Now that the first decade of the new millenium has come to a close in the NBA(2000-2009), who should hold the title of "Team of the Decade"?
Looking at the past 10 seasons, it is pretty clear that it comes down to the San Antonio Spurs and the Los Angeles Lakers. So let's compare how they did.
Overall regular season record- Spurs 576-244, Lakers 530-290
Finals appearances- Spurs 3, Lakers 6
NBA titles- Spurs 3, Lakers 4
Regular season confrence titles- Spurs 3, Lakers 3
Head 2 Head in playoff series- Spurs 1, Lakers 4
missed playoffs- Spurs 0, Lakers 1
eliminated 1st round- Spurs 2, Lakers 2
eliminated 2nd round- Spurs 3, Lakers 1
eliminated 3rd round- Spurs 2, Lakers 0
It looks very close. The Spurs never had a serous lapse like the Lakers did and missed the playoffs, so they get points for consistency. On the other hand, The Lakers won 1 more title, went to the Finals twice as many times and hold a 4-1 head to head matchup in the playoffs.
So who do you give it to?
The reason being he end result is everything and Lakers won more titles thus being more successful
I agree it was the Lakers, but I might be biased as a Laker fan. I brought this up because on another thread about the Spurs being boring, someone stated that it is very clear that the Spurs were the best team of the last decade, so I did some research.
Actually since we didn't start counting years at 0 AD the first decade of the new millenium would be 2001-2010. Take away 2000 and the Lakers have the same amount of championships as the Spurs (albeit with more final appearances). Still one more year left to decide the team of the decade!
It's been over an hour and i thought this would draw more debate. So far we just have one opinion and a guy who said Horry.
no, year 0 then year 1 was the second year. It's why they call the 80's 1980-1989, the 90's 1990-1999, the 2000's are 2000-2009.
ahh, my mistake. I thought it was decades were like milleniums.
In that case the Lakers were definitly the team of the decade; more championships, more finals appearances, better in head to head match ups.
I think this is easier because Head to Head Lakers owned them and they have more rings and will probably get at least one more ring this decade. Spurs on on their way out. Lakers missed the playoffs once and retooled so even when Kobe retires in like 6 or 7 years they will still have nice young talent to continue their dominance.
LOL. Lakers have Young Talent? Since when...Bynum doesn't seem like anything special to me, possibly 15 and 10, but I think he's overrated. Odom and Artest will go out with Fisher and Kobe. Gasol is the youngest of the bunch I believe and I think he's shown his team can't win if he's the Number 1 Option. Farmar, Brown, Walton, and Sasha aren't young talent. I think Morrison will turn things around, but i doubt Lakers keep him.
Fisher is the only old guy. Gasol, Odom, and Artest are all under 30. Kobe just turned 31 last month and he is in great shape and playing less minutes now so he can conserve himself. Bynum is a major difference maker if healthy. Brown, Farmar, Powell, Walton, Vujacic, Morrison are all still getting better and young. There is no reason to believe this Laker team couldn't compete at a high level for another 5 years. Fisher is the only guy on his way out, and he is not that important now.
Ron Artest and Lamar Odom both turn 30 this season in November...Pau and Luke Walton are 29. Kobe is 31.
From what I hear Farmar is on his way out of the Lakers after this season or the NBA and since when is Powell considered Young Talent? As I said, Morrison will probably be left out their team and why would he go back? He'll get no playing time...
I think they have 2 more years of competing...Bynum is the only young gun, but imo as I said, he doesn't seem like anything but an overrated young center to me...he can prove me wrong, but I'll stick with that. Also...if Sasha plays like he did last season then God Please Help Him...Shannon Brown has some Potential I guess, but I think he's best suited as a Backup.
2 more years of competing? So you think Kobe at 33 with a bunch of 30 and 31 year olds around them equals washed up? There is no sound reason to believe that Kobe can't play at high level until he is 34 or 35. And as long as he is playing at a high level and all the talent around him is even younger, then why do you think they will no longer be able to compete?
Lamar Odom and RonArtest will be 32 and Kobe will be 33 with Pau being 31...after they age one more year I don't see all playing at that same level besides Kobe and Pau...it's just my opinion. I could be wrong, but once that time comes I think they'll be out the Champ Picture because other teams will step up