PDA

View Full Version : Whats the argument against Duncan, as the greatest Bigman of All-Time?



Chronz
05-20-2013, 04:56 PM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

naps
05-20-2013, 05:16 PM
He's right up there but I don't think he can separate himself from them. 5 of the 6 you mentioned are in the top 10 all-time. That just goes to show how elite the bigmen have been throughout the league history.

slaker619
05-20-2013, 05:21 PM
He's deff one of the best, but not number one :o

Jtirado16
05-20-2013, 05:23 PM
He's in the top 10. I don't see him as one of the super elite you listed

JordansBulls
05-20-2013, 05:27 PM
You could make a serious case for him to be the top 5 for sure and possibly GOAT (since he would have not only led Tmac out of round 1, but gave him a title as well).

GrumpyOldMan
05-20-2013, 05:31 PM
He's right up there. Determining the best bigman of alltime is an argument that can be made for 5 or 6 guys. I think Duncan can be put on that list. I just don't see him as the best, but that again is simply my opinion.

Cromedome
05-20-2013, 05:33 PM
I need proof otherwise you're a liar and a troll.

Chronz
05-20-2013, 05:59 PM
I need proof otherwise you're a liar and a troll.

you dont get this thread at all. Im asking for the case against him, not making one.

But if you want me to make one, then how about you start by giving me your rankings. It doesn't have to be about all 7 since I know you hate those comparisons, but just players you've witnessed.

amos1er
05-20-2013, 06:03 PM
He would not do well in single match ups against the truly elite centers. Guess size matters in this case.

Twins Fanatic
05-20-2013, 06:06 PM
Definitely one of the greats. The level he is playing at for a big man at that age is unreal. He is the next guy after the six mentioned above, could be arguably better that Moses Malone.

Deezy3
05-20-2013, 06:08 PM
I'm not too sure a legit argument can be made against Duncan. No other big man has ever been as fundamentally sound as Duncan is. It's an art, and extremely interesting to watch. someone who just wants to watch for flashy plays will get bored fast though.

amos1er
05-20-2013, 06:14 PM
Pound or pound he has an argument, but I guess that can be said about any player at any position. It comes down to a size issue at the end of the day.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2013, 06:48 PM
Out of the 7 people you listed, he's...

Offense: 4th/5th
Defense: 3rd/4th
Winning: 3rd/4th
Longevity: 2nd/3rd

Chronz
05-20-2013, 07:12 PM
Out of the 7 people you listed, he's...

Offense: 4th/5th
Defense: 3rd/4th
Winning: 3rd/4th
Longevity: 2nd/3rd

Interesting that we have it around the same, hard to rate him ahead of this crew when hes not outstanding at any 1 of these aspects but his longevity sticks out the most and that can change an argument sometimes, I wonder how much left he has in him.

Chronz
05-20-2013, 07:20 PM
He would not do well in single match ups against the truly elite centers. Guess size matters in this case.
In what ways? Do you mean defensively? Wouldn't he cause as much problems offensively?

And take it more as a comparison between similar careers, Duncan was 7"1 and under almost any other circumstance would have been remember as a Center. He has the prerequisite size but I can see why he might be undersized in this comparison. 1 on 1 might be his biggest weakness with the group, but again, that wasn't Kareems strength either.

Chronz
05-20-2013, 07:22 PM
Pound or pound he has an argument, but I guess that can be said about any player at any position. It comes down to a size issue at the end of the day.

Kareem and Duncan have played at similar weights throughout their careers. Overall Duncan adapted to his league the same way the Cap did. Dont think this should be the determining factor at all.

SportsFanatic10
05-20-2013, 07:22 PM
You could make a serious case for him to be the top 5 for sure and possibly GOAT (since he would have not only led Tmac out of round 1, but gave him a title as well).

what kinda **** logic is that?

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2013, 07:30 PM
Interesting that we have it around the same, hard to rate him ahead of this crew when hes not outstanding at any 1 of these aspects but his longevity sticks out the most and that can change an argument sometimes, I wonder how much left he has in him.

He's going to retire in 1-2 years IMO. His longevity will not exceed Kareem (who is #1) so if he plays 1-2 years at a good level, he'll be #2. It was hard to rank his offense because while he has amazing fundamentals, you have 2 big men in the conversation who were just brute forces on offense who can force themselves to score over their opponents (Shaq and Wilt)

Sadds The Gr8
05-20-2013, 07:46 PM
are you talking about resume or just strictly on court? If it's just resume then I think he needs a couple more rings to be the absolute best.

Hawkeye15
05-20-2013, 07:48 PM
It's funny. We all rate him as the best PF, as you said. And we all have him top 10. But I honestly think Duncan may not get ENOUGH credit. He may very well be a top 5 player ever, but I highly doubt he ever makes most peoples top 5 list. I have him #7 or so all time, and I have him ahead of Russell out of that group, and I can see an argument for being ahead of Dream as well.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2013, 07:53 PM
It's funny. We all rate him as the best PF, as you said. And we all have him top 10. But I honestly think Duncan may not get ENOUGH credit. He may very well be a top 5 player ever, but I highly doubt he ever makes most peoples top 5 list. I have him #7 or so all time, and I have him ahead of Russell out of that group, and I can see an argument for being ahead of Dream as well.

A lot of people like flashiness. Most have Russell (rings), and Shaq (dominance) ahead of Duncan. Duncan doesn't have as much rings as Russell or as dominant as Shaq but when factoring rings, peak, longevity, defense, etc, you can rank him ahead of both of them.

b@llhog24
05-20-2013, 07:56 PM
He's better than Moses and Bill, that's for sure.

Supreme LA
05-20-2013, 08:40 PM
I guess the argument that could be made is he had Tony Parker, Pop, and a great FO. Duncan is still one of the best regardless.

Chronz
05-20-2013, 08:43 PM
are you talking about resume or just strictly on court? If it's just resume then I think he needs a couple more rings to be the absolute best.
Whatever your ultimate criteria for ranking a players achievements. Its so hard to narrowly define.

Hawkeye15
05-20-2013, 08:44 PM
A lot of people like flashiness. Most have Russell (rings), and Shaq (dominance) ahead of Duncan. Duncan doesn't have as much rings as Russell or as dominant as Shaq but when factoring rings, peak, longevity, defense, etc, you can rank him ahead of both of them.

I can't put Duncan ahead of Shaq. But I for sure have him ahead of Russell, probably Moses, and maybe Hakeem.

Sadds The Gr8
05-20-2013, 08:47 PM
Whatever your ultimate criteria for ranking a players achievements. Its so hard to narrowly define.

k then like I said resume wise he needs a couple more rings, but it's so hard to separate these guys because they were all so great. I'd have a hard time ranking them if we're talkin strictly on court

BKLYNpigeon
05-20-2013, 08:47 PM
The best of all time??? it depends who you ask...

But definitely not a clear cut #1 of all time.



sports fans love to relish the past.

amos1er
05-20-2013, 08:52 PM
In what ways? Do you mean defensively? Wouldn't he cause as much problems offensively?

And take it more as a comparison between similar careers, Duncan was 7"1 and under almost any other circumstance would have been remember as a Center. He has the prerequisite size but I can see why he might be undersized in this comparison. 1 on 1 might be his biggest weakness with the group, but again, that wasn't Kareems strength either.

One on one Shaq or Wilt would get the better of him. Kareem was weak at 1 on 1 too, but his longevity and career accomplishments out shine Duncan. Hakeem would be a closer debate.

amos1er
05-20-2013, 08:56 PM
A lot of people like flashiness. Most have Russell (rings), and Shaq (dominance) ahead of Duncan. Duncan doesn't have as much rings as Russell or as dominant as Shaq but when factoring rings, peak, longevity, defense, etc, you can rank him ahead of both of them.

I have Duncan ahead of Russell. Put Duncan on those old Celtic teams and they win 15 rings. lol

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2013, 10:26 PM
I can't put Duncan ahead of Shaq. But I for sure have him ahead of Russell, probably Moses, and maybe Hakeem.

Shaq and Duncan have always been interchangeable for me. Shaq was completely dominant but I feel Duncan is more well rounded and he has more accolades and intangibles. I wouldn't argue too much/at all if someone had Shaq over Duncan but when talking to more casual fans, they normally say Shaq is better mostly because of him being more flashy.

AntiG
05-20-2013, 10:40 PM
those that talk about Duncan's perceived "lack of size", just keep in mind listed heights are not usually the actual officially measured heights. Duncan measured in officially a couple inches taller than Russell and Hakeem.

Quinnsanity
05-20-2013, 10:43 PM
Kareem beats him in longevity, Shaq beats him in peak, Moses beats him at rebounding, Russell beats him at rings, Hakeem beats him at post moves, Wilt beats him in stats.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2013, 11:02 PM
Kareem beats him in longevity, Shaq beats him in peak, Moses beats him at rebounding, Russell beats him at rings, Hakeem beats him at post moves, Wilt beats him in stats.

Lol is this an argument against Duncan being the best big man of all time?

MR.TRIPDUB
05-20-2013, 11:46 PM
Id pick him 1st or at least 2nd but thats just me.

I think a case against him is he didnt have as much competition as the other guys did.

Sactown
05-20-2013, 11:52 PM
The only argument I see against him is the system, and it's a flimsy argument at best..

You could claim that Duncan has always played in a great system with the greatest coach and management. And with the supporting cast and play sets on defense and offense, he's given the opportunity to max out his production because of Pop

carlthack
05-21-2013, 12:15 AM
Duncan is indeed up there with those guys you mentioned. He has been superb both offensively and defensively in his illustrious career but if we're talking about the all-time greats then you cant say that TD's prime years were as dominant as Wilt's or KAJ or even Hakeem. Any of those 3 would consistently out-perform Duncan if they were against one another.

Avenged
05-21-2013, 12:19 AM
JB has the greatest point in here :laugh:

LongWayFromHome
05-21-2013, 12:35 AM
The only argument I see against him is the system, and it's a flimsy argument at best..

You could claim that Duncan has always played in a great system with the greatest coach and management. And with the supporting cast and play sets on defense and offense, he's given the opportunity to max out his production because of Pop

This is true...

But also true about:
-Kareem
-Russell
-Shaq

They all were put in outstanding situations.

IversonIsKrazy
05-21-2013, 01:08 AM
I believe there is no clear-cut #1 bigman. I mean u can make an argument for Shaq because of his dominance in his prime. Wilt because the guy scored 100 points. The Dream can be given an argument. Kareem for his hook. I wouldn't say Russell can be given an argument for GREATEST big man of all-time, one of them yes, but defs no #1. Duncan can also given an argument, possibly had the best overall career (in terms on late 30's, still getting 18/10 every night). Defs worth an argument, but overall, there isnt a clear-cut #1.

LongWayFromHome
05-21-2013, 01:14 AM
An argument in Duncan's favor would be that over the last decade rules have been made to severely hinder big men. The allowance of zone defense really hurt big man stats across the board. Only Shaq out of that group had to deal with that at all and only for the latter portion of his prime.

NoahH
05-21-2013, 01:31 AM
Arguably the second fiddle in 2007

Raps18-19 Champ
05-21-2013, 01:58 AM
The only argument I see against him is the system, and it's a flimsy argument at best..

You could claim that Duncan has always played in a great system with the greatest coach and management. And with the supporting cast and play sets on defense and offense, he's given the opportunity to max out his production because of Pop

All of the players listed have played with some great teammates, great management and great coaches.

ArmLaker
05-21-2013, 02:10 AM
1.KAJ
2.Wilt
3.Shaq
4.TD
5.Russell
6.Hakeem
7.Malone

When you average out skill, dominance, longevity, winning, def, off, impact etc etc, that list is what you get.

LongIslandIcedZ
05-21-2013, 02:33 AM
He just put up 21 and 12 per 36 minutes in what I believe to be his 15th season. His longevity is unbelievable. The guy is outstanding.

LongWayFromHome
05-21-2013, 02:34 AM
On paper:

Duncan is definitely ahead of Malone. PER, dWS, better defensive rebounder (though malone killed the offensive boards), playoff performances, Defensive abilities in general, offensive efficiency all go to Duncan. And of course honors, chips, etc.

Hakeem had no help and an unbelievable prime. I just have a hard time putting Duncan ahead of him. He was so amazing in those back-to-backs. PS - just for fun I noticed that in 87-88 playoffs the rockets lost to the Mavs 3 games to 1. Hakeem had a PER of 39 and had 1.3 WS when his team only won 1 game lol.

I would put Duncan ahead of Russell as well. But Shaq, KAJ, Hakeem beat him in my book with Wilt being on the fence.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2013, 03:06 AM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

This is all about circumstances. I think if you would of switched Robinson's and Duncan's career, then we'd be talking about David. IMO Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson, Moses, Duncan, KAJ, and Wilt are the best of all time. I think that on any given day the one could get the best of the other. I'd say Shaq would probably end up getting the best of everyone slightly more. Shaq is my number 1. After that, I'd say they are all pretty even. If I had to write down who were the best, I'd first say that only a molecule separates them but here we go.

Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
Robinson
KAJ
Wilt
Moses

I know this won't be a popular list, but I think that if all these guys played in the same Era in there primes, this is how it would go down. I'd probably put Patrick and for sure KG ahead of Russell using this way of thinking.

IKnowHoops
05-21-2013, 03:18 AM
He would not do well in single match ups against the truly elite centers. Guess size matters in this case.

Go watch the series between the spurs and the Lakers in 99 when the spurs won the chip. The spurs swept the lakers and Duncan guarded Shaq one on one much of the time, and outplayed him. Duncan played shaq better one on one than any other player Ive ever seen from a statistical and film point of view. Unlike when the Dream outplayed shaq, yet shaq was statistically better. Still don't quite get that one. But anyway saying Duncan would not do well when he has already outplayed Shaq, makes your statement wrong.

tredigs
05-21-2013, 03:33 AM
Arguably the second fiddle in 2007

Huh? To who - Manu or TP? Both were miles behind Duncan in impact, but I guess you mean TP based on the Finals performance (Timmy was the overwhelming #1 in the playoffs overall). I'd say Manu was the 2nd best on the team, though. At either rate, Duncan was the best defensive player in the league and a beast on the glass + offensively as well.

tredigs
05-21-2013, 03:53 AM
It's crazy that Duncan has no DPOY awards despite - in his rookie year - already being the best defensive player in the league. Definitely been a top 1-4 defender at least 8 seasons. Possibly 10 to 12. Hell he lead the league in Defensive rating THIS season.

