are on. It's been mentioned a lot. . . .
"Sure, it goes through your head. And if the three of them were honest, it's probably gone through their head. I won't lie to you and say, ‘No, what the are you talking about?'"
Happily for Bryant, he was 20 in the spring of 1999, making him 31 now. Duncan, who turned 23 that April, will be 34. O'Neal, who had just turned 27, is 38.
Kobe also plays with Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom and, the Lakers hope, Andrew Bynum.
Happily for O'Neal, he's in Cleveland with LeBron James.
Duncan has a refurbished supporting cast that's more athletic than it was but needs a center bigger than 6-5½ DeJuan Blair, or younger than Antonio McDyess, who's 35.
(Hey, Shaq will be a free agent! If things don't work out, how about going home after all these years?)
(Or not.)
Old Spurs never die, or at least not Popovich and Duncan, who have turned over one entire supporting cast, and are working on their second.
Even in their heyday, the Spurs were spurned as small-market ratings-killers who got in the way of the Lakers, the NBA version of a three-ring circus everyone wanted to see, if only to see if the clowns got in a fight.
No one is remembered for the way they carry themselves, but the Spurs were special.
They didn't blow cigar smoke, brag, complain, intrigue, work officials, make excuses or indulge in conspiracy theories, at least above the level of radio talk-show hosts.
When they got the ever-loving stuffing beaten out of them, as in 2001 when the Lakers swept them, 4-0, in the West finals, winning Games 3 and 4, 111-72 and 111-82, the Spurs said they got the ever-loving stuffing beaten out of them, or as Popovich put it:
"Custer had no idea."
The Spurs are now rebuilding on the fly. Unfortunately for them, the Lakers are already rebuilt with Twin Tower 7-footers, Gasol and Bynum, like the Spurs with Duncan and David Robinson.
The Lakers developed one of their 7-footers, and traded for the other.
Of course, every general manager or coach in the West could tell you where he was the moment he heard the Lakers got Gasol from Memphis for Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, Marc Gasol, Aaron McKie and two No. 1 picks.
"Well, as I've said before, Pau Gasol changed the landscape of basketball in the NBA, as far as the West is concerned and championship-caliber basketball," says Popovich.
"He's a great player, perhaps the most versatile big man in the league right now. It makes them really, really good."
Popovich would have said more, but it was hard to talk with his teeth clenched.
If you want to look at it this way, Popovich is playing with house money, having won four more les than anyone ever imagined, starting with himself.
If Popovich had looked at it that way, he might not have won Nos. 2, 3 or 4.
"I don't think my owner's going to fire me tomorrow, but I feel failure, just like everybody else," he says. "I feel a responsibility to getting these guys back to what they were. That's my concern or fear, of whatever you want to call it. . . .
"I think the overriding common denominator with me, I still think I'm a Division III coach. Because that's what I am.
"I'm really a Division III coach who had a lot of good fortune and ended up in a situation, as I've said before, where I didn't screw it up.
"Beyond that, I sometimes wonder what the I'm doing here. Do we really have those championships? Did we really do that?
"I just shake my head because, at heart, I'm a Division III coach."
Popovich really was an NCAA Division III coach at Pomona-Pitzer, but if he wanted to coach in college again, I'm sure he could land a Division I job.
Actually, he's a Spur for life, at a crossroads, with owner Peter Holt having ventured deep into the luxury tax for the first time, with Manu Ginobili in his free-agent year while playing the best ball of one of the most intermittently spectacular NBA careers.
Insiders say the decision to pay up to keep Ginobili or lure 7-foot Tiago Splitter, their 2007 No. 1 pick from Spain, depends on how the Spurs do in the playoffs.
In that case, I hope it turns out well somehow.
They really have those championships. They really did that. If anyone ever earned the right to die with their boots on, the Spurs have.
Last edited by duncan228; 04-03-2010 at 10:22 PM.
No matter what that was LA era ...
quote: "Insiders say the decision on whether to pay up to keep Manu or lure 7-foot Tiago Splitter, their 2007 first-round pick, from Spain depends on how the Spurs do in the playoffs."
Does that mean it is either manu or splitter? , that would suck.
There may be a few kicks left in those boots.
no... both signings depend on how the Spurs do in the playoffs... not on each other...
Once again, and I'll say it for the millionth time, Shaquille averaged over 34 points and 15 boards per game in those Finals from 2000-2002. He was a dominant force in the game at that point, rivaled only by Tim Duncan.
Bryant was simply a guard on Shaquille's team.
So the fact that Bryant is mentioned in the same sentence with Tim Duncan and Shaquille O'Neal, both of whom have three Finals MVPs, is nothing short of an insult.
In fact, Duncan was the dominant player on each of his four championship teams. Shaquille was on three of his. Bryant was on only one of his.
That just jinxed all the teams mentioned. Now the Jazz will win it all...
Thank you.I have said this a million times also.
Alpha Dog les:
Duncan: 4
Shaq: 3 (1 as a sidekick)
Kobe: 1 (3 as a sidekick)
People also now forget how Kobe shot the Lakers OUT of a championship against the Pistons..
Because Shaq is old and fat and Kobe is still (close) to his prime they seem to remember Kobe as an equal or better to Shaq in those 3 les.
But hindsight works that way. People also forget that Parker struggled majorly at times in the 2003 and 2005 championships, and that it was that 2007 series where he emerged.
The 2003 le in particular was a work of wonder by Duncan to carry a team to the le.
This organization can't be stupid enough to not to everything in their power to re-sign Ginobili and sign Splitter. These two decisions, plus health obviously, could very well make this team a le contender next season. Whatever happened to willing to pay for two years? It's not like the Spurs didn't expect this situation a year ago, so what's their excuse? Are we to believe they flat out picked Jefferson and McDyess over Ginobili and Splitter? Because I find that beyond hard to believe.
Ginobili will probably get paid similar money to what he currently makes, particularly if he's insistent on a third year and Splitter can essentially replace McDyess' salary slot. I doubt he'd be difficult to trade, as good - elite teams are always looking for affordable veteran big men on short term deals. I like McDyess and he may yet come around just in time for the playoffs, but if he has to be sacrificed for facilitating signing Splitter, then so be it. Assuming this is the case, what's with all the hand wringing? The payroll will be similar and could actually decrease some because Mason will be gone and his salary could be split up amongst minimum salaried players. Then after the season, Jefferson (if he's not traded at the '11 trade deadline) could either not be re-signed, or signed to roughly half the salary he's making now.
I don't know if you are just going off what that appears to say, or if you considered the possibility that if the going rate for manu is a mle, it would be dumb to pay him 7-8 per for 3. In that case, splitter and manu compete for the mle, and it IS one or the other.
I agree with you all, but it's the fricken' LA Times and if Heisler didn't write it like that, than he'd get shat on just like McDonald does here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
