Reply With Quote
No one believes the Spurs aren't a dynasty. Phil Jackson says it but he doesn't believe it, he's just a mediocre troll with a soapbox.
By definition wouldn't you consider sustained exellence a dynasty more than 3-4 good yrs than a rebuild. The argument that we're not a dynasty cause we didn't repeat is ing re ed.
No one believes the Spurs aren't a dynasty. Phil Jackson says it but he doesn't believe it, he's just a mediocre troll with a soapbox.
true phil
It's not an important resultant considering everything.
How many times a day do you think, OP?
Most telling of that was when he acknowledged it, then caught himself and backtracked:
“Tim Duncan making the salary he’s making after being part of a dynasty — not a dynasty, I wouldn’t call San Antonio a dynasty — a force, a great force,”
Phil Jackson, he hired Fisher as head coach. That's all that is needed to be said
This is arguably the most impressive dynasty in the history of professional sports. At least the modern sports Era. Sustained dominance over a full 15 years of play, with salary caps, with teams dumping players for cash, the Spurs have done this all despite being a relatively small market team in the middle of nowhere Texas. 0 super free agent acquisitions, 0 big market trades to being an already-proven all star over (lol Richard Jefferson), basically everything done by draft and passing young players with the eye test.
Astonishing. No one has done this before. It's not even a dynasty. The NBA is living in the Spurs Epoch.
Not one of his strong suits, obviously.
No I'm more physical than mental just ask your mom.
Right now I'm thinking what a bag you are.
Not quite yet. Still gotta win one more game. If the Heat come back and win the le this year, they will also have 4 championships, including a 3-peat, with two of those victories coming at the Spurs' expense.
If that happens, then it would be Heat >>>>> Spurs.
I have a more exclusive definition of a dynasty: a team that wins 3 le in a row. That narrows it down to:
'52-'54 Lakers
'59-'66 Celtics
'91-'93 Bulls
'95-'98 Bulls
'00-'02 Lakers
Could the post-Jordan era be defined as the Duncan era? Sure. San Antonio the most dominant team of the past 15 years? Arguably. But to me they were never a dynasty. They were two plays away from a 5-peat and being called the second greatest dynasty of all time after the '60's Celtics, but those are the breaks of the game.
That's cool. Personally I would rather win 5 les over a long period of time and be in contention every year than 3 peat and then suck for several years.
What's up with Splitter's and Leonard's heads?
Excellent post
What about if Spurs manage to win the Finals this year then proceed to repeat next year? I could definitely see that, Duncan's dream is to repeat. Still have my dream scenario where both Kobe and Duncan announce their retirement during next season once it's over, then they meet up in the WCF. Both have 5 rings, both going for #6! Historical WCF between to old legends that the game will miss.
Somebody photochopped the 2007 cover. KL was Bowen and Splitter was Oberto in the original.
We were already declared a dynasty back in 2007.
The Spurs Era.
They also decided to change 2007 to 2012, so this was likely done two years ago. I'm guessing it was when the Spurs were up 2-0 in the WCF.
That said, it's a decent job. I couldn't tell at a glance that it was really Bowen and Oberto. The reflection of Kawhi's number is correct, but you can see the reflection of Oberto's #7.
Ah...good catch. I guess if we can find out who did that photochop, we'll know who to blame for the Thunder BDS in 2012.
An argument could be made that this stretch regardless of victory in this season is The greatest dynasty in NBA history.
Boston had 14 teams to contend with.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
