PDA

View Full Version : If Duncan Wins A Fifth Ring, Does He Become A Top Five Player Of All-Time?



amos1er
05-29-2013, 03:11 AM
Well, does he???

I would say yes. He would take Shaq's place in my top five of all time. Debatable on weather he could overtake Wilt though. Perhaps with some more longevity.

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Kobe
8. Bird
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

amos1er
05-29-2013, 03:13 AM
If he gets another finals MVP with that ring he has a good argument for overtaking Wilt.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 03:37 AM
^ In addition to some more longevity.

SugeKnight
05-29-2013, 03:55 AM
Depends on how you value peak vs longevity.

Probably not in my top 5 though

amos1er
05-29-2013, 04:40 AM
Depends on how you value peak vs longevity.

Probably not in my top 5 though

I try my best to factor all in equally in addition to accolades.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 04:41 AM
Depends on how you value peak vs longevity.

Probably not in my top 5 though

Double post.

NYKalltheway
05-29-2013, 05:16 AM
Still around 10-15 for me.

KnicksorBust
05-29-2013, 05:38 AM
I would put him 4th on your list. Ahead of Wilt.

Shlumpledink
05-29-2013, 06:10 AM
No. Unless you're one of those people that just counts rings to evaluate talent. If you look at this team play, and a few of his other championship teams, you'll see that their victories have many heroes. Duncans dominance is felt, but so is the dominance of their system when they are constantly rolling out high quality role players. The dominance of tony parker over the years has been a godsend for Duncan's career.
The only problem I have with Duncan getting all this credit, is people seem to ignore Ginobilli and Parkers and Popovich's contributions.

When you consider that San Antonio has had the same core for the last 10 years, you wonder why they haven't won more?

R. Johnson#3
05-29-2013, 06:51 AM
I don't really use rings to measure a player's greatness. Some of the all time bests couldn't win it all but I don't think that takes away from their individual greatness. Stockton, Malone and Iverson are some of the greatest players ever to grace the hardwood. Just because they never won a ring doesn't change anything in my books.

Badluck33
05-29-2013, 06:59 AM
i think Duncan can be called a top 5 player in NBA over the past 20 years.

I also think hes the most under-rated player of this generation.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 08:16 AM
TD is already top 10
TD titles > Russell's titles (in terms of the difficulty of getting them)
TD is on my all time team - as a PF that can swing to C if needed

He's fundamentally sound, and I'd rather watch him than volume shooters like AI - or most others. I'm not to getting into hysterics about where he is placed.

MonroeFAN
05-29-2013, 09:12 AM
Have the Spurs ever lost in the finals? I think my 04-5 pistons came as close as anyone to beating them.

xRipCity
05-29-2013, 09:19 AM
Duncan is great, don't get me wrong. Statistically one of the best to ever play. Not top 5 though, that list is sacred and the only guy who will fall into that category that is currently playing is LeBron

ATX
05-29-2013, 09:43 AM
I think he'd certainly have an argument for it, and everyone's top 10/5's are going to vary, so depending on the individual he could be top 5. He's top 10 without doubt, and I think anyone could argue that point home with ease. It get's a little more difficult putting him in the top 5, but an argument could certainly be made, considering he'd have 5 rings spanning 3 decades, to go along with numerous personal accolades, and possibly something to be said that he did this all the while by being in one of the smallest markets in the NBA landscape.

D-Leethal
05-29-2013, 09:58 AM
#4 behind MJ, KAJ, Magic.

****ing crazy to think about. Love Timmy D.

Tony_Starks
05-29-2013, 11:04 AM
Nope. Still in my top 10 though.

Pakman
05-29-2013, 11:18 AM
#4 behind MJ, KAJ, Magic.

****ing crazy to think about. Love Timmy D.thats nonsense.

Longhornfan1234
05-29-2013, 11:54 AM
Top 15-20.

OceanSpray
05-29-2013, 11:59 AM
Did someone honestly say Tim is 10-15? He's a lock for 5-10 right now. He doesn't even need another ring to prove that.

kdspurman
05-29-2013, 12:01 PM
Did someone honestly say Tim is 10-15? He's a lock for 5-10 right now. He doesn't even need another ring to prove that.

10-15 & 15-20 were mentioned. (right before your post)

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, just would be curious to see who they would have ahead of him.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 12:02 PM
i don't think winning another ring should vault him too much higher than he already is.

he's firmly in my top 10. winning a ring late in his career isn't something I value too much. he might creep up a spot.

if i didn't have him over Kobe (I always go back and forth between the two) i would now though. i think they're the closest two players on my top-10 list. I think rings are really the only thing that favors Kobe at this point. duncan has the longevity to match. he has better career numbers. he has much better career playoff numbers. 3 finals mvps, 2 mvps, 14 all-defense teams, 14 all-nba teams...

his resume across the board trumps kobe's. if the ring is the cherry on the top (i don't think it should be necessarily) so be it.

not trying to make it a kobe thing, it's just kobe has always been the one i've ranked right with duncan.

LAKobeBryant
05-29-2013, 12:07 PM
best power foward to ever play the game. in that view you can say hes top 5.

ManningToTyree
05-29-2013, 12:20 PM
I say not quite but he would be right there. Love Timmy

LAKobeBryant
05-29-2013, 12:30 PM
Top 15-20.

can you even name 15 legends.

todu82
05-29-2013, 12:34 PM
No, Duncan's a solid player but as for right now guys like Michael Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Bill Russell, Shaq, Kobe, Oscar Robertson and Hakeem are ahead of him on an all time list.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 12:43 PM
no one really since jordan can match this resume.

2 MVPs
3 Finals MVPs
4 Championships
14 AS Games
14 All-NBA Teams
14 All-Defense Teams
14th most rebounds all time
9th most blocks
27th most points
9th in career PER (24.7)
9th in career win shares (184.2)
11th in career WS/48 (.213)

career: 20.2 points, 11.2 rebounds, 3.1 assists, 50.7% shooting, 24.7 PER
playoffs: 22.0 points, 11.9 rebounds, 3.3 assists, 49.9% shooting, 25.0 PER

7th most points in playoff history
5th most rebounds in playoff history
most blocks in playoff history
8th best PER in playoff history
4th most win shares in playoff history


i don't get how anyone in their right mind says that guy isn't in the top 10. that's an all-time great resume. one of the greatest playoff performers ever...probably top 5 IMO

Lakersfan2483
05-29-2013, 01:20 PM
Well, does he???

I would say yes. He would take Shaq's place in my top five of all time. Debatable on weather he could overtake Wilt though. Perhaps with some more longevity.

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Kobe
8. Bird
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

In my opinion, I would say no to him being in the top 5. However, he is a top ten player of all time for sure. I just don't think a 5th ring automatically places him above any of the following guys: MJ, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Russell. One thing that you certainly need to do is factor in how he's going to win this 5th ring as well. If the Spurs do go on to win a ring, I think it will be primarily because of Tony Parker and his ability to control the game and take over games down the stretch. Now that's not to say that Duncan isn't a huge piece and reason for the team winning, however at this stage in their careers, Parker is the team's best player. I could see him winning another finals mvp if they do in fact win another title.

Lakersfan2483
05-29-2013, 01:24 PM
no one really since jordan can match this resume.

2 MVPs
3 Finals MVPs
4 Championships
14 AS Games
14 All-NBA Teams
14 All-Defense Teams
14th most rebounds all time
9th most blocks
27th most points
9th in career PER (24.7)
9th in career win shares (184.2)
11th in career WS/48 (.213)

career: 20.2 points, 11.2 rebounds, 3.1 assists, 50.7% shooting, 24.7 PER
playoffs: 22.0 points, 11.9 rebounds, 3.3 assists, 49.9% shooting, 25.0 PER

7th most points in playoff history
5th most rebounds in playoff history
most blocks in playoff history
8th best PER in playoff history
4th most win shares in playoff history


i don't get how anyone in their right mind says that guy isn't in the top 10. that's an all-time great resume. one of the greatest playoff performers ever...probably top 5 IMO

He and Kobe have the best resumes since Jordan retired. Also, KG's resume is pretty outstanding as well. Shaq's resume isn't too shabby also, if you go back and luck at it.

Bruno
05-29-2013, 01:39 PM
Have the Spurs ever lost in the finals? I think my 04-5 pistons came as close as anyone to beating them.

no, but they've never gone back-to-back either. not one successful title defense during this Spurs dynasty.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 01:46 PM
He and Kobe have the best resumes since Jordan retired. Also, KG's resume is pretty outstanding as well. Shaq's resume isn't too shabby also, if you go back and luck at it.

i think what duncan has done stacks up favorably to all three of those guys. shaq is the closest, but duncan doing what he's doing now this late in his career has me more willing to give him the edge.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 01:49 PM
no, but they've never gone back-to-back either. not one successful title defense during this Spurs dynasty.

What's more impressive? Winning back-to-back or winning 5 over a 15 year period?

Genuinely asking...I'm not sure. I think I lean towards the latter. If Duncan gets another, well, that's just super impressive. Winning it as a 22 year-old, then a few times in his prime with a new cast, and then as a 36 year old to cap it off. That's awesome.

JasonJohnHorn
05-29-2013, 01:50 PM
There is a case for Duncan with or without this ring.

Duncan is my favorite player of to be drafted since 1990. But I wouldn't put him top five (though I would have him ahead of Kobe).

Wilt and Kareem and Russell all did so much in defining the game and winning and putting up such high level of performances, I can't imagine a top 5 without all three of those guys. And I think most people will agree that Jordan belongs in the top five, with Bird and Magic have strong cases as well.

I also have Hakeem ahead of Duncan. I mean, Hakeem was just SO great... but I wouldnt argue with somebody who had Duncan ahead of Hakeem, of had Duncan in the top five, but he's not in my top five. I think playing at his current level at 40 then he'd break my top five. We'll see.

PhillyFaninLA
05-29-2013, 01:53 PM
Say Robert Horry is better then Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant or Lebron James or admit the logic behind this topic is highly flawed.

kdspurman
05-29-2013, 02:30 PM
What's more impressive? Winning back-to-back or winning 5 over a 15 year period?

Genuinely asking...I'm not sure. I think I lean towards the latter. If Duncan gets another, well, that's just super impressive. Winning it as a 22 year-old, then a few times in his prime with a new cast, and then as a 36 year old to cap it off. That's awesome.

When you consider how many greats have less than that, or none at all, I'd say it's pretty impressive. Not to mention winning 70% of their games, never missing the playoffs, never winning less than 50 games (except 99 of course) Granted people will look at championships as the standard, or the fact that they've never repeated, but impressive nonetheless.

I mean the Bulls won what 6 titles in an 8 year span and before or after that haven't gotten anymore. They've also had a few losing seasons since then. But to have a guy who's been the glue guy of the team through the injuries, roster changes, etc... to possibly get a 5th title in 3 different decades? (Only John Salley has done that I believe) That's impressive, and as a fan as much as I would've loved to repeat, I can't say this opportunity isn't as good, if not better when looking at the big picture.

Lakers Ghost
05-29-2013, 02:37 PM
No. Unless you're one of those people that just counts rings to evaluate talent. If you look at this team play, and a few of his other championship teams, you'll see that their victories have many heroes. Duncans dominance is felt, but so is the dominance of their system when they are constantly rolling out high quality role players. The dominance of tony parker over the years has been a godsend for Duncan's career.
The only problem I have with Duncan getting all this credit, is people seem to ignore Ginobilli and Parkers and Popovich's contributions.

When you consider that San Antonio has had the same core for the last 10 years, you wonder why they haven't won more?

no it is not all baout rings or fisher or robert horry would be in this conversation too but agree with most of what you said.:cool:

Lakers Ghost
05-29-2013, 02:39 PM
he will become a top five player for some people and not others it all depends on your believes.:cool:

Quinnsanity
05-29-2013, 02:40 PM
Bird is 8th?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Jordan
Russell
Kareem
Magic
Bird

is my top 5. Duncan would be in that next group. LeBron is the only one playing currently with a top 5 shot imo.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 03:18 PM
I can't speak about the old guys like Russell, Wilt and KAJ.

But if Duncan plays well and wins a 5th ring he puts a concrete lock on the best player of this generation.

Most basketball people already have him better than Kobe, better than Garnett and about par with Shaq.

A 5th rings and 4th FMVP would put him over the top. It would separate him, flat out.

Bruno
05-29-2013, 03:25 PM
i don't think winning another ring should vault him too much higher than he already is. he's firmly in my top 10. winning a ring late in his career isn't something I value too much. he might creep up a spot. .

As long as his impact is still high and he's contributing to the teams success at a high level I think even a late in career championships should help a players overall career stock. so long as the value and production is still there.


if i didn't have him over Kobe (I always go back and forth between the two) i would now though. i think they're the closest two players on my top-10 list. I think rings are really the only thing that favors Kobe at this point. duncan has the longevity to match. he has better career numbers. he has much better career playoff numbers. 3 finals mvps, 2 mvps, 14 all-defense teams, 14 all-nba teams...

his resume across the board trumps kobe's. if the ring is the cherry on the top (i don't think it should be necessarily) so be it.

Duncan has Kobe in a lot of ways but across the board? Doesn't 'across the board' kinda imply that Duncan literally tops him in everything?

To date Kobe tops Duncan in championships, all-nba first team selections, total all-nba team selections, total all-star game appearances, total regular season points (8,000+ more points), total post-season points (800+), total regular season assists (2,000+), total post-season assists (350+), total regular season steals, total post-season steals, total field goals made in playoffs and regular season, total free-throws made in the playoffs and regular season, better FT shooter, more defensive first-team selections :hide:, more scoring championships.

Kobe is
3rd in most post-season point in NBA history.
4th in most regular-season points in NBA history.
4th in most post-season FGM in NBA history.
6th in most regular-season FGM in NBA history.
2nd in most post-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most regular-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most post-season three pointers made in NBA history.
7th in most post-season assists in NBA history.
5th in most post-season steals in NBA history.
7th in total post-season win-shares.
2nd most top five MVP finishes in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA team selection in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA first-team selections in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA defensive first-team selections in NBA history.
2nd in most All-Star selections in NBA history.
1st in most All-Star game MVPs in NBA history.
One out of four players to ever win the Finals MVP award in consecutive seasons in NBA history.


Kobe Bryant has a higher regular season TS% than Tim Duncan, Duncan a higher playoff TS%; both by negligible margins. For a player who's regularly criticized as a volume scorer Kobe has done a magical job of posting a nearly identical career TS% as one of the NBAs all-time beacons in fundamentals and smart-basketball.

Important to note- Duncans stat line raises in the post-season. I have a lot of respect for Duncan on this feat, one of my favorite reasons for arguing him as top five should he win another championship w SA. Duncan was the obvious leader of on court impact for the 2007 Spurs, despite Parkers finals MVP. The same can't be said in 2013 should SA rack their 5th- Parker has the stats to back up that potential finals MVP this year. I also argue that Karl Malones second MVP in lockout '99 should be Duncans, and that Duncan should have three regular season MVPs.

