Originally Posted by get these NETS
You didn't read me write that "admiral is a loser"...
I said that for all his physical tools, and he's THE most athletic center and one of the 10 most athletic nba players ever, drob lacked the super competitive nature that is found in almost ALL great players.
You could either read his quotes as being indicative of this lack of competitiveness OR you can see it as graciousness by an ex athlete who has moved on.
Admiral was an impossible cover...strong, guard-quick, agile, ..and he played on some balanced teams before the Duncan era started.
I'd have to look up the records..but I wanna say that for at least half his pre-duncan era...Spurs finished in top half of western conference playoff teams (1-4) ..and one team was lead by point guard Rod Strickland and coached by larry brown....that could have made more noise.....i also want to guess that spurs made at least one WCF before Duncan
Admiral just never exhibited the "extra something" that the great players have...call it selfishness, fire, spirit..whatever...he never did
as far as duncan's equal.....in regular season..d-rob at his peak plays about as well as anybody...but Duncan is the reason they won those rings....he didn't shrink in big moments..in playoffs
I don't think it was necessarily a matter of David Robinson shrinking in the playoffs because he lacked "it". As Owl mentioned, I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that if an opposing team wanted to focus all of their energy on stopping Robinson, victory was often going to rely upon how well his supporting cast played. And when that supporting cast is made up of Avery Johnson, Vinny Del Negro, Dennis Rodman, and Sean Elliott your team likely isn't going to keep defenses very honest.
Had Tim Duncan been running alongside Robinson during the 1995 playoffs, I'll venture to say it would have been a little bit easier for TD or Robinson to experience success, because one of those guys probably would have ended up matching up with Chucky Brown.
All that aside, I think Robinson's lack of "it" is wildly overstated. Using '95 once again as an example, Robinson's opponent in the Western Conference Finals went big, really
big. Hakeem Olajuwon dominated. He played excellent basketball and I don't think it was a matter of Robinson being horrible. It was just a matter of Hakeem being great (averaging 35 and 13 for the series). Robinson still played his heart out, averaging 24 and 11, but it obviously paled in comparison.
Still, folks often point the finger and say losses like the one San Antonio took in '95 were because Robinson was too nice, as if he didn't average 30, 16, and 4 in a tough six game series against the Lakers the series before. Sometimes things just don't work out.
Also, regarding the Strickland/Brown years, they lost in Game 7 of the Western Conference Semi-finals during Robinson's rookie year (in overtime, to eventual NBA Finalists Portland Trail Blazers). San Antonio was in control but it was Rod Strickland who had an ill-advised turnover and subsequent clear path foul that seemed to cost the Spurs the series (http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...layoff-hopes/)
And I think that's what Owl was referring to when he said it's not always a matter of certain players not having "it", as if Robinson's lack of "it" is what cost San Antonio that series. Instead, sometimes it's just a matter of things not going one way and instead heading the other. Had Strickland not attempted a behind the back pass in overtime of game 7 of the Western Conference Finals, what may have happened? Perhaps San Antonio emerges victorious? Perhaps they take out Phoenix in the WCF and have an opportunity to see the Bad Boys in the Finals? Of course, we'll never know.