Reply With Quote
Funny that Vinny and AJ are the ones you blame when Rodman was the one not covering Horry at the three point line.
I will focus on the ’94-‘95 season because that was the year, the Admiral was the closest to winning the le. I am going by memory on most of this from games I watched and listened to in regards to the guys that surrounded the Admiral in ‘95.
Sean missing those free throws against the Rockets in the opener hurt. I remember thinking we absolutely had to win the first two at home to win the series. Sean seemed shaky in most pressure situations up until the MDM. He had that nice first step and drive to the bucket but he didn't exactly breakdown guys off the dribble well.
Vinny was money during the regular season but he disappeared in the playoffs. most of his time with the Spurs, from what I remember. He didn't defend well, even though he was a compe or. And compared to Manu, Vinny was a sloth. I remember we used him at point guard which just used to kill me. He was so slow and his ball handling made me hold my breath at times. I am not sure if used him at the point in '95 but I think we did.
The Rifleman wasn't always consistent but he did hit some big shots. I always felt confident when he was in the game with the game on the line. And when Person was streaking, he was like Vinnie Johnson. He could fill it up in a short time.
A.J. had no midrange game to speak of prior to 1998 or so. Not that he was reliable from the perimeter after 1998 but he would at least take the shot with confidence and knockdown a few. He was very clever on penetrations, similar to TP, but he wasn't as tall or as quick. I did like how AJ managed the games and he was definitely a better passer than TP. Overall, AJ’s game was limited in '95 because he couldn't or wouldn’t stroke it from the perimeter.
Rodman played great. I loved the way he played. I just wished he would have cutout some of his antics. But I lived with it because he was fun to watch and dominating on many nights.
Overall, I think Dave had some good players around him in ’95. But the weaknesses of Vinny Del Negro and Avery Johnson were too glaring for him to take the Spurs to the promised land.
Funny that Vinny and AJ are the ones you blame when Rodman was the one not covering Horry at the three point line.
I would blame coaching for that. Hill left him in the game.
So you blame Rodman for the losing that series? I don't. They wouldn't even have been in that position without Rodman.
did they go on a 15 game winning streak without rodman? or was it the year after that?
anyways, i don't understand the logic. the Spurs only reliable PF was rodman, he could be an amazing defender if he wants to, and he is an absolutely dominating rebounder. now he acts up. refused to guard Horry on the perimeter, what was Hill supposed to do? Put in JR Reid? mings (who was like 82 years old then)? Moses Malone? Man, the more I think about that lineup, I more I think about how in the world did that team win 62 games, and how was it possible that that team was supposed to be a le contender.
I mean, look at it: Sean Elliott was an great perimeter defender and scorer who can't create; Avery Johnson has good court vision but no outside shot; Del Negro is at best a 2nd string combo guard (kinda like a poor man's, no make that a broke man's Brent Barry); Rodman is amazing when he decides to play, which he decided not to during the Rocket's series; the bench was a retirement home - Terry mings, Moses Malone, Doc Rivers.... man, 62 games and taking the Rockets to 6 games with that squad, no wonder Robinson was the MVP that year.
Charles Barkley, Pat Ewing, and K Malone weren't on the same level as Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, Wilt, Kareem.
Ewing was FAR from dominant; Barkley was great offensively but a weak defender and Malone wasn't a pure low post guy by ANY STRETCH. Malone's game was basically pick n roll, transition hoops, and a deadly 18-20 foot wing jumper.
Robinson technically was MVP that year but Hakeem was far and away the best player in the NBA that year and the MVP when it mattered in the playoffs, torching Robinson then O'Neal.
Saying that Sean Elliott couldn't create is simply asinine. Did you even watch the guy play? He averaged 18.1 ppg in 94-95, then 20 ppg in 95-96 and constistently shot a good FG%. He had a really good first step and could attack the basket.
It's not Elliott's playoff #'s which have the dramatic decline. Avery Johnson's #'s increase in the postseason. In the 95, WCF if not for Avery it's a sweep by Houston. Avery averaged over 20 ppg that series. Ask Karl Malone or Shaq or MJ or any of the Bad Boys opponents if Rodman wasn't a bigtime playoff performer. He has FIVE rings. It's Robinson who's #'s decline so dramatically in the playoffs and it's crazy to make every excuse in the book BUT cite his own shortcomings as a player for that fact.
As for Rodman, expecting him to be able to guard Horry is what's crazy. Rodman was a great interior defender who's strength wasn't guarding the 3. Maybe if Robinson hadn't gotten twisted around like a pretzel on every Hakeem fake, Rodman wouldn't have had to help down low and could try to cover his man.
Doc Rivers also played very well in that 95 Series. It was Dave who was just dominated and that was far and away the #1 reason for the loss, but like I said no one could contain Hakeem in that period.