4,688. Kobe has played 4,688 more minutes than Tim Duncan throughout their careers (regular season+ playoffs). Tim Duncan would have to play an additional 133.5 games at his career regular season minute per game average of 35.1 minutes to match Kobe in total time spent on the court. That's nearly a seasons and a half more production at starters minute average for Kobe. As far as longevity, Kobe edges him out by a season and a half in total production on the court (devils advocate- Duncan has the higher WS/48 averages and still tops Bryant by about 10 win-shares overall despite this).

Regular season MVP award shares are nearly identical, edge Duncan. This is mainly because of Duncans early dominance in MVP voting during the '99-'05 Spurs run. Despite this seasons reemergence for Duncan, he hasn't finished top five in MVP voting since 2007. Kobe has finished top five every season since 2006, and has 11 top five MVP finishes for his career. Although they've both become titans of longevity Kobe has remained more consistatnly dominat throughout (Duncan peaked out at a higher level of statistical dominance/defensive impact).
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/mvp_shares.html?redir

It should be noted that Duncans 2013 post-season PER, TS% and win-share figures are well beneath what Bryant posted during his later career 2009 and 2010 championships. Should Duncan win a fifth ring it should it should be remembered that his 2013 post-season production is on par (if not lower) than what Bryant posted in 2000, and 2002 (seasons where his championships are constantly criticized as being less valuable due to a lack of MVP level production, statistically.)


Do we take Olympics into consideration when we talk about better overall career, or do we leave that for The Hall? Kobe has two gold medals, Duncan has zero. Last mini-point; The Lakers since Kobe are 4-2 in the post-season against Duncan and the Spurs. Each winner in the six matchups went on to the NBA finals. On the road of going through each other in the post-season, advantage Lakers in the battle of the dynasties- heads up.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=bryanko01&y1=2013&p2=duncati01&y2=2013

A fifth championship certainly tilts the scale in favor of Duncan vs Kobe, even if Tony Parker gets the nod as 'top dog'. But Kobe is certainly right there in cumulative stats, career accomplishments, accolades and NBA championships.

Minimal
05-29-2013, 03:25 PM
Rings don't mean that much, so therefore he won't surpass Shaq even if he wins 3 rings more, atleast not for me.

Bruno
05-29-2013, 03:34 PM
What's more impressive? Winning back-to-back or winning 5 over a 15 year period?

Well, I'd say five championships is always better than two (regardless if those two championships were won back-to-back).

Five over fifteen years is very impressive. Kobes five championships over eleven seasons is also very impressive.



Genuinely asking...I'm not sure. I think I lean towards the latter. If Duncan gets another, well, that's just super impressive. Winning it as a 22 year-old, then a few times in his prime with a new cast, and then as a 36 year old to cap it off. That's awesome.

Beyond awesome, Duncan is the man.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 03:40 PM
Ignore PER and Win Shares. They only measure the box score. They do not measure impact on the game.

b@llhog24
05-29-2013, 03:42 PM
I have him at 6th under Hakeem. I normally wouldn't move a player up just because he improved his ring count, however in this case he moves to top 5 for me.

b@llhog24
05-29-2013, 03:43 PM
Ignore PER and Win Shares. They only measure the box score. They do not measure impact on the game.

Unless you've watched every player play, every single minute of Nba basketball. You're gonna be prone to some serious biases without the use of stats.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 03:50 PM
Unless you've watched every player play, every single minute of Nba basketball. You're gonna be prone to some serious biases without the use of stats.

Yes, there is bias. I saw Shaq, Kobe and Garnett play in their careers. I saw Duncan too. I watch all of them win rings. I watched all of them attempt to have longevity and I took note of their peak/dominance.

Of course I can't see every game. But I can make a good judgement of guys I SAW play.

Tim Duncan is just the best player I have seen. If he plays well in the Finals and wins. It's just end of discussion for me.

IversonIsKrazy
05-29-2013, 03:51 PM
Top 10 EASILY. Top 5 would be debatable, but he can defs make a case for it. The 2003 championship is and forever will be his most impressive tho. He put the team on his back on offense and was the anchor of their defense.

Bruno
05-29-2013, 03:54 PM
Top 10 EASILY. Top 5 would be debatable, but he can defs make a case for it. The 2003 championship is and forever will be his most impressive tho. He put the team on his back on offense and was the anchor of their defense.

x2.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 03:57 PM
Top 10 EASILY. Top 5 would be debatable, but he can defs make a case for it. The 2003 championship is and forever will be his most impressive tho. He put the team on his back on offense and was the anchor of their defense.

Yes his 2003 run is the most impressive. He can't just go back and be 27 with a lottery team again and win the title.

But everything a player does in his career matters. He can't change his peak level impact on the game. It's passed.

But he can add to his resume.

ArmLaker
05-29-2013, 04:03 PM
Not top 5, yet. Currently I have in under Kobe and Shaq respectively but he might just be able to squeeze by Shaq if he wins another chip. As far as him being better than Kobe, nah I doubt it.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 04:15 PM
Not top 5, yet. Currently I have in under Kobe and Shaq respectively but he might just be able to squeeze by Shaq if he wins another chip. As far as him being better than Kobe, nah I doubt it.

Of course you do. You got a giant Lakers avatar.

Sly Guy
05-29-2013, 04:16 PM
Well, does he???

I would say yes. He would take Shaq's place in my top five of all time. Debatable on weather he could overtake Wilt though. Perhaps with some more longevity.

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Kobe
8. Bird
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 04:17 PM
you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

If Duncan plays well for the 5th time in a Finals series it means he's played well more than 4 times. And 5 times is more than 4 times.

ArmLaker
05-29-2013, 04:20 PM
Of course you do. You got a giant Lakers avatar.

Prove me otherwise as to why I shouldn't have Duncan below Kobe and even Shaquille O'Neal.

b@llhog24
05-29-2013, 04:26 PM
you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

No he already thinks that TD is better than Russell.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 04:31 PM
you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

i will say that i agree with the last sentence here.

i will also say that i think he already believes that duncan is better than bill regardless.


but...

bill russell won 11 rings, sure. but many were in an EIGHT team league, and his last in a FOURTEEN team league.

i think comparing rings won in the 50s, 60s and even 70s as an equal accomplishment as winning a ring in the 2000s is a foolish thing to do. it's just much harder to do these days, period.

i mean, there were years when boston had 3/5ths of the All-NBA First Team on their roster (this same argument of a small league with unbalanced talent distribution can be made for those Lakers teams too). there was really only one team even close to their level for most of his run. a few randomly great teams would pop up, but nothing consistent.

he was playing on teams with 8 or 7 hall of famers on them. the Lakers were their staunchest competition back then and the most they could boast in the 60s was 3 all stars (Baylore, Goodrich, West).

if the rings argument should be thrown out the door it's for bill russell.

harryharrison
05-29-2013, 04:32 PM
Prove me otherwise as to why I shouldn't have Duncan below Kobe and even Shaquille O'Neal.

Most basketball analysts think Duncan has had a better career than Kobe. They are split with Shaq.

O'Neal has a great case against against Duncan.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 04:35 PM
Prove me otherwise as to why I shouldn't have Duncan below Kobe and even Shaquille O'Neal.

i'll quote myself earlier in this thread.


if i didn't have him over Kobe (I always go back and forth between the two) i would now though. i think they're the closest two players on my top-10 list. I think rings are really the only thing that favors Kobe at this point. duncan has the longevity to match. he has better career numbers. he has much better career playoff numbers. 3 finals mvps, 2 mvps, 14 all-defense teams, 14 all-nba teams...

his resume across the board trumps kobe's. if the ring is the cherry on the top (i don't think it should be necessarily) so be it.

not trying to make it a kobe thing, it's just kobe has always been the one i've ranked right with duncan.

him and shaq are closer. i think duncan could win out because of longevity at this point.

ArmLaker
05-29-2013, 04:53 PM
I get you, but you really can't use longevity as a point against Kobe of all players to make a case for Duncan being better. You can use it for a TD vs Shaq debate surely. Just talent and ability wise I rate Kobe higher. Hell I can even make a strong case for Shaq.

kdspurman
05-29-2013, 04:57 PM
Funny there was just something written about Duncan vs Kobe today, when discussing "best player of this generation"

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/58875/duncan-numbers-among-generations-best

Bruno couple things from your post (which I respect & think is totally fair BTW)

1- Kobe has Duncan in Olympic play frankly cause Tim was not happy with FIBA rules & officiating and thus chose not to play anymore. I don't know if this is something that is entirely relevant when comparing the 2.

2- I think most folks can agree the more defense team selections in favor of Kobe is probably something that can be taken with a grain of salt. :eyebrow: (I think you realize this too lol)

3- All star appearances: would Duncan have more if he was as popular as Kobe? Possibly. It's not necessarily a testament to his play, but rather a popularity thing. He keeps to himself, chooses not to market himself the way other guys do, and at the end of the day, he's not the kind of player/personality people want to see in a game that's supposed to be high flying & flashy play.

Their careers and accolades speak for themselves. I personally think 2010 & 2011 kind of hurt Duncan, he was battling that knee injury and saw a dip in his production and just wasn't himself. As a big man, knee problems are their worst nightmare. Retirement was looking inevitable to be perfectly honest. But these past 2 years, he's been great again, and looks like he could go another 2-3 years if he chose to.

Kobe has been in great shape and always is able to play through injuries. So seeing him play dam near 40 mpg this season & last and still able to produce night in and night out has been pretty amazing, just from the aspect of how much mileage he has. Being the guy he is, I don't think he'd have it any other way, though 1 has to wonder if he had a coach to preserve his minutes and rest him a little more, how much that could extend his career.

But these guys play different styles, different positions, and are just different players. What Duncan has to do for his team, Kobe might not have to & vice versa. Duncan was more instrumental to his teams success on the defensive & offensive side without causing any controversy with his teammates & ownership, while Kobe had to shoulder a huge load offensively most years and certainly carried some mediocre teams a few years, and rightfully voiced his opinions and frustrations about it. They have 2 different demeanor's, attitudes, philosophies, but they've both had pretty dam good careers and still going strong at their age.

Chronz
05-29-2013, 05:02 PM
Duncan has the best "guy you would rather build around" vibe, its not just his talent with him, but what his character brings to your organization. Thats why I have Duncan ahead of Kobe, because even if I think the talent is comparable, their approach to team building arent.

It takes a herculean dominance to combat the superstar ego that Duncan lacks.

tredigs
05-29-2013, 05:05 PM
I get you, but you really can't use longevity as a point against Kobe of all players to make a case for Duncan being better. You can use it for a TD vs Shaq debate surely. Just talent and ability wise I rate Kobe higher. Hell I can even make a strong case for Shaq.

If Duncan wasn't so much more monumentally important to a teams defense (and in turn winning imo) than Kobe than I could see the debate between those two being a flip, but he is. To me Duncan is already clearly ahead of Kobe - his stats, playoff success as a #1, 2 way dominance, etc. all go his way - and if he showed the media or endorsement possibilities an ounce of care that would be obvious to most casual fans.

Duncan and Shaq is a great debate, but Shaq having 10+ years of prime is more than enough to have him over Kobe imo given just how dominant he was.

akagiredsuns
05-29-2013, 05:25 PM
Duncan is great, don't get me wrong. Statistically one of the best to ever play. Not top 5 though, that list is sacred and the only guy who will fall into that category that is currently playing is LeBron

:facepalm:

Bruno
05-29-2013, 05:32 PM
Funny there was just something written about Duncan vs Kobe today, when discussing "best player of this generation"

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/58875/duncan-numbers-among-generations-best

Bruno couple things from your post (which I respect & think is totally fair BTW)
nice.



1- Kobe has Duncan in Olympic play frankly cause Tim was not happy with FIBA rules & officiating and thus chose not to play anymore. I don't know if this is something that is entirely relevant when comparing the 2.certainly not in peak or statistics but it should be at least mentioned when talking about overall career. Duncan was there in 2004.

I think it does have an impact on their careers. From 2008 until now Kobe has committed summers to team USA during summers where he was taking the Lakers deep into June (2008-2010). The amount of time that his body had to heal in between those seasons wasn't enough time to properly heal and that's why we saw Kobe crash so hard towards the end of the 2011 regular season and playoffs (he had played more basketball than anyone over those three years as he started his 30s) All that extra time added up and with this Achilles injury he wasn't even able to give it a legit go against the Spurs this post season, which would have been Duncan and Kobe's seventh all-time meeting in the post-season.

Of course the achilles injury has a lot more to do with MDAs minutes this season than the build up of deep june runs and olympic play that hobbled Bryant from 2009-2011, but I'm making the point that Kobe always started seasons from 2008 and on, on-fire statistically (I reference one year in one of my blogs). but due to a lack of a full summers off, his line drops gradually throughout the year due to fatigue. that has been happening for years, it's a consistent pattern i've observed. Duncan has been extremely fortunate to have his full summers to recover. Zero olympic play, only two trips to the WCF over five years from 2008 through 2012, as well as Pops brilliant minute management have allowed Duncan the luxury of rest, which has allowed his body to not burn out and still be in contention this year at his age. Kobe never had that luxury, and if there's anything that should show for it- I'd argue that it should be Olympic gold.


2- I think most folks can agree the more defense team selections in favor of Kobe is probably something that can be taken with a grain of salt. :eyebrow: (I think you realize this too lol)

haha, of course. Duncan is the more important defender, regardless of all defensive team nods. Kobe deserved most of his defensive team selections (the last 2-3 were questionable but the bulk were not) and he has the accolades to express excellence on the defensive end. but Duncan as an anchor was able to do things for his teams defense that guards, specifically Kobe, can not. he's also right there with defensive accolades and is dominant in defensive win-shares.


3- All star appearances: would Duncan have more if he was as popular as Kobe? Possibly. It's not necessarily a testament to his play, but rather a popularity thing. He keeps to himself, chooses not to market himself the way other guys do, and at the end of the day, he's not the kind of player/personality people want to see in a game that's supposed to be high flying & flashy play.

good point. the only difference between Duncan and Kobe as far as all-star game appearances is 2012. Both made it in '98 for the first time, (no '99 all-star game due to lockout season) and every all-star game from 2000-2013 (except Duncan in 2012). Popularity is no doubt important for selecting the starters but coaches pick the bench. LaMarcus Aldridge, Marc Gasol, Kevin Love, and Dirk Nowitzki were all selected by the coaches as the F/Cs representing the western conference bench behind Blake Griffin and Andrew Bynum as starters. Obviously Duncan wasn't himself.


Their careers and accolades speak for themselves. I personally think 2010 & 2011 kind of hurt Duncan, he was battling that knee injury and saw a dip in his production and just wasn't himself. As a big man, knee problems are their worst nightmare. Retirement was looking inevitable to be perfectly honest. But these past 2 years, he's been great again, and looks like he could go another 2-3 years if he chose to.
it's already looking like the public has forgotten 2010 and 2011. if he closes out his career with production/success like he had this year that will be all that people remember. this was no doubt the perfect year for the Spurs to advance to the finals now that the team is mostly healthy for the first post-season in years (and other key injuries in the WC crippling other contenders).


