The Magical Ping Pong Ball Era

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

I ask you again . . . for what purpose?

For the purpose of it being one's job to play basketball under the contract signed with the NBA via the player's union?

Perhaps?

**ChumpDumper** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

Not at all. Again, I want to see if anyone here has the balls to actually share that opinion whether it is the same is mine or not.

Then you were lying before.

OK.

Why is it so important to you?

**ChumpDumper** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

For the purpose of it being one's job to play basketball under the contract signed with the NBA via the player's union?

Perhaps?

Show us that clause in the CBA.

Should be easy for you to find.

**ohmwrecker** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

For the purpose of it being one's job to play basketball under the contract signed with the NBA via the player's union?

Perhaps?

No, head. What would be the Spurs purpose for tanking the season?

**manufan10** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

64,000 dollar question for Spurs fans... I dare anyone, even a silent lurker from upstairs to answer this one question:

How many les do the Spurs win with Keith Van Horn (#2 pick) instead of Tim Duncan?

Can't even use that. You don't even know if the Spurs would have chosen Van Horn with the #2 pick.

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Nope.

They can, it's often a legitimate concern.

Not really. There's no way of proving the team with Robinson would magically win out.

So team doctors now clear unhealthy players for play now? Interesting.

I call pussy-ass bull on the part of a fanboy who wants to toot the horn of his favorite team tanking a season to get a better draft pick. It's ok to say this but at least be a man and come out admit it.

**rascal** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

I remember it too. There was no reason for Robinson to come back and possibly get injured again. Their record was too poor for it to make a difference. I also don't remember the Spurs purposefully trying to lose games. They didn't even finish last in the conference. The record only guaranteed them a lottery pick and certainly not the #1 (the Celtics had the worst records and highest odds of selecting first with 36 % chance).

The assertion that the Spurs purposefully tanked the season to get Tim Duncan is ludicrous and fantastical.

No, Robinson was cleared to play and the spurs chose not to play him. If he was cleared to play then it was all right for him to play. The spurs were out of the playoff hunt but they won too many games early that year to have a shot at the worst record. They were trying to better their chances at landing the known franchise player- Duncan and sitting Robinson out was the smart thing to do.

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by manufan10

Can't even use that. You don't even know if the Spurs would have chosen Van Horn with the #2 pick.

That was presuming the #2 pick of course.

Could have Antonio Daniels, Tony Battie, Ron Mercer or Adonal Foyle too.

**ohmwrecker** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by rascal

No, Robinson was cleared to play and the spurs chose not to play him. If he was cleared to play then it was all right for him to play. The spurs were out of the playoff hunt but they won too many games early that year to have a shot at the worst record. They were trying to better their chances at landing the known franchise player- Duncan and sitting Robinson out was the smart thing to do.

That is so stupid. A 6% chance to land the sole potential franchise player in an extremely weak draft. Do you think the Spurs honestly thought they had a snowball's chance in of landing Duncan?

**ohmwrecker** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

That was presuming the #2 pick of course.

Could have Antonio Daniels, Tony Battie, Ron Mercer or Adonal Foyle too.

or Billups or McGrady . . . answer my question, head.

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by rascal

No, Robinson was cleared to play and the spurs chose not to play him. If he was cleared to play then it was all right for him to play. The spurs were out of the playoff hunt but they won too many games early that year to have a shot at the worst record. They were trying to better their chances at landing the known franchise player- Duncan and sitting Robinson out was the smart thing to do.

Also known as TANKING.

**rascal** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

They won't, lol. Because the evidence of the Spurs history clearly shows that the only success enjoyed by SA came from a plastic ping pong ball that bounced its way.

If you had just one other era of success I'd say, ok Punch, you gotta shot. But right now the evidence shows its only "the Magical Ping Pong Ball Era" and that's it.

The Gervin era was a success. That team came out of the ashes of the Dallas ABA franchise and made it into the NBA, which is remarkable for a small market ABA team to do.

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

That is so stupid. A 6% chance to land the sole potential franchise player in an extremely weak draft. Do you think the Spurs honestly thought they had a snowball's chance in of landing Duncan?

Obviously they did, lol

**Punchy** · 02-07-2011

What kind of damage did Tipsy wreak on your psyche in those ESPN days?

I've never seen a poster this butthurt about another team and their success in all my time posting on sports message boards.

I know you were gearing up to write your stock reply of "yeah, I'm really butthurt about the Spurs' 4 measly les when my team has 11!*," but that won't hide the fact that the Spurs' success bothers you.

Why?

*

Minneapolis

**rascal** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

Also known as TANKING.

I accept that the spurs tanked. I don't know why it is such a big problem for others to accept. I was hoping for the tank and it worked out. A very smart move by the Spurs.

**ohmwrecker** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by rascal

The Gervin era was a success. That team came out of the ashes of the Dallas ABA franchise and made it into the NBA, which is remarkable for a small market ABA team to do.

The Spurs moved to San Antonio while they were still in the ABA . . .

You should disqualify yourself from this discussion tbh.

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

or Billups or McGrady . . . answer my question, head.

Ahahahahahaha, " head"

Now the Spurs were going to be pioneers and gamble on a high school player?

Maybe they take Billups, although they had a little general at that position already did they not? It makes more sense to think they take a 4 or a 2 being that the core of the team was Robinson, Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_ and Avery.

Hence my references to Van Horn the consensus #2 pick in the draft.

**rascal** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by ohmwrecker

That is so stupid. A 6% chance to land the sole potential franchise player in an extremely weak draft. Do you think the Spurs honestly thought they had a snowball's chance in of landing Duncan?

Yes they did. They had a better chance then most every other team.

**ohmwrecker** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

Obviously they did, lol

Then why didn't they just lose more games to increase their chances? Robinson wasn't playing anyway, right?

**history2b** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by rascal

I accept that the spurs tanked. I don't know why it is such a big problem for others to accept. I was hoping for the tank and it worked out. A very smart move by the Spurs.

I agree.

Kudo for you to actually admit the truth. I respect that.

**spurs_fan_in_exile** · 02-07-2011

Originally Posted by history2b

64,000 dollar question for Spurs fans... I dare anyone, even a silent lurker from upstairs to answer this one question:

How many les do the Spurs win with Keith Van Horn (#2 pick) instead of Tim Duncan?

It's an excellent question. The lockerroom environment of the Spurs consisting of Pop's toughness and David Robinson's mentorship allows Van Horn to reach his true potential. Rather than suffering from New Jersey air and water pollution that weakened his joints that would hamper him later in his career he develops a Kevin Willis-esque physique. They skate to 5 consecutive championships before tanking to get into the lottery of the ultra deep 2003 draft class, something the foolishly compe ive Duncan would have refused to do. Their poor luck repeats itself and they only manage the #2 pick, with which they select Wade and launch yet another dynasty lasting until the decision to tank again in order to pass the torch Blake Griffin. So I guess really the Lakers are pretty lucky that the Spurs got the #1 pick and suc bed to the media pressure to select Tim Duncan.