so if they don't make it to the finals this year I won't consider them a dynasty.
i think we define "dynasty" differently here... Larry Bird's Celtics "only" won 3 championships in 6 years without a repeat (and two years between the first and 2nd) and during that same era, Magic's Lakers didn't repeat until their 5th championship in 87-88, and somewhere in there the Sixers won one. And yet I'm sure anybody would call both of those teams "dynasties", not because they won every single year but because they were legitimate championship
contenders every year for many years.
just like the Spurs. no other team since the beginning of the Popovich-Duncan era has a higher winning percentage, and the Lakers only have 3 rings, too, so no other team has out-performed them.
You're giving Pop a little too much credit there.
not possible. someone like Avery is a great on-the-court motivator, he knows how to push a team to perform to the highest of their
individual abilities and his play making skills aren't in question to me, I know he's good... but Popovich
is the Spurs. not a single pass, shot, or block happens on the court without him having a hand in it. he basically built the Spurs (around Duncan) himself, by hand, from the ground up, and they are his machine.
The organization of the Spurs is the best in the NBA, but the future of the Mavs is much brighter.
o rly?
two words:
Luis Scola.
recognized by most authorities as the most talented basketball player in the entire world
not playing in the NBA. he's only 26 years old, not even in his prime yet, and his draft rights are owned by, you guessed it, the Spurs.
we could trade the guy and a couple others for a #1 pick in a couple years.
how about when Greg Oden comes out after (probably) his sophomore year? it would be like Duncan and Robinson all over again. and at the
very worst, we end up just signing Scola to the team, move Ducan to center, and there ya go, the dynasty continues.
lol. spurs rule.