|
This really has all the hallmarks of a great barroom debate: who's the team of the "noughties" (a term Mookie used within his piece)? Here are three opinions on this... one from TBF who did the draft preview here, another from Mookie of A Stern Warning, and my own.
We also talked a bit about it within Bloguin NBA - Dave Kelsey of TWolves Blog thought LA ("I hate them because they have been the best. The Lakers."). Brian Packey of Detroit4lyfe thought LA as well. Kinda ("I would probably lean toward the Lakers")... and a few others fell either way.
But now... the slightly longer opinions. First up - A Stern Warning's Mookie...
----------------------------
 I'm sure you're still celebrating the Lakers' title... but I'm here to rain on your parade with my 2 cents for the Greatest team of the 00's debate:The battle for the title of greatest team of the past decade is a clear-cut two horse race. It comes down to the Los Angeles Lakers and the San Antonio Spurs. I don't even want to hear the Pistons enter the conversation.
Now, if we want to get technical, the Lakers have won four titles in the noughties, whilst the Spurs have only won three... but, the Spurs did win it all in 98-99 as well, so that's virtually a tie. Putting that aside for one moment, and I'll even say notwithstanding the Lakers 4-3 victory on titles, the best team of the past decade has to be the Spurs.
Why, you ask?
Well, it all comes back to consistent dominance for me.
There has not been a year in the past decade where people have been able to discount the Spurs from the championship race. They're a consistent title threat and their records over those years has shown that. The worst record that the Spurs have had in the past decade was 53-29 in 1999-00 when their post-title hangover saw them bow out in the first round of the playoffs. Injuries did them no justice in 2008-09 either, as they fell out in the first round. It's worth pointing out however that there has not been a season in the past decade when the Spurs have missed the playoffs.
The same can't be said for the Lakers, who had a three year lull from 2004-05 to 2006-07, including a 34-48 season and a dysfunctional team that wasn't scaring anyone or factoring in Finals talk outside of LA.
It doesn't get any simpler than that... the Lakers had seasons where they were a sideshow circus, where the main attraction was to see how many points Kobe would score and who he would be blast. Meanwhile the Spurs have been consistently dominant and relevant.
Narrow victory: San Antonio Spurs.
----------------------------
I'll chime in at this point:
The San Antonio Spurs. 2000-2009 - Team of the decade.
Ummm... well, let's explore that notion.
 Clearly it all comes down to two teams that have achieved at very high levels - the San Antonio Spurs and the Los Angeles Lakers. To be sure, there are other teams that have done well during the 00s - Detroit, Dallas to name but two others - but none have performed on the level that we've seen from the Spurs and the Lakers. Both are in the conversation for different reasons. The vaunted consistency from the Spurs versus the string of titles for the Lakers. So... which takes it?
San Antonio have made the Playoffs every year from 2000 to 2009. The entire decade, which is impressive of itself, but when you factor in that almost every year they've been considered one of the main contenders, then it's all that more an incredible achievement. They've been to the Finals 3 times, and walked away with 3 titles - a 100% success rate.
With Tim Duncan and Greg Popovich leading the charge, the San Antonio Spurs have been at the forefront of every Finals assault until the most recent playoffs.
Actual sum total of wins throughout the decade points to San Antonio as well. The Spurs accumulated the 3rd best winning percentage over the last 30 years (only the Showtime Lakers, and Jordan's Bulls are better).
Still - history will mark them down as only the second best team of this era, the "noughties" as Mookie likened it. For what's the true measure of success? The one and only thing that matters in the end is how many Titles do you have to show for that decade.
And that's really very simple: LA went to the Finals 6 times, and won 4. San Antonio 3 and 3.
History will remember that, and very little else.
Something else that's lost by it occurring at the beginning of the decade is LA's 3-peat. The sheer dominance of the Shaq/Kobe teams wasn't seen again for the duration of the decade. Sure: Timmy & co. were good, but they never managed to do what the Lakers of the turn of the millennium were able to.
You want consistency?
As every 1st grader is able to tell you, 4 is greater than 3.
Traveling to the Finals 6 times is far more consistent than making that trip but 3 times. Winning it 4 times is more consistent than winning it 3. It's not rocket science (tho' I guess Houston wishes it were!).
 Here's a few important statistics that proponents for the Spurs conveniently miss: LA competed for the ultimate prize 60% of the decade, against San Antonio's 30%. LA won that prize 40%.
Forget the stats pointing to win percentages and how successful San Antonio was at being a 5th-or-higher seed.
Forget stats completely.
People barely remember who finished second a few years later... barely a few years into the new decade, no-one will if a team came 3rd or worse. No-one's going to remember win/loss records for a year, or whether a team was in contention for a title. The only thing that will be remembered is how many NBA Championship banners did you get in that period of time.
LA hung one from the rafters 4 times during the Noughties, and ended up bookending the decade with a banner at either end, something that's only fitting for the decade's most dominant team.
----------------------------
TBF to wrap things up...
The team of the 00's: San Antonio Spurs. An openly biased argument
Hello. How about that drive in? Guess that's why they call it Sin City...
Sorry I've been waiting for ages to use that in a truly public setting. If you haven't seen it, go and see "The Hangover" to get what I mean...