However, why didn't Robinson abuse a team like Utah who had stiffs at Center in 94 and 96? He did not play well against them at all on either end. I remember the Jazz would put Malone on Robinson and he would just take Big Dave out of his game by playing so physically.
KG is not even close to Tim Duncan just like Robinson wasn't close to Hakeem. KG is extremely passive in the clutch playoff moments where Duncan wants the ball and has had success and multiple go to moves he can count on. KG, like DRob, had no go to move.
When you think of Hakeem, you think of that turnaround which absolutely no one could stop or takeaway. With Duncan, he's pretty money in the post with either the bank shot, hook shot, or other post moves. With Robinson and KG, you don't think of them hitting big time shots in the clutch moments because it just didn't happen.
Duncan and Hakeem and O'Neal are in a tier clearly distinct from Robinson and KG.
Robinson's 95 supporting cast was defintely better than what Hakeem had in his first le (K. smith and maxwell, a journeyman backourt no better than aj-del negro and Horry/Thorpe weren't nearly as good as Elliott/Rodman) or Duncan's supporting cast in 03.
Super Great players just don't see their #'s decline so dramatically in the postseason like Robinson's did. Even the yrs Jordan's teams weren't that great, he was still out there dropping 40 a game in the playoffs, doing all he could to help his teams win. The beef with Robinson is moreso that his individiual performance declined so much in the playoffs.
I find it amusing how you would quote stat in the later post about how better numbers = better play, yet claim Ewing was far from dominant. Not that I am saying he is on the level of Hakeem et al, but he did once average 28.6. Just want to point out why stats != dominance.
And yes, I agree that none of those players are as good as Hakeem and such (and I still won't put Shaq and Duncan in that group), but Barkley DID have a great low post game, and even dominant, but he never won a ring. Malone did have a low post game, he did turn into a jump shooter later on in his career, but in the late 80s, early 90's, he had a strong post game to go with his pick and rolls and fast breaks.
Eddie Jones was a 20 point scorer with a decent FG% too, he had a great first step too, but he doesn't create.
Rodman could be a big time performer, he is a great role player when he chose to play his role. He didn't in the 1995 playoffs. He left Horry wide open for perimeter shot game after game after game. And yeah, Avery, Elliott and such got wide open jumpers and no defensive attention, I wonder why.
Funny thing is, every time I see Hakeem in that series, he was singled! Usually, you don't even see Rodman within the vincinity, because he was hanging around the basket waiting for rebounds. And Rodman is not just a great interior defender, he could be a great perimeter defender too, that's what's so amazing about him. He can guard anyone from 2 to 5. That is, if he chose to.
It's very easy to contain a guy when you don't have to play his teammates. Haven't you been reading? You double Hakeem, Smith, Maxwell, Drexler and Elie are going to make you pay with 3 points. You double Robinson, Johnson, Elliott and Del Negro, are, at best, going to get two points. Why give the other team two points from 10 feet, when you can force them to shoot it from 18?
When it comes to someone of the character of a David Robinson, you can throw the stat sheets out the window as far as I am concerned.
I cannot think of an athlete and person who more warranted an award named after them.
The definition of what a "pro athlete" should be in the eyes of today's youth.
Just wanted to revisit this topic by bringing up David's playoff play season by season.
1990 - Sizable drop in production, but was a rookie, and still was an excellent force on both ends while losing to the WC champs, barely. Overall a normal first playoffs. He had "decent" support: an excellent scoring Terry mings at PF, and a solid wing in Willie Anderson who was solid in the playoffs, but generally just a solid guard (nothing special).
1991 - lost to the Warriors? A team that had good perimeter scorers and not much else, had no business really winning the series, but did anyway. David did great in the playoffs, about as good as he was in the regular season. Not his fault neccesarily, support was shaky. mings wasn't as good this season, Strickland was solid but not great. Elliot was solid, but not special.
1993 - His weakest offensive season until he was on the decline in 1999 -- Had a couple decent starters in Carr, Elliot, and Ellis -- hardly any standout support. Avery was a solid floor general, but didn't get starters minutes and wasn't as good as he would eventually become. Playoff time, Drob didn't get too much help, he himself had a subpar playoffs to his regular season standards, but considering his mediocre support it wasn't exactly a 'bad' playoffs.
1994 - Had one of the best regular season outputs in NBA history. Poor playoffs against the Jazz, team lost 3-1. Why? Drob's production was not good against the Jazz, horrible relative to his regular season standards. Maybe if he had more help, his numbers would have normalized. But he still didn't take over enough against Utah. Overall a bad playoffs for Drob despite having a monumental regular season.
