Reply With Quote
I love DROB..because of the person he is.
The answer to that, I believe is:
Basketball wasn't his first love. That wasn't the most important thing in his life.
FWD got me thinking when he made the post about Drob's ability to hedge on the pick and rolls better than Tim Duncan. Overall Drob was likely the better defender given his quickness, excellent help and man defense. The steals and blocks show how active and disruptive Drob was.
Obviously Drob was an excellent offensive player as well during several regular seasons. Sure he didn't have a bread and butter move and all, but he still got by and scored 30ppg one season. Something even Hakeem couldn't do.
Question is, why did Drob play so poorly in the NBA playoffs before Duncan? The stats show a HUGE drop off from his regular season stats. I don't have them handy at this moment, but if you look on www.basketball-reference.com you can see nearly every year his statistical output wasn't near his regular season. Question is why? How come he had so much regular season success individually and with the team, and yet struggled in the playoffs so much?
I love DROB..because of the person he is.
The answer to that, I believe is:
Basketball wasn't his first love. That wasn't the most important thing in his life.
Why was he so good in the regular season if he didn't love the game?
Robinson played a lot like Garnett, great player, great athlete, not a dominant low post game. He could never demand double teams like Timmy can. In the playoffs it was harder for him to make his mates around him better as a result.
I think the whole 'not having a dominant low post game' is way overstated. David Robinson put up some of the best regular seasons in the history of the NBA, and his average years were about as good statistically as Tim Duncan's best.
It's not like David Robinson was averaging 1.0apg and 4.0TOpg, he became a reasonable passer while remaining a dominant force on offense. Bottom line: he was one of the best offensive players in the league every season before Tim Duncan came along, along with being one of the best defensive players ever.
Were his teamattes just really bad? Was it just a fluke he played so poorly in 3-4 playoffs?
How come Drob's playoff numbers kicked ass his first 2 years in the NBA? Think it has anything to do with those being the most talented and best coached teams he played on?
Figure it the out.
Drob'd best regular season was the 93-94 season, easily one of the best seasons by a C since the merger...
Yet his playoff numbers were the absolute worst of his pre Duncan career...
Now why do you think that is? Drob was feeling a little less love than usual? A little bit softer than usual? A little more chokier than usual?
Or maybe, just maybe, any team that has Vinny Del Negro as it's starting PG, is an absolute team, and the only reason that team was in position for Drob to get gangraped by the Jazz in the playoffs, is because ing DRob lead the team in just about every single category in the regular season, including steals and assists...
Nikos...I applaud your pursuit of knowledge, you show me a lot more than the, "rings are all that matter" drones...but keeerist...I been telling you this for 2 or 4 years now...Drob's playoff numbers are directly reflective of the talent surrounding him...specifically his perimeter talent, and other than his first 2 years, it just wasn't that great...I don't care how much heart AJ had, he was lacking in the talent dept and his big man took the brunt of it.
And all this crap about basketball not being DRob's first love so that's why he wasn't one of the greats, is just that, crap...
You think basketball is Tim Duncan's first love? I seriously doubt it..I seriously doubt Duncan beats himself up over not winning a le.
Barkley had love for the game, Malone had it...
Just because Drob wasn't a balla does not mean he wasn't playing just as hard, trying to win just as hard, as some guy who whole goal in life was to win a le...DRob is a remarkable person because of his ability to commit himself to something and finish the job...regardless of whether or not it's something he wants for himself..or something he feels obligated to provide...Drob was willing to give up credit to bring SA a le...he could have been a horses ass about it, most would have, and most would not have won a le out of that situation.
People are clueless about DRob, about how ing good he was on the court, about how commited he was to winning...it's their loss that they don't realize it.
And DRob saw as many, if not more, double and triple teams as any of the great C's in recent memory, including Shaq...yes he lacked a post up game...but he could also smoke any bigman in the league in a one on one iso situation...double teaming him was effective, maybe more effective than it would be against Duncan or Hakeem...but that had as much to do with the deficincies of DRob's teams as it did deficiencies in DRob's game.
Sickeningly under-rated...and he deserves a more knowledgable fanbase than people that parrot cliched ESPN critiques of his game.
He was double teamed every time he sniffed the ball.He could never demand double teams like Timmy can.
Production dropoff is not uncommon for most great players in the Playoffs, with few exceptions. The game slows down, and opponents have several games to learn your strengths and weaknesses.