 Each decade you can pretty much pinpoint a team that's head and shoulders above the rest. In the 80's it was the Lakers and their "Showtime" brand of basketball. In the 90's it was Jordan's Bulls that possessed the greatest player and greatest coach in modern history (ever?) wowing fans every night and re-inventing basketball as we know it.
In the 00's however, the situation is not so easy. There are clearly two teams that stick out above the others, the Spurs and the Lakers, but separating the two is no trivial matter. Well... that is until you dig a little bit deeper, start analysing the finer points, and be a little more... ummm... biased!!!
The truth is these two teams are inseparable depending on which angle you come from - but, hey - I'm a Spurs fan, I'm looking at it from a Spurs angle, and here's why my team is better:
Sheer winning percentage
When you talk about the winningest teams, the name that automatically springs to mind is the Spurs. They're there: every year, every season - without fail.
Over the past 9 seasons encompassing the 00's, the Spurs ARE the winningest team in the NBA with an impressive 576 - 244 win/loss record (.702). The Lakers of the 80's had a winning record of 531 - 207 (.719) while the Bulls of the 90's had a winning record of 503 - 203 (.712).
This places the Spurs in pretty elite company with a win/loss record over 70% for a decade.
Can the '00s Lakers boast a similar feat? No, they come in at 64%.
This poor showing by the Lakers brings me to my next point.
Consistency, consistency, consistency
People like damn the Spurs, stating that they're a boring team to watch.
Sure, if you get sick of watching a team constantly win easily, methodically, and barely ever look stressed.
Seriously though, in the Spurs past 10 seasons they've made the playoffs every time. The Lakers have only missed once, but they've also been the 8th seed twice. The Spurs have never been lower than 5th seed, and have made the NBA finals 3 times.
At this point the Laker fans are yelling "Hah!!! But we made the finals 6 times, so nyah!!"
That's all lovely and good, but when the Spurs make the Finals they win 100% of the time, the Lakers on the other hand, win 66% of the time. Also add to that 50+ win seasons - the Spurs are, once again, a perfect 100% on 50+ win seasons whereas the Lakers are 70%. They may have more titles but have hardly been a team that you can constantly say "are a Championship team."
Luxury Tax
 The Lakers are the owners of arguably the best area code when it comes to luring in talent.
They're a huge market, have celebs a plenty attending their matches, and there are certain "financial benefits" to playing in a big city (e.g. endorsements).
This has meant the Lakers have always lured in the "big names" at free agent/trade time. Whether it's because the NBA is corrupt and makes sure the biggest market can win, or whether it's the Lakers owners' constant willingness to go over the luxury tax threshold, the Lakers keep reeling in the big names.
O'Neal, Malone, Payton, Grant, Odom, Gasol.
Couple that with Kobe Bryant and you're almost playing unfairly.
In fact, you are playing unfairly. If you look at the Lakers team of the 00's they're always over the luxury tax threshold which is essentially another way of saying "cheating" except your owner pays for it.
The Spurs on the other hand have never flirted with the luxury tax mark, making smart trades and key acquisitions to ensure the line isn't broken. If the Spurs did do that then who knows who else they could have had on the roster the years they just missed the finals; Maggette, Carter, McGrady, Allen, Iverson etc. All things being equal - which they never are with the Lakers - this makes the Spurs a better team on par.
One-dimensionality
The Lakers have shown their one-dimensionality all too often as alluded to by the above topic of tax.
If the Lakers "stars" aren't healthy and producing then the Lakers don't win. The Spurs on the other hand are a true "team" in that Tim Duncan can go down and the Spurs are still a shot at winning. The 2005 Spurs lost Duncan for the final part of the season, and again in the West semi-finals only to bounce back and win the whole thing. I think this is the final point that proves the Spurs are The Team of the 00's whereas the Lakers are the "checkbook" of the 00's.
No Kobe (since Shaq left), no Shaq (when he was there)... no way.
The Spurs truly are a team that this past decade could never be written off.
Even just last season in 2007 no one expected them to make the second round of the playoffs, let alone the conference finals, yet they did and did so pushing the Lakers (who'd only recently got the chequebook out AGAIN to get in Pau Gasol in a rip-off that screamed "NBA tampering" to have a Lakers-Celtics finals) to 6 games with 10 healthy players.
Yep if you look back at the 00's you'll definitely say Kobe and Shaq were awesome, but you'll still be left saying "but you never could go past those Spurs."
That's why they were the team of the 00's and will remembered as such.
----------------------------
The final say? I guess that's up to you. So, what do you think?
 |
Bloguin is the revolutionary blog network specifically focused on helping bloggers get the most out of their websites. We're currently working on building a large network of online communities and hope to expand our blogging coverage to include a wide range of topics. 
The Bloguin Network allows advertisers to promote their products and services to our ever-growing number of visitors. We offer both site-specific ad placements as well as the ability to run a network-wide campaign. If you're interested in working with Bloguin to meet your advertising needs, please contact us.
The Bloguin Network is always looking to expand. We're specifically looking for blogs in the sports, entertainment, and video games field, but are open to adding any type of quality site. If you're a blogger and interested in joining our network, please fill out our application form.
The Bloguin Login gives you full access to everything our network has to offer. Your name and password will work for each and every one of our sites. Signing up is simple, and will allow you to post in all our forums, create member blogs, and access other cool features! What are you waiting for? Create an Account! 