Reply With Quote
nah....we have come to expect that from Rosen.
this ought to redden yer asses..
Top 13 teams of all time and no mention of the Spurs.
13-9 http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4350680
8-5 http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4796682
4-1 http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/4802956
nah....we have come to expect that from Rosen.
as long as he has no control over the parade, the countless parties, and ultimate bragging rights he doesn't bother me at all.
Rosen is a moron. I don't know what grudge he has against the Spurs/Robinson, maybe Pop did his wife infront of him/raped her or something like that.
It doesn't bother me that Rosen did not include any Spurs team in the top 13. I wouldn't either.
It does bother me that he included the 1993-94 Rockets. That was one of the worst champions ever. He included the 1983-84 Celtics, but left out the obviously superior 1985-86 crew. He put in the 1988-89 Pistons, but omitted the 1982-83 "Fo-Fo-Fo" Sixers. He had the 1949-50 Lakers in there for whatever reason. He left out the 1996-97 Bulls, who were virtually as good as the 1995-96 version. He listed the 2000-01 Lakers because of their 15-1 playoff run despite a 56-26 record, but left out many teams that made comparable runs with superior regular seasons.
With these lists, Rosen clearly has established himself as a longtime basketball observer suffering from Alzheimer's Disease.
Why the does Rossen work in such bizarre numbers? The top 13? And then there was his top ten center list that only had eight guys on it. I wish I could say that I was suprised by the lack of Spurs love, but it's come to be expected. I certainly think that the current incarnation of the Spurs is better than that 93 Rockets team. Probably better than the 2000-2001 Lakers as well.
He was emphazising the teams that have repeated....if the Spurs repeat..does he include them then? Do any of you?
Get over it. Its an opinion from a sports writer. Its not a fact. Its an opinion, which haven't done anything to prevent the Spurs from winning.
But he included the 1969-70 Knicks and the 1983-84 Celtics, neither of whom repeated.
Perhaps he meant to write about repeat champions, but can't keep them straight.
he probably did. I wonder though since he included the other teams to repeat, if the Spurs repeat would he then add them? Probably not....He will change it to a "Top 12.5 list" and leave them out again!
No, I imagine if the Spurs did repeat he would find a way to discount that, since David Robinson is still part of the Spurs organization.
Personally I think the Spurs of the shortened 99 season deserve credit for the kind of dominance they were able to display down the stretch and then through the playoffs. A number of experts and critics have been quick to put down the Spurs compe ion saying that the shortened season didn't allow their opponents to gel, but the Spurs had to deal with that issue while fitting in a number of new faces. If anything I think they deserve some mention for how quickly they were able to adapt, gel, and then dominate against some teams that position for position were just as good if not better than the Spurs.
0 in who knows how many years...do you care?3 in 7 years and yet no one cares
You call'd Rosen a Sportswriter. Since when did they start letting Sports writers work on the funny farm?
I'm not even sure there are 13 elite teams all-time.
My list, in chronological order:
1959-60 Celtics
1964-65 Celtics
1966-67 76ers
1970-71 Bucks
1971-72 Lakers
1982-83 76ers
1985-86 Celtics
1986-87 Lakers
1991-92 Bulls
1995-96 Bulls
1996-97 Bulls
I only get 11 truly great ones.
Well, in retrospect that looks like the strongest of the Spurs' 3 championship teams. It was much easier to denigrate them before 2003 and 2005 happened. It can't be dismissed as a fluke now.Personally I think the Spurs of the shortened 99 season deserve credit for the kind of dominance they were able to display down the stretch and then through the playoffs.
They're still not among the best ever. I'd say they're in the top third or so.
Well great, time to hand those les back in....
Suck a , haters.
Personally I think the 2005 team was the better of the three championship teams. I'm not necessarily saying that the 99 Spurs belong on the top 13 list, just noting that people tend to deride that accomplishment rather than noting it as something very special.
I think you are right. Not sure what his beef against Robinson is. Maybe the Navy turned him down and he still holds a grudge.No, I imagine if the Spurs did repeat he would find a way to discount that, since David Robinson is still part of the Spurs organization.
Just by the numbers, I think the 1999 team was the best. It's unfortunate that there were extenuating cir stances that detract from that team's accomplishments, because they might have gone down as the greatest defensive team of all time if it had been an 82-game season.
Any list of 10 stand-alone champions (without regard to back-to-backs or multiples) that doesn't include the 1982-83 Sixers is immediately suspect. That Sixers team only won 1 le, but they reached 2 Finals before acquiring Moses and made a acious run in 83. They went 65-17 (.793) in the regular season, to boot (to distinguish them as better than the other low-playoff-loss champs, like the 99 Spurs (13 regular season losses in 50 games (.740)) or the 01 Lakers (26 losses (.683), per Extra Stout)).
To say that Sixers team wasn't among the best of the best is ludicrous.
I'm not even going to bother reading the article, then. That was easily one of the top 5 teams of all time.
The 0304 and 0405 teams are actually both better defensive teams by the numbers. The entire league efficiency scoring wise was down in 98-99 which will inflate their greatness statistically. I know for a fact the 0304 team was more efficient on defense by the #'s (they were #1 of all time actually if you go by standard devation of average league efficiency minus defensive efficiency of the team).
Check on Basketball-Reference.com each of the Spur season profiles and you will see what I mean.
I whole-heartedly agree. Leaving that monster of a team out of the top teams of all time is just plain ignorant.
Mo Cheeks, Dr J, Moses Malone, Bobby Jones, Andrew Toney, etc... pretty dominant team, if you ask me!
This is THE biggest factor.He was emphazising the teams that have repeated....if the Spurs repeat..does he include them then? Do any of you?
If the Spurs repeat this year, win 4 les in 8 years (3 of the last 4), then yes, they would be included.
But it's always harder to repeat as a Champion, and the Spurs haven't done it...yet.
Yep, the '83 Sixers are the team I hang my hat on when discussing the greatest teams of all time. Not saying they were the greatest, but they may have been.
I lived very near Philly up until 1981, and I lived and breathed Sixer ball for quite a while. Watching the Sixers win the le in 83 was my #1 highlight as a Sixers fan, but #2-XX were every game in which they beat the Celtics.
And for the geeks, here is a shout out for the Milwaukee Bucks team of the early 80's - Sidney Moncrief, Marques Johnson, Paul Pressey, and the 3-headed beast - Lister, Bruer, and Mokeski. Who am I forgetting? ... besides the coach ... *COUGH*don nelson*COUGH* Greatest team to never make the Finals??
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
