Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Do you consider the Spurs a Dynasty?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    11 55.00%
  • No

    9 45.00%
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 107
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,748
    vCash
    1500

    Phil Jackson: Spurs are NOT A Dynasty but have great TEAM PLAY

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...-not-a-dynasty

    Tim Duncan making the salary he's making after being part of a dynastyŚnot a dynasty, I wouldn't call San Antonio a dynastyŚa force, a great force. They haven't been able to win consecutive championships but they've always been there. San Antonio has had a wonderful run through Tim's tenure there as a player. He's agreed to take a salary cut so other players can play with him so they can be this good. And that's the beginning of team play.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    42,395
    vCash
    1000
    Haha, he's kidding right?

    A dynasty means you win your championships in a row? Not every other year?


    Come on Phil

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    18,582
    vCash
    1500
    Yeah I also do not agree with this.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brooklyn, NYC
    Posts
    13,735
    vCash
    1623
    Phil has his own perception of what a dynasty is. Like many people do. Nothing new here though, he's taken little jabs @ SA before. He does it when he can

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    8,767
    vCash
    1500
    I think he's right though...the Spurs are not a dynasty at this moment. You could argue that earlier in Timmy's career they were but not now they aren't. They haven't won a championship in 6 years. Which by most t means that is not a big window but in terms of dynasty I expect the team to win in those times.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,115
    vCash
    1500
    Most people probably wouldn't consider them a dynasty anyway.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,150
    vCash
    1500
    I think by the literal definition, they aren't technically a dynasty because they only ruled for one season at a time. They would lose their throne, and reclaim it, which makes them very formidable and respectable, but if we are playing the semantics game then they probably aren't a dynasty.

    But whats in a name anyhow?
    "If you find yourself in the majority, rethink your position" - Mark Twain

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,308
    vCash
    1500
    The Greg Popovich-Tim Duncan dynasty is most definitely real.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,748
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Haha, he's kidding right?

    A dynasty means you win your championships in a row? Not every other year?


    Come on Phil
    Every other yr ??


    They won in 99, have a 4 yr gap, then they had every other yr for 03, 05, and 07.



    Now, it's been a 7 yr drought. And I don't see the Spurs winning it this yr either.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,387
    vCash
    1500
    I like the way he's handling 'melo based on that story released today, but saying the spurs aren't a dynasty smacks of 'I'm insecure about my legacy', and he totally doesn't have to be.....Oh phil.....that trash talking zen master.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,748
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Sly Guy View Post
    I like the way he's handling 'melo based on that story released today, but saying the spurs aren't a dynasty smacks of 'I'm insecure about my legacy', and he totally doesn't have to be.....Oh phil.....that trash talking zen master.
    It's nothing about insecurity.

    Would you call 80s Celtics a dynasty?


    I wouldn't. KC Jones Celtics fit in the same category as Pop's Spurs. Competitive for a decade (or more), win titles, be in the finals, but never repeat.


    The Riley Lakers (back-to-back titles with multiple other titles) & Phil Lakers (3 peat and repeat) with Phil Bulls (2 3peats) are dynasties.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    444
    vCash
    1500
    They're a dynasty. Pop, Duncan, Parker, Ginobli...they've won alot, including some titles. How many 50+ win seasons in a row? Exactly. The role players have changed, but the main core has remained the same.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,115
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Pill View Post
    They're a dynasty. Pop, Duncan, Parker, Ginobli...they've won alot, including some titles. How many 50+ win seasons in a row? Exactly. The role players have changed, but the main core has remained the same.
    Most people aren't talking about regular seasons when they talk about dynasties.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,152
    vCash
    1500
    A real dynasty doesn't lose to an 8th seed. It most likely will happen again. The Spurs are done.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    5,511
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Haha, he's kidding right?

    A dynasty means you win your championships in a row? Not every other year?


    Come on Phil
    Phil's right.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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