He never lead the league in blocks, though. That's definitely what generates the most votes.

Shlumpledink
05-21-2013, 05:11 AM
Offense: KAJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Moses
Defense: Hakeem, Duncan, KAJ, Shaq, Moses
Winning: KAJ, Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Moses
Longevity: Kaj, Duncan, Moses, Shaq, Hakeem
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

I find it really hard to comment on russell and wilt, since they're before my time and i never saw them play. I saw a little bit of wilt, but he was past his prime by then.

To answer the topic, I haven't read much in here so I'm sorry if its redundant. The biggest knock for me against Duncan, is that he has had a great supporting cast throughout his career. his first championship he still had david robinson, who was playing good defense and getting 15/10 in a lockout shortened season. Then he has been playing with two future hall of famers in ginobili and tony parker, bruce bowen who should have had at least one defensive player of the year award.

His second championship is the most legit, he really beasted, but the next one he leaned on tony parker and manu a lot, and the next one was the three of them together with Michael Finley, who hadn't fallen off the face of the earth just yet.

Also, there is a dearth of quality big men in the game today. I would argue that Hakeem Olajuwon's era was the best era for bigmen in basketball, going up against Oakley/Parish/Robinson/Rodman/Mutumbo/Shaq/Malone/Ewing/Eaton/Smits/Nance, and probably a few more I missed that were quality big men.

Today Duncan is playing center, and we struggle to come up with quality bigmen. I can't think of marc gasol being the defensive player of the year in the era that any of the players listed played in.

Shlumpledink
05-21-2013, 05:15 AM
I would just like to say, that Hakeem Olajuwon was the superior two-way player. Some may even argue Kareem Abdul Jabaar, he was very underrated defensively, and he is probably the best all time offensively at the center position. I would put Hakeem as the greatest all time defensively, and Kareem Abdul Jabaar probably 5th or 6th. Offensively I would put Hakeem 2nd or 3rd offensively all time.

Patman
05-21-2013, 06:01 AM
It's crazy that Duncan has no DPOY awards despite - in his rookie year - already being the best defensive player in the league. Definitely been a top 1-4 defender at least 8 seasons. Possibly 10 to 12. Hell he lead the league in Defensive rating THIS season.

He never lead the league in blocks, though. That's definitely what generates the most votes.

I honestly think his 2003 run is underrated now, take a closer look at that team and you see that he had no one that was really on an Allstar level. Robinson was nearly done, he wasn't bad but could only contribute in limited spurts, Tony was nowhere near what he would become (14PTS on 14.7 FGA!, 3.5 AST), Manu was a rookie. The most reliable players outside Duncan were probably Jackson and Bowen. Don't get me wrong that team was well put together and a very very good defensive Team, but Duncan really carried that Team.

Yeah but he holds the record for most blocks in a Finals Series ;) . I really wanted him to win the DPOY this year just because it's laughable that he never won the award during his peak.

Where does he Rank? I don't know I would have him infront of Russel and Moses, but after that it gets muddy and I think you could interchange nearly all of them depending on the criteria applied. I'm also not a big fan of ranking players of different eras.

PhillyFaninLA
05-21-2013, 07:35 AM
If I could take any big of all time I'd take the following above all others:

Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem (order does not matter but Wilt and Kareem over Hakeem)

I don't know enough about Russell to really assess how he good he actually was.

Duncan, Shaq, Garnett, Robinson are in that next group to me.

MTar786
05-21-2013, 07:47 AM
since we're talking about duncan making the switch from pf to being discussed as one of the big men.. maybe we should give kg some credit in the best pf department. I dont understand how kg always gets ignored when it comes to these things. he was pretty much duncans equal throughout their careers. howcome he doesnt get to be best pf of all time (after duncan) I see people saying malone and barkley are better... ummm no

kg was easily a better defender, passer and all around player than either of them. malone had the scoring and longevity, and barkley had the scoring and rebounding. kg has a lot more to offer.

and to stay on topic.. i would say duncan is better than moses malone.. but not better than any of the others.. its hard to compare him to russel and wilt. id say hes better than they are too.. but saying any big man is better than russel and wilt is pretty much basketball taboo these days.
my list

1)shaq
2)KAJ
3)hakeem
4)duncan
5)wilt
6)russel
7)malone

Hangtime
05-21-2013, 12:13 PM
What Duncan continues to do at this stage in his career is incredible. Ranking all time center position is probably the hardest because each of these guys were vastly different players in style, strength, longevity, peak, offense, defense, and accomplishments.

Of all these guys Wilt and Shaq are probably the most easiest to compare directly. Most dominant of the entire group. Kareem's longevity was just as impressive spanning across different eras. All time leading scorer. Russell's defense and rebounding set the standard. Hakeem was the greatest all around center I ever witnessed and did more with less out of all these guys. Moses as great as he was would rank last out of this group of guys.

I have Duncan ahead of Moses and slightly over Russell but as of now tied with Hakeem. Duncan was a better all around player than Shaq and could score away from the basket. A much better defender over Shaq over long span of his career. If you were to plug Duncan on those Lakers teams, I think you get the same result. Imagine Timmy having Kobe and Phil and that great supporting cast. They may even last longer as a dynasty.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-21-2013, 12:19 PM
JB has the greatest point in here :laugh:

I laughed for 3 minutes straight when I read that.

flea
05-21-2013, 12:20 PM
1. Hakeem
2. KAJ
3/4. Shaq/Duncan (I think they're about equal when you consider Duncan's longevity)
5. Wilt
6. Malone
7. Russell

Hangtime
05-21-2013, 12:30 PM
I know I have guys who excelled more at certain things or accomplished more during their great careers at the top of my list but I have a great deal of respect for the all around guys like Hakeem and Tim. It's such a valuable commodity to get offense, defense, rebounding, passing, leadership, and intelligence of the game out of my big man. Shaq may have been a brute down low and that is very rare, But Tim and Hakeem were so versatile on offense and defense. You couldn't ask for more out of your center.

LongWayFromHome
05-21-2013, 12:42 PM
Duncan is so stinkin awesome

This year he posted his best FT%, 5th best PTS/36, 3rd highest REB/36, highest Defensive REB/36 (by 0.7!), highest BLK/36 (by 0.4!), best DRB%, 3rd highest TRB%, highest BLK%

And this all from a comparing him to himself in a stacked career!

Any reason to think he can't keep this up for another 3-4 years?

Chronz
05-21-2013, 12:50 PM
I know, the guys nutrisystem regimen has reopened the conversation about his career IMO. I actually think I might have to put him ahead of Shaq after this post season.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-21-2013, 12:54 PM
Duncan is so stinkin awesome

This year he posted his best FT%, 5th best PTS/36, 3rd highest REB/36, highest Defensive REB/36 (by 0.7!), highest BLK/36 (by 0.4!), best DRB%, 3rd highest TRB%, highest BLK%

And this all from a comparing him to himself in a stacked career!

Any reason to think he can't keep this up for another 3-4 years?

Do you not remember the three years of average stats before this year?

kdspurman
05-21-2013, 01:05 PM
Do you not remember the three years of average stats before this year?

The knee injury was evident fwiw... Not necessary last year but the 2 years prior.

Chronz
05-21-2013, 01:30 PM
Do you not remember the three years of average stats before this year?
Thats the sobering truth isnt it..... whenever old players have a resurgent year, the next year brings the inevitable decline.

the avenger
05-21-2013, 01:30 PM
How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense: TD has never been an elite scorer, can't compare to Moses, Wilt, Shaq, Kareem and Hakeem. Mediocre FG% and off rebounding.
Defense: almost elite, but a little overrated I guess. Not in the same category as Russell and Hakeem.
Winning: elite... Made the playoffs every year and won 4 titles. Need I say more?
Longevity: ok, stats are hardly declining. But then again, his stats were never that impressive.


Overall: 6th
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

Reply!

LongWayFromHome
05-21-2013, 01:45 PM
Do you not remember the three years of average stats before this year?

By per 36 and advanced stats the previous 2 years weren't very different and three years ago he was better than this year. But I didn't mean he would have 3-4 more years of this very elite season but rather 3-4 years of doing what he does.

bagwell368
05-21-2013, 02:43 PM
k then like I said resume wise he needs a couple more rings, but it's so hard to separate these guys because they were all so great. I'd have a hard time ranking them if we're talkin strictly on court

Duncan's 4 were harder to earn than Russell's 11.

bagwell368
05-21-2013, 02:57 PM
The holy 6 are Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

Russell was as I have written given the greatest placement in the history of an NBA player. Played for the best Coach, best GM, had as many as 5 OTHER HOF'ers on his team at the same time and usually 3 or 4. The Celts led the NBA in SRS 9 times in his 13 years, and were 2nd 3 times. No other player has had that. And while Russell was the single key player, that was a time and a team that was truly a team. Not like the post 1985 era when title teams can and do have one cosmic star, with two other guys in the 10-25 range, and a pile of role players.

For instance put Russell on the Pistons in his rookie year and give me his title count - right - zero. Duncan is clearly greater than Russell. His 4 titles were harder to earn than Russell's 11.

Moses was a nasty tough guy that was KAJ's kryptonite but he would have bounced off of Shaq and Wilt with no sign of damage. Duncan is greater then Moses, except offensive glass and sheer nastiness.

Peak Wilt crucifies Duncan, but, Duncan always showed up, and Wilt often lost interest, and certainly shot way too much early on, and not enough later. The 1966-67 version however... forget Duncan vs that.

I'll have to add KG since he's the current match - so out of 8:

Offense: 4
Defense: 4, might get to 3
Winning: hard to call, they all won a fair amount when they should have. Hakeem and Moses are probably the two that won with teams that shouldn't have won. Could be as high as #3. Pass.
Longevity: 4 right now, but could be #2, doubt he'll get to KAJ land.

Duncan's on my all time team as a PF. That's not bad.

Shlumpledink
05-21-2013, 03:00 PM
Russell was as I have written given the greatest placement in the history of an NBA player. Played for the best Coach, best GM, had as many as 5 OTHER HOF'ers on his team at the same time and usually 3 or 4. The Celts led the NBA in SRS 9 times in his 13 years, and were 2nd 3 times. No other player has had that. And while Russell was the single key player, that was a time and a team that was truly a team. Not like the post 1985 era when title teams can and do have one cosmic star, with two other guys in the 10-25 range, and a pile of role players.

For instance put Russell on the Pistons in his rookie year and give me his title count - right - zero. Duncan is clearly greater than Russell.

Moses was a nasty tough guy that was KAJ's kryptonite but he would have bounced off of Shaq and Wilt with no sign of damage. Duncan is greater then Moses.

Peak Wilt crucifies Duncan, but, Duncan always showed up, and Wilt often lost interest, and certainly shot way too much early on, and not enough later. The 1966-67 version however... forget Duncan vs that.

I'll have to add KG since he's clearly equal/better than Duncan at some things - so out of 8:

Offense: 4
Defense: 4, might get to 3
Winning: hard to call, they all won a fair amount when they should have. Hakeem and Moses are probably the two that won with teams that shouldn't have won. Could be as high as #3. Pass.
Longevity: 4 right now, but could be #2, doubt he'll get to KAJ land.

That's true, Russell played when players didn't leave through free agency. His team was stacked, and was there for good, of course he wins 11. Should have won more too.

PatsSoxKnicks
05-21-2013, 06:35 PM
Duncan's 4 were harder to earn than Russell's 11.

Agreed. Personally, I think Russell is overrated and I'm not even sure that he's better than the Admiral. Definitely think Duncan is better than Russell.

Anyways, I'm sure some Russell lovers will flame me for that statement

bagwell368
05-21-2013, 09:07 PM
Agreed. Personally, I think Russell is overrated and I'm not even sure that he's better than the Admiral. Definitely think Duncan is better than Russell.

Anyways, I'm sure some Russell lovers will flame me for that statement

Robinson is easily better then Russell. As soon as you peel away the myth, and NBA with two and then three rounds of playoffs, and 7 or 8 other teams most of his career, and NO convincing consistent rival (forget the Lakers, the West was much weaker then the East - only in the last couple of years were the Lakers any match at all)).

Plus Russell was a weak offensive player even before Wilt showed up with a dinky 12' wide lane and only 3 players at or over 6' 8" to play against. By 1965 every NBA team had a big capable or great Center, and the lane went to 16' feet to combat Wilt and Russell's offense was still put backs, 3 foot hooks, and lay-ups. His passing got very good after Cousy retired, and he was a top offensive rebounder, but, he couldn't carry a team on his back unless they could score because he couldn't score. In his career because of his crappy FT% he actually shot less than the average player of his era (a poor shooting era, and with his bunny FGA's it's actually pathetic).

I'll tell you what, I'd take these guys for what they did for their team, or their peak over Russell:

Pettit (did more for his team than than Russell did for the C's, his team just wasn't as good, one year #1 SRS, and they won the title over the Celts and Russell)

KG
McHale
Ewing
Sikma

and I'd strongly consider:

K. Malone
Dirk

BTW, I've been a Celt fan since '66 growing up less then 10 miles from the Garden with Coaches that loved Russell. I was as steeped in him as anyone here, and I'm telling you, in order to keep Russell in the top 10 you have to overplay the titles. On his own he does not stand up in this group.

Sadds The Gr8
05-21-2013, 10:14 PM
Duncan's 4 were harder to earn than Russell's 11.

Definitely, but I think to assure him as the absolute best big man resume-wise, he'd need 5 or 6 rings.

jam
05-22-2013, 04:02 AM
1. The eyeball test. Dude is boring as ---- to watch play.