Kobe has been in great shape and always is able to play through injuries. So seeing him play dam near 40 mpg this season & last and still able to produce night in and night out has been pretty amazing, just from the aspect of how much mileage he has. Being the guy he is, I don't think he'd have it any other way, though 1 has to wonder if he had a coach to preserve his minutes and rest him a little more, how much that could extend his career.
I know, and Phil tried. Phil had him down to 33.5 in 2011. Brown and MDA allowed his minutes to fly through the roof. That's why having strong coaches like Jackson and Pop is such a luxury- their players respect them enough to accept the minutes they are being dealt for their long term preservation, and for the long run of aiming for being fresh in the post season.


But these guys play different styles, different positions, and are just different players. What Duncan has to do for his team, Kobe might not have to & vice versa. Duncan was more instrumental to his teams success on the defensive & offensive side without causing any controversy with his teammates & ownership, while Kobe had to shoulder a huge load offensively most years and certainly carried some mediocre teams a few years, and rightfully voiced his opinions and frustrations about it. They have 2 different demeanor's, attitudes, philosophies, but they've both had pretty dam good careers and still going strong at their age.
x2.

Tony_Starks
05-29-2013, 05:59 PM
A lot of people won't admit it but Duncan's personality is a big reason they put him over Kobe. Just career accomplishment and numbers wise an argument can be made for either one.

Keep in mind Parker was having a MVP season this year and will more than likely be finals MVP if they get a chip this year.

LAKERS4LIFE!!
05-29-2013, 06:05 PM
Funny there was just something written about Duncan vs Kobe today, when discussing "best player of this generation"

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/58875/duncan-numbers-among-generations-best

Bruno couple things from your post (which I respect & think is totally fair BTW)

1- Kobe has Duncan in Olympic play frankly cause Tim was not happy with FIBA rules & officiating and thus chose not to play anymore. I don't know if this is something that is entirely relevant when comparing the 2.

2- I think most folks can agree the more defense team selections in favor of Kobe is probably something that can be taken with a grain of salt. :eyebrow: (I think you realize this too lol)

3- All star appearances: would Duncan have more if he was as popular as Kobe? Possibly. It's not necessarily a testament to his play, but rather a popularity thing. He keeps to himself, chooses not to market himself the way other guys do, and at the end of the day, he's not the kind of player/personality people want to see in a game that's supposed to be high flying & flashy play.

Their careers and accolades speak for themselves. I personally think 2010 & 2011 kind of hurt Duncan, he was battling that knee injury and saw a dip in his production and just wasn't himself. As a big man, knee problems are their worst nightmare. Retirement was looking inevitable to be perfectly honest. But these past 2 years, he's been great again, and looks like he could go another 2-3 years if he chose to.

Kobe has been in great shape and always is able to play through injuries. So seeing him play dam near 40 mpg this season & last and still able to produce night in and night out has been pretty amazing, just from the aspect of how much mileage he has. Being the guy he is, I don't think he'd have it any other way, though 1 has to wonder if he had a coach to preserve his minutes and rest him a little more, how much that could extend his career.

But these guys play different styles, different positions, and are just different players. What Duncan has to do for his team, Kobe might not have to & vice versa. Duncan was more instrumental to his teams success on the defensive & offensive side without causing any controversy with his teammates & ownership, while Kobe had to shoulder a huge load offensively most years and certainly carried some mediocre teams a few years, and rightfully voiced his opinions and frustrations about it. They have 2 different demeanor's, attitudes, philosophies, but they've both had pretty dam good careers and still going strong at their age.



Probably the best post I've read in the NBA forum in a loooong time.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 06:11 PM
Keep in mind Parker was having a MVP season this year and will more than likely be finals MVP if they get a chip this year.

when comparing Duncan to Kobe I'm not sure why this matters. This parallels Kobe in his early championship years.

they'd both be at 5 rings. Duncan would have 3 finals MVPs, Kobe has 2. it more than evens Duncan out in that regard. in fact, the "RINGZ" argument would probably slightly favor TD.

Tony_Starks
05-29-2013, 06:41 PM
when comparing Duncan to Kobe
I'm not sure why this matters. This parallels Kobe in his early championship years.

they'd both be at 5 rings. Duncan would have 3 finals MVPs, Kobe has 2. it more than evens Duncan out in that regard. in fact, the "RINGZ" argument would probably slightly favor TD.

I just mentioned that because a lot of people tend to hold Shaqs finals MVPs against Kobe career-wise even though he played a huge role in those wins and could've actually won one of those.

Even though Duncan is still ballin Parker is clearly the best player on the team. There have been playoff games this season where Duncan's numbers were very pedestrian and he even sat the bench against the Wubs in crunch time for a Spurs win.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 06:53 PM
you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

Titles were easier to win back in the day. Duncan's 4 were tougher to win than Russell's 11 - easily.

Not buying?

#1. Consider he played for the best Coach and GM of his era
#2. Consider he played with 3, 4, 5, and 6 OTHER HOF'ers on the same team
#3. No other franchise put together any sort of team that could battle the C's except the Lakers in Bill's last two years, and they were the best team in the West - a much weaker conference. Bill played on 9 #1 SRS teams and 3 more that were #2 - partially due to how great that TEAM was and partially due to how pathetic the rest of the league tended to be.
#4. Bill played when there two and much later 3 rounds of playoffs, he played in seasons with only ~72 regular season games, taxing him less, and allowing him to play more seasons.
#5. Red traded for Bill and he joined a team of high paced offensive players needing defense. Bill had the greatest placement of any player in NBA history. If he had been drafted by the Pistons he would have zero titles, the Hawks 1 or 2, the Bulls zero....

Bill Russell whom I saw many times with my own eyes is not top 10, he's not even in the top 7 Centers.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 06:57 PM
Duncan has the best "guy you would rather build around" vibe, its not just his talent with him, but what his character brings to your organization. Thats why I have Duncan ahead of Kobe, because even if I think the talent is comparable, their approach to team building arent.

It takes a herculean dominance to combat the superstar ego that Duncan lacks.

Amen. He's a great fit.

Funny thing is, that KG is a great fit too, but fans think he's a dick because he's punky and barbed to his enemies. He's a hell of a teammate as anyone that played with him can tell you. That kind of nasty is good.

Kobe among others is not, because the game revolves around them (in many ways), and not the team.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-29-2013, 07:00 PM
You can argue him as 2nd best big man all time if he does win (I think Kareem will be #1 big man). You can probably rank him 5 depending on how much value you have on Wilt and Russell.

Lakers + Giants
05-29-2013, 07:17 PM
Just wanted to say that ManRam, KD, and Bruno had some awesome posts here. read every single word.

3RDASYSTEM
05-29-2013, 07:31 PM
TD is already top 10
TD titles > Russell's titles (in terms of the difficulty of getting them)
TD is on my all time team - as a PF that can swing to C if needed

He's fundamentally sound, and I'd rather watch him than volume shooters like AI - or most others. I'm not to getting into hysterics about where he is placed.


I bet DUNCAN would either be a volume shooting big man with 7yrs of MCKIE/SNOW as his PARKER/GINOBILI or be at home for playoffs every yr(out 1st rd anyway), I bet DUNCAN would see his PER-efficient ******** fall big time with avg players surrounding him and his shots per game would skyrocket

how does this go over your head? are you also one of the non players on here?

sort of like KD did when RUSS went out of playoffs

had IVERSON had SHAQ as his big and a owner like BUSS to fill out the roster he wouldn't have been no volume shooter, he shot damn near 50pct coming out of G'TOWN but shot 40pct with MCKIE/SNOW but 46pct with MELO as a old old man, yea I get it some volume shooter(by trade)

and no matter how difficult 4 or 5 will never trump 11, and RUSS had a way tougher mental in winning back then with all that open crucial racism, now that's some difficulty for you

JordansBulls
05-29-2013, 07:36 PM
I think with Duncan what sets him apart is that he was able to win multiple titles for a franchise that never won anything prior to him arriving.

3RDASYSTEM
05-29-2013, 07:40 PM
I just mentioned that because a lot of people tend to hold Shaqs finals MVPs against Kobe career-wise even though he played a huge role in those wins and could've actually won one of those.

Even though Duncan is still ballin Parker is clearly the best player on the team. There have been playoff games this season where Duncan's numbers were very pedestrian and he even sat the bench against the Wubs in crunch time for a Spurs win.

I would agree had BEAN drawn the triple teams and opened it up for SHAQ 1000x over

but it was the other way around, had BEAN been destroying the young version duo of a BOWEN/ARTEST type perimeter tandem and finding SHAQ and others wide open, he would no doubt have those 3

that's how SHAQ was viewed, he was the triple team-hack a SHAQ headache, everybody on LA roster benefited, BEAN is a tough matchup 1 on 1, how could he not do damage and score with that type of benefit from modern day WILT?

but it didn't happen that way because he just wasn't that type of player, he even called himself a sidekick

DUNCAN said he's riding PARKER's coattails now but he's 37 yrs old, he would never say that at 25yrs of age, we already seen that version as PARKER was ROBIN and still is, just BATMAN is aged and ROBIN stepped up a little more,teamwork

JordansBulls
05-29-2013, 07:45 PM
you think adding a 5th ring makes him better than a guy with 11 as a player? That's just about the most flawed logic I've ever heard. If Duncan is a top 5 player then he's a top 5 player without the validation of needing another ring.

I don't think Duncan is better than Russell, but the 11 rings are not the same. Russell won 25 playoffs series to get 11 rings. You would have to win 20 series to get 5 rings, 24 series to get 6 rings. So when you think of it like that it is totally different. Hell in our time you would have to win 44 series to get 11 rings now, which is 20 more series than Russell had to win to get his 11.

3RDASYSTEM
05-29-2013, 07:46 PM
Duncan has the best "guy you would rather build around" vibe, its not just his talent with him, but what his character brings to your organization. Thats why I have Duncan ahead of Kobe, because even if I think the talent is comparable, their approach to team building arent.

It takes a herculean dominance to combat the superstar ego that Duncan lacks.


I see where you coming from but his impact trumps BEAN pretty bad from day1

just think DUNCAN was in Finals in like yr 2 with aging HOF in DROB

BEAN had the allworld in his psd prime SHAQ and took double the yrs

that speaks volumes, sort of how like BRON is on verge of going 3 for 3 after going 1 for his first 7, special players show it day1, no matter the ring, impact is there regardless and felt

DUNCAN being a good mate and all just makes it that more gravy, but its all about the hardwood impact 99pct of the time

sfattahian
05-29-2013, 08:04 PM
Well, does he???

I would say yes. He would take Shaq's place in my top five of all time. Debatable on weather he could overtake Wilt though. Perhaps with some more longevity.

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Kobe
8. Bird
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

No way he's better than anybody on that list. I'd revise the list though, Kareem isn't top-5.

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
LeBron
Hakeem
Shaq
Kobe
Kareem

ManRam
05-29-2013, 08:06 PM
I think with Duncan what sets him apart is that he was able to win multiple titles for a franchise that never won anything prior to him arriving.

see, i don't get why that stuff matters.

would you value a player who won a ring with the wizards (have won a ring) more than you'd value an identical player who wins with the magic (haven't won a ring)? if so, that's silly.

stuff that happened in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s doesn't matter. unless we're talking lakers and celtics, i'm not sure i care who or where you win it at

Chronz
05-29-2013, 08:20 PM
see, i don't get why that stuff matters.

would you value a player who won a ring with. the.. wiz.......... *looks at username*...

nvm

is how that should have gone

ewmania
05-29-2013, 08:30 PM
i already thought he was top 5

just me I guess

Chronz
05-29-2013, 08:31 PM
I see where you coming from but his impact trumps BEAN pretty bad from day1

just think DUNCAN was in Finals in like yr 2 with aging HOF in DROB

BEAN had the allworld in his psd prime SHAQ and took double the yrs

Its not just PSD, its common sense that you dont have the same expectations for a teen that you would for a seasoned college pro, coming into the league.

As far as Im concerned, Kobe from ages 18-20 were quality bonuses (considering Duncan wasn't even around ).

As far as when both became players worthy of comparison (ages 21+), I would agree Duncan had the leg up on Kobe throughout their primes, at some point Kobe sustains his but with injury, Duncan may outlast Kobe yet. (Longevity wise)

mngopher35
05-29-2013, 08:33 PM
Just wanted to say that ManRam, KD, and Bruno had some awesome posts here. read every single word.

agreed.

For me I am not sure if he enters top 5. Right I have him 7th behind Hakeem and could very possibly move above him. I have shaq at 5 and he would have a case, but I don't think I would move Duncan to that spot.

MagicBucsSox
05-29-2013, 08:55 PM
Lmao at Larry bird on that list.

b@llhog24
05-29-2013, 09:29 PM
Lmao at Larry bird on that list.

It's sad that you actually believe this.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 09:31 PM
I bet DUNCAN would either be a volume shooting big man with 7yrs of MCKIE/SNOW as his PARKER/GINOBILI or be at home for playoffs every yr(out 1st rd anyway), I bet DUNCAN would see his PER-efficient ******** fall big time with avg players surrounding him and his shots per game would skyrocket

PER isn't very useful. Obviously TD's percentage and counting stats would be lower if he played on KG era Minny (an argument I've made myself). TD's way of playing the game including things such as wise shot selection were already in place in college, do you really think he was going to turn into a 39% FG shooter on 25.5 FGA per game in another setting? Well, it's a ridiculous notion based on who TD was and is.


how does this go over your head? are you also one of the non players on here?

Cheeky... based on not much I can see...


had IVERSON had SHAQ as his big and a owner like BUSS to fill out the roster he wouldn't have been no volume shooter, he shot damn near 50pct coming out of G'TOWN but shot 40pct with MCKIE/SNOW but 46pct with MELO as a old old man, yea I get it some volume shooter(by trade)

Cap Keys stuck? They don't help you make your point any better. I advise working on the content of your posts more than the annoying method of typing it out.


and no matter how difficult 4 or 5 will never trump 11, and RUSS had a way tougher mental in winning back then with all that open crucial racism, now that's some difficulty for you

Russell played most of his years in a league with 7 or 8 other teams. Add that to the other factors I brought up and so sorry TD's 4 were harder to earn than BR's 11. I saw BR's last 3 in person, and they were hard because the Celts were basically done, and won those titles due to the rather large wasteland of talent/teams they faced in those final 4 years - except Wilt's '66-'67 76'ers which crucified the Celts.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 09:36 PM
No way he's better than anybody on that list. I'd revise the list though, Kareem isn't top-5.

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
LeBron
Hakeem
Shaq
Kobe
Kareem

I'm tough on Kareem, but no way is Russell, James, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt, and Bird better then he was - assuming you are using peak/career balance as a means of judging. He was vulnerable to tough guys like Moses as I've observed before, but the longevity alone gets him a long way. Then dominating what I would call 3 different eras in the NBA.

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-29-2013, 09:47 PM
Most basketball analysts think Duncan has had a better career than Kobe. They are split with Shaq.

O'Neal has a great case against against Duncan.

