1999 Spurs

**jlauber** · 10-08-2010, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Rose

Yeah Both Duncan and Robinson were just amazing at containing shaq in his prime/near his prime. Here's what I've got personally.

Timmy/Robinson
Sheed/Ben are so close though it's not funny.
Ewing Oakley
then Hakeem/Ralph Sampson.

I would add Chamberlain-Jackson from 65-66 thru 67-68, and perhaps even Chamberlain-Thurmond in 63-64.

**SsKSpurs21** · 10-08-2010, 03:32 PM

memorial day miracle!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1EL3...next=1&index=1

**Rose** · 10-08-2010, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by jlauber

I would add Chamberlain-Jackson from 65-66 thru 67-68, and perhaps even Chamberlain-Thurmond in 63-64.

I haven't watched those guys extensively. Right now on days I don't have a lot of homework I'm trying to download Finals games/highlight games from the 90s and backwards as far as I can go. Or at least important playoff series, something of the sort to improve my knowledge. If you can hook me up with some footage I'd be much obliged!

**BlueandGold** · 10-08-2010, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by shaqattack

Well, no teams from the late 90's/00's come close to the great 80's teams in terms of being stacked and even though the Lakers chemistry was crap due to the coaching changes midseason, the midseason trade of Jones and Campbell for Rice, the Rodman distraction and the Shaq/Kobe feud, that Laker team was still very talented. Sweeping a team that talented is an accomplishment in itself and sweeping just about any team in the conference finals like they did to Portland is as well.

But aside from big names(and Duncan/Robinson were considered a star duo at the time), how many of those teams had better defenses? And the Spurs balance was remarkable, Duncan dominates offensively averaging 29 in the WCSF and 27 in the finals, yet Avery Johnson leads them in scoring in the 1st round and David Robinson leads them in scoring in the WCF.

While I agree that the 99 Spurs were one of the top defensive teams these past 2 decades, it's just hard to compare them to other great defensive teams because of the shortened season as well as the sleuth of younger teams that the Spurs saw during the playoffs.

Another point worth mentioning is that the Knicks made the Finals as an 8th seed and without Ewing (the latter point being beaten to death). I think that just shows how wacky a year the 99 season was for the NBA.

**jlauber** · 10-08-2010, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by Rose

I haven't watched those guys extensively. Right now on days I don't have a lot of homework I'm trying to download Finals games/highlight games from the 90s and backwards as far as I can go. Or at least important playoff series, something of the sort to improve my knowledge. If you can hook me up with some footage I'd be much obliged!

**Rose** · 10-08-2010, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by jlauber

Ohh thanks. I'm watching the first one right now.

**Duncan21formvp** · 10-08-2010, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

For my money, this is one of the greatest teams of the past 15 years and the best Spurs team in their history. It's a shame that their defensive-oriented style and the lockout has prevented people from truly appreciating them. They started off the season just 6-8, but finished the regular season on a 31-5 run and they completely crushed every team they faced in the playoffs going 15-2 and They had the best defensive team in the league allowing just 95 points per 100 possessions and they held teams to just 84.7 ppg on 40.2% shooting during the regular season. In the playoffs, they held teams to just 81.2 ppg on 39.9% shooting.

Duncan emerged as the best player in the league with an incredibly polished low post arsenal, a polished face up game and increasingly dominant defensive game. Along with Robinson they formed the greatest interior defensive duo I've ever seen. Duncan was the star, but Robinson was still an excellent player. He was definitely a top 5 defensive player, very mobile for a center even after the back surgery, a very good passer and he hit mid-range shots with consistency. Duncan and Robinson's high/low plays were amazing to watch and both players were versatile enough to play either power forward or center at either end. A lineup with two seven footers causes enough match up problems, but when they're this skilled offensively and so good defensively, they become a true match up nightmare. The most impressive series for this duo were the semi-finals when Robinson did an excellent job defending Shaq while Duncan carried the scoring load and the finals when their size allowed them to seemingly do whatever they wanted. Those 2 alone almost guaranteed a great defense, but the role players bought into this as well. Avery Johnson was an excellent leader who ran the offense, distributed the ball very well and despite his limitations, found a way to score by getting to the basket and he made himself into a decent enough 15-18 footer shooter when he was open. Jaren Jackson and Sean Elliott also gave the team 3 point shooting.

The defense only allowed over 90 points twice during that playoff run and they held teams under 80 points 7 times in the playoffs. They were 4-0 in games decided by 5 points or less. And when you add their well-balanced offense in with their dominant defense, they become virtually unbeatable. They had atleast 3 players in double figures in every playoff game, they had atleast 4 players in double figures in 13 of their 17 games and they had 5 players in double figures in 6 games.