2. He was never the best in any one area. He never led the league in scoring, rebounding, field goal percentage, or blocked shots. He never averaged 3 bpg, never averaged over 13 rpg, averaged 25 ppg once, but never averaged over 24 ppg in any other season.

3. He lacked the freaky athleticism and/or physique of the others listed (Moses was an exception). Terrible vertical, slow, not esp. graceful.

4. He's always been blessed with exceptionally talented, yet extremely unselfish teammates and an amazing coach and front office. We don't know how or if, he could have elevated inferior teammates.

I've never been a tim duncan fan. The majority of nba fans and casual sports fans could care less about tim duncan. He's always been a ratings dud, year in, year out whenever they advance to the WC or NBA finals.


TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

jam
05-22-2013, 04:04 AM
Duncan will never be regarded as the greatest big of all time. It's just ridiculous to even consider him even remotely close to that status.

The posters on this forum are either too dimwitted or too young to remember that KAJ scored 38K points, and was averaging nearly 24 ppg when he was in his late thirties.

Let's just end the stupidity now.



Definitely, but I think to assure him as the absolute best big man resume-wise, he'd need 5 or 6 rings.

bagwell368
05-22-2013, 06:24 AM
1. The eyeball test. Dude is boring as ---- to watch play.

2. He was never the best in any one area. He never led the league in scoring, rebounding, field goal percentage, or blocked shots. He never averaged 3 bpg, never averaged over 13 rpg, averaged 25 ppg once, but never averaged over 24 ppg in any other season.

3. He lacked the freaky athleticism and/or physique of the others listed (Moses was an exception). Terrible vertical, slow, not esp. graceful.

4. He's always been blessed with exceptionally talented, yet extremely unselfish teammates and an amazing coach and front office. We don't know how or if, he could have elevated inferior teammates.

I've never been a tim duncan fan. The majority of nba fans and casual sports fans could care less about tim duncan. He's always been a ratings dud, year in, year out whenever they advance to the WC or NBA finals.

I'm a fan, but I generally agree with you. The other factor is that with all the teams in the NBA, and the absolute drop in Center play during his career, and the fact that at best, there were at most 5-6 really good/great #4's at any given time. What that all means is that Duncan and KG earned their bones in a lesser env. than earlier guys like Hakeem who may have played in the strongest period for Centers in NBA history. Robinson, Shaq, Ewing obviously right there. KAJ is another one that had a pretty easy ride. Russell and Wilt from about '62 to '69 had some pretty tough match-ups on almost a game by game basis. So if we add a category "strength" of opponents I'd nominate TD, KG, and KAJ for the bottom 3 slots.

bagwell368
05-22-2013, 06:43 AM
Duncan will never be regarded as the greatest big of all time. It's just ridiculous to even consider him even remotely close to that status.

The posters on this forum are either too dimwitted or too young to remember that KAJ scored 38K points, and was averaging nearly 24 ppg when he was in his late thirties.

Let's just end the stupidity now.

But this old timer doesn't forget the ABA weakened NBA without Russell, and after a couple of years w/o Wilt was a very very easy env for KAJ to put up his points. Later he played on one of the great dynasties of all time and didn't have to carry the offense. And oh BTW, Moses Malones place on this list is largely due to the terrible beatings he laid on KAJ - is it two would be NBA championships were lost by the Lakers because KAJ couldn't come up with anything vs MM?

1981 a 40-42 Rockets team beat the Lakers (54 wins) in the 1st round behind MM
1983 the 76'ers beat the Lakers 4-0 (58 wins) - out rebounding KAJ by about 10 a game

If Malone with his body could bully KAJ like that how would Shaq do? If Hakeem could run 1 man fast breaks on the '86 Celts and Parish so easily in the Finals, what would Hakeem do to KAJ when Parish routinely would get 2-3 break away layups on Jabbar every game?

This old guy thinks KAJ should be #1 too, but I can never write his name in because he's too flawed. I don't think there is a big man GOAT, but if I was forced to name one and I didn't know which Center or what team(s) we'd have to face, I'd take Hakeem, the best all around (not dominant) big of all time. He wins because all the others have too many flaws.

Wilt, Russell, Shaq - FT%
Russell - offense - limited, low % FG - awful given competition
KAJ - too easy to beat up by tough Centers (even Cowens when healthy gave Jabbar a terrible time at 6' 9"), weak competition 1st half of career. When Wilt was still in shape in '69-'71 he game KAJ a tough time
DRob - inadequate low post game, good all around, tough to overlook the beating Hakeem gave him
KG - not a true Center, didn't go low post enough (although he was effective), great D at the #5 against the non body guys
TD - excellent all around player, weak competition, not dominant
Wilt - too erratic
Moses - lunch pail player of this group, tough but limited
Shaq - stopped playing D too early in career, limited offensive arsenal (very effective however)

Hakeem - was moody at times, didn't age well. But in his prime was enough of a force to make his team relevant and win 2 titles with casts weaker than every guy listed that won a title - except maybe the 68 and 69 Celts - maybe - and Russell was no longer the leader of that crew in terms of play. One of the best 3 low post bigs of all time. Nice mid range jumper. Athletic and dominant on D, faced as I said probably the toughest group of Centers ever faced by any Center in NBA history. Wins by virtue of being the last man standing.

Patman
05-22-2013, 07:49 AM
Why do people act like that 2003 didn't exist and Manu/TP/Robinson were apperantly All star level players in that year....... Honestly it gets on my nerves. Not one player on that squad was close to an All Star, Duncan put up an absolutely domanating performance or that's what I would call 24.7/15.3/5.3/3.3, Duncan is the only one to reach 24/15/5/3, even if we ignore Assists there still only KAJ and Moses, to be fair to KAJ he scored an insane 34 per game.

Duncan wasn't an uber athlete but look at his peak the guy was really really agile, his lateral movement was very good for a guy his size.

We also could also throw all bigs out that played before the abolishment of Illigal Defense, because that was an easy environment for a Post Up big.

DenButsu
05-22-2013, 08:09 AM
Interesting that we have it around the same, hard to rate him ahead of this crew when hes not outstanding at any 1 of these aspects but his longevity sticks out the most and that can change an argument sometimes, I wonder how much left he has in him.

Yeah, every time it seems like everyone is about to write him off he comes back out and surprises again, and this season has been especially impressive. If the Spurs win the WCF and go on to beat the Heat, and he has a big Finals series, it'll be hard to count him out of the top 5 at least, considering the unlikelihood of that happening, and his consistency in winning with fundamentals in an NBA era where the athleticism he lacks is increasingly important. Unseating LeBron and "stealing" a ring would be a big deal.

kdspurman
05-22-2013, 08:26 AM
Not that this has any bearings on this argument, but I guess it's a stat worth noting here. Duncan is the first player in NBA history to record 500 blocks in the post season.

BklynKnicks3
05-22-2013, 10:05 AM
Barkley was the best pf i ever seen. Duncan 2nd

blahblahyoutoo
05-22-2013, 10:19 AM
I would just like to say, that Hakeem Olajuwon was the superior two-way player. Some may even argue Kareem Abdul Jabaar, he was very underrated defensively, and he is probably the best all time offensively at the center position. I would put Hakeem as the greatest all time defensively, and Kareem Abdul Jabaar probably 5th or 6th. Offensively I would put Hakeem 2nd or 3rd offensively all time.

yup, hakeem is superbly underrated.
his offensive skillset is leaps and bounds above any of the big men today and of his era.

blahblahyoutoo
05-22-2013, 10:25 AM
Not that this has any bearings on this argument, but I guess it's a stat worth noting here. Duncan is the first player in NBA history to record 500 blocks in the post season.

that goes under longevity and being in the playoffs year in and year out.

ColtsSpursTerps
05-22-2013, 10:26 AM
A lot of people like flashiness. Most have Russell (rings), and Shaq (dominance) ahead of Duncan. Duncan doesn't have as much rings as Russell or as dominant as Shaq but when factoring rings, peak, longevity, defense, etc, you can rank him ahead of both of them.

this. One poster said Duncan would be inferior as far as 1-on-1, which is true. too bad basketball is a team game. and Duncan affects the team game of basketball with the best of em

bagwell368
05-22-2013, 10:45 AM
Barkley was the best pf i ever seen. Duncan 2nd

And of the guys with any claim at the title he has easily the worst D. McHale used to give him a very tough time - including the 1985 ECF where McHale dominated Barkley badly. Since McHale on D is similar to this group: Hakeem, KG, Wilt, Russell, DRob and TD, I see Barkley's offense as suppressed by this level of player, and his D was going to be even more exposed than the average player he faced (not including Russell).

Verdict: no chance, TD and KG are 1/2 or 2/1. Pettit, CB, Malone, Dirk, McHale can battle it out for the next 5 spots.

bagwell368
05-22-2013, 10:47 AM
that goes under longevity and being in the playoffs year in and year out.

And Russell and Wilt not having blocks tallied. Russell in particular would have dwarfed this number.

In 145 playoff games Hakeem averaged 3.3 BPG, in 202 TD has 2.5 -that 75.8% as much as Hakeem per game.... please. DRbo had 2.5 as well. Hakeem, Wilt, and Russell at least - all better.

JordansBulls
05-22-2013, 11:36 AM
Barkley was the best pf i ever seen. Duncan 2nd

Offensively yes.

LongWayFromHome
05-22-2013, 11:49 AM
Why do people act like that 2003 didn't exist and Manu/TP/Robinson were apperantly All star level players in that year....... Honestly it gets on my nerves. Not one player on that squad was close to an All Star, Duncan put up an absolutely domanating performance or that's what I would call 24.7/15.3/5.3/3.3, Duncan is the only one to reach 24/15/5/3, even if we ignore Assists there still only KAJ and Moses, to be fair to KAJ he scored an insane 34 per game.

Duncan wasn't an uber athlete but look at his peak the guy was really really agile, his lateral movement was very good for a guy his size.

We also could also throw all bigs out that played before the abolishment of Illigal Defense, because that was an easy environment for a Post Up big.

:clap:

JordansBulls
05-22-2013, 01:05 PM
Why do people act like that 2003 didn't exist and Manu/TP/Robinson were apperantly All star level players in that year....... Honestly it gets on my nerves. Not one player on that squad was close to an All Star, Duncan put up an absolutely domanating performance or that's what I would call 24.7/15.3/5.3/3.3, Duncan is the only one to reach 24/15/5/3, even if we ignore Assists there still only KAJ and Moses, to be fair to KAJ he scored an insane 34 per game.

Duncan wasn't an uber athlete but look at his peak the guy was really really agile, his lateral movement was very good for a guy his size.

We also could also throw all bigs out that played before the abolishment of Illigal Defense, because that was an easy environment for a Post Up big.

Same thing with the 1991 and 1998 Bulls where they had 1 star and the 2011 Mavs.

Chronz
05-22-2013, 01:40 PM
Same thing with the 1991 and 1998 Bulls where they had 1 star and the 2011 Mavs.
Same, how?

JordansBulls
05-22-2013, 02:31 PM
Same, how?

Duncan was the only allstar on the 2003 Spurs the same as MJ was on the 1991 and 1998 Bulls and Dirk on the 2011 Mavs.

tredigs
05-22-2013, 04:01 PM
Duncan was the only allstar on the 2003 Spurs the same as MJ was on the 1991 and 1998 Bulls and Dirk on the 2011 Mavs.

What do you value more - the production level of a player in X year or whether or not he made the All Star team in that season? Based on your posts over the past few years, this is serious question.

Chronz
05-22-2013, 04:01 PM
Duncan was the only allstar on the 2003 Spurs the same as MJ was on the 1991 and 1998 Bulls and Dirk on the 2011 Mavs.
Pippen was All-NBA in 98 tho, so thats technically better than All-Star....

Seriously tho, again with this? What picture are you trying to paint for MJ here?

Keep in mind Pippen was an All-Star the year prior and IMPROVED as a player the following year. Would you rather have the All-Star or the improved player?

JordansBulls
05-22-2013, 04:24 PM
Pippen was All-NBA in 98 tho, so thats technically better than All-Star....

Seriously tho, again with this? What picture are you trying to paint for MJ here?

Keep in mind Pippen was an All-Star the year prior and IMPROVED as a player the following year. Would you rather have the All-Star or the improved player?

Parker and Manu were allstars as well and so was DRob not to mention Kidd was an allstar the season before as well and so was Thorpe on the Rockets in 1992. It that line of thinking is going to apply with MJ then it gotta apply with the others as well.

Chronz
05-22-2013, 04:29 PM
Parker and Manu were allstars as well and so was DRob not to mention Kidd was an allstar the season before as well and so was Thorpe on the Rockets in 1992. It that line of thinking is going to apply with MJ then it gotta apply with the others as well.
Difference being that Pippen got BETTER and Kidd was DECLINING. But of course we consider all achievements, why would just making the All-Star game be anything worthy of note?

Bruno
05-22-2013, 04:40 PM
Duncan was the only allstar on the 2003 Spurs the same as MJ was on the 1991 and 1998 Bulls and Dirk on the 2011 Mavs.

but go look at playoff numbers from Pippen in 1991. does it even matter if he wasn't an all-star? i mean its a cool fun-fact JB but we gotta look at his production, don't you think? he was dominant in his own right, all-star selection or not.

Dirk and Duncan might have not had all-star those years but their supporting casts were still filled with either past or future all-stars who combined to be dominant.

Lakersfan2483
05-22-2013, 06:01 PM
Same thing with the 1991 and 1998 Bulls where they had 1 star and the 2011 Mavs.

Come on JB, that's laughable right there and total disrespect to Scottie Pippen. Whether or not he was an all star selection is irrelevant and you know it. Pippen was an all nba player and an elite player at that. It seems like you go out of your way to discredit Pippen and that Bulls squad to make your case for Jordan look better.

Lakersfan2483
05-22-2013, 06:03 PM
but go look at playoff numbers from Pippen in 1991. does it even matter if he wasn't an all-star? i mean its a cool fun-fact JB but we gotta look at his production, don't you think? he was dominant in his own right, all-star selection or not.

