+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Tim Duncan Retires

  1. #21
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    How much of San Antonio's success was tied to TD? Clearly the culture is set in stone and getting a guy like Pau that we Lakers fans love is great in addition to Aldridge from last year. However, does San Antonio even make another finals, given the make up of Golden State?

  2. #22
    Administrator Dawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forums Dawg in Dallas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Age
    46
    Posts
    71,973
    Rep Power
    3531744

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Phil had a dynasty with Jordan/Pippen and with Kobe's Lakers (2000-2010).
    If you say so, but while Shaq's Lakers were dominant, that was a fairly short stretch. The Lakers had a lossing record in 2004-05 and didn't make the playoffs and the next two years lost in the first round failing to win 50 games each year. Kobe's Lakers did have anopther small stretch of greatness.

    Based on your own definition:

    It fits my way of defining it, being consistently winning or on the cusp.
    I don't think the Lakers qualify. But hey you can change your definition if you want.

  3. #23
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg in Dallas View Post
    If you say so, but while Shaq's Lakers were dominant, that was a fairly short stretch. The Lakers had a lossing record in 2004-05 and didn't make the playoffs and the next two years lost in the first round failing to win 50 games each year. Kobe's Lakers did have anopther small stretch of greatness.

    Based on your own definition:

    [COLOR=#333333]

    I don't think the Lakers qualify. But hey you can change your definition if you want.
    DiD, what does 2005 have to do with what I said? Nothing. Phil Jackson wasn't our coach then. Re-read or re-comprehend what I said. Furthermore, the Lakers won the title on average once every two years during their dynastic run from 2000-2010. How does that not fit my definition of "consistently winning." Riddle me that.

    No need to change my definition. If you're winning championships in a concentrated stretch, you're a dynasty. Certainly if 5 in 16 years is a dynasty (the Spurs), then 5 in 11 is too (what we accomplished). You're getting too caught up in the "other" years when we didn't win. The Spurs had more years in their "stretch" when they didn't win either. I could careless how far they did get or we got. End of the day it's about finals and championships as I said. If we are going to weight regular seasons so much, with apologies to my guy Dirk, why not calls all those disappointing Mav teams a dynasty also???

    Honestly, the Lakers are like the Serena Williams of the NBA. If Serena is on her game, nobody is beating her in tennis. The Spurs were fortunate to win when the Lakers had issues going on. If LAL didn't have any of the Kobe/Shaq issues, the Spurs aren't winning but that title in 1999 and maybe 2014. The Spurs have no chance, like all those other tennis players, if LAL is at the top of its game. Think about it Kobe and Shaq won three titles WITHOUT each other during this supposed "Spurs dominance." That's three years separately that they won titles during the Spurs era.
    KT is so knowelegable about basketball, he can back his **** up. He can rip a program 6 ways to Sunday, yet turn around in the next breath and explain why that same program should/could/will be/is a great program.
    -Storm

    I like and respect kentubby, he does know his stuff when it concerns college basketball.
    msudawgs1964

    This board would be boring if it wasn't for Kentubby's posts and the responses he gets.
    -fatboydog

    Kentubby is one of my favorite posters on this board. Sure he has some personal views, but this board would be so if everyone agreed all the time that it wouldn't be worth going to. I'd challenge you to find another poster on this board that knows as much about EVERY SEC team as he does. He knows more about lowly South Carolina and our recruiting then alot of our own fans do. It would be a sad day for the basketball forum if he ever left.
    -SCfan804

  4. #24
    Administrator Dawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forums Dawg in Dallas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Age
    46
    Posts
    71,973
    Rep Power
    3531744

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    DiD, what does 2005 have to do with what I said? Nothing. Phil Jackson wasn't our coach then. Re-read or re-comprehend what I said.
    You listed a time period. I comprehend that. You could have said 200-2004 and 2008-2010, but you didn't.

    If you're winning championships in a concentrated stretch, you're a dynasty. Certainly if 5 in 16 years is a dynasty (the Spurs), then 5 in 11 is too (what we accomplished). You're getting too caught up in the "other" years when we didn't win.
    Again your definition:

    It fits my way of defining it, being consistently winning or on the cusp.
    If you aren't having a winning season or losing in the first round of the plauyoffs you aren't on the cusp. Sorry, that is YOUR definition, not mine

  5. #25
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg in Dallas View Post
    You listed a time period. I comprehend that. You could have said 200-2004 and 2008-2010, but you didn't.