20+ games
Duncan- 12
Robinson- 3
Johnson- 2
Jackson- 2
Elliott- 1

20/10 games
Duncan- 9
Robinson- 3
Johnson- 1

Double/doubles
Duncan- 10
Robinson- 9
Johnson- 3

The team had a great cast of veterans, a superstar big man in Duncan, another great big man in Robinson and every one on the team played like winners stepping up in crucial times whether it be Avery Johnson's jumper from the corner in Madison Square Garden or Sean Elliott's miracle 3 vs Portland. Elie and Kerr had already won multiple championship teams which can't hurt. With that type of size, experience, depth and talent you'll always have a chance to win. However, when you have one of the best coaches of all-time like Gregg Popovich, those odds become even greater.

Here are the numbers for each key player in the 4 series.

1st round vs Minnesota (Spurs won 3-1)
Avery Johnson- 19.5 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 6.3 apg, 1 spg, 2.3 TO, 59.3 FG%, 73.7 FT%
Tim Duncan- 18.8 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 3.3 apg, 3 bpg, 1.8 TO, 46 FG%, 77.3 FT%
David Robinson- 14.8 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3 apg, 2 bpg, 2 spg, 1.8 TO, 50 FG%, 65.4 FT%
Sean Elliott- 12 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2 apg, 1.3 TO, 43.6 FG%, 50 3P% (4/8), 83.3 FT%

Semi-finals vs the Lakers (Spurs won 4-0)
Tim Duncan- 29 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2 bpg, 1 spg, 4.5 TO, 51.3 FG%, 80.9 FT%
Sean Elliott- 13.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4 apg, 1.5 TO, 44.4 FG%, 40 3P% (4/10), 76 FT%
David Robinson- 13.3 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 1.8 apg, 1 bpg, 1.5 spg, 2 TO, 50 FG%, 73.1 FT%
Jaren Jackson- 12.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg, 0.5 apg, 51.4 FG%, 43.5 3P% (10/23), 60 FT%
Avery Johnson- 10.8 ppg, 3 rpg, 8.8 apg, 2.3 spg, 3.3 TO, 43.6 FG%, 61.5 FT%

Conference Finals vs Portland (Spurs won 4-0)
David Robinson- 17.5 ppg, 9 rpg, 3 apg, 3.3 bpg, 2.3 spg, 4.3 TO, 53.3 FG%, 84.6 FT%
Tim Duncan- 16.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 2.5 apg, 3.5 bpg, 2.5 TO, 52.1 FG%, 56.7 FT%
Sean Elliott- 15 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 1.5 apg, 1 TO, 58.3 FG%, 47.4 3P% (9/19), 81.8 FT%
Avery Johnson- 12 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 7.5 apg, 1 spg, 2 TO, 40.7 FG%, 80 FT%

Finals vs New York (Spurs won 4-1)
Tim Duncan- 27.4 ppg, 14 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.2 bpg, 1 spg, 3.4 TO, 53.7 FG%, 79.5 FT%
David Robinson- 16.6 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 2.4 apg, 3 bpg, 1 spg, 1.6 TO, 42.4 FG%, 68.8 FT%
Mario Elie- 11.6 ppg, 4 rpg, 2.6 apg, 1.2 spg, 1.6 TO, 44.7 FG%, 30.8 3P%, 87 FT%
Avery Johnson- 9.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg 7.2 apg, 4 TO, 50 FG%, 60 FT%

I hope I'm not the only one who appreciates this team. While they weren't the greatest team of all-time, I'm not sure you'll see another team like this ever again. A very unique team that won in a way that wasn't appealing to the casual fan.

This is the best team since 1999.

**dbugz** · 10-08-2010, 04:19 PM

I remember Avery shooting clutch jump shots during the Finals, I think it's the last game

**ShaqAttack3234** · 10-08-2010, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by BlueandGold

Another point worth mentioning is that the Knicks made the Finals as an 8th seed and without Ewing (the latter point being beaten to death). I think that just shows how wacky a year the 99 season was for the NBA.

The Knick didn't really make the finals without Ewing. They had him until game 3 of the ECF. They upset Miami with him and swept Atlanta with him. They did win 3 out of the 4 ECF games they needed without him, though.