Dirk and Duncan might have not had all-star those years but their supporting casts were still filled with either past or future all-stars who combined to be dominant.

This. Thank you. Scottie Pippen was clearly one of the best players in the NBA during both years he mentioned and is a hall of famer. Makes absolutely zero sense to discredit him.

Lakersfan2483
05-22-2013, 06:05 PM
Pippen was All-NBA in 98 tho, so thats technically better than All-Star....

Seriously tho, again with this? What picture are you trying to paint for MJ here?

Keep in mind Pippen was an All-Star the year prior and IMPROVED as a player the following year. Would you rather have the All-Star or the improved player?

Bingo

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 03:22 AM
yup, hakeem is superbly underrated.
his offensive skillset is leaps and bounds above any of the big men today and of his era.

And even with that skill set David Robinson averaged more points on higher efficiency through there prime years.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 03:36 AM
David Robinson is what would of happened to Lebron had he stayed on the Cavs. Total and complete underrating.

JordansBulls
05-23-2013, 08:29 AM
Come on JB, that's laughable right there and total disrespect to Scottie Pippen. Whether or not he was an all star selection is irrelevant and you know it. Pippen was an all nba player and an elite player at that. It seems like you go out of your way to discredit Pippen and that Bulls squad to make your case for Jordan look better.

I'm not saying he wasn't. I am saying if you could say David Robinson, Tony Parker and Manu were not allstars in 2003, then why can't the same be applied to Jason Kidd in 2011, Shawn Marion in 2011 or Scottie Pippen in 1991 or 1998?

Simmo
05-23-2013, 08:36 AM
David Robinson is what would of happened to Lebron had he stayed on the Cavs. Total and complete underrating.

good point although, I suspect LBJ has it over the Admiral.

Plague
05-23-2013, 11:13 AM
I seen 4 of the 6 listed. I am using the eye test as my judge I think the only one I would say Duncan is better than is Moses Malone. Malone was not that great of a defensive center and he was also the master of racking up rebounds off his own misses.

That 76er team that Malone played on was stacked, they Sixers won 58 games the season before Malone joined them. If Malone was a true stud those Rocket teams would of performed much better than they did. I think Malone was a top notch player, but he was not in the elite class of guys like Jabbar, Wilt, and Shaq.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 12:14 PM
And even with that skill set David Robinson averaged more points on higher efficiency through there prime years.

Because Hakeem had much stronger teams and less pressure on him than DRob... oh wait, it was the other way around.

Of course there is the head to head which even outside of the pathetic MVP year beatdown DRrob suffered at Hakeems hands (and he did and has suffered over it) Hakeem had the edge.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 12:16 PM
I seen 4 of the 6 listed. I am using the eye test as my judge I think the only one I would say Duncan is better than is Moses Malone. Malone was not that great of a defensive center and he was also the master of racking up rebounds off his own misses.

That 76er team that Malone played on was stacked, they Sixers won 58 games the season before Malone joined them. If Malone was a true stud those Rocket teams would of performed much better than they did. I think Malone was a top notch player, but he was not in the elite class of guys like Jabbar, Wilt, and Shaq.

His Houston teams were weak, check out the '81 team, please. Also and to his credit he made KAJ his private beach once he got his feet wet in the league. Still, I have to agree that Malone is at the back end of that very heavy duty stack.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 12:47 PM
Because Hakeem had much stronger teams and less pressure on him than DRob... oh wait, it was the other way around.

Of course there is the head to head which even outside of the pathetic MVP year beatdown DRrob suffered at Hakeems hands (and he did and has suffered over it) Hakeem had the edge.

Yeah, Hakeem will always have that one playoff series. There Head to head is tie statistically through there career. Hakeems playoff stats were better. David's regular season stats were better. I like David better, although I have no problem saying that Hakeem was better. Prime for prime I'll take David personally. Against everyone else, David was better pretty much every year during the regular season, and David's advanced stats destroy hakeems. Its not even close. David has the larger sample size of superior play.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 12:53 PM
good point although, I suspect LBJ has it over the Admiral.

I agree 1000% but David was better than Moses Malone and Bill Russell. His advanced stats are better than everyones accept Shaq.

I truly believe had David had Popavich and championship level talent on his team through his whole career, many people may have him as high as the G.O.A.T big man.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 01:01 PM
Because Hakeem had much stronger teams and less pressure on him than DRob... oh wait, it was the other way around.

Of course there is the head to head which even outside of the pathetic MVP year beatdown DRrob suffered at Hakeems hands (and he did and has suffered over it) Hakeem had the edge.

Hakeem had more talent on his team than David during there prime years.

blacksniper
05-23-2013, 03:48 PM
The biggest argument I would have against Duncan is he never went back to back titles.

Although you could counter that by saying in his prime he had a weak supporting cast. At the height of his career he did not have much to work with.

Chronz
05-23-2013, 05:37 PM
Hakeem had more talent on his team than David during there prime years.
Looking outside the championship years, name a season in which D-Rob got more out of his squads than Hakeem did his..

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 08:24 PM
Looking outside the championship years, name a season in which D-Rob got more out of his squads than Hakeem did his..

Well he lead his team to better records in the regular season, but its harder to get more out of a team, when your team is not as good, and when you got del curry one year, and george lucas the next. Meanwhile Hakeem has Rudy his entire career. I would say if David had Pop his whole career, he would of had much more team success even without the addition of a player that wasn't there. Disagree?

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 08:27 PM
Hakeem had more talent on his team than David during there prime years.

PRove it, guys like Pippen and Barkley in their doddering years with Hakeem entering his don't count.

Otis Thorpe was the best player a number of years w/ Hakeem. Sampson was overrated junk too.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 08:28 PM
Looking outside the championship years, name a season in which D-Rob got more out of his squads than Hakeem did his..

And as I stated, he as an individual outplayed Hakeem every year from a statistical standpoint. More point, and better efficiency. They registered a very close amount of blocks in the prime years. They were basically even in blocks and boards. David's advanced stats blew his away. Those years remind me of how Lebron would always lead Cleveland to the best record in the NBA, but then they would get eliminated in the second round by a lower seed because in the playoffs.... well you know.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 08:29 PM
Well he lead his team to better records in the regular season, but its harder to get more out of a team, when your team is not as good, and when you got del curry one year, and george lucas the next. Meanwhile Hakeem has Rudy his entire career. I would say if David had Pop his whole career, he would of had much more team success even without the addition of a player that wasn't there. Disagree?

Rudy T. sucked. McHale's sidekick in Minny is the only guy I can think of that coached a bunch of years that was more incompetent than Rudy T.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 08:30 PM
PRove it, guys like Pippen and Barkley in their doddering years with Hakeem entering his don't count.

Otis Thorpe was the best player a number of years w/ Hakeem. Sampson was overrated junk too.

Otis was 14 and 10. Mario, kenny, sam, drexler were all good and more importantly very mentally tough. David had Rodman. 17 and 5 maybe. Then Sean elliot, vinny del negro, very old del harris.
You be the judge.

When David Robinson was drafted number 1 overall, he lead the Spurs to the biggest turnaround in NBA history. Hakeem did a great job with what he had. David did a great job with what he had too. Hakeem had more though. You can't win with what David had.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 08:36 PM
And as I stated, he as an individual outplayed Hakeem every year from a statistical standpoint.

Really? Robinson had a higher FG% in the regular season. The rest of the stats were virtually tied in every category except Hakeem had a higher FT%.

But in the playoffs... OMG.

HO: 35.3/12.5/5.0/4.2 - 15.7 for 27.7 (.560 FG%)
DR: 23.8/11.3/2.7/2.2 - 07.3 for 16.3 (.449 FG%)

Anybody that looks at those reg and post season stats and says Robinson outplayed him every year (even though Hakeem had a bigger share of his teams wins than DR, and DR had more help than Hakeem cannot be taken seriously).


David's advanced stats blew his away.

Win Shares are higher for players of similar ability for the guy on the team with more wins. Hakeem never had a team that was a #1 playoff seed, DR had a team that was a #1 seed what - 5 times... and never won a title until he was old and got one of the 12 best players of all time dropped on his lap. 9 years 55 or more wins. Hakeems teams had 3. If you think that was all because DRob was better than Hakeem than you don't know hoops....


Those years remind me of how Lebron would always lead Cleveland to the best record in the NBA, but then they would get eliminated in the second round by a lower seed because in the playoffs.... well you know.

Right, Robinson failed with big time teams many more times than Hakeem did, quite so.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 08:51 PM
Otis was 14 and 10. Mario, kenny, sam, drexler were all good and more importantly very mentally tough. David had Rodman. 17 and 5 maybe. Then Sean elliot, vinny del negro, very old del harris.
You be the judge.

Thorpe was more like 16/9.5 - but he didn't pass much, didn't get steals, wasn't stellar on D. He's a great 4th option on a ring team, and good 3rd one if #1 and #2 are studs, but as the #2? Few teams have ever won with a guy like that as the second best player on a team.

Drexler had 1.5 excellent years on the Rockets - the best player Hakeem had by his side when he could actually do something. Later Barkley had a big year, but Hakeem was toast.


Hakeem had more though. You can't win with what David had.

I doubt a single one of the senior posters on this board would agree that SAS in DRob's time had weaker teammates than Hakeem's Rockets. Start with me. A big no.

IKnowHoops
05-23-2013, 08:56 PM
Really? Robinson had a higher FG% in the regular season. The rest of the stats were virtually tied in every category except Hakeem had a higher FT%.

But in the playoffs... OMG.

HO: 35.3/12.5/5.0/4.2 - 15.7 for 27.7 (.560 FG%)
DR: 23.8/11.3/2.7/2.2 - 07.3 for 16.3 (.449 FG%)

Anybody that looks at those reg and post season stats and says Robinson outplayed him every year (even though Hakeem had a bigger share of his teams wins than DR, and DR had more help than Hakeem cannot be taken seriously).



Win Shares are higher for players of similar ability for the guy on the team with more wins. Hakeem never had a team that was a #1 playoff seed, DR had a team that was a #1 seed what - 5 times... and never won a title until he was old and got one of the 12 best players of all time dropped on his lap. 9 years 55 or more wins. Hakeems teams had 3. If you think that was all because DRob was better than Hakeem than you don't know hoops....



Right, Robinson failed with big time teams many more times than Hakeem did, quite so.

Thats like saying Lebron had number 1 teams in cleveland and Paul pierce beat him so pierce is better

And Your playoffs stats account for what 10 games, where as the season counts for 82 games. And every year David lead him in points and efficiency. So I have a sample size of over 300 games. And you have a smaple size of 40 games. I said I'm fine with you thinking Hakeem is better. I'm just saying its a very arguable debate. Where as most would say its not close. I would take David. And David's team won more games during the regular season, because David was more dominant than Hakeem in the regular season. Hakeem won more in the playoffs, because he was more dominant in the playoffs. Stepping away from that, I believe hakeem had a better team. At the end of my Day, David out performed Hakeem in every year of there primes during the regular season. He also started in the all star game over Hakeem 4 of 6 times. Find me a situation in which a player started more in the all star game over another player and out performed that player in the regular season every year of there primes and wasn't considered better. I think knowing these facts, its not a big deal to take David over Hakeem. Hakeem has his things on David no doubt. But the point is they both have a lot on each other, so its very debatable.

bagwell368
05-23-2013, 09:06 PM
Thats like saying Lebron had number 1 teams in cleveland and Paul pierce beat him so pierce is better

What? I am saying the Duncan, Robinson, and Russell among the big men had by far the best teams to play with. So using crap like Win Shares makes those guys look better than they are.

In the case of Hakeem his teams were weaker then Robinson's - by about 9 wins per year on average if you focus on the years that they were both "prime" at the same time.

Hakeem was simply a more skilled player that had to carry a big load and had to face more defense than Robinson. Robinson's low post game was meh, not Hakeem's - top 3 all time. Hakeem had a fine outside game to match Robinson. Hakeem at his peak was was a better defender and shot blocker then Robinson. I like Robinson. For pure Centers he's ahead of Moses IMO, and Russell too. But he can't touch KAJ, Wilt, and Hakeem. When Robinson won his MVP, Hakeem broke him, and left him in the dirt in the playoffs when it mattered most. Real hard to argue Robinson with that big rotten tomato hanging over his head.

Chronz
05-23-2013, 09:17 PM
And as I stated, he as an individual outplayed Hakeem every year from a statistical standpoint. More point, and better efficiency. They registered a very close amount of blocks in the prime years. They were basically even in blocks and boards. David's advanced stats blew his away. Those years remind me of how Lebron would always lead Cleveland to the best record in the NBA, but then they would get eliminated in the second round by a lower seed because in the playoffs.... well you know.


Yea but then the playoffs....... nobody raised their game more than Dream come post season.

blacksniper
05-23-2013, 10:07 PM
Win Shares and PER are only affected by the box score. They don't measure the impact a player has on the game.

Is Kevin Garnett really as dominant and effective as Duncan? No, not even close. The box score says otherwise.

Words of wisdom? Don't listen to the box score.

JordansBulls
05-23-2013, 10:19 PM
Looking outside the championship years, name a season in which D-Rob got more out of his squads than Hakeem did his..

A few seasons Robinson won 60+ games. Don't think Hakeem ever won that many games in any season.

IKnowHoops
05-24-2013, 02:14 AM
Win Shares and PER are only affected by the box score. They don't measure the impact a player has on the game.

Is Kevin Garnett really as dominant and effective as Duncan? No, not even close. The box score says otherwise.

Words of wisdom? Don't listen to the box score.

I disagree. I think its very close. KG would many time outplay Duncan and Robinson when he was on the T-wolves. Well Robinson was past his prime by that time, but Duncan was right there. Id say the biggest difference between KG and Duncan was sourrounding teamates. Look what happened when he went to the celtics. He was already on the decline and still won a ring. Don't underate KG. You switch KG and Duncan as far as there career paths, and there legacy's switch as well.