1995 - Was a little better than Hakeem during the regular season, and he deserved the MVP that he got. Did much poorer in playoffs that regular season, not neccesarily just against Houston. Overall a poor performance for Drob. Had decent role player support, Elliot was very good but didn't step up. Rodman was very valuable, but didn't have scoring ability. Every single Spur's production pretty much went down in the playoffs, except Rodman -- but he was nothing special either. Looks like the team overacheived in the playoffs. But it would have been nice if Drob could have produced a little more. Overall a poor playoffs for Drob when measured against his regular season. Hakeem had better support, but he also stepped up in his role as an MVP calibur player.
1996 - Lost to Utah again. Drob had a good playoffs, but again, weaker than his regular season efforts, but not by a huge margin (but still large enough). Elliot was horrible in the playoffs again. Avery was solid in the playoffs. All the rest of the Spurs underperformed AGAIN. Utah was more balanced considering Karl had Stockton AND Hornaceck who were better than any Spur supporting player -- but Spurs had homecourt, and Drob still probably could have produced more statistically. But overall was probably unlucky again with lack of team support.
1998 - Drob began to decline, but was still elite when Duncan came in as a rookie. Their support was still relatively weak. Drob again didn't produce near his regular season level. Avery did real well in this playoffs. Duncan wasn't nearly as good as his regular season. Del Negro was OK relative to reg ular season, but not an impact player nonetheless. Lost to Utah again, WHY didn't Drob and Duncan do better? No support? Overall not a great showing for Drob.
1999 - Drob was about as good as he was during the regular season. Overal a great second banana in this playoff run.
2000 - Did a great job in the first round, but didn't have the support with Duncan out. A good playoffs for Drob. Why did he do well in this playoffs with minimal support, and not in years past? Drob was slightly declining in this era.
2001 - Great playoffs until the Lakers came to town. Had a good game or two during that series, but generally was ineffective in the other games. Why did he do so poorly vs LA. True Duncan did too at times, but why couldn't they figure it out together? No Derek Anderson? Old weak supporting cast? Yeah Shaq and Kobe were good, but they never repeated that success/dominant after that year even though Kobe wasn't in his prime then. Dissapointing ending despite very productive stats from Drob and Duncan.
Overall it seems a combo of bad luck, poor support. But still Drob has a pattern of not dominating when he doesn't have the support like MJ, Shaq, Hakeem did more often then not (but not always). Bird had some bad playoff years as well.
So was Drob just unlucky? Is he really a Top 10 player of all time in disguise? His regular season dominance can't be ignored.
Drob never had the support Duncan has now, plain and simple. Why argue this fact. You put a prime Drob on this TEAM and they dominate.
You replace TP with Avery/sleepy Floyd, Manu with Del Negro/Anderson.
This might be true. But Drob himself consistently underperformed in the playoffs. Most of it is likely due to teamattes, but it makes me wonder when I see his production drop drastically in 80% of his playoff appearences. True most of his support choked most of the time as well, but Avery Johnson did play well in 2-3 of those playoffs (at least for his standards). Elliot seemed to be the biggest underacheiving support player who played with Drob.
Don't forget Rodman's ill-fated sabotaging of the team in his last playoff stint with the Spurs.
Last edited by hegamboa; 03-25-2006 at 09:37 AM.
Duncan lets the Spurs play inside out...
Robinson was not as effective in the playoffs because, just like with sheed on duncan, you could put a very good physical defender on him and single cover.
i'm confused, how did rodman sabotage the spurs in the playoffs? did he just refuse to play??
You know... a lot can be said too for our defensive system that we put into place in the wake of pop's arrival here too.
I was looking for a stat on NBA.com but I couldnt find it...
Someone that has more access maybe can. What were the spurs best Fg% against and ppg allowed ranks in league pre pop and pre duncan?
Growing up in WV, I was never blessed like you all to watch many DRob games. Those I did have the opportunity to watch, I was in awe of his speed as a big. That MAN was amazing! I obviously do not have many insights like many of you have, but this thread has been a good read. One area that cannot be denied, the man had some huge guns!
THANKS TO YOU D-ROB!
His performance did drop off, because in the playoffs when you have just one superstar and sub supporting cast. They take away the superstar and make the supporting cast bet them. Well, Avery, Del Negro or even Sean could not take over a game and take pressure off David.
And he also didn't have a coach as good as Pop. A good coach makes a difference and they always had revolving door on coachs back then. No stable enviroment.
Rodman was only good at one thing....Rebounding. He never rotated out to his player or someone else's. He would stay close to the basket to get the rebound. Thats why he was traded the following season.
The answer is very simple. The Spurs didn't have any real talent around D'Rob except for Shawn. As soon as the playoffs started, teams would double and triple David and make other people beat them. The Spurs were FAR from athletic and could not put the ball on the floor and get to the rim and make teams play for their double teams. Look no further than the Spurs in '02 against the Lakers to see a team that was very similar...Terry Porter, Steve Smith, Parker (rookie), Cherokee Parks, Danny Ferry, and Bruce Bowen (before he could shoot). In that series, the Lakers packed it in, then ran at the shooters and the Spurs had no athleticism to put the ball on the floor and make them pay.