Ewing's gutty performance in the deciding game 5 vs Miami really set the tone for that run, IMO. He was so visibly injured that I thought he was going to come out at any minute throughout the game, yet he managed to outscore and outrebound a much younger Alonzo Mourning to lead the Knicks to the clinching victory in Miami. He actually outrebounded ZO by 2.6 boards per game that series, too.

Though, that season and 2004 are odd seasons as far as scoring. In '99 there were only 2 players who averaged over 25 ppg(Iverson and Shaq) and there was only one in 2004(T-Mac).

**DatWasNashty** · 10-08-2010, 05:00 PM

The 1999 Spurs are one of the teams that could give the second three-peat Bulls some trouble.

The Bulls alleged weakness was their post defense and lack of a true center. They were able to hide that with their terrific help defenders, perimeter defense and Rodman's exceptional post-defense and mental tactics.

I don't think they would be able to hold their own against two elite big men, though. Robinson was still a top ten player in the league contrary to what his stats imply and Duncan was the best player in the league.

The Bulls wouldn't generate a lot of points in the paint and will have to heavily rely on Jordan for offense. I find it hard to believe that Rodman would lock up Duncan when Kemp was having his way with him and Chuck also had a huge game against him. Add Robinson and the Bulls would struggle finding an answer for him. The Bulls help defense will trouble SAS, though.

The 1999 Spurs were also a historically terrific defense team and very well-built around two dominant big men. A veteran floor general in Avery Johnson who lacked outside shooting but did a good job of hitting clutch and timely jumpers and feeding the post. Outside threats such as Steve Kerr, Jaren Jackson, Mario Elie and Sean Elliott to space the floor for Duncan to work down low. Admiral operating at the elbow area hitting face up jumpers and cutting to the rim with Duncan being doubled. Their games weren't redundant either and complemented each other more than anything.

**SinJackal** · 10-08-2010, 05:05 PM

I wish it were possible to open a thread about the Spurs without half the posts being hater posts.

In any case, good thread ShaqAttack. It's nice to see some of the more overlooked teams get some props for a change. ^_^

Originally Posted by RUCKER

Joakim Noah and Tyrus Thomas would smash all over a prime Robinson/Duncan, and Rasheed/Ben Wallace.

IMO they're the best defensive tandem this game has ever seen. Hands down, bar-none.

Are you just trying to troll? You must be. Noah and Thomas would get obliterated by Duncan and Robinson. Noah's not even close to as good defensively as Robinson (you clearly have never seen DRob play even once if you think that, and shit, you must've never even seen a basketball card of him, a statsheet of him, or know any history about him whatsoever.

And you even went so far as to claim they'd smash a PRIME Robinson and Duncan. Dude, prime Robinson alone is better than both Noah and Thomas. He was being called the best player in the NBA at times during his prime. He won the MVP, and DPOY, while always putting up great record with an otherwise average team, and always being high in the voting for both awards the years he didn't win them. If anybody in the current league put up the numbers and won the game totals he did back in the 90's now, they would be the MVP every season, or at WORST #2 in the voting. Imagine LeBron's current stats, only better FG%, double the rebounds (at the cost of half the assists), but more steals, and 3x the blocks with less turnovers and much better defense that would likely earn him DPOY awards over Howard every season. That's David Robinson. Get a clue dude.

As for Rasheed and Ben Wallace, Duncan already beat those two without DRob in '05. -_- So clearly they couldn't do shit against just Duncan, much less Duncan AND DRob. Meanwhile, this was right after they just beat the great LA Lakers the year before. Can they beat Shaq and Kobe? Sure. Just Duncan? Fail.

Originally Posted by BlueandGold

Although I don't agree with everything this poster has to say there is a degree of truth to this post. The league was watered down due to expansion and this was the first "post-jordan" season in the NBA, which also happened to be a shortened season due to a lockout.

As far as star players and hall of famers, the Spurs don't match up to the 80s Celtics/Lakers/Pistons, the 90s Bulls or even the 00 Lakers or this current Laker/Celtic squads. Sure Duncan/Robinson is a fearsome twin tower force, even with Robinson in the twilight years of his career, but I believe that the reason why they went 15-2 in the playoffs was because of the quality of the playoff teams at that point (bunch of new teams out west, beat a Knicks team in the finals without Ewing) due to over-expansion.

Of course you agree with him, every thread I've seen you post in having to do with S.A. or it's players has been negative. You obviously hate the Spurs and have an agenda against them, so it isn't surprising at all that you're "agreeing" with the worst posts in the thread that are completely devoid of logic, and instead are full of ignorant bias.