IKnowHoops
05-24-2013, 02:17 AM
Yea but then the playoffs....... nobody raised their game more than Dream come post season.

And I 100% agree with that. But still, he outplayed Dream during the regular season every year of his prime. That has to count for something. And I'm not even saying David is better. Its debatable and I'd say there is nobody that is worse than Dream, that is better than David.

IKnowHoops
05-24-2013, 02:59 AM
Thorpe was more like 16/9.5 - but he didn't pass much, didn't get steals, wasn't stellar on D. He's a great 4th option on a ring team, and good 3rd one if #1 and #2 are studs, but as the #2? Few teams have ever won with a guy like that as the second best player on a team.

Drexler had 1.5 excellent years on the Rockets - the best player Hakeem had by his side when he could actually do something. Later Barkley had a big year, but Hakeem was toast.



I doubt a single one of the senior posters on this board would agree that SAS in DRob's time had weaker teammates than Hakeem's Rockets. Start with me. A big no.


I'd bet your severely wrong about that. Secondly, who are these teamates that Drob played with that were better than Drexler and Thorpe? David never played with anyone who could score as well as Drexler or any player that did as much as Thorpe. Please tell me who these great players Drob played with.

LongWayFromHome
05-24-2013, 03:18 AM
[/B]

I'd bet your severely wrong about that. Secondly, who are these teamates that Drob played with that were better than Drexler and Thorpe? David never played with anyone who could score as well as Drexler or any player that did as much as Thorpe. Please tell me who these great players Drob played with.

Rodman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thorpe

Cummings was better than the Clyde that showed up in HOU. Eliot was a very dynamic scorer.

Neither had much help. Their supporting casts were incredibly comparable and INCREDIBLY pedestrian. The point everybody is making is that Dream took those shoe clerks and slum bums to the top twice while Robinson couldn't get it done until Duncan was around.

amos1er
05-24-2013, 03:51 AM
Win Shares and PER are only affected by the box score. They don't measure the impact a player has on the game.

Is Kevin Garnett really as dominant and effective as Duncan? No, not even close. The box score says otherwise.

Words of wisdom? Don't listen to the box score.

Finally, a sensible poster who realizes that the criteria for greatness doesn't depend on the sole emphasis of stats. You will have a hard time convincing people on here otherwise. The posters on this site seem to rely heavily on re-posting stats from basketballreference.com. Whoever has the better PER and WS/48 is the better player according to the majority on here. Even if you prove to them that the majority of expert opinions seems to believe otherwise, they will just pull more stats in a vain attempt to prove you wrong. There are some logical posters on here however, but some of the homerism is just outrageous and even worse since they all learned how to site baskeballreference.com...apparently the holly grail of basketball wisdom. :rolleyes: Some of the biggest homers believe Hollinger stats to be canon and have a very obtuse way of looking at things. It really is quite humorous and frustrating at the same time, but it does fill the hours of the day. lol

amos1er
05-24-2013, 03:56 AM
Oh, and if Duncan can win a ring this year...I think it's safe to say that he will move up to the top five of all time...taking Shaq's place IMO.

Ipushkidsdown
05-24-2013, 03:58 AM
I think he the greatest of our era

Shlumpledink
05-24-2013, 04:22 AM
[/B]

I'd bet your severely wrong about that. Secondly, who are these teamates that Drob played with that were better than Drexler and Thorpe? David never played with anyone who could score as well as Drexler or any player that did as much as Thorpe. Please tell me who these great players Drob played with.

Drexler was on after his prime, Otis Thorpe was a good player, and their time together did not overlap as they were traded for each other. Otis Thorpe was a good player, but undersized and wasn't very strong defensively. Fortunately he had Hakeem there to help erase his mistakes.
Sean Elliott and Dale Ellis were both good players. Terry Cummings was a good player who did a lot on the court as well, maybe better than Otis Thorpe in his prime, but he came over towards the end of his prime.Rod Strickland was there for a few years. Avery Johnson and Rod Strickland were better point guards than Sleepy Floyd and Kenny Smith.

I don't think that Hakeem had better players than the Spurs players. I thought they should have held onto Horry and Cassell longer, but they were dealt to get an old barkley, whose game did not age well.

bagwell368
05-24-2013, 06:36 AM
Win Shares and PER are only affected by the box score. They don't measure the impact a player has on the game.

Good so far.


Is Kevin Garnett really as dominant and effective as Duncan? No, not even close.

Duncan beats KG on Win Shares because he played for much better teams, hence the "win" in shares. Since KG finally got onto a solid team in 2007-2008 and later, look at the end of their careers. Duncan overall is ahead of KG, but its hardly "not even close". Not when Duncan fits in the #7-9 all time list and KG is #10-12 or better. In some settings KG would be better then TD in fact. SAS '03-'04 - KG instead of TD gives a good chance to win the title and not fall to the Lakers in 6 in round two for starters. TD wasn't very good in that Series.


Words of wisdom? Don't listen to the box score.

Right. Use your eyes and not your biases.

TornadoOfSouls
05-26-2013, 02:43 PM
Right. Use your eyes and not your biases.

Yes, and my eyes tell me Tim Duncan s.hits on Garnett from a great height. Duncan's the number two option on a Finals team at the age of 37 while KG's a role player right now. Duncan's always been better than Garnett.

A Black Prophet
05-26-2013, 02:58 PM
Charles barkley was an undersized PF but still dominated Next

bagwell368
05-26-2013, 10:59 PM
Yes, and my eyes tell me Tim Duncan s.hits on Garnett from a great height. Duncan's the number two option on a Finals team at the age of 37 while KG's a role player right now. Duncan's always been better than Garnett.

?? KG was the most important single member of the team this year. PP played at roughly the same level, but Green could have picked up some of that, who did the C's have to pick up KG if he went down? Do please check your opinions against facts or C's fans that could set you straight.

Duncan has played with better teammates and a better coach through most of their careers, pity you can't acknowledge the obvious truth.

JJ_JKidd
05-27-2013, 01:16 AM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

The best big man, pg, sg what have you can never be determined unless you put them ALL in one season or have them all play against each other to see who dominates. PERIOD

Yumboldt
05-27-2013, 02:30 AM
At Age 37...
Tim 17.8 9.9 2.7
Wilt 13.2 18.6 4.5
Kareem 21.5 7.3 2.6
Bill Retired
Shaq 17.8 8.4 1.7
Hakeem 10.3 6.2 1.4
Moses 15.6 9.1 1.1
Kevin 14.8 7.8 2.3
Charles 14.5 10.5 3.2

Patman
05-27-2013, 02:48 AM
Good so far.



Duncan beats KG on Win Shares because he played for much better teams, hence the "win" in shares. Since KG finally got onto a solid team in 2007-2008 and later, look at the end of their careers. Duncan overall is ahead of KG, but its hardly "not even close". Not when Duncan fits in the #7-9 all time list and KG is #10-12 or better. In some settings KG would be better then TD in fact. SAS '03-'04 - KG instead of TD gives a good chance to win the title and not fall to the Lakers in 6 in round two for starters. TD wasn't very good in that Series.



Right. Use your eyes and not your biases.

Yeah right and in 03 the Spurs don't win a chip with KG instead of Duncan, KG wouldn't have provided that amount of post dominance that the Spurs needed out of Tim in that year. I'm also not so sure if they win with 99 KG over Timmy. 04 Timmy had a bad Series against the Lakers yes, would they have won with Garnett? Maybe and only if he pulls his 3rd round performance and not his 2nd round against the Kings.

Fact is, in the Playoffs, Tim Spots the higher, PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG while AST% goes to KG. TRB%, TOV% are very close(an. Garnett has a higher STL%, but duncan leads clearly on Block%.

Duncan just spots the better Playoff numbers and has the success it's very hard to argue for KG.

Saltinuts40
05-27-2013, 03:18 AM
Russell has 11 Rings. Duncan has 4. Much more dominant defensively against much better competition
Shaq has as many championships and was much more dominant offensively
Wilt Chamberlain would have 10 rings if Russell wasn't in the same era. Best All-Around Big Man Ever.
Kareem is the all-time scorer among all big men. Duncan isn't in his area code.
Hakeem Olajuwon has 2 rings, and was better on both ends of the floor than Duncan.

At best, he's 5th.

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 09:03 AM
Yeah right and in 03 the Spurs don't win a chip with KG instead of Duncan, KG wouldn't have provided that amount of post dominance that the Spurs needed out of Tim in that year. I'm also not so sure if they win with 99 KG over Timmy. 04 Timmy had a bad Series against the Lakers yes, would they have won with Garnett? Maybe and only if he pulls his 3rd round performance and not his 2nd round against the Kings.

Fact is, in the Playoffs, Tim Spots the higher, PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG while AST% goes to KG. TRB%, TOV% are very close(an. Garnett has a higher STL%, but duncan leads clearly on Block%.

Duncan just spots the better Playoff numbers and has the success it's very hard to argue for KG.

Ridiculous. Defensive intensity increases in the playoffs. Until KG got to Boston past his prime, who on Minny was going to draw defensive attention (help, doubles, etc.) more than KG, and who were the other 3 best players he went into the playoffs with each year vs SAS and Timmy? Also SAS had killer seeding just about every year, how many times was Minny the home team in the 1st round, 2nd round, and so on?

Seemingly your ability to analyze/isolate a player from his team isn't that strong, or for the sake of the debate you've decided to ignore those factors. Pity either way. Everyone should try to think before you make up your mind, it helps to not look biased/homer in discussions such as this.

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 09:10 AM
Russell has 11 Rings. Duncan has 4. Much more dominant defensively against much better competition
Shaq has as many championships and was much more dominant offensively
Wilt Chamberlain would have 10 rings if Russell wasn't in the same era. Best All-Around Big Man Ever.
Kareem is the all-time scorer among all big men. Duncan isn't in his area code.
Hakeem Olajuwon has 2 rings, and was better on both ends of the floor than Duncan.

At best, he's 5th.

As usual Russell is being placed in the top 5 more because of his Coach/GM/team/weakness of other franchises than for his actual skill set.

Tier 1:

Hakeem, Jabbar, Shaq

Tier 2:

DRob, Wilt, Moses, Duncan


I have Duncan 7th as a C, but 1st/2nd as a PF.

BTW, the claim that Wilt on the teams he was on would have won 10 titles w/o Russell around is... well the only word I have is wrong. Six maybe.

3RDASYSTEM
05-27-2013, 10:06 AM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

Since you're like the best on here can you explain to me what a 'prime' is?

like I recall DUNCAN doing what he did same all his career at top flight up until few yrs back, and what he is doing now is top notch at 37yrs of age

was his prime from 97-2008? or even back further at WF?

halfway thru his prime? like is a prime a set number of yrs that you just go off in your head that fits your agenda? you said he locked up best PF alltime 'halfway' thru his prime, how did you come up with that 'halfway' thru his prime? he was primed at WF in my opinion,preNBA

3RDASYSTEM
05-27-2013, 10:11 AM
Yeah right and in 03 the Spurs don't win a chip with KG instead of Duncan, KG wouldn't have provided that amount of post dominance that the Spurs needed out of Tim in that year. I'm also not so sure if they win with 99 KG over Timmy. 04 Timmy had a bad Series against the Lakers yes, would they have won with Garnett? Maybe and only if he pulls his 3rd round performance and not his 2nd round against the Kings.

Fact is, in the Playoffs, Tim Spots the higher, PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG while AST% goes to KG. TRB%, TOV% are very close(an. Garnett has a higher STL%, but duncan leads clearly on Block%.

Duncan just spots the better Playoff numbers and has the success it's very hard to argue for KG.

That's why bball is in the ***** when speaking on which player is better-dominant-court impact in todays world of debate

there is no way that a PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG/AST% is used by actual players to determine whos better individually

TOV%? Like what the **** is this **** all about

we talking about whos better on court and have to result to matrix type **** to only double the confusion

just reading that dumb **** makes you dumber,trust me

KG was drafted by a true bottom feeder and DUNCAN was drafted by a team that tanked with up and coming HOF coach and a HOF big waiting in wings to make the new HAKEEM/SAMPSON tower tandem

they were both good on block but I give edge to DUNCAN but KG had more range and was more a perimeter type who could go on block but DUNCAN was more traditional big and he won MVP 2 to 1 and was looked a more of an anchor on D even though DUNCAN had ROB-BOWEN-POP scheme at his disposal, it changed somewhat when KG went to BOS but even he had TIBS-DOC to go along with PERK/ALLEN, so to me they were a wash individually and I wouldn't be mad having either or

but I don't need to see that dumb **** of TS and WS and so on to figure it out, neither do you

DUNCAN already showed what he can do against SHAQ, i'd take SHAQ
I'd take DREAM-ALCINDOR-WILT

Him and RUSS are closest out of the group, so 5th or 6th or tied for 5th is where he would be

kdspurman
05-27-2013, 10:58 AM
Yeah right and in 03 the Spurs don't win a chip with KG instead of Duncan, KG wouldn't have provided that amount of post dominance that the Spurs needed out of Tim in that year. I'm also not so sure if they win with 99 KG over Timmy. 04 Timmy had a bad Series against the Lakers yes, would they have won with Garnett? Maybe and only if he pulls his 3rd round performance and not his 2nd round against the Kings.

Fact is, in the Playoffs, Tim Spots the higher, PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG while AST% goes to KG. TRB%, TOV% are very close(an. Garnett has a higher STL%, but duncan leads clearly on Block%.

Duncan just spots the better Playoff numbers and has the success it's very hard to argue for KG.

I love when people say that sort of thing when talking about KG & TD. Fact is, there is no way of knowing that and anyone who thinks that (KG would've won if he replaced TD in 03 for example), well it's just their opinion. Aside from all the other statistical stuff people use for their arguments, there are other things that are pretty important too that are instrumental to a teams success.

KnicksorBust
05-27-2013, 11:14 AM
If the Spurs win the chip and Duncan produces at the level he has all playoffs, then I would rank his career as the 4th greatest of All-Time. Behind only MJ-Kareem-Magic.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 11:49 AM
Do people realize what Duncan's record is again KG? He destroys him.