You look up espn, TNT, NBA.com si.com and most of them all have Kobe ranked higher then Duncan

And no if Kobe isn't considered top 5 even though he should be then neither should Duncan who is below him

ManRam
05-29-2013, 09:49 PM
is how that should have gone

Yeah. You right...

Hawkeye15
05-29-2013, 09:52 PM
I mean, I voted no, but can live with someone making him a reasonable top 5 player ever if he wins Finals MVP.

b@llhog24
05-29-2013, 10:02 PM
I mean, I voted no, but can live with someone making him a reasonable top 5 player ever if he wins Finals MVP.

I never quite get what's the obsession with multiples of 5. If you say somebody is a ranked at 11, a big **** storm ensues because you didn't say he's in the top 10.

bagwell368
05-29-2013, 10:03 PM
I don't think Duncan is better than Russell, but the 11 rings are not the same. Russell won 25 playoffs series to get 11 rings. You would have to win 20 series to get 5 rings, 24 series to get 6 rings. So when you think of it like that it is totally different. Hell in our time you would have to win 44 series to get 11 rings now, which is 20 more series than Russell had to win to get his 11.

Russell played when there were two playoff rounds, until his last two years, so your math doesn't add up. How you can see two playoff rounds as HARDER than four is beyond bizarre.

On top of that this is the total of regular season games the Celts played in his career:

72 72 72 75 79 80 80 80 80 80 81 82 82

So, in Russell's first 3 years, if he played the max 7 games in each series plus his regular season, you end up with 86 games to a title. These days it's four 7 games series, so 28 + 82 = 110. You don't think 24 more games isn't a much harder grind for that season? What do you think about nagging injuries and career longevity long term?

From 1956-1967 the Celts had the #1 SRS (in most cases by a wide margin) eight times and won eight titles, two other times they were second, and got beat - first by the Hawks (Pettit did more for the Hawks in his career then Russell did for the Celts in terms of overall contribution to the team, but his team wasn't as good, so they won the one time) - secondly by the '66-'67 76'ers who was the first really dominating team the Celts played, and they got squashed (losing the 4 games by 74 points total). That was Wilt's one team that was #1 SRS and they owned the Celts that year.

AFAIK I'm the only reliable witness of Russell and Wilt in the days when they faced off. Russell more than any other player mentioned for the top 25 was a creation (Coach/GM/team) of his env. and by far the best placement of any player in NBA history. Strip it down, and Russell is out of his league in the top 10 or 15 for that matter.

Russell is a myth, a superior athlete in an inferior league with the best team and Coach/GM. He played about ~145 games against Wilt in the regular season and playoffs and yielded Wilt 28.7 PPG and 28.7 RPG. Tell me again how great Bill was? Bill was a below average scorer/shooter. Became a fine passer after Cousy retired, and was obviously a great defender and rebounder. Tell me, how is a guy like that going to carry a team that needs scoring - good efficiency scoring? He couldn't score when the lane was 12' wide, and only 3 guys were over 6' 8" before Wilt hit the NBA. Goodness knows when the lane went to 16' (to combat Wilt) and each team had a capable 6'10" or better Center, that Russ's offense became even weaker.

ManRam
05-29-2013, 10:07 PM
i never actually answered the question.

i'd vote "no" too. but an insane Finals and another Finals MVP might sway me, whether or not it should.

i don't think i could vote him ahead of jordan or magic, and less convincingly kareem and wilt too. bird is the next toughest.

the more i think about it, the more i think i could argue myself into taking timmy over russell, hakeem, kobe and shaq. i think i'd peg him at about 6 or 7 now. i know i'd take him over russell and hakeem at this point.

Hawkeye15
05-29-2013, 10:07 PM
I never quite get what's the obsession with multiples of 5. If you say somebody is a ranked at 11, a big **** storm ensues because you didn't say he's in the top 10.

self validation is why many get offended. They need others to validate their own opinion.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 10:41 PM
No way he's better than anybody on that list. I'd revise the list though, Kareem isn't top-5.

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
LeBron
Hakeem
Shaq
Kobe
Kareem

I understand that a lot of this is subjective and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this has to be one of the worst lists I have ever seen. :laugh:

Kareem at 10!!!
Bird at 3???
Lebron at 6 let alone in the top ten right now!!!
Lebron ahead of Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe and Kareem???!!!

Someone should sig this list this is pure comedy. :laugh:

Seriously, there needs to be an age limit to post on this site.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 10:48 PM
self validation is why many get offended. They need others to validate their own opinion.

So if I said Lebron was at 16 you wouldn't be offended?

amos1er
05-29-2013, 10:50 PM
Funny how all these Lebronites don't feel Duncan is worthy enough to be top 5 of all time if he wins a ring this year, yet they already have Lebron in their top ten after only one ring. :pity:

#consistency

Hawkeye15
05-29-2013, 10:50 PM
So if I said Lebron was at 16 you wouldn't be offended?

I don't get offended by anyone on the internet. Nor do I get offended by anyone who I don't respect.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 10:58 PM
Russell played when there were two playoff rounds, until his last two years, so your math doesn't add up. How you can see two playoff rounds as HARDER than four is beyond bizarre.

On top of that this is the total of regular season games the Celts played in his career:

72 72 72 75 79 80 80 80 80 80 81 82 82

So, in Russell's first 3 years, if he played the max 7 games in each series plus his regular season, you end up with 86 games to a title. These days it's four 7 games series, so 28 + 82 = 110. You don't think 24 more games isn't a much harder grind for that season? What do you think about nagging injuries and career longevity long term?

From 1956-1967 the Celts had the #1 SRS (in most cases by a wide margin) eight times and won eight titles, two other times they were second, and got beat - first by the Hawks (Pettit did more for the Hawks in his career then Russell did for the Celts in terms of overall contribution to the team, but his team wasn't as good, so they won the one time) - secondly by the '66-'67 76'ers who was the first really dominating team the Celts played, and they got squashed (losing the 4 games by 74 points total). That was Wilt's one team that was #1 SRS and they owned the Celts that year.

AFAIK I'm the only reliable witness of Russell and Wilt in the days when they faced off. Russell more than any other player mentioned for the top 25 was a creation (Coach/GM/team) of his env. and by far the best placement of any player in NBA history. Strip it down, and Russell is out of his league in the top 10 or 15 for that matter.

Russell is a myth, a superior athlete in an inferior league with the best team and Coach/GM. He played about ~145 games against Wilt in the regular season and playoffs and yielded Wilt 28.7 PPG and 28.7 RPG. Tell me again how great Bill was? Bill was a below average scorer/shooter. Became a fine passer after Cousy retired, and was obviously a great defender and rebounder. Tell me, how is a guy like that going to carry a team that needs scoring - good efficiency scoring? He couldn't score when the lane was 12' wide, and only 3 guys were over 6' 8" before Wilt hit the NBA. Goodness knows when the lane went to 16' (to combat Wilt) and each team had a capable 6'10" or better Center, that Russ's offense became even weaker.

Some very good points. Couldn't have said it better myself. I have often said that Russell is the most overrated player in NBA history. I honestly have a hard time including him in my top ten of alltime. I truthfully believe that Oscar should take his place at the ten spot, but I do it solely out of respect for what he did for the game which is a lame reason I know.

amos1er
05-29-2013, 10:59 PM
I don't get offended by anyone on the internet. Nor do I get offended by anyone who I don't respect.

Ouch...tell us how your really feel.

Hawkeye15
05-29-2013, 11:10 PM
Ouch...tell us how your really feel.

Think I just did bud..

ARMIN12NBA
05-29-2013, 11:18 PM
I don't personally think Duncan enters the top 5, but I can see the argument for him in there. At this point, there are all these great players that have made such an incredible impact on the league that there can be an argument for at least 10 guys to be in the top 5 (with MJ and Magic being virtual locks, but certain players who cycle in and out depending on individual taste and bias).

HouRealCoach
05-29-2013, 11:26 PM
Well, does he???

I would say yes. He would take Shaq's place in my top five of all time. Debatable on weather he could overtake Wilt though. Perhaps with some more longevity.

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Kobe
8. Bird
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

All this time of arguing you admit that Shaq is better than Kobe huh?

JordansBulls
05-29-2013, 11:40 PM
see, i don't get why that stuff matters.

would you value a player who won a ring with the wizards (have won a ring) more than you'd value an identical player who wins with the magic (haven't won a ring)? if so, that's silly.

stuff that happened in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s doesn't matter. unless we're talking lakers and celtics, i'm not sure i care who or where you win it at
Because it shows he can take franchises that are not known for success to success. That matters a lot when dealing with guys on the same level all time.

Lakers + Giants
05-30-2013, 02:11 AM
I don't get offended by anyone on the internet. Nor do I get offended by anyone who I don't respect.

:laugh2:

tapajafri
05-30-2013, 03:10 AM
No. And it will always be NO.... Look I'm a huge Tim Duncan fan and I've always said he is the greatest PF to ever play. But a fifth ring will not make him a top 5 player. No number of rings will make him a top 5 player because RINGS DEFINE GREAT TEAMS.

Plain and simple, Duncan will never be in the top 5 when you have Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, Lebron, Magic, etc...


Rings don't define individual players. No fifth ring will bump Duncan higher. If that were the case, we should put Fisher and Horry on the top 50 players of all time list......

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:24 AM
No. And it will always be NO.... Look I'm a huge Tim Duncan fan and I've always said he is the greatest PF to ever play. But a fifth ring will not make him a top 5 player. No number of rings will make him a top 5 player because RINGS DEFINE GREAT TEAMS.

Plain and simple, Duncan will never be in the top 5 when you have Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, Lebron, Magic, etc...


Rings don't define individual players. No fifth ring will bump Duncan higher. If that were the case, we should put Fisher and Horry on the top 50 players of all time list......

lol of course all the Lebronites don't want to use rings to measure greatness.


“I think what [James] should do, instead of worrying about where Mike was at, he should be trying to get to the accolades, get to the Finals, as many times as Kobe had. … I think the comparison [for James] should be more toward a current player he’s playing against now because of what Michael already did, and LeBron, in the early part of his career, faltered two times in the Finals. I think that [the Jordan/James] comparison can’t be made, just from that alone.” - Phil Jackson


“That’s really the idea of what excellence is, when you win championships.” - Phil Jackson

http://nba.si.com/2013/05/23/phil-jackson-michael-jordan-bill-russell-comparison-bulls-celtics-lakers-first-pick-start-franchise/

The Zen Master has spoken. :shush:

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:27 AM
Oh and :laugh: @ you mentioning Lebron in the same sentence as Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and Magic. For shame.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:29 AM
Think I just did bud..

It was rhetorical...pal

tapajafri
05-30-2013, 03:30 AM
lol of course all the Lebronites don't want to use rings to measure greatness.
- Phil Jackson

- Phil Jackson

http://nba.si.com/2013/05/23/phil-jackson-michael-jordan-bill-russell-comparison-bulls-celtics-lakers-first-pick-start-franchise/

The Zen Master has spoken. :shush:

Lebronite? I dont even care about lebron or the heat whatsoever. It's just a fact that rings define great teams and MVP's + individual accolades define great players.

And if you want to talk about credibility, you're bio says "Lakers hall of fame" and you're quoting a coach that coached Jordan/Bryant, but not Lebron. I'm unbiased whereas you're an extreme homer.

Case closed. Rings don't define players. By your view, Fisher is better than John Stockton, DJ Mbenga is better than Charles Barkley, Robert Horry is better than Karl Malone, and Luke Walton is better than Chris Webber.


Yeah....see what I mean? And if you can't accept that, it's because your blind bias and homerism has clouded up your ability to think straight.

waveycrockett
05-30-2013, 03:30 AM
smh he already is

tapajafri
05-30-2013, 03:32 AM
Oh and :laugh: @ you mentioning Lebron in the same sentence as Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and Magic. For shame.

Oh, i apologize for mentioning that. I should probably just let the MVP awards mention them in the same sentence instead.

Kareem: 6
MJ: 5
Russell: 5
Wilt: 4
Magic: 3
Bird: 3
Lebron: 4 (and counting)



Oh....


I wonder what you're going to say when James ties Kareem. It's almost a guarantee (if he stays healthy) that James will win at least 2 more MVP's. He's only 28.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:32 AM
All this time of arguing you admit that Shaq is better than Kobe huh?

When did I ever say he wasn't? I think his peak is the greatest of all time and that's what gives him a slight edge on Kobe at the current moment when comparing their resumes as a hole. Unlike the majority of Lebronites on this site, I do try my best to be objective.

texanmonstra011
05-30-2013, 03:35 AM
lol of course all the Lebronites don't want to use rings to measure greatness.
- Phil Jackson

- Phil Jackson

http://nba.si.com/2013/05/23/phil-jackson-michael-jordan-bill-russell-comparison-bulls-celtics-lakers-first-pick-start-franchise/

The Zen Master has spoken. :shush:

it does't take a rocket scientist to know that it's true, rings are achieved by great teams. and your quoting phil jackson. he might be almost as biased as u are.

texanmonstra011
05-30-2013, 03:36 AM
When did I ever say he wasn't? I think his peak is the greatest of all time and that's what gives him a slight edge on Kobe at the current moment when comparing their resumes as a hole. Unlike the majority of Lebronites on this site, I do try my best to be objective.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

i only read 3 of your posts in this thread and busted up laughing when i read your post of u claiming to be objective

texanmonstra011
05-30-2013, 03:36 AM
Oh, i apologize for mentioning that. I should probably just let the MVP awards mention them in the same sentence instead.

Kareem: 6
MJ: 5
Russell: 5
Wilt: 4
Magic: 3
Bird: 3
Lebron: 4 (and counting)



Oh....


I wonder what you're going to say when James ties Kareem. It's almost a guarantee (if he stays healthy) that James will win at least 2 more MVP's. He's only 28.

can you please stop with the facts? thanks

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:38 AM
No way he's better than anybody on that list. I'd revise the list though, Kareem isn't top-5.

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
LeBron
Hakeem
Shaq
Kobe
Kareem

This list is a perfect example of exactly what I am talking about when I refer to Lebron being among the most overrated athletes of all time. I defy any of you to find me an example of any so-called "Kobephile" that has ever said anything this out of whack. Even the most fanatical Kobe fans aren't as bad as this new breed of Lebronites. This list is proof of that. Again...please come up with an example that trumps this. There is no "Kobephile" on this site that has ever said anything this foolish.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:40 AM
it does't take a rocket scientist to know that it's true, rings are achieved by great teams. and your quoting phil jackson. he might be almost as biased as u are.

I'm not saying that rings are the end all be all, I'm just saying that they are a very important piece of the pie...if not the most important. And please don't come up with the token Horry argument, because obviously the amount a player contributed to those rings is factored in which is exactly why I rank Russell at the bottom of my top ten.

jam
05-30-2013, 03:42 AM
Duncan is so overrated it's a complete joke. There's no doubt he's a legit HOF'er, and as a consistent 20/10 guy in his prime, he deserves to be.

Having said that, there is a pretty long list of bigs I would take AHEAD of Duncan if I were to start a franchise (hypothetically): KAJ, Hakeem, Patrick, Shaq, Wilt, and Russell were all far more talented, had a bigger impact on the game, and were far superior at their peak.