His playoffs numbers were excellent, but they certainly didn't kick ass by his standards, considering he had solid support and lost to a clearly inferior team in 1990-91 in Golden State. Golden State won 44 games that season and generally was not a great team. Why did the Spurs lose in 4 games to them?
No doubt. But I will go even further. It was one of the best seasons in NBA history by ANY player. If you factor in his defensive presense, he basically had a Jordanesque impact that year (actually for a few seasons for that matter). Hakeem never had that good of a regular season.Drob'd best regular season was the 93-94 season, easily one of the best seasons by a C since the merger...
I don't know. I guess he was unlucky and had poor support? But that is part of why I ask the question in the first place. Why the loss to Golden State? Why the loss to Utah in 1996? Was it poor coaching as well?Now why do you think that is? Drob was feeling a little less love than usual? A little bit softer than usual? A little more chokier than usual?
I don't doubt his support was awful on the perimeter in 1994, but why was he so good in the regular season, and why did the team have success then and yet play awful in the playoffs? Why didn't Drob put up 24-11 on poor shooting in the regular season if he had so little help? Did teams simply not design game plans for him because they didn't have time to the regular season?Or maybe, just maybe, any team that has Vinny Del Negro as it's starting PG, is an absolute team, and the only reason that team was in position for Drob to get gangraped by the Jazz in the playoffs, is because ing DRob lead the team in just about every single category in the regular season, including steals and assists...
Nikos...I applaud your pursuit of knowledge, you show me a lot more than the, "rings are all that matter" drones...but keeerist...I been telling you this for 2 or 4 years now...Drob's playoff numbers are directly reflective of the talent surrounding him...specifically his perimeter talent, and other than his first 2 years, it just wasn't that great...I don't care how much heart AJ had, he was lacking in the talent dept and his big man took the brunt of it.
I don't doubt Drob was great. I am just dumbfounded as to why his stats never measured up in the playoffs and why in 1990-91 and 1995-96 he underacheived as well? Drob if you go strictly by the regular season was one of the best players of all time in his prime. Statistically he was better than Olajuwon, about the same as Shaq (better probably if you factor D), better than Ewing, Barkley, Malone etc..... There were seasons where these guys didn't have great help either but managed to put up decent numbers I beleive (Hakeem, Bark, and Ewing). Was it just freak luck that David Robinson couldn't put up better stats in the playoffs with minimal support?People are clueless about DRob, about how ing good he was on the court, about how commited he was to winning...it's their loss that they don't realize it.
Last edited by Nikos; 11-26-2005 at 10:54 PM.
Anyone ever look at Wilt Chamberlain's playoff stats?
Was there a particular reason you quoted me before you decided to make this the same tired Duncan vs. Robinson debate that's already been rehashed countless times here?
8600+ posts, Spurm? Get a life!
Oh yeah -- the point
I think that's the biggest reason, along with the reasons that are hidden somewhere in whottt's tirade.
David could be doubled every time down the floor because his teammates were generally the types of players that other teams would allow to beat them. Said differently, teams had no difficulty doubling off of most of David's teammates for many of those years because they were so limited. For years, AJ couldn't hit a jumper or go right. For years, Del Negro was asked to be a playmaker when his best attribute may have been his shooting (which isn't saying much). David played with a number of offensively-challenged power forwards between Terry mings in his prime and Tim Duncan. All of those things made it very easy for teams to close down on David.
David didn't help matters a great deal by his inability to handle double-teams the way that guys like Olajuwon and Duncan have at playoff time. But that's like saying you don't like Cindy Crawford because she has a mole.
I also think part of the discrepancy arises from the nature of playoff games. David's greatest strength relative to other big men of his era was his ability to get out and run in transition -- to get easy buckets by beating guys down the floor. In regular season games, a player can roll up a ton of points just by running hard on the break. A big man like David, who was THE most athletic center of his day, could get several dunks a night just by running hard. In the playoffs, though, transition opportunities don't arise as frequently -- teams run harder to get back and will more often foul guys going to the rack rather than concede the layup or the dunk. You take away those several transition dunks, and a player's production will diminish (as will his shooting percentage).
I think the combination of defensive commitment to stopping Dave (aided by his poor supporting casts), coupled with taking the break largely out of his scoring arsenal, played a huge role in David's diminished playoff numbers.
Well it damn sure wasn't because Drob shot 25PPG on 68% shooting.
The Spurs blew the Warriors out of the water in the first game...they got over confident IMO, and Nelly...ummm...he Nellied them.
Believe it or not it was Don Nelson that devised the formula for stopping the Drob lead Spurs...take DRob out of the game and force his teamates to beat you.