Plus people need to get over the Duncan had the better team. In the early 2000's Tim Duncan was close to a one man show. Ginobili was a role player. Parker was a rookie.

Tim Duncan's effort in 2003 was amazing. Nobody else since 2000 won with less.

flea
05-27-2013, 12:04 PM
Do people realize what Duncan's record is again KG? He destroys him.

Plus people need to get over the Duncan had the better team. In the early 2000's Tim Duncan was close to a one man show. Ginobili was a role player. Parker was a rookie.

Tim Duncan's effort in 2003 was amazing. Nobody else since 2000 won with less.
This is absolutely correct, but for some reason (probably because most users are too young to even remember 2003) this forum treats the 03 team like it was stacked even though it was a 20 year old Parker and a 25 year old Ginobili scoring 7.5 PPG on 43% shooting.

b@llhog24
05-27-2013, 12:17 PM
That's why bball is in the ***** when speaking on which player is better-dominant-court impact in todays world of debate

there is no way that a PER/TS/eFG/USG/ORTG/AST% is used by actual players to determine whos better individually

TOV%? Like what the **** is this **** all about

we talking about whos better on court and have to result to matrix type **** to only double the confusion

just reading that dumb **** makes you dumber,trust me

KG was drafted by a true bottom feeder and DUNCAN was drafted by a team that tanked with up and coming HOF coach and a HOF big waiting in wings to make the new HAKEEM/SAMPSON tower tandem

they were both good on block but I give edge to DUNCAN but KG had more range and was more a perimeter type who could go on block but DUNCAN was more traditional big and he won MVP 2 to 1 and was looked a more of an anchor on D even though DUNCAN had ROB-BOWEN-POP scheme at his disposal, it changed somewhat when KG went to BOS but even he had TIBS-DOC to go along with PERK/ALLEN, so to me they were a wash individually and I wouldn't be mad having either or

but I don't need to see that dumb **** of TS and WS and so on to figure it out, neither do you

DUNCAN already showed what he can do against SHAQ, i'd take SHAQ
I'd take DREAM-ALCINDOR-WILT

Him and RUSS are closest out of the group, so 5th or 6th or tied for 5th is where he would be

Ironic.

Patman
05-27-2013, 12:39 PM
Ridiculous. Defensive intensity increases in the playoffs. Until KG got to Boston past his prime, who on Minny was going to draw defensive attention (help, doubles, etc.) more than KG, and who were the other 3 best players he went into the playoffs with each year vs SAS and Timmy? Also SAS had killer seeding just about every year, how many times was Minny the home team in the 1st round, 2nd round, and so on?

Seemingly your ability to analyze/isolate a player from his team isn't that strong, or for the sake of the debate you've decided to ignore those factors. Pity either way. Everyone should try to think before you make up your mind, it helps to not look biased/homer in discussions such as this.

Oh that's rich from the guy who wants to play what if's and then cherry picks a certain year to make his point.

I'm well aware that you can't compare those stats without taking into account the relative teams, and then you would also have to look at the opponents strength. if you play what if's, I'm throwing out career playoff stats. I could now go on and make my point about the lack of offensive help in 03 (the defensive help was great), and you would probably find another year where KG could have produced better. They are pretty close and hard to compare because they had pretty different skill sets and tendencies, with very similar production.

I'm not sure why you need to make the argument that he would have won more rings for SA, the same amount very likely. But again you can't really proof any of this, unless we get a time machine and manipulate the draft.

OceanSpray
05-27-2013, 12:44 PM
His 03 team wasn't stacked but at that time, the league wasn't really that good. That 2003 class paved the way for the future of NBA.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 12:49 PM
His 03 team wasn't stacked but at that time, the league wasn't really that good. That 2003 class paved the way for the future of NBA.

I could say the same thing right now. The league is terribly weak right now. Tim Duncan is 37 and he's the best big man in the league. That's not tough competition for anyone to win rings.

There is only 1 real superstar in the ENTIRE NBA right now. It's LeBron James and he should bulldoze through the league due to this.

There are NO BIG MEN. The league talent right now is laughable. Point Guards dribble the ball up the court. And we call that the deepest position in the league? It's sad.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 12:50 PM
His 03 team wasn't stacked but at that time, the league wasn't really that good. That 2003 class paved the way for the future of NBA.

I could say the same thing right now. The league is terribly weak right now. Tim Duncan is 37 and he's the best big man in the league. That's not tough competition for anyone to win rings.

There is only 1 real superstar in the ENTIRE NBA right now. It's LeBron James and he should bulldoze through the league due to this.

There are NO BIG MEN. The league talent right now is laughable. Point Guards dribble the ball up the court. And we call that the deepest position in the league? It's sad.

flea
05-27-2013, 12:50 PM
His 03 team wasn't stacked but at that time, the league wasn't really that good. That 2003 class paved the way for the future of NBA.

Are you just making things up? The 03 team beat the Kobe/Shaq version of Lakers, Dirk/Nash Mavs, and a good Nets team with prime Kidd and Martin. Obviously you're a Heat fan which probably means you're young and don't remember, but the NBA was still full of stars before Lebron and Wade were rookies.

OceanSpray
05-27-2013, 01:02 PM
Are you just making things up? The 03 team beat the Kobe/Shaq version of Lakers, Dirk/Nash Mavs, and a good Nets team with prime Kidd and Martin. Obviously you're a Heat fan which probably means you're young and don't remember, but the NBA was still full of stars before Lebron and Wade were rookies.

Lmao, Kobe+Shaq had their differences. Nash wasn't even in his prime. Prime Kidd and Martin? That was one of the weakest Eastern Conferences of all time. Obviously you forgot what you were watching.

flea
05-27-2013, 01:08 PM
Lmao, Kobe+Shaq had their differences. Nash wasn't even in his prime. Prime Kidd and Martin? That was one of the weakest Eastern Conferences of all time. Obviously you forgot what you were watching.

I think that Jefferson/Martin/Kidd team was one of the best of the last 20 years not to win a title. It's easy to laugh at now because Jefferson is worthless and overpaid and Martin is an old role player, but they were quite good. Either way, the Spurs went through a pretty good western conference - if only because they beat the strongest dynasty since Jordan directly after their 3peat.

A Black Prophet
05-27-2013, 03:36 PM
I think that Jefferson/Martin/Kidd team was one of the best of the last 20 years not to win a title. It's easy to laugh at now because Jefferson is worthless and overpaid and Martin is an old role player, but they were quite good. Either way, the Spurs went through a pretty good western conference - if only because they beat the strongest dynasty since Jordan directly after their 3peat.
Agreed

Sssmush
05-27-2013, 04:19 PM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

Just in terms of public perception, Duncan never had that aura of unstoppable dominance like Shaq and Chamberlain, the giant-smashing-the-backboard-over-all-the-little-people incredible freakshow dominance
of the classical super big man.

I think you can DEFINITELY compare Duncan quite favorably to Bill Russell and Hakeem, because they were both under the rim fundamentals type guys, and Duncan probably stacks up very well against them. I mean obviously if it were today Duncan would completely tool Russell... Hakeem is a much closer matchup that maybe Duncan loses but then again stat and title wise Duncan is going far beyond Hakeem.

Moses Malone is probably not properly in the super big category either. From highlights he appears to me like some kind of Charles Barkley or something, like a chubby 6'9" guy that is a fantastic rebounder and inside scorer. An ABA and NBA legend for sure, but I don't see how we rank him ahead of Duncan.

And Kareem was great but he was super one-dimensional and is amazing largely because of sheer longevity.

It's probably not unreasonable to put Duncan in the top five players of all time even if you eliminate the power forward position. Something like:

G: Jordan
G: Kobe
SF: Magic (or Lebron)
PF: Duncan
C: Chamberlain (or Hakeem)

Sssmush
05-27-2013, 04:22 PM
or maybe if we do an all time all star lineup, it is possible that Kobe gets squeezed, or more probably moved to SF:

so, like

PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: Kobe
PF: Duncan
C: Chamberlain or Hakeem

but if your proposition is right then maybe

PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: Kobe
PF: Lebron
C: Duncan

Just in sheer objective terms (as in, actually have this team play against other players of any era in their primes) I don't think anybody can really argue with that second lineup.

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 06:33 PM
Do people realize what Duncan's record is again KG? He destroys him.

In what way? Wins and Losses? SAS was much better than Minny. Head to Head? Very close, and again KG was getting a lot of attention while on Minny, since they sucked.


Plus people need to get over the Duncan had the better team. In the early 2000's Tim Duncan was close to a one man show. Ginobili was a role player. Parker was a rookie.

Why because it kills your case? Line up SAS vs Mnny in the years both were there.

Also, put down the playoff seedlings. Timmy and co. Got to fatten up their playoff stats by playing against 7's and 8's quite a few times.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 06:41 PM
A Boston Fan is trying to tell me Garnett is in the same league as Tim Duncan. A top 7-8 player of all time. Go figures.

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 06:42 PM
I think you can DEFINITELY compare Duncan quite favorably to Bill Russell and Hakeem, because they were both under the rim fundamentals type guys, and Duncan probably stacks up very well against them. I mean obviously if it were today Duncan would completely tool Russell... Hakeem is a much closer matchup that maybe Duncan loses but then again stat and title wise Duncan is going far beyond Hakeem.m

Duncan is clearly better than Russell. But you fall in a trap to compare stats and titles between Hakeem and Duncan. Duncan had far better teams, and Hakeem won a title with far less help than Duncan's weakest team. No way Duncan is a better Center than Hakeem. He played against weaker Centers than Hakeem by far.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 06:44 PM
Tim Duncan won with almost nothing in 2003

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 06:53 PM
A Boston Fan is trying to tell me Garnett is in the same league as Tim Duncan. A top 7-8 player of all time. Go figures.

I think on balance and in most circumstances, TD is better than KG. But KG is better in some ways, and people here do not consider his poor teams in Minny, and the let their dislike of his tactics color their opinions which is a shame.

I'm not crazy about all time lists in the NBA between positions. As for Centers I have TD 7th. For PF's TD narrowly beats KG. All time I have TD 8th or 9th and KG 13th. That's much closer than Jordan and Kobe or Bird and Erving or Magic and Stockton.

I have them both on my 12 man all time team. There is no other PF to put ahead of KG IMO. How bad can he be?

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 07:00 PM
Tim Duncan won with almost nothing in 2003

Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 07:46 PM
Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

Robinson was retired. Parker and Manu were role players. You don't know what you are talking about.

Dnovakovic099
05-27-2013, 09:13 PM
Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

David Robinson sucked, 8.5 and 8 on 47 from the field with slightly above average defense. Which other championship team had a worse second option? 16 points 5 assists for Parker on 46 percent shooting... 10 and 6 for Malik on 46. Ginobili god awful year. Parker was an average pg at best. Malik was below average at his position, so was David Robinson, and Ginobili, besides defense, was pretty bad. Go and rewatch the series or a few games, the Lakers one. You will really see what Duncan did. Literally, 90 percent of the time they gave the ball to Duncan and ran everything through him. They doubled him and yet he scored more points, while being more efficient than any of his scrub teammates.

Dnovakovic099
05-27-2013, 09:19 PM
Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

Are you ****ing kidding me? Seriously, are you just pulling **** out of your ***?

Clyde: 21 7 4 on 50
Thorpe: 13 9 on 56

Spurs had 4 guys in double figures. Rockets 6.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1995.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2003.html

Now, I know raw per game stats aren't the end all be all, but advanced stats, I don't have time to post them all, point in the Houston player's favors also. The only argument you can make is Pop, but to say that Duncan didn't have the worst team, at least players and not coach because I believe coaches are heavily underrated, in the last twenty years is blasphemy.

tredigs
05-27-2013, 09:21 PM
Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

Manu's better this season than he was in '03, and that's not saying much based on his level of play recently. D Rob was on his way into retirement that summer and it showed. Parker was barely 20 and finished with a playoff PER of 11.9. He was a shell of what he would eventually become. That team was an absolute bottom feeder outside of Duncan, far worse than the 95 Rockets with Drexler/Horry/Sam Cassell/Kenny Smith. There ship the year before without Drexler (and MJ gone) is the one that Hakeem truly threw on his back to the title. That's probably the one you were thinking of. There's not a very strong argument that it was worse than Duncan's '03 cast though.

Dnovakovic099
05-27-2013, 09:25 PM
Bull. DRob had a fine year. Rose played well, as did Parker, and Manu.

'95 Rockets were well weaker from 2-7 than '03 SAS

Not to mention that who is to say Ginobili takes a 6th man role with KG as his teammate? Popovic has said numerous times the reason they play so great as a team is because of Duncan. Now, I am not saying KG is a bad teammate, but I don't think you can assume that Parker and Ginobili would have taken the specific roles they took with KG's track record with foreign players.

IndiansFan337
05-27-2013, 09:28 PM
TD put a strangle hold on the best PF of All-Time ranking like halfway through his prime, now its just an outdated label that people like to use in order to separate Duncan from the behemoths he should rightfully be compared with.... The titans at Center

The holy 6 are
Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses

A much tougher list to crack than the midgets at PF. But in what way did Duncan not stack up?

Chips, 2-way dominance, longevity, intangibles....... seems to me he nearly has it all. Can he still wind up the best bigman to ever play or is his window shut now that hes clearly past his prime?






How would you rank Duncan in the following categories;

Offense:
Defense:
Winning:
Longevity:
(VS Russ-Wilt-KAJ-Shaq-Hakeem-Moses)

He deserves to be in the conversation with those guys. His longevity has now surpassed all of those guys, I believe, besides for Kareem. If he can win one or two more titles that certainly wouldn't hurt. He has been the best player on 4 championship teams (even though Parker won Finals MVP once), which is more than everyone on that list except for Russell.

JordansBulls
05-27-2013, 09:33 PM
So is Duncan above Hakeem all time for you?

effen5
05-27-2013, 10:40 PM
TD is in top 5 for me.