Plus, how was the league magically "watered down" just because one guy retired? Almost the exact same players who were in the league the year before were in it that year again. Especially compared to the current league, where we have some of the lowest leaders for stats in NBA history (rebounds, blocks, etc, over the last half a decade have been way down).

Oh, but of course, according to you, the Lakers squad of the very next year (who had almost the EXACT same players on it), were MUCH better, and played in a MUCH better league, right? Even though it was just the next year and the exact same league. Lemme guess, the league remained strong and excellent and the best it's been in a long time every year they won their titles, right?

But as soon as they didn't win and SA did, the league was watered down again, right? Amiright!?

Oh, and they were only 15-2 in the playoffs since they were playing the brand new teams out west, right? Even though they were 15-2 against the brand new teams of: Minnesota Timberwolves, Portland Trail Blazers, Los Angelos Lakers, and New York Knicks. -_-

Originally Posted by SCdac

all these Spurs teams were just that, the epitome of "team". It's made it very easy to be a fan. there were solid veterans (easiest part to underrate) and there were hungry player in Antonio Daniels and Malik Rose. but certainly the teams were lead by Duncan. In the third quarter of the last finals game (game 5) he carried the team, don't remember the exact numbers but I remember Robinson didn't score a point and Tim was the definition of "reliable" hitting turnaround jumpers and doing everything to start the second half.

as a 14-15 year old in 1999, it was Mario Elie and Avery Johnson who were my favorite Spurs players at that time. Both defensive, both tough, and both could hit a clutch shot.... I remember when we finally won a/that championship, my father who is more of a diehard spurs fan than anybody (he grew up in Dallas, listening to SA games back when they were the "Dallas Chaparrals" in the early 70's, then moved to SA in early 80's - he watched Gervin fall flat in the 80's, Robinson be labeled soft in the 90's, a slew of head coaches come and go, and the Spurs play in multiple arenas ), after knocking out the Knicks, it was probably the happiest I had ever seen him, it's hard to explain but it almost felt like he had another child! lol. And maybe the happiest I had ever seen SA, it was great for the city, you'd go outside and just hear people honking their car horns every where you go. I still got one of the original championship t shirts they wore after the game (well, a replica), though it's like 3 sizes too small now.... Spurs not only won, but they won in all the right ways, with teamwork, relentless/focused defense, resiliency, and sparked by playing a 22 year old Tim Duncan 43.1 minutes per playoff game... somebody who wasn't then, but went on to become the best power forward ever.

After 26 years of franchise disappointment ... and the first of the ABA teams to go all the way

Going 15-2 in the playoffs is dominant.... as is sweeping a team in the Finals almost 10 years later.... Spurs definitely deserve a good amount of credit, whether the team is filled with popular "names" or not.

Great post dude, repped.

Originally Posted by BlueandGold

While I agree that the 99 Spurs were one of the top defensive teams these past 2 decades, it's just hard to compare them to other great defensive teams because of the shortened season as well as the sleuth of younger teams that the Spurs saw during the playoffs.

The playoffs weren't shortened, and yet their numbers were retained, clearly indicating that they were a good team, regardless of 30 less regular season games having been played.

But oh, the "current Lakers" were better, right? Even though they give up over 10 more PPG than that Spurs team did, and rarely hold teams to under 90, much less low 80s or even the 70s.

But they're better defensively. . .since they're the Lakers, and not Spurs, right?

And you're AGAIN making excuses for their title. They won FOUR titles. . .but they didn't deserve to win the first one? Who did then? Nobody else beat them. They were crushing the league which was comprised of almost all the players who were in the league the year before, and would be in it the next year too.

Reading all your posts, at this point it's obvious you care about the brand name of teams/players more than the actual product.

The epitome of bias.

**jlip** · 10-08-2010, 05:20 PM

Great thread. People tend to foolishly underrate them because of the shortened season. They act as if the Spurs somehow played 75 games while everyone else played 50. The Spurs played the same amount of games as everyone else and destroyed everyone on their road to their 1st title.

**Scott Baker** · 10-08-2010, 06:10 PM

I really think the Knicks would've won if not for injuries.

That Spurs team was a lot of fun to watch though.

**Wakko** · 10-08-2010, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Baker

I really think the Knicks would've won if not for injuries.

That Spurs team was a lot of fun to watch though.

**Gotterdammerung** · 10-08-2010, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by insidehoops.com

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ShaqAttack3234 again.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to SinJackal again.

Solid posts, y'all.

Thread: 1999 Spurs

Thread Tools

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Re: 1999 Spurs

Posting Permissions