http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/c...s.305b321.html
Buck Harvey: Spurs alter order and their image
Web Posted: 11/18/2006 10:36 PM CST
San Antonio Express-News
The change would have happened last week had the 6-1 Spurs beaten the 1-6 Bobcats. They instead will have to wait.
But it's going to happen, perhaps as early as Monday, assuming Tim Duncan doesn't do a Michael Jordan and head toward baseball. Another win will be added to the franchise total, another calculation will be made — and the Spurs will replace the Boston Celtics as one of the top two in the NBA's all-time standings.
advertisement
"Unbelievable," said Red McCombs, and he's underplaying this.
The change is remarkable because there rarely is one. The Celtics and Lakers have been either No. 1 or No. 2 in winning percentage among active franchises for about 20 years, and they would have held their positions longer if not for another late entry.
The Milwaukee Bucks, lifted in their second season by a rookie named Lew Alcindor, began a run that lasted a little more than 15 years. During the 1987-88 season, the Lakers passed them.
Otherwise, the Celtics and Lakers have had the highest winning percentages. For Boston, this has been tradition; the Celtics haven't been out of the top two since the '50s.
Buck Harvey
Got a question for Buck Harvey? Use the form below and fire away!
*Your name
*Your e-mail
Your hometown
*Your question
*Required
It's not shocking the Celtics would eventually endure down years. But fans in Boston could have never guessed the one who would catch them. The Spurs, in 1976, might have been their last guess.
No two franchises differed more 30 years ago. One was storied, the other an ABA refugee. The Celtics were solid, with names everyone knew, and the Spurs would be led by a star who had seemingly come from nowhere, in a place no one was sure about.
"The writers didn't know San Antonio then," said Jeff Cohen, who covered the Spurs then and went on to become the editor of the Houston Chronicle. "Some of them probably thought San Antonio was a dusty, West Texas town."
The perception was fuzzy but strong, and McCombs remembers a conversation he had with the owner of the Lakers then, the late Jack Kent Cooke. "He told me, 'If the Lakers were to lose to New Jersey or Denver, we could live with that. But we couldn't live with losing to you guys. And the thing is? My coaches tell me you could beat us.'"
After their first NBA game the Spurs had the league's best winning percentage. A 1-0 record has that effect. McCombs was there in Philadelphia that night, and the memory is so fresh for him that — after all the years and all the games since — he remembers the score.
Spurs 121, 76ers 118.
"It was glorious in every sense of the word," McCombs said. "Philadelphia had just purchased Dr. J (Julius Erving), and there was a big crowd, and we won. I saw more reporters there than I had ever seen in the ABA days."
But then he kept hearing the reporters asking about Erving, and that was old news to McCombs. San Antonio had seen Erving in the ABA. So McCombs announced to the media in the locker room that they were missing the story. Hadn't his Spurs won?
McCombs says there was silence until a Philadelphia reporter answered him. "Who gives a bleep," the reporter said.
The Spurs didn't overwhelm the league that season. They won 44 games and lost in the first round of the playoffs to, again, the Celtics. But they won 52 the next season, 48 after that.
They kept on with good players and better luck, and here's the stat that sums up this franchise more than a winning percentage does: This is the Spurs' 30th year in the NBA, and they've played every season but four with a Hall of Fame lock.
Unbelievable fits there, too.
The Spurs have surged in the Duncan era, winning more than any franchise, and they've been in third place in the all-time standings for several years. The Phoenix Suns trail in fourth by a sizeable difference, and, for the record, the Bucks are now sixth.
Then came Wednesday. Had the Spurs beaten Charlotte, coincidentally with the worst record among active franchises, their winning percentage would have risen to .59195. Even though the Celtics, also 1-6 as Wednesday's games began, won that same evening, their mark would have been .59193.
The Spurs instead lost, which merely delayed what comes next. And after they pass the Celtics?
Only the Lakers will be ahead, and not by much.
I knew this was going to happen this season and posted it in a thread earlier...but I didn't expect it to happen this soon....
Impressive as ....and something that every guy that has ever put on a Spurs uni can take pride in.
But mainly...George, David and Tim. Well done guys. You just took down Bill Russell and Larry Bird
Ha!"Some of them probably thought San Antonio was a dusty, West Texas town."
Idiots!
It's a dusty South Texas town!
red owns this joint
So who wants to do the math to figure out when the Spurs can pass the Lakers?
When Duncan retires, this franchise should fold and keep the top spot forever.
is this great news?
spurs>bulls?
So who wants to do the math to figure out when the Spurs can pass the Lakers?
When Duncan retires, this franchise should fold and keep the top spot forever.
It's not going to be as easy as Buck makes it sound...they are a pretty good ways in front of us IMO, especially since they haven't sucked for 15 years like the Celtics.