I think San Antonio has been the best overall team the last 15 years. Have they missed a playoff the last 15 years?

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 10:46 PM
David Robinson sucked, 8.5 and 8 on 47 from the field with slightly above average defense. Which other championship team had a worse second option? 16 points 5 assists for Parker on 46 percent shooting... 10 and 6 for Malik on 46. Ginobili god awful year. Parker was an average pg at best. Malik was below average at his position, so was David Robinson, and Ginobili, besides defense, was pretty bad. Go and rewatch the series or a few games, the Lakers one. You will really see what Duncan did. Literally, 90 percent of the time they gave the ball to Duncan and ran everything through him. They doubled him and yet he scored more points, while being more efficient than any of his scrub teammates.

Sucked? A 109 ORtg and a 95 DRtg? That's a +14. That's superstar territory buddy. He played 26 MPG, and sure his averages and even percentages in some cases were down (he was 37 after all), but there is no title for SAS that year w/o DRob, and probably a loss in the 2nd round. Sounds pretty good to me.

He didn't play enough to be the second option. Duncan, Parker, DRob, Rose, Bowen, Manu, Jackson, Smith, Kerr, Willis were the top 10. In case you forgot, DRob and Manu were studs in the playoffs.

'78 Bullets were much worse. '94 Rockets were worse as well. No doubt at all.

bagwell368
05-27-2013, 10:48 PM
Robinson was retired. Parker and Manu were role players. You don't know what you are talking about.

I don't?

DRob wasn't retired.
Parker was 2nd on the team w/ 33.8 MPG
Manu played 20.7 MPG - and was huge in the playoffs.

Who doesn't know what?

tredigs
05-27-2013, 11:15 PM
Sucked? A 109 ORtg and a 95 DRtg? That's a +14. That's superstar territory buddy. He played 26 MPG, and sure his averages and even percentages in some cases were down (he was 37 after all), but there is no title for SAS that year w/o DRob, and probably a loss in the 2nd round. Sounds pretty good to me.

He didn't play enough to be the second option. Duncan, Parker, DRob, Rose, Bowen, Manu, Jackson, Smith, Kerr, Willis were the top 10. In case you forgot, DRob and Manu were studs in the playoffs.

'78 Bullets were much worse. '94 Rockets were worse as well. No doubt at all.
When you're calling a guy who averaged 9.4/2.6/3.8 on 38.6% from the field and a PER of 15 in the post-season a "playoff stud", I have to imagine you have an angle at play. In this case, likely to diminish Duncan's overwhelming dominance in order to somehow prop up KG.

Saying that without D. Rob those Spurs wouldn't have won the title is akin to saying that without Otis Thorpe the '93-94 Rockets wouldn't have won a title. Both statements are probably true, but it does not change the fact that both teams are pining for the #1 pick in the draft without Timmy or Hakeem. As for '95, those Rockets would have been a playoff team without Dream (if Clyde had been traded before the season).

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 11:58 PM
I don't?

DRob wasn't retired.
Parker was 2nd on the team w/ 33.8 MPG
Manu played 20.7 MPG - and was huge in the playoffs.

Who doesn't know what?

You're grasping at straws here. Just stop it.

harryharrison
05-27-2013, 11:59 PM
You know what is truly sad and representative of the average viewer? They do not realize how completely dominant prime Duncan was.

He took, (no could) a lottery ticket team to the title in 2003 and went through Shaq and Kobe doing it.

bagwell368
05-28-2013, 09:08 AM
When you're calling a guy who averaged 9.4/2.6/3.8 on 38.6% from the field and a PER of 15 in the post-season a "playoff stud", I have to imagine you have an angle at play. In this case, likely to diminish Duncan's overwhelming dominance in order to somehow prop up KG.

I wasn't thinking about KG one bit when I wrote that. I assumed we all know how huge Duncan was in the playoffs, in this thread we've been talking supporting case - or did you miss that somehow? BTW, Manu took some 3's as his .522 TS% indicates. Why a senior poster would just post raw FG% leads one to wonder what the agenda is? Manu also played some great D. Manu and DRob were clearly the 2nd and 3rd best players for SAS in the playoffs. One guy on your side said DRob was retired and another says Manu was a "bit" player. They averaged 51 MPG between them in those playoffs.

But Clyde was not. BTW, not just for you, but how come nobody is taking me on with the '78 Bullets as the worst NBA Champ of all time in terms of supporting cast - with Elvin Hayes as the best player - gack!

Longhornfan1234
05-28-2013, 12:44 PM
no.


1. Wilt

2. Kareem

3. Hakeem

3a. Shaq

5. M. Malone

6. K. McHale

7. T. Duncan

8. B. Russell

9. W. Unseld

10. K. Malone

My top 10 PF/C list.

Chronz
05-28-2013, 01:55 PM
So is Duncan above Hakeem all time for you?
I cant bring myself to answer the Shaq-Dream-Duncan comp....


What about you?

JayW_1023
05-28-2013, 03:01 PM
no.


1. Wilt

2. Kareem

3. Hakeem

3a. Shaq

5. M. Malone

6. K. McHale

7. T. Duncan

8. B. Russell

9. W. Unseld

10. K. Malone

My top 10 PF/C list.

Kevin McHale over Duncan? I like to hear you explain that one. LOL.

bagwell368
05-28-2013, 03:08 PM
no.


1. Wilt

2. Kareem

3. Hakeem

3a. Shaq

5. M. Malone

6. K. McHale

7. T. Duncan

8. B. Russell

9. W. Unseld

10. K. Malone

My top 10 PF/C list.

This must be peak. I'm as big a McHale nut as there is, but career wise he's not top 20 material. Peak one season he's in the top 4 at worst - among #4's.

Wes Unseld had the greatest outlet passes ever. He was a nasty rebounder, and while his weight wasn't too crazy and his knees good, he was a notable player for the time, but he's not even top 30 all time for a big. He declined early, very early.

Still, I like posters that are out of the box.

mightybosstone
05-28-2013, 03:11 PM
You know what is truly sad and representative of the average viewer? They do not realize how completely dominant prime Duncan was.

He took, (no could) a lottery ticket team to the title in 2003 and went through Shaq and Kobe doing it.
That 2003 team isn't nearly as bad as you're making them out to be. They were certainly better than the team Hakeem took to the finals in 1994. By a wide margin.

JordansBulls
05-28-2013, 03:33 PM
That 2003 team isn't nearly as bad as you're making them out to be. They were certainly better than the team Hakeem took to the finals in 1994. By a wide margin.

Maybe so, but three things are true.

1.) Houston avoided the #1 seeded team out west and

2.) the team that won it all the season before was missing it's top player.

3.) Spurs had to beat the defending champion (3x) on there route to the title.

mightybosstone
05-28-2013, 03:45 PM
Maybe so, but three things are true.

1.) Houston avoided the #1 seeded team out west and

2.) the team that won it all the season before was missing it's top player.

3.) Spurs had to beat the defending champion (3x) on there route to the title.

Your first point is kind of pointless. If the Sonics were that good that season, they wouldn't have gotten beat by the lowly Nuggets in the first round. You can only beat the teams you face in the playoffs. And you're also making it sound like the Rockets beat a bunch of scrubs, when that isn't the case at all. That Blazers team was stacked with backcourt talent (including Drexler), the Suns had Barkley and KJ and they crushed the Malone/Stockton Jazz in the Conference Finals before beating that defensively dominant Knicks team.

Also, I've always said that my biggest regret as an NBA fan was the Rockets never getting to face the Bulls in the NBA Finals in the 90s. The Rockets and Hakeem played the Bulls better than any other team during the regular season, and I think Houston would have given Chicago one hell of a fight, especially in 94 and 97. But you can't just say "Houston wouldn't have won the title if Jordan was playing." That's completely hypothetical, and there's no way to prove that.

As far as the Spurs beating the Lakers, I think people forget how thin those Lakers teams were aside from Shaq and Kobe. Hell, Derek Fisher was their third leading scorer in the playoffs that year and he was the only other guy to average double figures.

IKnowHoops
05-28-2013, 03:51 PM
no.


1. Wilt

2. Kareem

3. Hakeem

3a. Shaq

5. M. Malone

6. K. McHale

7. T. Duncan

8. B. Russell

9. W. Unseld

10. K. Malone

My top 10 PF/C list.

David Robinson wouls smash Kevin Mchale

flea
05-28-2013, 05:41 PM
As far as the Spurs beating the Lakers, I think people forget how thin those Lakers teams were aside from Shaq and Kobe. Hell, Derek Fisher was their third leading scorer in the playoffs that year and he was the only other guy to average double figures.
Uh what? The Lakers team was virtually the exact same roster as the championship year before - and basically for the other 2 championship seasons for their 3peat. Glenn Rice on the 2000 champs was the only meaningful difference between the rosters for those 4 years, and the Lakers won 2 more rings after he was gone.

Bruno
05-28-2013, 06:50 PM
I cant bring myself to answer the Shaq-Dream-Duncan comp....


What about you?

you put wilt ahead of the Shaq-Dream-Duncan group and russell after them right? where do you put KAJ? any debate between Moses and Russell for 5th?

harryharrison
05-28-2013, 07:52 PM
To be honest this thread has gotten a little off topic. Still about Duncan, but the thread has evolved from it's original purpose.

I'm going to be honest. I have never seen tape of KAJ, Wilt and Russell. I vaguely remember Hakeem. I saw Shaq and Duncan live.

How can I compare Duncan to the rest of the bigs when I saw nothing of them?

I think this is the case with many posters here.

Chronz
05-28-2013, 09:04 PM
you put wilt ahead of the Shaq-Dream-Duncan group and russell after them right? where do you put KAJ? any debate between Moses and Russell for 5th?
Wilt is in that group, just wanted to keep it as recent as possible. KAJ is my unbiased choice for #1, as a player he fits every major criteria.
Secretly tho, I wish it was Wilt who came in after Russell retired and had gotten the opportunities that Cap had.

Russ has 5th locked up, hes earned at least that much, I could be overrating his defense but his team impact really seems to rival Wilt. Really depends on what your priorities are when it comes to these sort of things. I know some who completely disregard rings and focus on what players did with their supporting talent.

If the question you're asking isnt about career rankings but who you would take if you were drafting the player or who you would build around, my list definitely changes.

KAJ is the only one of the 6 who remains at or near the top in every scenario. Thats usually enough for me to go with him.

bagwell368
05-28-2013, 09:43 PM
David Robinson wouls smash Kevin Mchale

Best year vs best year? Don't be so sure. McHale is probably one of the 4-5 defenders at any position that could cover 2.5 positions worth of guys at a 1st team all defense level (#4, #3, about 2/3 of the #5's). Some of my favorite tape is McHale totally flummoxing KAJ in the mid 80's.

McHale's favorite shot was unblockable and he's easily one of the 3 best low post offensive players of all time. McHale is the first player in league history to post a 60%+ FG and 80%+ FT. Barkley makes it clear that McHale is the toughest player he ever faced. Maybe you ought to consider some of that before you award the slam dunk.

bagwell368
05-28-2013, 09:48 PM
To be honest this thread has gotten a little off topic. Still about Duncan, but the thread has evolved from it's original purpose.

I'm going to be honest. I have never seen tape of KAJ, Wilt and Russell. I vaguely remember Hakeem. I saw Shaq and Duncan live.

How can I compare Duncan to the rest of the bigs when I saw nothing of them?

I think this is the case with many posters here.

UTube, and newspapers, magazines and books have not cheated those players. Go for it.

bagwell368
05-28-2013, 09:56 PM
Wilt is in that group, just wanted to keep it as recent as possible. KAJ is my unbiased choice for #1, as a player he fits every major criteria.
Secretly tho, I wish it was Wilt who came in after Russell retired and had gotten the opportunities that Cap had.

Russ has 5th locked up, hes earned at least that much, I could be overrating his defense but his team impact really seems to rival Wilt. Really depends on what your priorities are when it comes to these sort of things. I know some who completely disregard rings and focus on what players did with their supporting talent.

If the question you're asking isnt about career rankings but who you would take if you were drafting the player or who you would build around, my list definitely changes.

KAJ is the only one of the 6 who remains at or near the top in every scenario. Thats usually enough for me to go with him.

Interesting. But consider what Wilt did to him the first two years in the league before Wilt got real old (and long after Wilt had a true offensive touch). Then fast forward to the headaches Cowens gave him for a couple of years, then go to the devastation Moses Malone laid on him in particular in the '81 and '84 playoffs. Both LAL teams that lost to the inferior Rockets are in the top 10 of great teams that failed to win the '84 team could be in the top 3-4. Lost all because KAJ couldn't contend with Moses - at all. I can't imagine KAJ in his prime would have any way to combat Shaq - at all.

KAJ wouldn't seem to have problems with Russell, DRob, and Duncan from a physical standpoint, but Hakeem killed KAJ once he got his feet wet and he wasn't bulky at all.

Too many holes in KAJ. I personally think there is no GOAT in the Centers. Tell me who they will play against and then I'll tell you who to pick.

Chronz
05-28-2013, 11:22 PM
Interesting. But consider what Wilt did to him the first two years in the league before Wilt got real old (and long after Wilt had a true offensive touch). Then fast forward to the headaches Cowens gave him for a couple of years, then go to the devastation Moses Malone laid on him in particular in the '81 and '84 playoffs. Both LAL teams that lost to the inferior Rockets are in the top 10 of great teams that failed to win the '84 team could be in the top 3-4. Lost all because KAJ couldn't contend with Moses - at all. I can't imagine KAJ in his prime would have any way to combat Shaq - at all.

KAJ wouldn't seem to have problems with Russell, DRob, and Duncan from a physical standpoint, but Hakeem killed KAJ once he got his feet wet and he wasn't bulky at all.

Too many holes in KAJ. I personally think there is no GOAT in the Centers. Tell me who they will play against and then I'll tell you who to pick.
The lone weakness and only question he doesn't shine in, is the "how does he fare 1v1 against his hypothetical peers" argument.