If we even began to compare Duncan with any of the "big six" listed above, we'd have to stop almost as soon as we started, since the comparisons would just be laughably one-sided.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. DUNCAN IS NOT A TOP FIVE PLAYER ALL TIME.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:42 AM
can you please stop with the facts? thanks

MVP awards are the most subjective argument you can make. There are at least five players in any given season that a good case can be made for. The criteria also is too inconsistent from year to year. It's pretty hard to question something as concrete as championships. If you really value MVP's all that much, why not factor in MVP award shares as well?

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:44 AM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

i only read 3 of your posts in this thread and busted up laughing when i read your post of u claiming to be objective

Can you actually explain how one of the three posts in question prove that I am not objective?

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:46 AM
Duncan is so overrated it's a complete joke. There's no doubt he's a legit HOF'er, and as a consistent 20/10 guy in his prime, he deserves to be.

Having said that, there is a pretty long list of bigs I would take AHEAD of Duncan if I were to start a franchise (hypothetically): KAJ, Hakeem, Patrick, Shaq, Wilt, and Russell were all far more talented, had a bigger impact on the game, and were far superior at their peak.

If we even began to compare Duncan with any of the "big six" listed above, we'd have to stop almost as soon as we started, since the comparisons would just be laughably one-sided.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. DUNCAN IS NOT A TOP FIVE PLAYER ALL TIME.

Other than Shaq and Wilt, I don't really see how the players you mentioned have all that much greater a peak than Duncan. So why do you feel that peek is the most important thing to take into consideration? Surely it's important, but you have to weigh in other factors as well right?

jam
05-30-2013, 03:48 AM
The mvp award has definitely become tarnished. Jordan was the MVP every damn season he played, but the writers philosophically didn't believe in allowing a single player to have a monopoly on the award, so clowns like barkley and malone wound up with mvp awards. They were great players, but so far inferior to jordan, the award became a joke.

The same holds true today with nash as a two time mvp. I stopped paying attention after that. Nash should NEVER have won an mvp award.

The first two all nba teams and the rookie of the year award are usually pretty legit however.


MVP awards are the most subjective argument you can make. There are at least five players in any given season that a good case can be made for. The criteria also is too inconsistent from year to year. It's pretty hard to question something as concrete as championships. If you really value MVP's all that much, why not factor in MVP award shares as well?

jam
05-30-2013, 03:50 AM
Stop being ********. I don't feel like copying and pasting stats right now. If you're ******** enough to believe that Duncan's numbers peak or career are anywhere near Kareem's for example, your stupidity disqualifies you from participation in this discussion. Take a nyquil and go to sleep son.


Other than Shaq and Wilt, I don't really see how the players you mentioned have all that much greater a peak than Duncan. So why do you feel that peek is the most important thing to take into consideration? Surely it's important, but you have to weigh in other factors as well right?

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:55 AM
Stop being ********. I don't feel like copying and pasting stats right now. If you're ******** enough to believe that Duncan's numbers peak or career are anywhere near Kareem's for example, your stupidity disqualifies you from participation in this discussion. Take a nyquil and go to sleep son.

Wow, aren't we testy. Already resorting to childish insults. So you don't factor in the era's they played in at all? You don't think Duncan's numbers would have been higher had he played in the early 70's? Also, you don't feel that Duncan playing along side Robinson for those year had an affect on his peak statistically?

amos1er
05-30-2013, 03:56 AM
The mvp award has definitely become tarnished. Jordan was the MVP every damn season he played, but the writers philosophically didn't believe in allowing a single player to have a monopoly on the award, so clowns like barkley and malone wound up with mvp awards. They were great players, but so far inferior to jordan, the award became a joke.

The same holds true today with nash as a two time mvp. I stopped paying attention after that. Nash should NEVER have won an mvp award.

The first two all nba teams and the rookie of the year award are usually pretty legit however.

At least we agree there.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 04:01 AM
I also never claimed his peak to be anywhere near Kareem's. I was more referring to the Hakeem, Ewing, and Russell reference. Duncan's peak is great, but modest when compared to some of the powerhouses in the top ten. If you read my whole post you would see that I made mention of the fact that peak isn't the only thing to consider and that the peaks of the said players in question weren't significantly higher enough to warrant them to be ranked over Duncan on that merit alone...The exception being KAJ of course as his accolades and longevity in addition to his peak are top notch.

jam
05-30-2013, 04:17 AM
ALL of the bigs I listed (except Russell) were superior scorers: peak AND over the course of their careers. There's no question about it. And it's not that difficult to explain why: they were all far more talented and far superior athletes. It's not even close. Patrick, without a ring, was an absolute freak, with the athleticism of a guard, crazy reach which made him a superior defender, and one of the most under-rated scoring skill sets in nba history.

You're either blind or a duncan/spurs homer if you think he had the skillset of a patrick, hakeem, russell, wilt or kaj.

Duncan's 4 rings are a huge factor to consider, but it's no shame that patrick and hakeem couldn't wing rings in the jordan era. No one else could either.

I know what you are arguing, but every big I listed were superior in the following ways:

1. superior peak numbers

2. superior career totals and averages

3. superior athleticism

The SIGNIFICANT DISADVANTAGE ALL of the bigs I list face however, is that the pimply faced teenage virgin nerds who constitute the vast majority of posters on PSD HAVE NEVER SEEN THEM PLAY.



I also never claimed his peak to be anywhere near Kareem's. I was more referring to the Hakeem, Ewing, and Russell reference. Duncan's peak is great, but modest when compared to some of the powerhouses in the top ten. If you read my whole post you would see that I made mention of the fact that peak isn't the only thing to consider and that the peaks of the said players in question weren't significantly higher enough to warrant them to be ranked over Duncan on that merit alone...The exception being KAJ of course as his accolades and longevity in addition to his peak are top notch.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 04:45 AM
ALL of the bigs I listed (except Russell) were superior scorers: peak AND over the course of their careers. There's no question about it. And it's not that difficult to explain why: they were all far more talented and far superior athletes. It's not even close. Patrick, without a ring, was an absolute freak, with the athleticism of a guard, crazy reach which made him a superior defender, and one of the most under-rated scoring skill sets in nba history.

You're either blind or a duncan/spurs homer if you think he had the skillset of a patrick, hakeem, russell, wilt or kaj.

Duncan's 4 rings are a huge factor to consider, but it's no shame that patrick and hakeem couldn't wing rings in the jordan era. No one else could either.

I know what you are arguing, but every big I listed were superior in the following ways:

1. superior peak numbers

2. superior career totals and averages

3. superior athleticism

The SIGNIFICANT DISADVANTAGE ALL of the bigs I list face however, is that the pimply faced teenage virgin nerds who constitute the vast majority of posters on PSD HAVE NEVER SEEN THEM PLAY.

That's all I'm saying.

Again, I never denied that their peaks weren't better. Just saying that Duncan's peak is nothing to scoff at and that it's not like those players had the peaks of Shaq or Wilt or anything where it's just so dominant to the point where it is a determining factor where we can start discounting rings. His longevity is also a huge factor as well. Duncan also beat some great opponents on the way to his rings such as the 03 Lakers. I'm not a Spurs/Duncan fan at all...just my opinion on the matter and that with another ring and finals MVP, he would have a good case for top five of all time. Duncan was also one of the best teammates and leaders in league history...that should be taken into account as well. Sure Duncan could have scored more, but it's not like it was needed for his team to win. Doing what it takes to win is the most important thing and if that means sacrificing personal stats, than so be it...the proof is in the pudding. It's not like he had the most stacked teams or anything...that should be taken into account as well. Oh and did I mention his 8 All Defensive 1st team awards.

BTW, I saw all of them play with the exception of Russell. Shouldn't assume so much without any sort of proof. Just because someone doesn't feel the way you do doesn't mean they are automatically a youngster. Hasty Generalization fallacy.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:29 AM
Duncan's 4 rings are a huge factor to consider, but it's no shame that patrick and hakeem couldn't wing rings in the jordan era. No one else could either.

Hakeem was able to win 2 rings...during the 90's. :shrug:

Oh and how many times did he make it to the finals during the Jordan era? So why are you implying that it was Jordan who was stopping Hakeem from winning more rings when he didn't even play in the same conference???

If I remember correctly, it wasn't always the Bulls who knocked out Ewing's Knicks. Pacers, Rockets, Spurs to name a few. Why blame Jordan for Ewing's shortcomings as well??? The Knicks had plenty of chances despite Jordan's dominance. Duncan still found a way to get it done despite the dominance of the Lakers in the 2000's.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 06:15 AM
I already have Shaq, Wilt, and Kareem Ranked above Duncan presently assuming Duncan doesn't win a ring this year and then I feel he would overtake Shaq on the all time list. Hakeem is debatable for now (without a 5th ring), but to throw Ewing in the mix is a complete joke and makes you lose all your credibility.

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 07:35 AM
Stop being ********. I don't feel like copying and pasting stats right now. If you're ******** enough to believe that Duncan's numbers peak or career are anywhere near Kareem's for example, your stupidity disqualifies you from participation in this discussion. Take a nyquil and go to sleep son.

If you think KAJ's competition level before the ABA merger is anything to crow about - then you don't know the history of the league. After that the NBA wasn't that strong in bigs until the mid 80's.

On top of that, the '81 and '84 Lakers took loses in the playoffs against inferior Rockets teams because Moses Malone made mincemeat out of KAJ. Those were great teams.

KAJ has everyone beat in longevity. But his peak numbers are due to the era he played in more than how great he was. His trouble against intense muscular Centers is another issue that has to cut him down.

KAJ in terms of career accomplishments has to be #1. But if I was making an all time team, he's not there due to potential (Moses, Shaq, Wilt) match-up issues. My starting center is Hakeem because he's the least vulnerable vs other Centers overall IMO.

kdspurman
05-30-2013, 09:06 AM
Maybe it's just me, but I think it's probably a little too premature to have Lebron ahead of Duncan at this point in their careers.

ManRam
05-30-2013, 09:59 AM
When did I ever say he wasn't? I think his peak is the greatest of all time and that's what gives him a slight edge on Kobe at the current moment when comparing their resumes as a hole. Unlike the majority of Lebronites on this site, I do try my best to be objective.

half-sentence of the year right here!

:laugh2:

ManRam
05-30-2013, 10:05 AM
Maybe it's just me, but I think it's probably a little too premature to have Lebron ahead of Duncan at this point in their careers.

absolutely.

he might be in the midst of a better peak than a lot of guys we talk about in the top 10, but duncan's longevity puts him out of LBJ's reach right now. lebron has a bit more work to do to get where duncan is. we should check back 5 or 7 years from now. lebron has half of what it takes to be remembered as an all time great (peak dominance/MVPs) he needs to get the other half down too (longevity/championships). until then, he shouldn't be in anyone's top 5 at all.

he's still only about half way into his career. i can't put him ahead of a lot of guys, even players i think lebron's peak play trumps at this point (kobe, kareem, duncan etc.)

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 01:01 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I think it's probably a little too premature to have Lebron ahead of Duncan at this point in their careers.

Totally agree. Lebron still has plenty of time to move up on the all time list, but hasn't passed some of these greats with such great longevity. I think the people who say Lebron is better are either talking about peak/prime, making a prediction, or biased. Lebron appears to be on track for a top 5 career all time but we need to just let it play out before putting him ahead of other greats who accomplished more through their careers. Longevity matters.

EDIT: Ha, so basically what manram said

BklynKnicks3
05-30-2013, 01:05 PM
1. Mj
2. K0be
3. Bird
4. Magic
5. Wilt

harryharrison
05-30-2013, 01:29 PM
I do not wanna see LeBron in the discussion for top 5. He needs more rings. The book on his career is just opening. He has a good 6-7 years left to accumulate rings.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 02:09 PM
I do not wanna see LeBron in the discussion for top 5. He needs more rings. The book on his career is just opening. He has a good 6-7 years left to accumulate rings.

He doesn't even deserve to be in the top ten discussions for that matter. The Lebroniites on this site are an absolute joke in they way they continuously overrate him. Worst fans in the NBA by far.

mp3
05-30-2013, 02:25 PM
Duncan may very well be the best power forward of all time. With another ring, i think he's top 5.

tnewkirk
05-30-2013, 02:30 PM
What's more impressive? Winning back-to-back or winning 5 over a 15 year period?

Genuinely asking...I'm not sure. I think I lean towards the latter. If Duncan gets another, well, that's just super impressive. Winning it as a 22 year-old, then a few times in his prime with a new cast, and then as a 36 year old to cap it off. That's awesome.

agree, not to mention they've consistently been a top 5 team in the nba.

ManRam
05-30-2013, 02:32 PM
The Lebroniites on this site are an absolute joke in they way they continuously overrate him. Worst fans in the NBA by far.


"He is a player that can play four positions. Except for perhaps the center spot, which he hasn't (been) given a shot at yet, he can play those other four positions quite well. This is unique; Michael could play three and was very good at all three of those, but as a power player that LeBron can become, I think he has an opportunity to explore and advance some of the status that he has already gained."

-Noted "LeBronite" Phil Jackson


“It’s only like one person that’s more scarier than that and that’s God. I’m sure if we were looking at Him in the face we would be very nervous. I’m sure He could make all the plays that we want people to make. LeBron is a great player, he’s the MVP for a reason, he’s one of the best to ever play this game.”

-Noted "LeBronite" George Hill

"He’s only going to get better and better and better, and thank God that he’s in the NBA, in America, and that we get a chance to see him every day, and then thank God he’s going to play in the Olympics and that the world gets a chance to see this unbelievable dominant player on the biggest stage perform at the highest level."

"I think he's the best player in the league, in the world.

-Noted "LeBronite" Magic Johnson

"Michael Jordan was the best defensive player in the league but he was also the best offensive player,” said West. “It wasn’t a one-year fluke, he proved it over time.”LeBron James will do the same type of things because he’s getting better. He’s a much more effective shooter. “But even though it’s hard for me to be objective, because I brought Kobe to Los Angeles, I do think LeBron has surpassed Kobe as a player.”

-Noted "LeBronite" Jerry West

“As long as LeBron stays healthy and keeps playing the game at a high level, he, of course, could break my record,’’ Abdul-Jabbar wrote in an email to FOX Sports Florida minutes after James had been awarded his latest trophy. “The challenges he faces are getting injured or losing interest.’’

-Noted "LeBronite" Kareem Abdul Jabbar

"What I think about him is what I used to think about Wilt," Russell said after a morning round of golf, "and like I told Wilt one time, 'I think I'm the only guy on the planet who really knows how good you are because I've seen you up close.'

-Noted "LeBronite" Bill Russell...comparing LeBron to Wilt freaking Chamberlain

"Michael Jordan is probably the greatest scorer to ever play the game. I may go so far as saying LeBron James may be the greatest player to ever play the game."

-Noted "LeBronite" Scottie Pippen

--------------------------------

Look dude. If you really think the only people in the world who think LeBron James could go down as an all time great are lowly PSD posters, well, you're delusional. Actually, we know this, so I don't know why I'm laying it out for you. Dude has 4 MVPs. Yes, that's subjective, but most all of those were uncontested. He's been the clear best player in the NBA for over 5 years now...I'm not sure more than 2-3 players can say that with as much certainty as LeBron.

