Reply With Quote
My favorite dunk of all time...
Sean's first game back against the Hawks. It wasn't anything spectacular looking but all he did to get back onto the court made it special.
Link
Top 30 NBA Spurs: No. 5 - Sean Elliott
Web Posted: 03/10/2007 11:05 PM CST
Thirty seasons ago, the Spurs joined the NBA after being absorbed into the older league along with three other teams from the ABA. To commemorate the milestone, the Express-News each Sunday will recognize our selections as the 30 greatest NBA Spurs. Here is No. 5:
Sean Elliott, 1989-2001: For Spurs fans, Elliott's "Memorial Day Miracle" will forever rank near the top of the franchise's greatest plays. Tip-toeing along the sideline at the Alamodome in the waning seconds of Game 2 of the Western Conference finals against Portland, Elliott managed to stay inbounds and launch a perfect 3-point shot that gave the Spurs a dramatic, 86-85 victory.
Not long after the Spurs won their first le that season, Elliott announced he had been suffering for several years from a rare kidney disorder, focal glomerulosclerosis, that required a transplant. After receiving a kidney from his brother, Noel, in August 1999, Elliott became the first pro athlete to return to action after an organ transplant when he played for the Spurs on March 14, 2000. He played 18 more games that season and 52 in 2000-01. He retired after the 2000-01 season.
One of only five Spurs players whose number has been retired, Elliott spent 11 of his 12 seasons with the team. The third pick in the 1989 draft after a standout career at Arizona, Elliott improved his scoring average each of his first four seasons, averaging 17.2 points in 1993-94. But he was traded to the Pistons after that season for Dennis Rodman. His absence was noted immediately, and when Gregg Popovich was named general manager in 1994, he had instructions from majority owner Peter Holt: Get Elliott back. On July 19, 1994, Popovich did just that.
On the Spurs' all-time lists, Elliott ranks first in 3-point field goals made (563) and attempted (1,485); fourth in games played (669); fourth in points scored (9,659); sixth in rebounds (2,941).
My favorite dunk of all time...
Sean's first game back against the Hawks. It wasn't anything spectacular looking but all he did to get back onto the court made it special.
It's hard to have too much beef with Ginobili being number four. His 2005 playoff run was out of this world impressive.
However, it might be a little early to put him there. Elliott played a long time in San Antonio and went through the ups and the downs. Ginobili is the better player but as of this second, it can be argued that it's a little premature to put him over Elliott.
That was General Robert McDermott. (R.I.P)
Mike Monroe has had so many errors in these write-ups it has been embarrassing. In the 25 that he's done, there have been about 40 errors and a handful of major ones.
Uh oh...here comes the Argentine "you're a Manu hater" onslaught!However, it might be a little early to put him there. Elliott played a long time in San Antonio and went through the ups and the downs. Ginobili is the better player but as of this second, it can be argued that it's a little premature to put him over Elliott.
I was in the Dome the night that Sean returned from his transplant and thought it was among the most special sports moments I've ever witnessed. Sean wasn't supposed to start that night, but at the last minute, he was announced as a starter -- and the Dome erupted. It was even louder when Sean dunked. He was never the same player, not surprisingly, after the transplant (though the first couple of months of 2000-01 gave hope that he might come all the way back), I think mostly to some extent that was because the kidney condition prevented effective treatment of his IT band problems. Still, he is an iconic Spur -- in some ways, he might be the most beloved Spur of all-time because he comes off as the fan friendliest of the elite players for this franchise.
I'm still surprised to find him at #5 and not at #4, but I can understand that because if there is any Spur who might be more beloved than Sean, that guy is Manu.
Your supposed "best player" totally failed to show up in the Spurs' first two losses (7 and 12 points, respectively). If not for that you would have a valid point. Get over it already.
I would agree FWD. I was surprised but I am ok with it. I think timvp was on target also about it being a little early for Manu. I think when his career is over, he will validate the selection.
You´re right my bad.It looks like you´ve got a pretty good memory.I hope it helps you remember who was the best player in the 05 finals as well..Your supposed "best player" totally failed to show up in the Spurs' first two losses (7 and 12 points, respectively). If not for that you would have a valid point. Get over it already
Agreed...im also still waiting for..
A. Where I said he wasn't.
B. What that had to do with comparing Ice and Manu.
Come on, mikey. Really. Was Ice the should-have-been-MVP of the 2005 Finals? I don't think so.
And because of that, Manu > Ice beyond any reasonable doubt -- not as an overall player and not in any way that ArgSpursFan is willing to define except to say that Manu played well on teams that won les -- but better nonetheless.
Come on, mikey. Really. Was Ice the should-have-been-MVP of the 2005 Finals? I don't think so.
And because of that, Manu > Ice beyond any reasonable doubt -- not as an overall player and not in any way that ArgSpursFan is willing to define except to say that Manu played well on teams that won les -- but better nonetheless.
You're right! My bad....
Hey, Erica and I are coming back in june for a visit...we gotta get some margaritas!
You're right! My bad....
Hey, Erica and I are coming back in june for a visit...we gotta get some margaritas!
It's far from a decisive factor in deciding who is the greatest player -- or in stratifying players on a greatest player list like this one -- but I had assumed that the Memorial Day Miracle would carry more sway in a historical ranking like this one.
To this day, I'm convinced that the MDM is the defining moment in the franchise's history. Had that team lost that game, they might very well have gone to Portland and won a game or two and ended up closing out the series in 5 or 6. But when that shot went down, it was the final nail in the Blazers' coffin. You could see it as they left the floor that afternoon/early-evening. They were done. That shot, one could argue, essentially made the Spurs champions and changed the view of the franchise.