    Again your definition:



    If you aren't having a winning season or losing in the first round of the plauyoffs you aren't on the cusp. Sorry, that is YOUR definition, not mine
    It's clear what was meant. If I'm saying Phil had a dynasty OBVIOUSLY that doesn;'t include the year he wasn't there. Again, it's not hard to comprehend.

    So, you can try to slice everything up that I said. At the end of the day, the Lakers won 5 titles in 11 years. Basically half the titles available. Forget about "contending." They won. Note that WON. Add a 6th and 7th finals in that time frame that they didn't win. They contended for all but 4 titles in that time frame (7 in 11 years for crying out loud, do you need a math teacher to know that's contending around 64% of the time?). The Spurs contended for only three, because the Mavs got to one. The Spurs were in 3 finals in an 11 year time period. What am I not seeing that you are seeing there? 3 in 11 is not a dynasty. I can't believe how unreasonable, a normally open-minded, reasonable person like you is being here.
    KT is so knowelegable about basketball, he can back his **** up. He can rip a program 6 ways to Sunday, yet turn around in the next breath and explain why that same program should/could/will be/is a great program.
    -Storm

    I like and respect kentubby, he does know his stuff when it concerns college basketball.
    msudawgs1964

    This board would be boring if it wasn't for Kentubby's posts and the responses he gets.
    -fatboydog

    Kentubby is one of my favorite posters on this board. Sure he has some personal views, but this board would be so if everyone agreed all the time that it wouldn't be worth going to. I'd challenge you to find another poster on this board that knows as much about EVERY SEC team as he does. He knows more about lowly South Carolina and our recruiting then alot of our own fans do. It would be a sad day for the basketball forum if he ever left.
    -SCfan804

  6. #26
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    End of the day, it's not a disagreement on dynasty that we are having. It's about what contending means?

    I'm sorry a 60 win team that doesn't even get to the finals isn't contending. Were the Spurs contenders this year with all those wins but not even a conference finals appearance? Certainly not. I'll give you the Spurs were a great regular season team, but they weren't contenders year in and year out like we were from 2000-2010 when we were consistently in the finals year after year. And, before you say where were the Lakers from 2005-2007, I ask where were the Spurs from 2000-2002, 2004, 2006, 2008-2010... S-E-V-E-N YEARS! in a 11 year period where apparently they had a dynasty going?
    KT is so knowelegable about basketball, he can back his **** up. He can rip a program 6 ways to Sunday, yet turn around in the next breath and explain why that same program should/could/will be/is a great program.
    -Storm

    I like and respect kentubby, he does know his stuff when it concerns college basketball.
    msudawgs1964

    This board would be boring if it wasn't for Kentubby's posts and the responses he gets.
    -fatboydog

    Kentubby is one of my favorite posters on this board. Sure he has some personal views, but this board would be so if everyone agreed all the time that it wouldn't be worth going to. I'd challenge you to find another poster on this board that knows as much about EVERY SEC team as he does. He knows more about lowly South Carolina and our recruiting then alot of our own fans do. It would be a sad day for the basketball forum if he ever left.
    -SCfan804

  7. #27
    Moderator Bama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forumsBama_Man has a great deal of respect on the forums Bama_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    VA
    Age
    30
    Posts
    13,030
    Rep Power
    3871334

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Okay I'm done now, its clear someone has no intention of being unbiased. The Spurs were only lucky to win titles bc the Lakers were a mess. That's such utter horse**** its not even funny. What about SAS SWEEPING LA in 99? How was SA lucky there? What about 03? Eliminating LA when they were going for four in a row?

    I'm done with this, its clear your love of Kobe will not allpwmyou to admit that Duncan was every bit as good at least. Most will agree TDs better, same rings but more consistent winning and never had to rely on Shaq (Duncan's first title, who was MVP of Finals? He was), but I understand a Lakers fan would be on Kobe's side, but saying dumb **** like SAS wasn't a dynasty or the Spurs were simply lucky shows noting but ignorance.
    "Alabama's cornerbacks don't impress me one bit. They're overrated. Real men don't play zone defense and we'll show them a thing or two come January 1."