What talent did MJ around him before Pippen? Did that stop him from dominating individually in the playoffs and matching or exceeding his regular season excellence? Absolutely not. He was still exploding for 50 point games in the playoffs.
What talent did Hakeem have after Sampson-Lloyd-Wiggins left and before the 94-95 teams? Did that stop him from individually excelling in the playoffs? Absolutely not. He still had ridiculous playoff series against Seattle and Dallas in those years surrounded by the likes of Buck Johnson Sleepy Floyd, etc.
The notion that if you're teammates aren't all-stars, your playoff performance is going to decline from regular season is absurd. Great players make others around them better, not vice versa. Great players step their games up in the playoffs.
Guys like David Robinson and Kevin Garnett are great regular season players who decline in the playoffs. It's not about "luck" or making excuses. Facts are simply facts. If you choose to deem it "unlucky" you are just in denial.
Nikos, what team has ever won a ring for anything that happened in the regular season? All that matters in the end is the playoffs, period. That's the only time anything is on the line. Jeff Bagwell would be one of the 20 best baseball players ever if great regular season success made up for playoff failures. Tom Brady would be inferior to Peyton Manning if all you looked at was regular season. Etc. Postseason is when you make your fame. Who gives a rat's ass who had the best regular season wins if you dont win it all?
Teams don't win rings for the regular season, but the best teams that usually win les are also excellent regular season teams. Post-season is of course where you can cement your legacy, but sometimes certain franchise players don't have the horses to get the job done. You call Garnett a loser, yet the Wolves were easily le contenders that year when Cassell was healthy. It would be like asking Shaq to win a le without Kobe, that is how valuable Cassell was to them that season. How convenient of you to simply omit that from your KG analysis. True KG hasn't been great in all playoff's, but he isn't been as bad as a Drob has been. Both Drob and KG have had minimal support for most of their careers, this is a big reason why they never have competed for a le.
You simply dismiss Drob because he failed in the playoffs, but by that logic Manu Ginobili was a better player than Drob because he played excellent in the playoffs in 2005. The reason is because his stats were simply superior, so were Tim Duncan's. Actually I could name a bunch of leaders and second/third banana's of playoff teams who have had players do better statistically than Drob did. Does that make them better players because they were given beter cir stances (i.e. better teamattes and more opportunities to have successful playoff runs with several teams).
Now I am not saying Drob is better than Hakeem or Shaq per se, and I do think he did fail a bit in the playoffs -- but it doesn't make him a horrible player in comparison. Regular season is a great indicator of the quality of a basketball player. Even Larry Bird had a bunch of horrible playoff series, but because he makes a few clutch plays and is given excellent support every season, he is remembered as a Top 5 player of all time in most people's eyes. Same with Magic, even though he had a few playoffs that were substandard.
Context does account for something. Maybe Drob was a weaker player in the playoffs, but that doesn't completely eradicate the fact that he had some of the best regular seasons of any NBA player in history.
Robinson rocks man!!!
David Robinson was better than Garnett. Now that he is gone, you can see how truly awesome he was. He made Duncan worlds better.
He was the most athletic center there will ever be.
He wasn't an overly physical player and did not have the great foot work that Hakeem had and Duncan used to have, but he was still a very effective offensive player.
Think about Shaq though, Shaq has a horribly skilled offensive game if you think about it.
In the playoffs, the games would tighten up and the Spurs would try to win games on David's athletic ability alone.
Vinny Del Negro??? Please, that guy wouldn't even make the Spurs roster today.
Avery Johnson was an overachiever who probably should have been a back up point guard. His personality and persistance made him a starter, not his talent.
Sean Elliott fed off of David to become an all-star, but he was mostly a one-dimensional player. He was a great slasher with a quick step and a fair shot. He was a decent compliment, but not nearly enough. See his Detroit career.
JR Reid? Antoine Carr? Chuck Person? Monty Williams? Lloyd Daniels? Charles Smith? Negele Knight? Sleepy Floyd? Willie Anderson? Dale Ellis?
These are the guys the Admiral regularly went to battle with. His best teammates were Rod Strickland, Terry mings, and Dennis Rodman, and Sean Elliott.
The other teams that won the championship during David's tenure always had a second star and supporting cast that would put those guys to shame.
Garnett has had way more to work with. Part of the problem maybe Garnett himself. He is much more selective on who he wants on his team than David and is harder to get along with.
Another thing you can't say for Garnett is that he always took his teams to the playoffs. With David, any team would be guaranteed the playoffs.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