They lost to Golden State from over-confidence and Don Nelson outcoaching Larry Brown.I don't know. I guess he was unlucky and had poor support. But that is part of why I ask the question. Why the loss to Golden State?
You gotta realize...in that 90-91 season...Jordan was the guy that couldn't win the big one, no one was penciling him in as the champ that year...while just about everyone was picking a Spurs Pistons final in the pre season.
Why the loss to Utah in 1996?
Dude...as much as it pains me to admit it...Utah was ing good and they knew playoff ball...and Utah would literally collapse their whole team on DRob...5 men foul Drob, only one, or none, get called for the foul.
Utah also beat the Duncan and Robinson Spurs...they beat the Shaq Lakers, when they had NVE, Eddie Jones, and the core of their 3 time championteam...in fact the Jazz swept them. I believe they also did in Houston on more than one occasion.
The Jazz were ing good...look at some of those teams they had...even without Stockton and Malone. Tom Chambers, Jeff Hornacek...
Exactly...not to mention that the teams in the playoff, on average are better.I don't doubt his support was awful on the perimeter in 1994, but why was he so good in the regular season, and why did the team have success then and yet play awful in the playoffs? Why didn't Drob put up 24-11 on poor shooting in the regular season if he had so little help? Did teams simply not design game plans for him because they didn't have time to the regular season?
But yes of course...in the playoffs the first thing a team will do is take away the best player...if you have a one dimensional team you are going to get bounced...
Ask Hakeem, Kareem, Shaq, Jordan....
Um...Drob played harder night in and night out in the regular season than any of the so called ballas...Drob always ing did his job, whether he loved the game or not...because of that, he was able to pull off some remarkable regular season achievements...I don't doubt Drob was great. I am just dumbfounded as to why his stats never measured up in the playoffs and why in 1990-91 and 1995-96 he underacheived as well? Drob if you go strictly by the regular season was one of the best players of all time in his prime. Statistically he was better than Olajuwon, about the same as Shaq (better probably if you factor D), better than Ewing, Barkley, Malone etc..... There were seasons where these guys didn't have great help either but managed to put up decent numbers I beleive (Hakeem, Bark, and Ewing). Was it just freak luck that David Robinson couldn't put up better stats in the playoffs with minimal support?
And he was also able to fool a lot of people into thinking ty lottery teams were actual le contenders...
Drob is the John Elway of the NBA...just good enough to get his team in way over their heards...as with Elway...when DRob got a talented team, he did whatever it took to win, even giving up top billing....and he got a ring, on a team far less talented than the ones Barkley and Malone failed to win rings with.
I agree that the lack of supporting cast, decrease of easy transition buckets allowed in the playoffs may have played a big part of Drob's decreased production. Maybe he was just unlucky in some of the years to put up poor numbers, but he did have support in 1995-96 with Sean Elliot and the team underacheived in that series as well. Question is why?
Was David just extremely unlucky from a team personel standpoint? Poor teamattes most of his prime seasons, mediocre coaching, etc....?
How might Duncan play if he had similiar support?
Whattt are you talking about?
I guess Drob never had an all-star with him in his prime...no wait, he had an all-star level player in Sean Elliot playing with him in the 92-3, 94-95 and 95-96 seasons, with 2 all-star game appearances in 93 and 96. Sean was scoring between 17 and 20 ppg, shooting lights out at the 3 pt line (around 40%), and at the high point was getting 5rpg.
Sounds pretty good to me.
Avery Johnson not talented, huh? I remember that, but this jumped out at me from the Spurs official website:
Here is what they say about the poor supporting cast of the spurs that year they fell to houston:Dynamic point guard Avery Johnson rejoined the team after a year with the Golden State Warriors and averaged 13.4 points and 8.2 assists. He increased his scoring average for the seventh consecutive season, and his .519 field-goal percentage ranked third among NBA guards.
They sure do sound like a one-man teamSean Elliott, reacquired from the Detroit Pistons in a trade for draft pick Bill Curley, lit up the scoring charts with an average of 18.1 points per game and drilled 136 of 333 three-pointers for a .408 percentage (18th in the NBA). Rodman's look remained unique and his rebounding unmatched. Despite missing 33 games, he led the league in rebounding for the fourth consecutive season (16.8 rpg) and was named to the All-NBA Third Team and the NBA All-Defensive First Team. Vinny Del Negro assumed the starting off guard job and averaged 12.5 points on .486 shooting from the field. Chuck Person joined the team and knocked down 172 three-pointers as a hired gun off the bench.
Well, in 1995, when Rodman left, the talent was poor on Spurs team, right? Again, that same website disagrees:
I'm afraid David has to shoulder the blame for the lack of playoff success for his team. Just as he get the credit for the regular season wins, he get the blame for coming through when it counts. I don't doubt the Spurs coaches of that time got owned, but its not from a lack of talent that David couldn't get it done.The move paid off in the regular season, where the Spurs didn't miss a beat. They completed the season 59-23 to capture their second straight Midwest Division le, only three games off their record-setting pace of the previous year. Team chemistry was remarkable, and according to coach Bob Hill "the best I've ever been around. The talent was equally extraordinary. Sean Elliott and David Robinson represented the West at the All-Star Game, and the backcourt of Vinny Del Negro and Avery Johnson posted the league's best assist to turnover ratio. They shored up their front line with the acquisition of Charles Smith and Monty Williams from New York in February. In March, they posted a perfect 16-0 record, tying them with the 1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers for the best month in NBA history. "
Anderson, Strickland, mings, and Elliot weren't exactly shooting under 40% that series either. Their defense must have been awful to lose to Golden State, not to mention the Warriors defense was horrible that year. They were basically like the Sonics of last year offensively with no bruisers to rebound. Golden State was basically a perimeter oriented offensive team. They likely had no business winning that series.
Hard to prove or dissaprove. If everyone but Drob was sucking you might have a good point, maybe the coaching didn't devise a good plan to get players good shots, nor did they emphasize defense against Golden State's firepower? But it's not like Drob's support was shooting under 40% and were naturally horrible on D. The team was elite on defense that year under Larry BrownThey lost to Golden State from over-confidence and Don Nelson outcoaching Larry Brown.
Completely irrelevant that he couldn't WIN the big one. Jordan's numbers never took a huge hit in the playoffs no matter how bad his support was. Jordan was still leading supporting casts equal or worse to Drob to 45+ wins. This is something they have in common to Drob's credit. Both have led a team to 47 wins or more with basically poor support. Difference is Jordan put up great numbers in the playoffs that nearly mirrored his regular season outputs.You gotta realize...in that 90-91 season...Jordan was the guy that couldn't win the big one, no one was penciling him in as the champ that year...while just about everyone was picking a Spurs Pistons final in the pre season.
This might be true somewhat, but Drob did have Elliot who had an all star calibur regular season. Where was he? Does he not count as reasonable help?Dude...as much as it pains me to admit it...Utah was ing good and they knew playoff ball...and Utah would literally collapse their whole team on DRob...5 men foul Drob, only one, or none, get called for the foul.
Utah also beat the Duncan and Robinson Spurs...they beat the Shaq Lakers, when they had NVE, Eddie Jones, and the core of their 3 time championteam...in fact the Jazz swept them. I believe they also did in Houston on more than one occasion.Utah did beat SA, but they had a major experience and chemistry advantage. Plus Duncan was a rookie. Even so, Duncan still played respectably that series despite Malone being the better player.The Jazz were ing good...look at some of those teams they had...even without Stockton and Malone. Tom Chambers, Jeff Hornacek...
Tom Chambers was never that good at a Jazz player.
Utah did sweep LA, which was impressive, but they were a much better offensive team that year due to Malone having a carrer year and Hornececk and Stockton playing as well as ever in their roles. 64 wins in 1996-97, in 1995-96 they still hadn't made the NBA finals and didn't have homecourt over the Spurs in that series.
Of course. But this still doesn't answer why when Drob had reasonable support his teams underpeformed excessively or Drob simply didn't put up a respectable playoff output relative to regular season performance (91 Warriors, 96 Jazz)? Could it be a combination of bad luck: running into better teams. not having a consistent and solid supporting cast?But yes of course...in the playoffs the first thing a team will do is take away the best player...if you have a one dimensional team you are going to get bounced...
Ask Hakeem, Kareem, Shaq, Jordan....
I'd dispute that Elliott as a stand alone would amount to "support" in a playoff series. Sean was a nice complimentary player and could occasionally rise to an All-Star level, but even with Sean on board, teams had 3 other options on the floor to use in trying to neutralize David. Sean, however, couldn't take the heat off of David by dropping 30 on a given night or
David didn't play with a lot of great teammates. His best supporting casts were clearly 1989-90 (Elliott, mings, Anderson, Strickland) and 1994-95 and, not coincidentally, those teams went the deepest of the DRob teams before Duncan. Other than his first two seasons, with Larry Brown, he never really had very good coaching -- and he certainly didn't have good playoff coaching. The injury to Terry mings, Willie Anderson's injuries and fall from grace, the Strickland saga, Larry Brown's wayward ways, the Elliott trade, and a chameleon in Rodman never really helped the cause of building continuity from year-to-year, either.