Yes, some people get carried away with their LeBron love, but no more than you get carried away with your LeBron hate.


Now, back to Tim Duncan...who "yes", should be currently ranked well ahead of LeBron because of the fact he's played twice as many seasons.


What's worse than the "LeBronites" is you. You are far less objective than most of them could ever hope to be.

5ass
05-30-2013, 02:57 PM
Amos1er will never post here again.

Bruno
05-30-2013, 03:03 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I think it's probably a little too premature to have Lebron ahead of Duncan at this point in their careers.

way premature. lbj doesn't touch duncan in overall career accomplishment, he's not even 29 yet.

phoenix_bladen
05-30-2013, 03:54 PM
I think he's 10 top for sure if he wins another ring but he has a case as definitely the best PF to ever play the game, if he already isn't.

His teams have been consistently good in the regular season, but where I think hurts him in this argument is the fact that his teams never defended their champions or repeated in consecutive years. Can you really call them a dynasty? Sure but not ur traditional ones where they win 2-3 straight.

I think if he would have at least repeated once then he'd move up even higher.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 04:31 PM
"He is a player that can play four positions. Except for perhaps the center spot, which he hasn't (been) given a shot at yet, he can play those other four positions quite well. This is unique; Michael could play three and was very good at all three of those, but as a power player that LeBron can become, I think he has an opportunity to explore and advance some of the status that he has already gained."

-Noted "LeBronite" Phil Jackson


“It’s only like one person that’s more scarier than that and that’s God. I’m sure if we were looking at Him in the face we would be very nervous. I’m sure He could make all the plays that we want people to make. LeBron is a great player, he’s the MVP for a reason, he’s one of the best to ever play this game.”

-Noted "LeBronite" George Hill

"He’s only going to get better and better and better, and thank God that he’s in the NBA, in America, and that we get a chance to see him every day, and then thank God he’s going to play in the Olympics and that the world gets a chance to see this unbelievable dominant player on the biggest stage perform at the highest level."

"I think he's the best player in the league, in the world.

-Noted "LeBronite" Magic Johnson

"Michael Jordan was the best defensive player in the league but he was also the best offensive player,” said West. “It wasn’t a one-year fluke, he proved it over time.”LeBron James will do the same type of things because he’s getting better. He’s a much more effective shooter. “But even though it’s hard for me to be objective, because I brought Kobe to Los Angeles, I do think LeBron has surpassed Kobe as a player.”

-Noted "LeBronite" Jerry West

“As long as LeBron stays healthy and keeps playing the game at a high level, he, of course, could break my record,’’ Abdul-Jabbar wrote in an email to FOX Sports Florida minutes after James had been awarded his latest trophy. “The challenges he faces are getting injured or losing interest.’’

-Noted "LeBronite" Kareem Abdul Jabbar

"What I think about him is what I used to think about Wilt," Russell said after a morning round of golf, "and like I told Wilt one time, 'I think I'm the only guy on the planet who really knows how good you are because I've seen you up close.'

-Noted "LeBronite" Bill Russell...comparing LeBron to Wilt freaking Chamberlain

"Michael Jordan is probably the greatest scorer to ever play the game. I may go so far as saying LeBron James may be the greatest player to ever play the game."

-Noted "LeBronite" Scottie Pippen

--------------------------------

Look dude. If you really think the only people in the world who think LeBron James could go down as an all time great are lowly PSD posters, well, you're delusional. Actually, we know this, so I don't know why I'm laying it out for you. Dude has 4 MVPs. Yes, that's subjective, but most all of those were uncontested. He's been the clear best player in the NBA for over 5 years now...I'm not sure more than 2-3 players can say that with as much certainty as LeBron.

Yes, some people get carried away with their LeBron love, but no more than you get carried away with your LeBron hate.


Now, back to Tim Duncan...who "yes", should be currently ranked well ahead of LeBron because of the fact he's played twice as many seasons.


What's worse than the "LeBronites" is you. You are far less objective than most of them could ever hope to be.

I love how when I post quotes from other players, coaches, owners, analysts, and experts I am mocked and countered with Hollinger stats. When a Lebronite does it, it's all of the sudden a valid argument.

#hypocrisy

amos1er
05-30-2013, 04:32 PM
Amos1er will never post here again.

Oh please.

jam
05-30-2013, 04:35 PM
Moses is arguably one of the top 15 guys of all time. And Kareem was in his mid 30's in those two particular matchups. On top of that, KAJ was in complete beast mode offensively throughout his mid 30's averaging 26.2 ppg at 33, and 23.4 at 38 years of age.

Duncan couldn't match Kareem's average AT ANY POINT in his career, yet Kareem averaged over 20 ppg EVERY SEASON in his thirties until he was THIRTY EIGHT, and shot SIXTY PERCENT from the field IN HIS LATE THIRTIES.

It's just a joke trying to compare Duncan and Kareem. You just look stupid even starting.


If you think KAJ's competition level before the ABA merger is anything to crow about - then you don't know the history of the league. After that the NBA wasn't that strong in bigs until the mid 80's.

On top of that, the '81 and '84 Lakers took loses in the playoffs against inferior Rockets teams because Moses Malone made mincemeat out of KAJ. Those were great teams.

KAJ has everyone beat in longevity. But his peak numbers are due to the era he played in more than how great he was. His trouble against intense muscular Centers is another issue that has to cut him down.

KAJ in terms of career accomplishments has to be #1. But if I was making an all time team, he's not there due to potential (Moses, Shaq, Wilt) match-up issues. My starting center is Hakeem because he's the least vulnerable vs other Centers overall IMO.

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 04:42 PM
I love how when I post quotes from other players, coaches, owners, analysts, and experts I am mocked and countered with Hollinger stats. When a Lebronite does it, it's all of the sudden a valid argument.

#hypocrisy

It isn't like this is the only thing ever presented. I think he was making that post with the types of things you continually provide so that it could hold some value to you (also that directly answered you saying Lebronites on this site, as if others didn't also think he's an all time great). I have seen you post statistics many times when it suits your cause, but never acknowledge them when it's the opposite. You just write off anything that doesn't fit your agenda, just like you did his post.

This isn't to say you always do this, but when it comes to Lebron and Kobe it is an obvious trend (more so with Lebron actually).

A Black Prophet
05-30-2013, 04:55 PM
Ill have him number 7 ahead of Hakeem and Kobe and probably shaq but it's not about the ring too me I just feel that he has had one of the GOAT Longevity

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-30-2013, 05:01 PM
Ill have him number 7 ahead of Hakeem and Kobe and probably shaq but it's not about the ring too me I just feel that he has had one of the GOAT Longevity

You have him ahead of Kobe Because of longetivity yet Kobe had been greater for just as long if not more

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:01 PM
It isn't like this is the only thing ever presented. I think he was making that post with the types of things you continually provide so that it could hold some value to you. I have seen you post statistics many times when it suits your cause, but never acknowledge them when it's the opposite. You just write off anything that doesn't fit your agenda, just like you did his post.

This isn't to say you always do this, but when it comes to Lebron and Kobe it is an obvious trend (more so with Lebron actually).

I already know about those quotes and I have never denied that Lebron is a great individual talent or that he is the best player in the NBA. It's just ironic that whenever I posted expert testimonial, I was mocked in favor of Hollinger stats. The general response I got from most of the Lebronites on this site was that I was out of my mind to post expert testimonial to back up my opinions. It's almost as if this sort of stuff is taboo to a Lebronite and Hollinger stats are the only thing that matter. Thats why I felt that to be hypocritical...Not that I don't respect the quotes he posted.

I have a question for you...How am I not objective with Lebron? I agree that I take a very offensive approach, but what I say has truth to it and I am only tying to offset the massive amount of Lebron nuthugging that goes on here. I would say that he is waaay more overrated by his fanbase than Kobe is by his. I have yet to see anyone provide me an example otherwise. When people say that Lebron is already top ten and even top five, that to me is worse than anything I have ever seen a so called "Kobephile" say. That is what really is annoying honestly. It's honestly Lebron's fans that I truly loath more than him. I know that Laker fans can be obnoxious and all, but from what I have seen from these Lebronites and Kobe haters, compared to Laker fans, the former is 10 times worse. They truly make me want to root against him.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:03 PM
You have him ahead of Kobe Because of longetivity yet Kobe had been greater for just as long if not more

I think he was talking about with an extra ring and finals MVP this season. With those things, he would move ahead of Kobe IMO. As of now however, I have Kobe ahead of him.

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-30-2013, 05:05 PM
No. And it will always be NO.... Look I'm a huge Tim Duncan fan and I've always said he is the greatest PF to ever play. But a fifth ring will not make him a top 5 player. No number of rings will make him a top 5 player because RINGS DEFINE GREAT TEAMS.

Plain and simple, Duncan will never be in the top 5 when you have Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, Lebron, Magic, etc...


Rings don't define individual players. No fifth ring will bump Duncan higher. If that were the case, we should put Fisher and Horry on the top 50 players of all time list......

Lebron hahaha

A Black Prophet
05-30-2013, 05:05 PM
You have him ahead of Kobe Because of longetivity yet Kobe had been greater for just as long if not more

Thats one of the reasons I would Have him ahead of all 3 I already got him ahead of Kobe and Shaq and it's a toss up between him and Hakeem.
Other Reasons I have him ahead of Kobe
1. Better Finals Performances
2.Better team player
3.Better Defender
4.Better Leader

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:06 PM
Where do I currently have Lebron ranked you ask???

Somewhere between 15-20. Thats a very good ranking for a guy that has only 9 seasons and one ring under his belt.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-30-2013, 05:13 PM
Where do I currently have Lebron ranked you ask???

Somewhere between 15-20. Thats a very good ranking for a guy that has only 9 seasons and one ring under his belt.

Somewhere around 16 is about right.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:16 PM
Somewhere around 16 is about right.

Ya, I haven't done an official list yet, but 16 sounds about right.

Oh and nice sig btw! When you gonna add a pic?

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-30-2013, 05:18 PM
To all the Kobe haters what has Duncan done to surpass? Kobe

Kobe's resume is greater then Duncan's in almost every way possible... Besides Duncan having one more MVP and finals MVP Kobe triumphs him in every thing! And lol at people having lebron in the top 5 that's when You can tell your 15 or younger...
Lebron is close to being in the top 10 but top 5 lmfao

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-30-2013, 05:20 PM
I think he was talking about with an extra ring and finals MVP this season. With those things, he would move ahead of Kobe IMO. As of now however, I have Kobe ahead of him.

I feel the same way, only way I see TD move ahead of Kobe is if he gets the finals MVP!

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-30-2013, 05:21 PM
Ya, I haven't done an official list yet, but 16 sounds about right.

Oh and nice sig btw! When you gonna add a pic?

thanks :)I can't find a right size. Soon I hope.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-30-2013, 05:22 PM
To all the Kobe haters what has Duncan done to surpass? Kobe

Kobe's resume is greater then Duncan's in almost every way possible... Besides Duncan having one more MVP and finals MVP Kobe triumphs him in every thing! And lol at people having lebron in the top 5 that's when You can tell your 15 or younger...
Lebron is close to being in the top 10 but top 5 lmfao

This is PSD bro, Lebron is goat here.

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 05:28 PM
I already know about those quotes and I have never denied that Lebron is a great individual talent or that he is the best player in the NBA. It's just ironic that whenever I posted expert testimonial, I was mocked in favor of Hollinger stats. The general response I got from most of the Lebronites on this site was that I was out of my mind to post expert testimonial to back up my opinions. It's almost as if this sort of stuff is taboo to a Lebronite and Hollinger stats are the only thing that matter. Thats why I felt that to be hypocritical...Not that I don't respect the quotes he posted.

I have a question for you...How am I not objective with Lebron? I agree that I take a very offensive approach, but what I say has truth to it and I am only tying to offset the massive amount of Lebron nuthugging that goes on here. I would say that he is waaay more overrated by his fanbase than Kobe is by his. I have yet to see anyone provide me an example otherwise. When people say that Lebron is already top ten and even top five, that to me is worse than anything I have ever seen a so called "Kobephile" say. That is what really is annoying honestly. It's honestly Lebron's fans that I truly loath more than him. I know that Laker fans can be obnoxious and all, but from what I have seen from these Lebronites and Kobe haters, the former is 10 times worse. They truly make me want to root against him.

Well part of it might be your perception of other people's views, and also that we are currently in Lebron's prime. What I mean by that is at this moment their are more people hyping Lebron because he is currently the best player in the world. The same happened for Kobe a few years ago. I mean look like 10-15 posts ago and someone had Kobe #2 on their all-time list (and this is not the first time I have seen this). I do agree that Lebron gets over hyped, but many stars do especially in their prime, and Kobe still has plenty of similar followers (even if it isn't quite as many anymore).

I do think there are grains of truth in what you say about Lebron, you just tend to take things to a whole different level. Best supporting cast ever (this isn't true, and many knowledgeable people/posters disagree), always bringing up 2011 when mentioning him (as if other greats didn't have an off year), saying he is not clutch at all (I think this was you), weakest competition ever etc etc. Now in all of these there is a grain of truth, but it isn't nearly as bad as you always make it sound. If all of these things were so true it would be mentioned more than just by a few posters on this site (who mostly have a reputation of bias against him). Basically you just go way overboard, and always mention him in some negative way.

An example would be like me saying Shaq carried Kobe to his first three rings while he just sat and watched. Easily the best player any other top 10 player has ever played with, any of them could win with him. Then in 2004 he chucked his team out of a series, proving how much of a ballhog he is. After running shaq out of town he did nothing until he was gifted Pau Gasol in 2008 but still couldn't win a title that year. In 2009 they had the easiest road to a title ever, with the best team they played being Carmelo and the nuggets (who only made it out of the first round one time). In 2010 they played the aging celtics and barely pulled it off because Perkins was injured. Gasol should have gotten F-MVP that year but it was gifted to Kobe. Now all of this has a small amount of truth behind it but it is way overboard and is taking the negative approach every single opportunity. This is similar to what it seems like you do to Lebron thread after thread. If someone posted things like this on the daily wouldn't you think of them as a complete "hater" and totally disregard their opinion?

I actually think that when we have been on non Lebron/Kobe subjects you can have actual good basketball conversations. I think if you focused more on ignoring the Lebron topics it would be great (very difficult since that's half the discussions I know). When it comes to Lebron specifically it always appears completely a completely one sided opinion, always taking the negative and blowing it out of proportion (like my kobe example). This is how I view your stance on Lebron.

kdspurman
05-30-2013, 05:30 PM
To all the Kobe haters what has Duncan done to surpass? Kobe

Kobe's resume is greater then Duncan's in almost every way possible... Besides Duncan having one more MVP and finals MVP Kobe triumphs him in every thing! And lol at people having lebron in the top 5 that's when You can tell your 15 or younger...
Lebron is close to being in the top 10 but top 5 lmfao

Fwiw, if someone ranks Duncan ahead of Kobe it doesn't make them a hater. (in some cases at least) BTW, wouldn't say Kobe trumps him in everything, especially when you consider defense.

kdspurman
05-30-2013, 05:33 PM
Probably the best post I've read in the NBA forum in a loooong time.