Like timvp, I don't know that one shot is enough to overshadow the sublime performance that Manu gave during the 2005 Playoffs. I don't know that (for me, at least) the comparison is limited to those things; without "disrespecting" Manu, I think I'd be inclined to favor Elliott's 2 all-star selections, his rankings among the franchise's statistical leaders, his underrated defensive prowess, and the fact that he did a lot of his work while suffering from the kidney condition.
Added to all of those things, I think the fact that Sean is the author of the franchise's biggest shot should have been enough to make him #4, for now.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 03-11-2007 at 07:38 PM.
"Ninja" is still intimate, firsthand, with a player's feelings of having lost a close game or gotten stomped and beaten by a large margin and as a media communicator, expresses those lows as well as all the highs so effectively. The kind of contributions he's made to his team reinforces the high quality of character and teamwork that brings championship results on and off the court. And after having read his bio that ST people have placed here collectively, it puts these past 10 years into perspective, will we ever have another group like that that played alongside him, Robinson, Duncan, Johnson, Ellie, and subsequent 03'ers and 05'ers that picked up the baton and ran to the finish line with it?
We are so lucky as Spurs fans to have had Sean and all that he brought with him, and we're spoiled because of it, too.
So what if the lean years loom on the horizon!
We've been through those too and unfortunately, the cycle demands that others spend some time in the spotlight while we adjust to new names and faces.
But in my heart and mind, Sean Elliot remains the benchmark.
I agree completely. No MDM = no rings ever, possibly. That's why it will always rank abover AJ's and Horry's shots for me.
However, Sean was probably the top Spurs player who least fulfilled his potential, even allowing for his health problems. Prior to his kidney disease, he was a guy who should have had a couple of All-NBA selections, but his reluctance to assert himself always held him back.
If I want to win a le I am takng Manu over the Ninja. Sorry Sean.
Probably Parker too. Maybe even Bowen.
Yeah, I don't dispute that idea at all. Just as the MDM is probably the pivotal on-court moment in the history of this franchise, Sean also is the guy who missed the icing free throws at the end of Game 1 of the 1995 WCF. He misses those freebies, Horry hits his only FG of the game, the Spurs don't convert on the final possession, and the Rockets are playing free and easy to take Game 2. I don't know that winning Game 1 would have changed the ultimate result of that series, but winning that game might have altered the tenor of the series in a way that might have favored the Spurs.
I don't think there's much doubt that Manu will always be more of a playoff killer than Sean Elliott ever was. And I think in the end, both Parker and Manu will have had better careers as Spurs. But at this moment in time, I still would have made Manu #5 and Elliott #4.
Well Elliott is one of my favorite players...I wouldn't have had a problem if he was 4th...playing so many games as a Spur...really the only career Spur other than Drob.
But just sayin'...Manu and Parker are both more dominant players than Elliott. And I might even think Bowen is as well, on the defensive side of the ball.
Elliott was an excellent player on both sides of the ball, very good, all star level on both sides, but just, not a dominant player...and not clutch either, until the MDM.
Ironically though...
How nice would it be to have a young Elliott right now? He's exactly what the Spurs need at SF.
I think Elliott had more overall ability than any player except Robinson and Duncan.
I used to say during his prime that if NBA players could submit a portfolio of their best moves, Sean's would be second only to MJ's. Offensively he had no weaknesses: post moves, slashing to the basket, three-pointers, mid-range. He was an above-average defender and solid ball handler. He just didn't have the aggressiveness or mental toughness to want to go out there every night and dominate.
Agree except for the mental toughness part...Elliott proved himself to be an uncommon human being in the mental toughness dept with his Kidney. But I agree, he just didn't have the instinct to be a dominant player.
Well, I would argue that dealing with the kindey disease helped him to develop more toughness on the court.
A mentally tough player wouldn't have missed those FTs in 95.
OHHH,so you take in consideration the production on games that the spurs actually lost?
That´s a good one.
I reather have a great game to take my team to a world championship,tham having a great/good game and them loose.(Manu Ginobili)
Great players, both fan favorites, but Sean's commercials are better. Manu at 5, Elliott at 4.
So if Manu stunk up the joint and the Spurs lost, it doesn't count, but if Manu played great games and the team wins, he takes all the credit. Impeccable logic.OHHH,so you take in consideration the production on games that the spurs actually lost?
That´s a good one.
I reather have a great game to take my team to a world championship,tham having a great/good game and them loose.(Manu Ginobili)
Player A in series scores 30 points and grabs 15 rebounds in every single game in a 7 game series, with 4 wins and 3 losses.
Player B in series scores 32 points and grabs 16 rebounds in the 4 wins, and scores 0 points and 0 rebounds in the 3 losses, averaging 18.3 ppg and 9.1 rpg, but according to your logic, Player B > Player A (which according to you, means Player B should be ranked higher than Player A in a ranking, but doesn't necessary means Player B is Better than Player A) even though Player A won the MVP .... nice.
That´s totally unfair.cause you know player A averages more minutes tham player B.
Let´s take the production P/48 mins of player A and B on both Wins and Losses.
Then I´tell you who played better.
Just to remind you The spurs were trailed by as many as 15 pts in game 1 and player B took complete over the game and we actually won the game.
Last edited by ArgSpursFan; 03-13-2007 at 05:58 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