    Miami WR Lamar Thomas, the weeks before the 1993 Sugar Bowl national title game.


  8. #28
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Furthermore, DiD it seem that we're all in agreement that MJ had a dynasty. What Kobe did was eerily similar.

    For Jordan: 3 peat... 3 peat
    For Kobe: 3 peat... 1 finals loss, then a 2 peat.

    Kobe had the same two 3 peats that Jordan had other than finals loss in one of his three year periods. It's not outrageous, DiD.

  9. #29
    Brigadier General kentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forumskentubbybasketball has a great deal of respect on the forums
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    51,765
    Rep Power
    1015363

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    Quote Originally Posted by Bama_Man View Post
    Okay I'm done now, its clear someone has no intention of being unbiased. The Spurs were only lucky to win titles bc the Lakers were a mess. That's such utter horse**** its not even funny. What about SAS SWEEPING LA in 99? How was SA lucky there? What about 03? Eliminating LA when they were going for four in a row?

    I'm done with this, its clear your love of Kobe will not allpwmyou to admit that Duncan was every bit as good at least. Most will agree TDs better, same rings but more consistent winning and never had to rely on Shaq (Duncan's first title, who was MVP of Finals? He was), but I understand a Lakers fan would be on Kobe's side, but saying dumb **** like SAS wasn't a dynasty or the Spurs were simply lucky shows noting but ignorance.
    Exactly,why I told you earlier that I wouldn't engage you with debate here. We aren't seeing eye to eye, and you have no class (we're talking about sports, no need to get so caught up that you have to cuss at me multiple times). FWIW, I admit I'm biased toward Kobe... you're biased toward Duncan. Get over it. People have differing opinions. No matter how much I try to like you or get along with you, you always remind me why it's difficult.

    If I wanted to be truly biased, I could pull a page out of Phil Jackson's book and say the Spurs really only have 4 1/2 titles. LOL

  10. #30
    Administrator Dawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forumsDawg in Dallas has a great deal of respect on the forums Dawg in Dallas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Age
    46
    Posts
    71,973
    Rep Power
    3531744

    Re: Tim Duncan Retires

    It's clear what was meant. If I'm saying Phil had a dynasty OBVIOUSLY that doesn;'t include the year he wasn't there. Again, it's not hard to comprehend.
    What about the two years after the losing season where the Lakers lost in the first round and failed to win 50 games? Is that on the cusp? How does that mesh with this:

    I'm sorry a 60 win team that doesn't even get to the finals isn't contending. Were the Spurs contenders this year with all those wins but not even a conference finals appearance? Certainly not.
    That would be the Lakers in 2003, 2005 (non Phil year), 2006, 2007. Based on your own words, the Lakers were not a dynasty for the period you claim.
    Furthermore, DiD it seem that we're all in agreement that MJ had a dynasty. What Kobe did was eerily similar.

    For Jordan: 3 peat... 3 peat
    For Kobe: 3 peat... 1 finals loss, then a 2 peat.

    Kobe had the same two 3 peats that Jordan had other than finals loss in one of his three year periods. It's not outrageous, DiD.
    Again, Kobe was not the leader of the 3 peat, he was Shaq's Pippen. SHAQ won the finals MVP each of those years. Shaq was the man, not Kobe. Kobe is not and will never be MJ - nobody will be. It is outrageous your repeated attempts to compare the two in this manner when every knowledgeable BB fan know SHAQ was the driver of the 3 peat, not Kobe. MJ was the man on ALL of his title teams.

    Your Laker bias is causing a thread about a better all around player/TEAMMATE than Kobe to be put on the backburner. That is a damn shame.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. RIP Michael Clarke Duncan
    By Whiplash50 in forum Terry's Pub
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-06-2012, 10:01 AM
  2. RIP Michael Clarke Duncan.
    By joehogjoe in forum Terry's Pub
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-04-2012, 07:29 PM
  3. Probably NOT the next Tim Duncan Gatorade commercial
    By Storm in forum National Basketball Association
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-03-2008, 01:16 AM
  4. Tim Duncan
    By georgiaguy31015 in forum National Basketball Association
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-30-2007, 04:21 PM
  5. Duncan Hunter: Reagan Republican?
    By CrimsonPirate in forum SECFanatics Think Tank
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-29-2007, 09:33 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts