- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Where Do the 2014 Spurs Rank Among Top Teams In Past 15 Years?
Posted on 6/20/14 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 6/20/14 at 4:52 pm
If we consider the past 15 years to be the post-Jordan era, where does this year's Spurs team rank in that?
You've got the Lakers of the early 2000s, the other Spurs champions, the 2008 Celtics, and the last two Heat champions in the conversation, I think.
This Spurs team might have been the best of them all, though. Perhaps the 2000-2002 Lakers would have been better. Not sure how this Spurs team handles Shaq in his prime.
Thoughts?
You've got the Lakers of the early 2000s, the other Spurs champions, the 2008 Celtics, and the last two Heat champions in the conversation, I think.
This Spurs team might have been the best of them all, though. Perhaps the 2000-2002 Lakers would have been better. Not sure how this Spurs team handles Shaq in his prime.
Thoughts?
Posted on 6/20/14 at 4:54 pm to AlaTiger
Not sure on all, but I think this was the best Spurs team ever. They simply dominated the Heat. I would have to put them in the conversation of the elite Lakers teams and the 2012 Heat. I would think somewhere around 3rd best.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 4:56 pm to Kafka
Thanks for that. I had no idea.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:03 pm to AlaTiger
I would think top 5 for sure maybe 2 or 3
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:10 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
If we consider the past 15 years to be the post-Jordan era, where does this year's Spurs team rank in that?
You've got the Lakers of the early 2000s, the other Spurs champions, the 2008 Celtics, and the last two Heat champions in the conversation, I think.
This Spurs team might have been the best of them all, though. Perhaps the 2000-2002 Lakers would have been better. Not sure how this Spurs team handles Shaq in his prime.
I'll probably get guff for saying this, but if it were the Celtics, Lakers or Heat who did what the Spurs did, the media and fans would be lauding them as the best ever.
I'm not even a Spurs fan, but they continue to be underrated in the grand scheme of things. The talk all season was of the Pacers, Heat and Thunder, with the Spurs being an afterthought of a talking point.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:17 pm to Feral
I agree. 5 titles is pretty amazing. And, they are good every year. They should get much more credit than they actually get.
It is all about the media and ignoring small markets/non-traditional powers. I am not a Spurs fan (am a Celtics fan), but they play basketball the way that it was meant to be played. I was definitely pulling for them. With the Celtics in the garbage dump the next few years, I would be happy to see the Spurs keep winning if only to influence the rest of the NBA to play that way. It was a beautiful thing to watch.
It is all about the media and ignoring small markets/non-traditional powers. I am not a Spurs fan (am a Celtics fan), but they play basketball the way that it was meant to be played. I was definitely pulling for them. With the Celtics in the garbage dump the next few years, I would be happy to see the Spurs keep winning if only to influence the rest of the NBA to play that way. It was a beautiful thing to watch.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:22 pm to AlaTiger
Hard to say. What hurts them is they went 7 games with an 8 seed and if OKC had Ibaka they might have lost that series.
The 01 Lakers that went 15-1 in the playoffs are still the GOAT of the post MJ era.
I do think they are the best franchise post MJ.
The 01 Lakers that went 15-1 in the playoffs are still the GOAT of the post MJ era.
I do think they are the best franchise post MJ.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:29 pm to RTR America
I don't know. definite top 5. that 2001 laker team is the best
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 5:31 pm
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:33 pm to RTR America
quote:I think its a wash with the lakers. sure they haven't missed the playoffs and the lakers have twice, but they've both won a frick ton of titles, conference titles, and have only a one series difference in the playoff head to head. I think theyre both 1A and 1B
I do think they are the best franchise post MJ.
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 5:34 pm
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:35 pm to AlaTiger
I'd put them below the early 2000 Lakers teams and on par with the 2011-12 Heat team
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:36 pm to WestCoastAg
Why did the Lakers in 2001 have a worse regular season than the year before? They lost like 11 more games than 99-00, but blew through the playoffs.....did they have injury issues?
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:36 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I think its a wash with the lakers. sure they haven't missed the playoffs and the lakers have twice, but they've both won a frick ton of titles, conference titles, and have only a one series difference in the playoff head to head. I think theyre both 1A and 1B
Pretty much. It is just their sustained success and lack of down seasons that sets them apart IMO, but we are really just splitting hairs.
This past season doesn't help the Lakers cause though
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:41 pm to LL012697
im trying to remember who. but I really cant think of any major injuries sustained to that laker team. they just went through periords were kobe tried to do too much which meant shaq didn't get the ball enough and we would lose. people forget with the 15-1 playoff run that laker team also won its last 6 games. they lost one game after april 1st
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:43 pm to RTR America
I think that's what people are going to look at. the lakers had a core that would have ran off at least two more titles IMO that fell apart in 2004 only to rebuild it in 2008 and have it fall apart in 2012. I still am very salty over the chris paul fiasco cause I feel like what happened this year could have been somewhat avoided had that thing not fallen through but whatever. I think a lot of people are going to look at what happened this year and forget the lakers have won the west more and have the playoff head to head over the spurs in this time frame while the spurs have been able to not miss the playoffs
Posted on 6/20/14 at 5:46 pm to WestCoastAg
western conference winners post Jordan
1999 - spurs
2000 - lakers
2001 - lakers
2002 - lakers
2003 - spurs
2004 - lakers
2005 - spurs
2006 - mavs
2007 - spurs
2008 - lakers
2009 - lakers
2010 - lakers
2011 - mavs
2012 - thunder
2013 - spurs
2014 - spurs
titles post Jordan
1999 - spurs
2000 - lakers
2001 - lakers
2002 - lakers
2003 - spurs
2004 - pistons
2005 - spurs
2006 - heat
2007 - spurs
2008 - Celtics
2009 - lakers
2010 - lakers
2011 - mavs
2012 - heat
2013 - heat
2014 - spurs
what these two franchises have accomplished post Jordan is incredible
1999 - spurs
2000 - lakers
2001 - lakers
2002 - lakers
2003 - spurs
2004 - lakers
2005 - spurs
2006 - mavs
2007 - spurs
2008 - lakers
2009 - lakers
2010 - lakers
2011 - mavs
2012 - thunder
2013 - spurs
2014 - spurs
titles post Jordan
1999 - spurs
2000 - lakers
2001 - lakers
2002 - lakers
2003 - spurs
2004 - pistons
2005 - spurs
2006 - heat
2007 - spurs
2008 - Celtics
2009 - lakers
2010 - lakers
2011 - mavs
2012 - heat
2013 - heat
2014 - spurs
what these two franchises have accomplished post Jordan is incredible
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 5:49 pm
Posted on 6/20/14 at 6:02 pm to WestCoastAg
IMO:
1. 2014 Spurs
2. 2001 Lakers
3. 2008 Celtics
4. 2009 Lakers
5. 1999 Spurs
1. 2014 Spurs
2. 2001 Lakers
3. 2008 Celtics
4. 2009 Lakers
5. 1999 Spurs
Posted on 6/20/14 at 6:08 pm to Ghazi
this is going to look biased but I feel like I do a pretty good job at calling shite how I see it and generally refrain from pumping up my own team but this is really how I see it
2001 lakers as long as we get what we had post april and not what was there in march
2000 lakers
2014 spurs
2008 Celtics
1999 spurs
shaq was too dominant, IMO, and those are the two best teams shaq ever played on
2001 lakers as long as we get what we had post april and not what was there in march
2000 lakers
2014 spurs
2008 Celtics
1999 spurs
shaq was too dominant, IMO, and those are the two best teams shaq ever played on
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 6:10 pm
Posted on 6/20/14 at 6:26 pm to WestCoastAg
The only reasons I rank the 14 Spurs ahead of the 00/01 Lakers is pace and depth.
Shaq was dominant (understatement), but he wouldn't have been able to run with these Spurs.
Shaq was dominant (understatement), but he wouldn't have been able to run with these Spurs.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 6:36 pm to TbirdSpur2010
the lakers had depth in both 2000 and 2001. maybe not as much depth but they still had depth. the 2000 team would have been ok, the 01 team may have had some trouble with the spurs depth. they still regularly beat more deep teams in seven game series just because of shaq and kobe though. those laker teams controlled the flow of the game so well though, shaq may have had trouble getting up and down the floor at times but I don't feel like it would have been to a critical point. just how I view it. those three teams are clearly the best
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 6:38 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News