Thanks man. There's good quality stuff on here from time to time, it just gets buried in some of the other mess that gets posted. I doubt mine was the best, but I appreciate that though :)


Just wanted to say that ManRam, KD, and Bruno had some awesome posts here. read every single word.

Thanks dude. It's nice to have a debate without the bickering and immaturity, and there's been some great quality posts here which is always nice to see.

amos1er
05-30-2013, 05:41 PM
thanks :)I can't find a right size. Soon I hope.

Looks good!

It's pretty hard to work with the size though.

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 06:05 PM
To all the Kobe haters what has Duncan done to surpass? Kobe

Kobe's resume is greater then Duncan's in almost every way possible... Besides Duncan having one more MVP and finals MVP Kobe triumphs him in every thing! And lol at people having lebron in the top 5 that's when You can tell your 15 or younger...
Lebron is close to being in the top 10 but top 5 lmfao

I agree with the last sentence. Now let me try and answer why I have Duncan over Kobe (even though it is possibly the closest 2 players on my list, duncan barely having the edge). When it comes to rings, accolades, and longevity I see things on a pretty similar level.

Kobe having and extra ring (with 3 coming as 2nd best player on the team), and an extra All nba selection. Duncan having an extra MVP, and finals MVP, and two more defensive team selections (also ROY if that matters to you). I will note that being 2nd best on that team isn't a huge negative at all to me, but it is part of the reason Kobe has one more ring so I mentioned it. To me the accolades are just slightly in favor of Timmy here because he was arguably the best player on all 4 rings and has an extra mvp (more valuable than an extra all nba selection to me).

Longevity is pretty even as well. Kobe so has played more minutes, but that doesn't mean too much necessarily (as it wasn't like duncan chose to, pop just manages minutes more). Kobe came in a year earlier but took 3-4 years to really make a major impact. Duncan came in and made a major impact right away giving him an early advantage. Now it evens out because Duncan wasn't quite the same player in 2011 or 2012. Each player made the 1st team this year as well, so they have a long span of dominance. To me this hasn't changed things much and still has things very slightly in Duncan's favor overall, but not a huge difference either way.

This leaves us with production and impact to discuss. Kobe was the better offensive player, because he could score with the same efficiency at a higher volume (also evident in their o rating). Kobe also had the ability to take over games at a higher level. Duncan did a lot of things on this end that helped on this end too and was an excellent passer for a big man. On top of this he was still a very good scorer for a bigman, just not as elite as kobe. On the defensive end however Duncan was a gamechanger throughout his career. Kobe was good on this end (more so at the begining/middle of his career), but wasn't nearly as impactful as a dominant big man. To me the gap of impact Duncan had on the defensive end is bigger than their gap offensively. Then just to back things up a little more, Duncan has a better career PER, and WS/48, and even more win shares with his less minutes. Now to finish things off Tim duncan's playoff numbers take a slight bump up, while Kobe's see a slight drop (both of these are very slight, but it does matter).

To me these guys are very close but Duncan has the slight edge over Kobe.

waveycrockett
05-30-2013, 06:06 PM
How is Duncan not better than Kobe?

He has won more rings as the #1 guy

MVP awards he kills Kobe

Blocks, Rebounds, FG%, defense he kills Kobe

His teams NEVER came close to a losing season

LoveMeOrHateMe
05-30-2013, 06:22 PM
How is Duncan not better than Kobe?

He has won more rings as the #1 guy

MVP awards he kills Kobe

Blocks, Rebounds, FG%, defense he kills Kobe

His teams NEVER came close to a losing season


Because how is Kobe gonna have more blocks or rebounds when he's a sg not a pf?
Kobe's TS% > Duncan's
And Kobe defense was just as good as Duncan's only reason Duncan makes a bigger impact because big men do most of the work.

And his team never came close to a losing season hmmm I wonder why, oh yeah because he was never handed crap as a team, he's always had 1-2 all-stars and really good role players.

DODGERS&LAKERS
05-30-2013, 06:24 PM
.

As long as his impact is still high and he's contributing to the teams success at a high level I think even a late in career championships should help a players overall career stock. so long as the value and production is still there.



Duncan has Kobe in a lot of ways but across the board? Doesn't 'across the board' kinda imply that Duncan literally tops him in everything?

To date Kobe tops Duncan in championships, all-nba first team selections, total all-nba team selections, total all-star game appearances, total regular season points (8,000+ more points), total post-season points (800+), total regular season assists (2,000+), total post-season assists (350+), total regular season steals, total post-season steals, total field goals made in playoffs and regular season, total free-throws made in the playoffs and regular season, better FT shooter, more defensive first-team selections :hide:, more scoring championships.

Kobe is
3rd in most post-season point in NBA history.
4th in most regular-season points in NBA history.
4th in most post-season FGM in NBA history.
6th in most regular-season FGM in NBA history.
2nd in most post-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most regular-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most post-season three pointers made in NBA history.
7th in most post-season assists in NBA history.
5th in most post-season steals in NBA history.
7th in total post-season win-shares.
2nd most top five MVP finishes in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA team selection in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA first-team selections in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA defensive first-team selections in NBA history.
2nd in most All-Star selections in NBA history.
1st in most All-Star game MVPs in NBA history.
One out of four players to ever win the Finals MVP award in consecutive seasons in NBA history.


Kobe Bryant has a higher regular season TS% than Tim Duncan, Duncan a higher playoff TS%; both by negligible margins. For a player who's regularly criticized as a volume scorer Kobe has done a magical job of posting a nearly identical career TS% as one of the NBAs all-time beacons in fundamentals and smart-basketball.

Important to note- Duncans stat line raises in the post-season. I have a lot of respect for Duncan on this feat, one of my favorite reasons for arguing him as top five should he win another championship w SA. Duncan was the obvious leader of on court impact for the 2007 Spurs, despite Parkers finals MVP. The same can't be said in 2013 should SA rack their 5th- Parker has the stats to back up that potential finals MVP this year. I also argue that Karl Malones second MVP in lockout '99 should be Duncans, and that Duncan should have three regular season MVPs.

4,688. Kobe has played 4,688 more minutes than Tim Duncan throughout their careers (regular season+ playoffs). Tim Duncan would have to play an additional 133.5 games at his career regular season minute per game average of 35.1 minutes to match Kobe in total time spent on the court. That's nearly a seasons and a half more production at starters minute average for Kobe. As far as longevity, Kobe edges him out by a season and a half in total production on the court (devils advocate- Duncan has the higher WS/48 averages and still tops Bryant by about 10 win-shares overall despite this).

Regular season MVP award shares are nearly identical, edge Duncan. This is mainly because of Duncans early dominance in MVP voting during the '99-'05 Spurs run. Despite this seasons reemergence for Duncan, he hasn't finished top five in MVP voting since 2007. Kobe has finished top five every season since 2006, and has 11 top five MVP finishes for his career. Although they've both become titans of longevity Kobe has remained more consistatnly dominat throughout (Duncan peaked out at a higher level of statistical dominance/defensive impact).
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/mvp_shares.html?redir

It should be noted that Duncans 2013 post-season PER, TS% and win-share figures are well beneath what Bryant posted during his later career 2009 and 2010 championships. Should Duncan win a fifth ring it should it should be remembered that his 2013 post-season production is on par (if not lower) than what Bryant posted in 2000, and 2002 (seasons where his championships are constantly criticized as being less valuable due to a lack of MVP level production, statistically.)


Do we take Olympics into consideration when we talk about better overall career, or do we leave that for The Hall? Kobe has two gold medals, Duncan has zero. Last mini-point; The Lakers since Kobe are 4-2 in the post-season against Duncan and the Spurs. Each winner in the six matchups went on to the NBA finals. On the road of going through each other in the post-season, advantage Lakers in the battle of the dynasties- heads up.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=bryanko01&y1=2013&p2=duncati01&y2=2013

A fifth championship certainly tilts the scale in favor of Duncan vs Kobe, even if Tony Parker gets the nod as 'top dog'. But Kobe is certainly right there in cumulative stats, career accomplishments, accolades and NBA championships.


Funny there was just something written about Duncan vs Kobe today, when discussing "best player of this generation"

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/58875/duncan-numbers-among-generations-best

Bruno couple things from your post (which I respect & think is totally fair BTW)

1- Kobe has Duncan in Olympic play frankly cause Tim was not happy with FIBA rules & officiating and thus chose not to play anymore. I don't know if this is something that is entirely relevant when comparing the 2.

2- I think most folks can agree the more defense team selections in favor of Kobe is probably something that can be taken with a grain of salt. :eyebrow: (I think you realize this too lol)

3- All star appearances: would Duncan have more if he was as popular as Kobe? Possibly. It's not necessarily a testament to his play, but rather a popularity thing. He keeps to himself, chooses not to market himself the way other guys do, and at the end of the day, he's not the kind of player/personality people want to see in a game that's supposed to be high flying & flashy play.

Their careers and accolades speak for themselves. I personally think 2010 & 2011 kind of hurt Duncan, he was battling that knee injury and saw a dip in his production and just wasn't himself. As a big man, knee problems are their worst nightmare. Retirement was looking inevitable to be perfectly honest. But these past 2 years, he's been great again, and looks like he could go another 2-3 years if he chose to.

Kobe has been in great shape and always is able to play through injuries. So seeing him play dam near 40 mpg this season & last and still able to produce night in and night out has been pretty amazing, just from the aspect of how much mileage he has. Being the guy he is, I don't think he'd have it any other way, though 1 has to wonder if he had a coach to preserve his minutes and rest him a little more, how much that could extend his career.

But these guys play different styles, different positions, and are just different players. What Duncan has to do for his team, Kobe might not have to & vice versa. Duncan was more instrumental to his teams success on the defensive & offensive side without causing any controversy with his teammates & ownership, while Kobe had to shoulder a huge load offensively most years and certainly carried some mediocre teams a few years, and rightfully voiced his opinions and frustrations about it. They have 2 different demeanor's, attitudes, philosophies, but they've both had pretty dam good careers and still going strong at their age.


nice.


certainly not in peak or statistics but it should be at least mentioned when talking about overall career. Duncan was there in 2004.

I think it does have an impact on their careers. From 2008 until now Kobe has committed summers to team USA during summers where he was taking the Lakers deep into June (2008-2010). The amount of time that his body had to heal in between those seasons wasn't enough time to properly heal and that's why we saw Kobe crash so hard towards the end of the 2011 regular season and playoffs (he had played more basketball than anyone over those three years as he started his 30s) All that extra time added up and with this Achilles injury he wasn't even able to give it a legit go against the Spurs this post season, which would have been Duncan and Kobe's seventh all-time meeting in the post-season.

Of course the achilles injury has a lot more to do with MDAs minutes this season than the build up of deep june runs and olympic play that hobbled Bryant from 2009-2011, but I'm making the point that Kobe always started seasons from 2008 and on, on-fire statistically (I reference one year in one of my blogs). but due to a lack of a full summers off, his line drops gradually throughout the year due to fatigue. that has been happening for years, it's a consistent pattern i've observed. Duncan has been extremely fortunate to have his full summers to recover. Zero olympic play, only two trips to the WCF over five years from 2008 through 2012, as well as Pops brilliant minute management have allowed Duncan the luxury of rest, which has allowed his body to not burn out and still be in contention this year at his age. Kobe never had that luxury, and if there's anything that should show for it- I'd argue that it should be Olympic gold.



haha, of course. Duncan is the more important defender, regardless of all defensive team nods. Kobe deserved most of his defensive team selections (the last 2-3 were questionable but the bulk were not) and he has the accolades to express excellence on the defensive end. but Duncan as an anchor was able to do things for his teams defense that guards, specifically Kobe, can not. he's also right there with defensive accolades and is dominant in defensive win-shares.



good point. the only difference between Duncan and Kobe as far as all-star game appearances is 2012. Both made it in '98 for the first time, (no '99 all-star game due to lockout season) and every all-star game from 2000-2013 (except Duncan in 2012). Popularity is no doubt important for selecting the starters but coaches pick the bench. LaMarcus Aldridge, Marc Gasol, Kevin Love, and Dirk Nowitzki were all selected by the coaches as the F/Cs representing the western conference bench behind Blake Griffin and Andrew Bynum as starters. Obviously Duncan wasn't himself.


it's already looking like the public has forgotten 2010 and 2011. if he closes out his career with production/success like he had this year that will be all that people remember. this was no doubt the perfect year for the Spurs to advance to the finals now that the team is mostly healthy for the first post-season in years (and other key injuries in the WC crippling other contenders).


I know, and Phil tried. Phil had him down to 33.5 in 2011. Brown and MDA allowed his minutes to fly through the roof. That's why having strong coaches like Jackson and Pop is such a luxury- their players respect them enough to accept the minutes they are being dealt for their long term preservation, and for the long run of aiming for being fresh in the post season.


x2.

Great posting guys. If more post were like this rather than "My guy>Your guy", I and a lot of others would come here more often

DODGERS&LAKERS
05-30-2013, 06:29 PM
I agree with the last sentence. Now let me try and answer why I have Duncan over Kobe (even though it is possibly the closest 2 players on my list, duncan barely having the edge). When it comes to rings, accolades, and longevity I see things on a pretty similar level.

Kobe having and extra ring (with 3 coming as 2nd best player on the team), and an extra All nba selection. Duncan having an extra MVP, and finals MVP, and two more defensive team selections (also ROY if that matters to you). I will note that being 2nd best on that team isn't a huge negative at all to me, but it is part of the reason Kobe has one more ring so I mentioned it. To me the accolades are just slightly in favor of Timmy here because he was arguably the best player on all 4 rings and has an extra mvp (more valuable than an extra all nba selection to me).

Longevity is pretty even as well. Kobe so has played more minutes, but that doesn't mean too much necessarily (as it wasn't like duncan chose to, pop just manages minutes more). Kobe came in a year earlier but took 3-4 years to really make a major impact. Duncan came in and made a major impact right away giving him an early advantage. Now it evens out because Duncan wasn't quite the same player in 2011 or 2012. Each player made the 1st team this year as well, so they have a long span of dominance. To me this hasn't changed things much and still has things very slightly in Duncan's favor overall, but not a huge difference either way.

This leaves us with production and impact to discuss. Kobe was the better offensive player, because he could score with the same efficiency at a higher volume (also evident in their o rating). Kobe also had the ability to take over games at a higher level. Duncan did a lot of things on this end that helped on this end too and was an excellent passer for a big man. On top of this he was still a very good scorer for a bigman, just not as elite as kobe. On the defensive end however Duncan was a gamechanger throughout his career. Kobe was good on this end (more so at the begining/middle of his career), but wasn't nearly as impactful as a dominant big man. To me the gap of impact Duncan had on the defensive end is bigger than their gap offensively. Then just to back things up a little more, Duncan has a better career PER, and WS/48, and even more win shares with his less minutes. Now to finish things off Tim duncan's playoff numbers take a slight bump up, while Kobe's see a slight drop (both of these are very slight, but it does matter).