It's not easy to say. Tim is far better than David ever was at dealing with doubles and still finding ways to score. But, in large part, that works because his teammates have generally been capable of scoring when Tim kicks the ball back out. I guess you get close to the same scenario with something like the 2002 playoffs. But Tim went for 27.6 ppg, 14.4 rpg, 5.0 apg, and 4+ blocks per game in that playoff run.
In the end, I think trying to compare the two is unfair to both.
Elliot was a 20ppg scorer whose production dipped to 15.5ppg on a measly 40% shooting in the playoffs (but he did get to the line alot which means that number is deflated more than it has to be).
Avery seemed to play reasonable basketball, Del Negro and Chuck Person were on fire from downtown. What happened in that Utah series considering they had the homecourt edge? Maybe Utah was just a little better, and Drob was simply unlucky that year along with not having a stable and solid supporting casts in his tenure pre-Duncan?
Agreed that he didn't have great stability around him. But the years I am having trouble understanding are 1991 and 1996 in the playoffs. mings was still solid, the team still was good in the regular season on defense and as a whole. Maybe I am reading too much into those seasons, maybe it was just coincidence he didn't do GREAT. But it is tough to ignore when all his other playoffs his statistics were drastically low, even despite not having tons of help. I mean there have been players who were dominant in the regular season, who had no help in the playoffs and still put up a solid fight.David didn't play with a lot of great teammates. His best supporting casts were clearly 1989-90 (Elliott, mings, Anderson, Strickland) and 1994-95 and, not coincidentally, those teams went the deepest of the DRob teams before Duncan. Other than his first two seasons, with Larry Brown, he never really had very good coaching -- and he certainly didn't have good playoff coaching. The injury to Terry mings, Willie Anderson's injuries and fall from grace, the Strickland saga, Larry Brown's wayward ways, the Elliott trade, and a chameleon in Rodman never really helped the cause of building continuity from year-to-year, either.
I think it makes for an interesting debate, not only about Tim and Dave, but about playoff success in general when franchise players have good support vs bad and stable chemistry year by year vs no chemistry. And it makes for good debate on regular season vs playoff performance, and why players might perform as well as they do (or as poorly as they do) etc....It's not easy to say. Tim is far better than David ever was at dealing with doubles and still finding ways to score. But, in large part, that works because his teammates have generally been capable of scoring when Tim kicks the ball back out. I guess you get close to the same scenario with something like the 2002 playoffs. But Tim went for 27.6 ppg, 14.4 rpg, 5.0 apg, and 4+ blocks per game in that playoff run.
In the end, I think trying to compare the two is unfair to both.
Last edited by Nikos; 11-26-2005 at 11:34 PM.
I'll respond to the rest later, or just jump in after others have responded to your points. But I did want to address 1991 for one second. David had a great series in 1991 -- he improved on his regular season numbers almost across the board. The Spurs lost that series, though, because they couldn't match up with Don Nelson's munchkin lineups, which were fueled by great play by Run-TMC.
After Game 1 of that series, in which the Spurs scored 130 points and had a dominating lead after 3 quarters, Nellie went exclusively with a very small lineup, playing Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond, Chris Mullin, Sarunas Marciulionis, and Mario Elie. At the time, Hardaway, Richmond, and Mullin were pretty exceptional against anyone, but the Spurs couldn't do anything with Marciulionis because they didn't have small guys who could matchup across the board. The Spurs' numbers look okay in black and white today, but they are inflated by some huge performances in Game 1 that were never repeated in the later games of that series.
On top of that, the Golden State series in 1991 was highlighted by a Rod Strickland meltdown that rivals Dennis Rodman's implosion in 1995. By the time the series moved to Oakland, the Spurs were discombobulated on the floor and dealing with distractions off the floor, and the Warriors just took advantage. I don't think anything that happened in that series should reflect negatively on David Robinson.
