Reply With Quote
The Spurs are easily the team of the decade and it's not really close.
They have been an alpha dog every single year post Jordan.
I think the Spurs run is over though.
Well 'technically' the Sacramento Kings should have advanced to the finals in 2002.
The Spurs are easily the team of the decade and it's not really close.
They have been an alpha dog every single year post Jordan.
I think the Spurs run is over though.
I like that. So on those lines, whomever gets #4 wins.If you count 1999, the Spurs are easily number one.
If you don't count 1999, then we are tied in rings 3 to 3.
We are equal in the playoffs, both teams have won 19 playoff series and won 82 playoff games.
So the tie-breaker is regular season record, the Spurs win that:
Spurs; 552 wins including this season.
Lakers; 500 wins including this season.
To be the team of the decade, you need to be a consistent winner.
Spurs - Team of the decade.
That being said, it doesn't really mean anything. You don't get extra points or a Team of the Decade trophy.
The 1st year of the christian calendar was year 1 not year 0 !!!
The 1st decade = 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 (10 years)
1st century = 1-2-3.....98-99-100 (100 years)
1st millenium = 1-2.....998-999-1000 (1000 years)
1st decade of the 3rd millenium = 2001-2002.....2009-2010 (10 years)
Agreed.
The new millenium started on January 1st, 2001 at 00:00
The Spurs have 3 championships, the Lakers have 2(*2002).
Spurs: 3
Lakers:2
Simple math.
I think team has to refer to a single core group of players. Team of the decade can't refer to two seperate and unique groups of players that just happened to wear the same uniform.
The Lakers wouldn't qualify because they've had 2 different core iden ies, unless we count the Lakers = Fisher and Bryant.
The Spurs have had 4 players define them for the entire decade = Parker, Manu, Bowen, Duncan.
If either the Spurs or the Lakers win the le this year, The answer is obvious. If another team wins the le, I'm not sure who I'd give it to. Both LA and SA have 3 championships in this decade but the Lakers have more finals appearances. But the lakers had a 3 year spurt, and then no rings since 2002. The Spurs have been in the elite class, contending every year while the Lakers had a couple of lean years.
I'd say the Spurs would, up to this point, be the team of the decade. However, if the Lakers win the championship this year, it changes everything.
Well, technically, they didn't.Well 'technically' the Sacramento Kings should have advanced to the finals in 2002.
Head to head in the playoffs, it's 1-0 Detroit, and 1-0 Boston.
Therefore, one of them must be the Team of the Decade.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