Pakman
05-29-2013, 03:18 AM
Duncan is great but you guys are definitely prisoners of the moment. At least wait to see if he wins A chip this year. Hes not even the best player on his team this year but everyone is giving him all the love.

jerellh528
05-29-2013, 04:27 AM
Because outside of lebron, the consensus seems to be to undervalue active players and to overrate old "legends" like russell, chamberlain, etc.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 07:15 AM
Because outside of lebron, the consensus seems to be to undervalue active players and to overrate old "legends" like russell, chamberlain, etc.

Not quite IMO. Old legend guys are over valued, for sure. OTOH, guys like Jerry Lucas, Cowens, Moncrief, Howell, Nance, Marques, and Chet Walker to name a few tend to get you blank stares these days.

The current guys - Kobe, Duncan, Wade, LeBron are over valued - in particular by those that started to watch in the past dozen years.

Lakersfan2483
05-29-2013, 01:30 PM
Duncan is a tremendous player and the best power forward of all time, but he's not the greatest big in league history. He's not ahead of Kareem, Wilt, Russell or Shaq. Hakeem is debatable, although I would take the Dream over Duncan if I had to choose between the two. Dream was just a little more complete as a player, in my opinion.

A lot of times people become prisoners of the moment and don't truly take into account how dominant some players were in the past. For example, a player of Wilt's size, skill set, and dominance would be the best in any era. Wilt was a multi sport athlete who completely dominated the game of bball in such a way that rules were created just to slow him down. Besides Wilt, not too many players can say that the game was altered because of their dominance. Guys like Kareem and Shaq can make the same claim, however the list is few and far between.

3RDASYSTEM
05-30-2013, 10:34 AM
Best year vs best year? Don't be so sure. McHale is probably one of the 4-5 defenders at any position that could cover 2.5 positions worth of guys at a 1st team all defense level (#4, #3, about 2/3 of the #5's). Some of my favorite tape is McHale totally flummoxing KAJ in the mid 80's.

McHale's favorite shot was unblockable and he's easily one of the 3 best low post offensive players of all time. McHale is the first player in league history to post a 60%+ FG and 80%+ FT. Barkley makes it clear that McHale is the toughest player he ever faced. Maybe you ought to consider some of that before you award the slam dunk.

In mid 80's wasn't ALCINDOR damn near pushing 40? it wasn't the same ALCINDOR that WILT said he needed help with was it?

DROB over MCHALE, no best vs best, just player vs player day1, that's when you're at your best, young and dangerous

3RDASYSTEM
05-30-2013, 10:43 AM
I wasn't thinking about KG one bit when I wrote that. I assumed we all know how huge Duncan was in the playoffs, in this thread we've been talking supporting case - or did you miss that somehow? BTW, Manu took some 3's as his .522 TS% indicates. Why a senior poster would just post raw FG% leads one to wonder what the agenda is? Manu also played some great D. Manu and DRob were clearly the 2nd and 3rd best players for SAS in the playoffs. One guy on your side said DRob was retired and another says Manu was a "bit" player. They averaged 51 MPG between them in those playoffs.

But Clyde was not. BTW, not just for you, but how come nobody is taking me on with the '78 Bullets as the worst NBA Champ of all time in terms of supporting cast - with Elvin Hayes as the best player - gack!

MANU took some 3's that his .522 TS% indicates?

like who do you debate with in live person? like you cant be serious this will carry out in a circle debate?

3RDASYSTEM
05-30-2013, 10:49 AM
In what way? Wins and Losses? SAS was much better than Minny. Head to Head? Very close, and again KG was getting a lot of attention while on Minny, since they sucked.



Why because it kills your case? Line up SAS vs Mnny in the years both were there.

Also, put down the playoff seedlings. Timmy and co. Got to fatten up their playoff stats by playing against 7's and 8's quite a few times.

How come when I use the IVERSON situation as the same as you(and I) use the KG in MINNY I get destroyed for it on here by you and others?

Lo Porto
05-30-2013, 11:02 AM
#1 - he's not a power forward. He's always been the center but the Spurs labeled him as the power forward. Just go back and see who Robinson guarded, how he plays, etc. The Spurs labeled him a PF because they knew he could be considered the best labeled that way but only a top 5 C.

#2 - he's always been treated differently by the refs. Since he was so skilled as Mr. Fundamentals, he always got called by the refs closer to a guard or SF than a C or PF. If you compare the contact Shaq, Dwight, or even Gasol endures compared to Duncan, it's obvious that Duncan was always handled with kid gloves by the refs.

#3 - Duncan has been amazing, but he has never impacted the game like Wilt, Kareem or Russell. It's not even close.

SMH!
05-30-2013, 11:12 AM
#1 - he's not a power forward. He's always been the center but the Spurs labeled him as the power forward. Just go back and see who Robinson guarded, how he plays, etc. The Spurs labeled him a PF because they knew he could be considered the best labeled that way but only a top 5 C.

#2 - he's always been treated differently by the refs. Since he was so skilled as Mr. Fundamentals, he always got called by the refs closer to a guard or SF than a C or PF. If you compare the contact Shaq, Dwight, or even Gasol endures compared to Duncan, it's obvious that Duncan was always handled with kid gloves by the refs.

#3 - Duncan has been amazing, but he has never impacted the game like Wilt, Kareem or Russell. It's not even close.

On your first one, the thread asked if he was one of the greatest "big" men of all time, so him being a center rather then a pf really doesnt matter lol. And your 2nd one is all based on opinion. And third is also opinion, many feel like Duncan has impacted the game, I for one do.

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 11:44 AM
no best vs best, just player vs player day1, that's when you're at your best, young and dangerous

Where did you get that? What a steaming pile...

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 11:45 AM
removed for the sake of common decency.

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 11:48 AM
How come when I use the IVERSON situation as the same as you(and I) use the KG in MINNY I get destroyed for it on here by you and others?

Well at least you admitted you were destroyed.

AI and KG are about as opposite from each other as two pro players can be. AI was a volume scorer in Philly and elsewhere. He dominated the ball to the point of hurting his teams.

OTOH, KG is probably one of 5 best passing bigs of all time, a player that deferred to others, and in Boston a player that left a lot more of himself on the D side of the floor then the O.

If you can't tell the difference between the two, than why should anyone pay attention to you?

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 11:54 AM
#1 - he's not a power forward. He's always been the center but the Spurs labeled him as the power forward. Just go back and see who Robinson guarded, how he plays, etc. The Spurs labeled him a PF because they knew he could be considered the best labeled that way but only a top 5 C.

That's bizarre logic. They labeled him as a PF because that's where the sets had him play. He did great there. In a league thats run short of Centers about the time Shaq he was able to play and dominate at the #5. KG played #5 the past couple of years, something he never was before - because the league got weaker. This is like complaining that Cal Ripken played at 3B. I'd like to have a big man that did well at 4 and 5. SAS had no thought about him being labeled the best at a position. They wanted to win titles and they did.


#3 - Duncan has been amazing, but he has never impacted the game like Wilt, Kareem or Russell. It's not even close.

Tim Duncan is a better player than Bill Russell, hands down.

JordansBulls
05-31-2013, 08:23 AM
I think Tim Duncan vs Shaq vs Hakeem is probably the hardest debate in basketball.

LeperMessiah
05-31-2013, 09:24 AM
History will remember Tim Duncan forever.

3RDASYSTEM
05-31-2013, 09:45 AM
Well at least you admitted you were destroyed.

AI and KG are about as opposite from each other as two pro players can be. AI was a volume scorer in Philly and elsewhere. He dominated the ball to the point of hurting his teams.

OTOH, KG is probably one of 5 best passing bigs of all time, a player that deferred to others, and in Boston a player that left a lot more of himself on the D side of the floor then the O.

If you can't tell the difference between the two, than why should anyone pay attention to you?

For someone to put on a front like you know something you sure don't know nothing about bball talent

IVERSON was a volume shooter because he played with volume allstar type or non scorer/creator 12th man type talent?

I was saying they had same team talent wise when you said MINNY sucked, how could PHI not have sucked with a 1 man scorer squad?

yea IVERSON dominated the ball to the point it hurt the backups he acquired as his core at 5ppg, if you cant tell the diff. between avg and allstar type talent then why are you paying attention to sports and speaking on it blindly?

They had diff. game style but same passion/competiveness

did you not see KG go haywire for IVERSON when he found out he was avail in 06-07'? he was like where my gm at we got to get IVERSON

now go do your homework and quite calling someone a volume shooter playing with MCKIE and SNOW as 2nd and 3rd options, cut the dumb ******** talk out

I get blindly destroyed, its like emo females overreacting before thinking it out what I type

now read very slow and close so you can understand what a 'volume shooter' is

had he shot the same 23 shots per game with MELO then you wouldn't look so bball uneducated(non player)

that would be a volume shooter ballhog

3RDASYSTEM
05-31-2013, 09:49 AM
Where did you get that? What a steaming pile...

go pick up a ball and play at least a game of horse

that's when you're at your best when you young

player vs player day1 is how we players judge'em

we don't need to wait for a PER/WS% to determine whos a better individual player

go to sleep on your steaming pile

where did I get that? from actual playing for yrs and playing with nba players and nba type talented players

seeing who was the best on the court game plus impact wise is not rocket science, its quite abc 123

You know you suck at debating when all you can say is 'what a steaming pile"? are you that confused on bball topics?

3RDASYSTEM
05-31-2013, 09:59 AM
In 1998 with IVERSON his soon to be 'core'(7yrs)robins avg 3.9ppg each

and Bagwell669 is on here calling him a volume shooter

like no **** Sherlock, look at his robins

you win again psd genius

harryharrison
05-31-2013, 10:42 AM
People are saying fans forget how dominant the past bigs were and that we are prisoners of the moment.

I laugh in the face of that logic. Fans forget how DOMINANT Duncan was. In 2003 he lead a lottery ticket team to the Championship.

bagwell368
05-31-2013, 03:09 PM
For someone to put on a front like you know something you sure don't know nothing about bball talent


I was saying they had same team talent wise when you said MINNY sucked, how could PHI not have sucked with a 1 man scorer squad?

Minny was a lot less sucky than the 76'ers. KG did a vast amount more to maximize his team and his teammates than AI did. Ever play? Want to tell me you'll keep running down floor on O if you have some mini-mite guard that won't share the ball - and not take plays off vs. playing with KG who shared the ball?


yea IVERSON dominated the ball to the point it hurt the backups he acquired as his core at 5ppg, if you cant tell the diff. between avg and allstar type talent then why are you paying attention to sports and speaking on it blindly?

AI's teams were better than they looked, his teammates were under utilized due to AI. Minny got more out what they had OTOH. IF you can't see that, than I can't help you.


They had diff. game style but same passion/competiveness

One guy was perhaps one of the 5 best under 6' one on one players of all time, who did not max out when it was 5 on 5. The other guy was one of the 13-14 best players of all time. KG was hated by his opponents and opposing fans, but his teammates didn't hate him. AI was hated by coaches, teammates, and people that know what actual team basketball looks like.


did you not see KG go haywire for IVERSON when he found out he was avail in 06-07'? he was like where my gm at we got to get IVERSON

Maybe KG could have imposed some order on AI. If AI had a time when he actually played a bit of team ball, it was right before that after he left the 76'ers.


now go do your homework and quite calling someone a volume shooter playing with MCKIE and SNOW as 2nd and 3rd options, cut the dumb ******** talk out

In AI's "big" season in the Finals there were 7-8 players on his team with better shooting stats. Obviously most or all of these guys were not going to do as well if they were taking 15 FG's a game, but if AI deferred on say 4-5-6 of his less well selected shots and passed off, they would have scored more, and might have involved other players in the O more. If you had actually coached or played like I have you'd know how critical it is to suppress any players that shots out of the flow of the game - in particular if their percentages are meh. How young man did you miss those truths? Probably because like most people under 30 you think basketball is mostly dunks, blocks, and 3's as shown by the 4 letter network.


I get blindly destroyed, its like emo females overreacting before thinking it out what I type

Not interested in your sex life.


now read very slow and close so you can understand what a 'volume shooter' is

had he shot the same 23 shots per game with MELO then you wouldn't look so bball uneducated(non player)

that would be a volume shooter ballhog

Funny, I played D1 and coached travel/AUU for 10-15 year olds for 14 years. I was watching Wilt and Russell when your parents were children... keep talking, nobody over the age of 28 is buying.

bagwell368
05-31-2013, 03:15 PM
People are saying fans forget how dominant the past bigs were and that we are prisoners of the moment.

I laugh in the face of that logic. Fans forget how DOMINANT Duncan was. In 2003 he lead a lottery ticket team to the Championship.

Elvin Hayes won with a much weaker team in '78. Hakeem won with a weaker team in '94. So yeah, as usual fans always overrate what they have seen and ignore the past.

harryharrison
05-31-2013, 03:32 PM
Elvin Hayes won with a much weaker team in '78. Hakeem won with a weaker team in '94. So yeah, as usual fans always overrate what they have seen and ignore the past.

I don't know much about those teams. Duncan did win with what most would agree was a lottery team. Have other bigs won with less? Maybe they have. I don't know because I'm in my 20s.

But I do know what I saw. That 2003 team was a lottery team.

bagwell368
05-31-2013, 06:19 PM
I don't know much about those teams. Duncan did win with what most would agree was a lottery team. Have other bigs won with less? Maybe they have. I don't know because I'm in my 20s.

But I do know what I saw. That 2003 team was a lottery team.

In your time, that's probably the #1 example. There were earlier examples which I refer to. I'm impressed by your rational/polite behavior - even more so, as it's all too rare around here.

JordansBulls
06-01-2013, 02:58 PM
People are saying fans forget how dominant the past bigs were and that we are prisoners of the moment.

I laugh in the face of that logic. Fans forget how DOMINANT Duncan was. In 2003 he lead a lottery ticket team to the Championship.

In no way shape or form were the 2003 Spurs a lottery team.

KniCks4LiFe
06-01-2013, 03:01 PM
Hakeem? Wilt, Bill, David? Shaq, those are my arguements.