Lottery Standings

[theNBAnerd]

their three best players that year were david robinson, sean elliott and an over-the-hill 'nique. the first two were injured for basically the entire year, the third was remarkably inefficient. they didn't tank, they just sucked.

 

[NAOS]

their three best players that year were david robinson, sean elliott and an over-the-hill 'nique. the first two were injured for basically the entire year, the third was remarkably inefficient. they didn't tank, they just sucked.

I'm not going to review the sides of this debate, but doesn't the argument hinge on one's stance about whether Robinson (and Elliott?) sat out for way longer than they really needed to?

 

[theNBAnerd]

I'm not going to review the sides of this debate, but doesn't the argument hinge on one's stance about whether Robinson (and Elliott?) sat out for way longer than they really needed to?

doesn't your point lose all credibility when you start it with "i'm not going to review the sides..."? basically you're saying you're not going to be bothered by the details of the situation, but rather accept a broad, revisionist view of what happened.

david robinson injured his back in the preseason, worked hard to return to the court , but six games into his return he broke his foot. are you suggesting that he should have been fine to throw some ice on a broken foot and return in a week?

elliott was in and out of the lineup for the first half of the season, battling a chronic quad injury. after a setback in early february, he finally opted for a quad tendon surgery that usually requires 4-6 months of recovery time. you're saying he milked it by missing the final 38 games of the season?

 

[NAOS]

doesn't your point lose all credibility when you start it with "i'm not going to review the sides..."? basically you're saying you're not going to be bothered by the details of the situation, but rather accept a broad, revisionist view of what happened.

david robinson injured his back in the preseason, worked hard to return to the court , but six games into his return he broke his foot. are you suggesting that he should have been fine to throw some ice on a broken foot and return in a week?

elliott was in and out of the lineup for the first half of the season, battling a chronic quad injury. after a setback in early february, he finally opted for a quad tendon surgery that usually requires 4-6 months of recovery time. you're saying he milked it by missing the final 38 games of the season?

I'm saying I don't really ****ing care. You have a problem with that?
Like Cy, you seemed to bite on a shiny hook that I never set. Did I give my personal belief one way or the other? I asked about the hinge of the debate as it is repeated/relived. You didn't answer that question... instead started wondering about my credibility. Kool, braugh.

 

[theNBAnerd]

ok well then the answer to your earnest question is no, it doesn't appear either guy unnecessarily milked a minor injury. sorry for misreading your post as an assertion that they did.

 

[NAOS]

ok well then the answer to your earnest question is no, it doesn't appear either guy unnecessarily milked a minor injury. sorry for misreading your post as an assertion that they did.

ok.........
Again, I'm not asking whether they did or didn't actually milk an injury. But, I'm dropping it....

 

[northeast]

Nerd, you have proven nothing, lots of teams suffer injuries without getting a #1 pick.

 

[theNBAnerd]

Nerd, you have proven nothing, lots of teams suffer injuries without getting a #1 pick.

what was it i was supposed to prove? i was merely saying that the spurs landing duncan was the result of key injuries and a lack of depth, and not months of contrived tanking.

for what it's worth, they didn't even have the league's worst record that year. they finished 3rd worst with 20 wins (although they had the 2nd highest chance of getting the top pick, since 1st-worst vancouver was unable to get the top pick because of the expansion agreement). in other words, there was a 78.4% chance going into lotto night that the spurs would NOT have the opportunity to pick tim duncan.

 

[northeast]

just your opinion, doesn't prove they didn't tank

 

[theNBAnerd]

northeast, were you even alive during that season? they had a crappy roster when their only two star-level players were hurt.

here was their depth chart after robinson & elliott got hurt:

PG: avery johnson, corey alexander
SG: vinny del negro, vernon maxwell
SF: dominique wilkins, monty williams
PF: carl herrera, jamie feick
C: will perdue, greg anderson

 

[northeast]

its not that important...
you want to spend a week discussing the ability and motivation of every player on every team in the league that year?
I see some names on your roster that were not so bad.
I see about 4 guys with rings, plus an all time great.
were you the doctor examining the injuries?
when did the injuries occur?
isn't popovich the guy that some people here think could coach the worst team in the league to the playoffs?
you telling me Sloan wouldn't have had those guys fighting harder for an 8th place finish?
you 100% sure?
you sure the organization couldn't have picked up some free agents to help them out if they wanted to ?

no one knows for sure that could not have got a better record if they wanted to.
going from 2nd to 13th is a huge drop, even with 2 stars out.
It's unlikely that the team would have dropped so hard unless they lost some motivation to win.

Maybe the reason it seemed that they sucked so bad is that they tanked some.

 

[theNBAnerd]

again, if you watched the NBA that year, you would know that nique was not an "all-time great" at that point, and that guys like mad max and avery johnson were well past their primes. look at the starting frontcourt for hell's sake.

it's pointless to argue, though. you don't want to look at it within the context of what happened, so i won't bother you with facts anymore. believe what you will about the 1997 spurs. still doesn't change my opinion about what the jazz's goals should be this year.