I am no math genius but we'd need @+60 more wins(or - losses if you like that) all time right now to be tied with them. So just to save the hassle, and without going into all the details, let's say we have to make up 60 games on them, win 60 more than they do...that's not completely accurate but it's close enough.
Assuming they keep winning at their historical .615% clip(@ 50 wins per season) and we keep winning at the rate of the Duncan era, @.700%(@57 wins)...it would still take us about 8 years to catch them...probably more, we'd need more than 60 wins to pass them. Something like that. Of course...they will probably win at a much better rate than that for a few years...
That math isn't exactly right but it's kinda in the ballpark. I think. It's too much of a pain in the ass to mess with this late/early. If I am way off I apologize. And math.
Now if they start sucking like the Celtics and winning 30 game every year, we could do it in a few years. possibly even 2 or 3, I think. But that wouldn't be a case of us overtaking them so much as it would be them falling back...but seeing as how they are winning at 67% clip this season, and look to be both talented and improving, with Phil in tow, Kobe entering his prime, and a quite a few young and talented players emerging...
I wouldn't count on us catching them for a while....there's a reason they are the Lakers, and there's a reason they have the #1 spot.
Last edited by whottt; 11-19-2006 at 06:44 AM.
In terms of all time winning %? Yeap...Spurs>Bulls, and everyone else cept the Lakers(and Celts for a couple more games).
I knew this was going to happen this season and posted it in a thread earlier...but I didn't expect it to happen this soon....
Impressive as ....and something that every guy that has ever put on a Spurs uni can take pride in.
But mainly...George, David and Tim. Well done guys. You just took down Bill Russell and Larry Bird
But the Spurs suck. [/Sequ]
Other than the Jordan years, the Bulls have sucked, hard.
The difference between the Spurs and Lakers and Celtics?
San Antonio Spurs
Championships 1999, 2003, 2005
Los Angeles Lakers
Championships 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001, 2002
Boston Celtics
Championships 1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986
The Spurs don't suck at winning, but an argument could be made that they suck at winning when it really counts.
Over half of those Boston/LA championships came when the San Antonio Spurs didn't exist.
Since 1976-1977:
San Antonio Spurs
Championships 1999, 2003, 2005
Los Angeles Lakers
Championships 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001, 2002
Boston Celtics
Championships 1981, 1984, 1986
Detroit Pistons
Championships 1989, 1990, 2004
It would also be interesting to calculate the winning percentages just since the 76-77 season.
EDIT:Can't believe I forgot the Bulls!
Last edited by ShoogarBear; 11-19-2006 at 03:32 PM.
You realize this is another reason Red died. Well, this and the Celtic cheerleaders.
Good thing the Celtics have sucked for the past 5 or so seasons....
More like the last 17 seasons...Good thing the Celtics have sucked for the past 5 or so seasons....
UHHHH, I WAS TOLD THERE WOULD BE NO MATH...
LOL! J/K I GOT THAT QUOTE OFF A COMMERCIAL.
Now is now. Then was then. Some of those years credited to the Lakers were Mikan-led years when they were known as the Minneapolis Lakers. Neither the old Celtics nor the old Lakers had the compe ion that exists today.
The current Wizards head coach was asked what his wildest dream is for his Washington NBA team. Without hesitation he said, "plaing the San Antonio Spurs for the NBA Championship." And that was several years ago.
That says it all.
If you do that I would imagine the Celtics plunge and the Lakers shoot way way above what they are now. The Lakers had about a 75% winning PCT through the 80s and most of the 90s.
There is one other thing though...
Since the Spurs entered the NBA they have won more division championships than any other team...they broke the tie with the Lakers last season.
Edit: My bad...they are tied with the Lakers as of last year...15 apiece.
Damn...you're smart.
I just went through and crunched the number legit and you are dead on...if we win at 70%(57.2 wins per year) and they keep winning at their historic rate of 61.5%(@50 wins)...
After 7 years we will trail them by an 8th of PCT point...and pass them during the season 8 years from now(or 7 if you include this season) to have a 64% winning pct.
You mean to tell me you did all that in your head using a fixed and hard numbers instead of PCT and were still able to accurately ascertain@ how many seasons it will take(all things staying the same)?
Brilliant!
Thank you whottt...I have to admit I am quite pleased with myself as math was a subject I loathed and despised with every fiber of my being.
I ran some numbers for team records since the Spurs entered the league. I didn't do all teams, just some of the more "successful" ones I could think of. (IOW, this isn't necessarily a "top 10" though I'd be surprised if the top 5 would change when all teams are considered)
Win% since 1976-1977:
Lakers .654
Spurs .592
Blazers .568
Celtics .556
Jazz .548
Sixers .536
Pistons .532
Rockets .527
Bulls .508
Knicks .506
Try running the Suns...
They currently have the fourth best winning PCT of all time and their record prior to 76-77 was poor.
Good call... Knew I was forgetting someone.
Might run the Mavs too just for kicks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
