Phil Jackson: Spurs are not a dynasty
While making his point Wednesday that he wants Carmelo Anthony to stick to his word about taking less money to help the Knicks build a stronger team, Jackson compared the situation to what Tim Duncan did with the San Antonio Spurs.
But Phil being Phil, he couldn’t just leave it at bringing up Duncan; he had to slight the Spurs.
“Tim Duncan making the salary he’s making after being part of a dynasty – not a dynasty, I wouldn’t call San Antonio a dynasty — a force, a great force,” Jackson said via Newsday. “They haven’t been able to win consecutive championships but they’ve always been there. San Antonio has had a wonderful run through Tim’s tenure there as a player. He’s agreed to take a salary cut so other players can play with him so they can be this good. And that’s the beginning of team play.”
Dang, I’m sorry, Phil, that the Spurs didn’t win back-to-back titles. But I’d say winning three championships in five seasons sure as heck qualifies as a dynasty. What more do you want? Not everyone was like your Bulls and Michael Jordan where they won three in a row two times, but three in five definitely qualifies as a dynasty.
Oh, what’s that, you say you want more?
The Spurs have not won fewer than 50 games (in a full season) or missed the playoffs since drafting Duncan in 1997. They have reached the NBA Finals five times and won four titles. They reached the conference finals three more times in that span.
Yeah, I don’t care what Phil says, that is definitely a dynasty.