And double teaming the Admiral was the best way to defend him. If you stuck a single defender on him, especially a key player, you were looking at the guy riding the pine for most of the game. This was true even of the old Drob. You look at the stats of Drob's relatively short career as a superstar...his stats are pretty impressive, but not among the all time greats who had the really long careers, except in 2 categories, FTA and FTM, he ranks among the all time greats in career totals in these categories, and therein lies the main reason that he was double teamed extensively in the playoffs...Post up game or not, he was a real to defend with one man, especially your garden variety C, even Hakeem...he may not go off for 50 on them game in and game out...but have their ass on the bench, and out of the game, with 4-5 fouls by the 3rd quarter...that he could do game in and game out...to anyone. Why in the world would any one cover him with a single defender when he was always 2 steps away from the basket and 1?
His passing was under-rated as well...but it's not like he had a lot of options to kick it out too...still Drob had the defining trait of all the truly great players, he made his teamates better, he got guys open. People can say, "yeah but he never won the big one", but I'd say just making the post season with some of those teams, forget never fininishing lower than second in the division, matches anything any of those other guys did...then again...I can clearly see that Manu is a better SG than Vinny D..and I don't think many others can...at least that's the way it seems in every Drob V Hakeem argument. Thinking Drob one of the greatest ever does not make me the homer...thinking Vinny D was a championship caliber 2 guard is what makes someone a homer.
I agree; unless you did it the way that Nellie did in 1991. He ran a parade of virtual nobodies -- Alton Lister, Tyrone Hill, Jim Peterson and company -- at David for the last 3 games of that series and basically told them to employ the Pat Riley strategy of foul a lot because the officials won't call all of them. And Nellie didn't care if those guys piled up fouls because the Warriors successes didn't depend on any of them being available for long stretches. The Warriors were committed to allowing David to have his way (for the most part) while causing monumental problems elsewhere for that Spurs team.
I'll keep it simple.
It was usually D-Rob vs. the Jazz/Warriors/Suns/Rockets/Trailblazers in the plaoffs. That's why. He didn't play poorly, he just played alone at times.
My bad...I guess he had one. Once. The guy who missed the game winning FT's in game 1 of the 95 WCF...you remember...that's the game where Robert Horry hit the game winner....Robert Horry being the same guy who stuck 21 points up the Pistons ass in a 4th quarter and a half of game 5 of last years finals...Damn that brought back memories of Sean tearing it up in the playoffs.
Oh ...well if the Spurs media guide says it then you know it must be true...I mean that Spurs media guide is designed to be an unbiased view if ever there was one.Avery Johnson not talented, huh? I remember that, but this jumped out at me from the Spurs official website:
Keep rolling those eyes...it might do you some good.They sure do sound like a one-man team rolleyes
Does that same website tell you that Rodman missed about half the season the year the Spurs nailed down the best record in team history?Well, in 1995, when Rodman left, the talent was poor on Spurs team, right? Again, that same website disagrees:
DRob always had decent front court help...He had TC, and TC was damn good, Rodman was easily the second best player on the team...but it takes perimeter talent, or at least clutchness to win an NBA le...and the Spurs never had it with DRob...The Rifleman was about as close as they ever got to having it.
And I'm afraid you're wrong...go take a look at how your boys Sean, AJ and Vinny did the year the Admiral missed the season...it's easy to find...go to google.com and type in "worst record in Spurs history"...then tell me how much Drob has to apologize for...and if you are really feeling adventurous, go look at the Spurs record in DRob's prime without DRob in the lineup...hint...I'm afraid David has to shoulder the blame for the lack of playoff success for his team. Just as he get the credit for the regular season wins, he get the blame for coming through when it counts. I don't doubt the Spurs coaches of that time got owned, but its not from a lack of talent that David couldn't get it done.
They didn't go 15-8 like the Spurs did last year without Duncan.
They didn't challenge for the conference le like the Bulls did when Jordan retired...
And they didn't rip off a 19 game winning streak like the Rockets did when Hakeem got his face smashed in...
What they did was suck ass, and suck ass badly...but hey, at least we got Tim Duncan out of the deal.
Last edited by whottt; 11-27-2005 at 12:11 AM.
YOU KNOW WHAT DUNCAN AGAINST PISTONS HAD SUPBAR GAMES BECAUSE They doubled team him.
and you know when rockets played the spurs the dream had help most of the time guarding david
I also would bet david loved the game of basketball more then 90% of the players today
and people rember duncan LOVES SWIMMING
I bet he loves swimming more then basketball
half the problem was david robinson's teamates would just watch david and not move without the ball
they just stood in awe of him
I remember Tom Tolbert being a part of that pain in the ass rotation but I could be off...
You say it was Riley...I say it was typical Nellieball...just liked he pulled on us with the Mavs 3 years ago...thank god for Steve Kerr.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