To me these guys are very close but Duncan has the slight edge over Kobe.

Bird should be in there with Kobe and Duncan. All of them had very similar careers

DODGERS&LAKERS
05-30-2013, 06:34 PM
I would have Duncan over Kobe just going by pure statistics. He is slightly better and a better defender. But since it is not so big a gap I would personally rather have Kobe on my team just for entertainment value. His efficiency still came about with spectacular plays that would drop your jaw. Duncan is so steady but rarely ever did anything that makes you rewind and look at the play again.

This is a big mans game so any great bigman should have better more efficient numbers than a great guard. Unless the guard is Jordan. But since Kobe and Duncan are comparable, I would go with the guy that brings entertainment for my dollar

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 06:41 PM
Moses is arguably one of the top 15 guys of all time. And Kareem was in his mid 30's in those two particular matchups. On top of that, KAJ was in complete beast mode offensively throughout his mid 30's averaging 26.2 ppg at 33, and 23.4 at 38 years of age.

I'm not sure it was in this thread, but I laid out the case against KAJ the past day or so.

#1. NBA weak from when he was a rookie until the ABA merger.
#2. At the time of the merger and after - the state of Center play remained low until the mid 80's, when KAJ was in pretty steep decline.
#3. Match-ups.

KAJ got eaten alive by Wilt the first few years he played, Wilt had enough youth and strength left to make KAJ look bad.
As I pointed out Moses dominated KAJ, and he did it in the regular season before he did it in the playoffs.
I'm quite sure Shaq in his prime would have posed problems for KAJ (in his prime) would have very few answers for.
I saw Walton (old and beat up) in his time with the Celts manhandle an old KAJ.
I watched Hakeem dominate KAJ starting in about his 2nd year.
I saw Dave Cowens in his prime before he got hurt give KAJ all he could handle - a 6' 9" PF playing Center (with short arms)

KAJ gathered a lot of stats against a lot of average and poor Centers. On paper he *must* be the best Center, and yet his very real problems in match-ups with players at or near the top level (in particular stronger ones) says that if you were trying to choose Centers based on the match-ups against say the other 20 best Centers of all time, that they are all vulnerable to others - sort of like a mega game of rock-paper-scissors.

In that sort of a round robin, Hakeem is the only guy that comes to #1 for me, and has been for decades. He's the best all around center, and the only player that beat on him (his era of Centers played destroys what KAJ faced) was Shaq, and that was only after Hakeem declined.


It's just a joke trying to compare Duncan and Kareem. You just look stupid even starting.

I never claimed Duncan was ahead of KAJ. Like I've been saying, just ticking off accomplishments, KAJ has to be 1st. OTOH, when the match-up game comes along, I would never put KAJ ahead of Hakeem. If the opposing Center is Wilt, Shaq, or Moses, I'm not taking KAJ. That all means if there is a GOAT Center, it's Hakeem. If he's not it, nobody is, except by given match-up.

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 06:41 PM
Bird should be in there with Kobe and Duncan. All of them had very similar careers

I have each of them right ahead of bird actually haha. Bird is in 3rd because although his prime was probably the best of the 3, his longevity really doesn't stack up to the other two.

DODGERS&LAKERS
05-30-2013, 06:46 PM
I have each of them right ahead of bird actually haha. Bird is in 3rd because although his prime was probably the best of the 3, his longevity really doesn't stack up to the other two.

Agreed. Its too bad Birds back did him in.

P.S. I like your post, I thought that you were a new user that just got here but I see your join date is 2010. Hopefully you post more often

BSF101
05-30-2013, 06:47 PM
Wait Bill Russell at #10? Come on.

mngopher35
05-30-2013, 06:51 PM
Agreed. Its too bad Birds back did him in.

P.S. I like your post, I thought that you were a new user that just got here but I see your join date is 2010. Hopefully you post more often

Thanks. I joined in 2010 but mostly came here because the site had tons of updates. I've had free time lately and have been posting for maybe 10 months now? I just got a new job, but hopefully continue to have time to post. There are some really good basketball discussions here if you can just ignore some of the bickering/trolling/baiting.

ManRam
05-30-2013, 07:38 PM
I love how when I post quotes from other players, coaches, owners, analysts, and experts I am mocked and countered with Hollinger stats. When a Lebronite does it, it's all of the sudden a valid argument.

#hypocrisy

the only point i'm trying to make is that it's not just PSD's "LeBronites" that think very highly of him. you have some delusion that only people on PSD think he could be an all time great...when the reality is most people already feel he is, and the only thing keeping him from skyrocketing is a few more rings. i could link you to thousands of well-written arguments about how lebron is already an all time great. but i did quotes from people who's opinions i don't even care for (but i'm sure you do) to perhaps get it through your skull.


it's not hypocrisy. i'm stooping to your level to simply explain (as it needs to be with you) how idiotic that belief of yours is.

i'm not using this to prove that he's great, because i don't think it's compelling. i'm doing it to prove that people outside of PSD think lebron is something incredibly special...something you for some reason don't believe.

ManRam
05-30-2013, 07:40 PM
Where do I currently have Lebron ranked you ask???

Somewhere between 15-20. Thats a very good ranking for a guy that has only 9 seasons and one ring under his belt.

I respect this.

I think he's closer to 12 or 13, just because his peak is almost unrivaled, but he's not in my top 10. If we did like a per year thing, or just judged people's peaks, he'd be close (probably in) to my top 5. And that's many think he can reach that high.

ManRam
05-30-2013, 07:50 PM
.

As long as his impact is still high and he's contributing to the teams success at a high level I think even a late in career championships should help a players overall career stock. so long as the value and production is still there.



Duncan has Kobe in a lot of ways but across the board? Doesn't 'across the board' kinda imply that Duncan literally tops him in everything?

To date Kobe tops Duncan in championships, all-nba first team selections, total all-nba team selections, total all-star game appearances, total regular season points (8,000+ more points), total post-season points (800+), total regular season assists (2,000+), total post-season assists (350+), total regular season steals, total post-season steals, total field goals made in playoffs and regular season, total free-throws made in the playoffs and regular season, better FT shooter, more defensive first-team selections :hide:, more scoring championships.

Kobe is
3rd in most post-season point in NBA history.
4th in most regular-season points in NBA history.
4th in most post-season FGM in NBA history.
6th in most regular-season FGM in NBA history.
2nd in most post-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most regular-season FTM in NBA history.
3rd in most post-season three pointers made in NBA history.
7th in most post-season assists in NBA history.
5th in most post-season steals in NBA history.
7th in total post-season win-shares.
2nd most top five MVP finishes in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA team selection in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA first-team selections in NBA history.
1st in total All-NBA defensive first-team selections in NBA history.
2nd in most All-Star selections in NBA history.
1st in most All-Star game MVPs in NBA history.
One out of four players to ever win the Finals MVP award in consecutive seasons in NBA history.


Kobe Bryant has a higher regular season TS% than Tim Duncan, Duncan a higher playoff TS%; both by negligible margins. For a player who's regularly criticized as a volume scorer Kobe has done a magical job of posting a nearly identical career TS% as one of the NBAs all-time beacons in fundamentals and smart-basketball.

Important to note- Duncans stat line raises in the post-season. I have a lot of respect for Duncan on this feat, one of my favorite reasons for arguing him as top five should he win another championship w SA. Duncan was the obvious leader of on court impact for the 2007 Spurs, despite Parkers finals MVP. The same can't be said in 2013 should SA rack their 5th- Parker has the stats to back up that potential finals MVP this year. I also argue that Karl Malones second MVP in lockout '99 should be Duncans, and that Duncan should have three regular season MVPs.

4,688. Kobe has played 4,688 more minutes than Tim Duncan throughout their careers (regular season+ playoffs). Tim Duncan would have to play an additional 133.5 games at his career regular season minute per game average of 35.1 minutes to match Kobe in total time spent on the court. That's nearly a seasons and a half more production at starters minute average for Kobe. As far as longevity, Kobe edges him out by a season and a half in total production on the court (devils advocate- Duncan has the higher WS/48 averages and still tops Bryant by about 10 win-shares overall despite this).

Regular season MVP award shares are nearly identical, edge Duncan. This is mainly because of Duncans early dominance in MVP voting during the '99-'05 Spurs run. Despite this seasons reemergence for Duncan, he hasn't finished top five in MVP voting since 2007. Kobe has finished top five every season since 2006, and has 11 top five MVP finishes for his career. Although they've both become titans of longevity Kobe has remained more consistatnly dominat throughout (Duncan peaked out at a higher level of statistical dominance/defensive impact).
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/mvp_shares.html?redir

It should be noted that Duncans 2013 post-season PER, TS% and win-share figures are well beneath what Bryant posted during his later career 2009 and 2010 championships. Should Duncan win a fifth ring it should it should be remembered that his 2013 post-season production is on par (if not lower) than what Bryant posted in 2000, and 2002 (seasons where his championships are constantly criticized as being less valuable due to a lack of MVP level production, statistically.)


Do we take Olympics into consideration when we talk about better overall career, or do we leave that for The Hall? Kobe has two gold medals, Duncan has zero. Last mini-point; The Lakers since Kobe are 4-2 in the post-season against Duncan and the Spurs. Each winner in the six matchups went on to the NBA finals. On the road of going through each other in the post-season, advantage Lakers in the battle of the dynasties- heads up.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=bryanko01&y1=2013&p2=duncati01&y2=2013

A fifth championship certainly tilts the scale in favor of Duncan vs Kobe, even if Tony Parker gets the nod as 'top dog'. But Kobe is certainly right there in cumulative stats, career accomplishments, accolades and NBA championships.

this is a great post, and i missed it until now i think...

but ALL of it is longevity-related (besides a few amount of things. i think kobe is one of the 2-3 best players all time when it comes to just longevity. perhaps their longevity numbers (essentially pure counting stats) aren't as identical as I felt...but it's hard to compare two totally different players in that regard.

they're neck-and-neck IMO, as I said. i'm not sure who i have above the other. i think compelling arguments can be made either way. but IF kobe has one perceived strong advantage, it is indeed longevity. as duncan continues to do things like he did this year (and kobe was spectacular himself) and in the playoffs, he might slowly be tapping into that advantage of kobe's and the gap narrows, or swings in TD's favor.

pardon me if that sounds like incoherent babbling. basically i'm so torn between the two of them that i don't really know what i'm saying half the time.

i admittedly don't really ever look at olympic things with american players. maybe that's hasty on my behalf

bagwell368
05-30-2013, 09:07 PM
Wait Bill Russell at #10? Come on.

I know... Russell doesn't even crack the top15...

JordansBulls
05-31-2013, 08:08 AM
I know... Russell doesn't even crack the top15...

Come on now.

ManRam
05-31-2013, 09:59 AM
i think russell is generally the most overrated basketball player, but i really would have a hard time saying he's not in the top 15.

Hellcrooner
05-31-2013, 11:13 AM
he is got a case already.
It woudl only make it more legit.

He would probably get into MY list with Magic , Kareem, Jordan, Wilt, Bird.

bagwell368
05-31-2013, 12:55 PM
Come on now.

I've made my case a number of times the past 3 years. If you give full weight to his landing spot (best GM, best Coach, best team outside of himself) - then it's clear to see that he's not the sole reason for 11 titles - which so many like to give him credit for. In fact of all the nominees for top 10, it takes the most work to remove him from these things (or give others the same sorts of goodies he had - on paper) to be able to extract who and what he was.

Nobody considers that outside of the Hawks the first few years and the Lakers the last couple of years and the 76'ers in one year, the Celts had no peers or near peers. They faced much weaker foes year in and year out than any other team that could be considered a dynasty - period. 9 years #1 SRS (mostly well ahead of #2) one year at 3rd, 3 years at 2nd. Quick name me any player with a great set of teams than that?

Years - SRS Rank - Result - Record - # of HOF's including Russell on team:

1956-57: 1 +4.79 Won Finals (44-28) - 5
1957-58: 1 +5.02 Lost Finals (49-23) - 6
1958-59: 1 +5.84 Won Finals (52-20) - 7
1959-60: 1 +7.62 Won Finals (59-16) - 7
1960-61: 1 +4.93 Won Finals (57-22) - 7
1961-62: 1 +8.25 Won Finals (60-20) - 6
1962-63: 1 +6.38 Won Finals (58-22) - 7
1963-64: 1 +6.93 Won Finals (59-21) - 6
1964-65: 1 +7.46 Won Finals (62-18) - 5
1965-66: 2 +4.34 Won Finals (54-26) - 4
1966-67: 2 +7.24 Lost Eastern Division Finals (60-21) - 5
1967-68: 3 +3.87 Won Finals (54-28) - 5
1968-69: 2 +5.35 Won Finals (48-34) - 5

So, traded for by a Coach/GM that had a high pace offensive team with weak defense and rebounding, Russell was put into perfect position. Now, he didn't screw that up - which is clearly in his favor. But if you know the personnel on that team and in that league, NOBODY should be shocked if I said if Russell ended up on the Pistons (0 titles), NYK (1 title late), Bulls (0 titles), Hawks (1 or 2 titles) that Russell was not making much of a dent. Meanwhile if a guy like Thurmond (weak offense but strong D was put on the Celts instead (yeah I know he'd need a time machine too), it's still 8 - 11 titles. Well Thurmond is a HOF, but one you can drive a truck through his holes - and relative lack of rings.

The final example is last night. James won that game last night in the 3rd quarter - on both ends of the floor. Russell couldn't do that. He's a cog - a great cog in a team, but unlike the class of players we are talking here, he couldn't create wins on his own on the offensive side of the ball. He needed a great team - the best team of his era, with great players, and a great Coach/GM to be the historic Russell.

I saw him and AFAIK, no others of you did. I'm happy to have the guy on my team, but, if I was given a pool of players to draft, Russell isn't 5, 8, 12, or 15. He might be 18. We're talking thousands of players here, and I'm just telling you as soon as you separate out the myth and the surroundings Russell becomes a fish out of water - at least in terms of discussing him in the top15.

For bigs: Hakeem, KAJ, Shaq, Wilt, M. Malone, Duncan, KG, DRob are all easily ahead of him. If we are talking peak, McHale eats Russell for breakfast.

BTW, Red said for many years that Russell was the greatest of all time... but a few years after Bird retired he said he could no longer choose Russell as #1. Bird won 3 titles, but was able to win in a lot of ways Russell could not. Interesting.

JordansBulls
05-31-2013, 01:31 PM
he is got a case already.
It woudl only make it more legit.

He would probably get into MY list with Magic , Kareem, Jordan, Wilt, Bird.

Why no Russell?

HouRealCoach
05-31-2013, 02:49 PM
I think if Duncan wins Finals MVP with the title that he could make a case for 2nd best player of all time

ManRam
05-31-2013, 02:59 PM
If Duncan wins a ring this year, I'd say without much hesitation that his 5 rings are more impressive to me than Russell's 11.

_KB24_
05-31-2013, 03:23 PM
If Duncan wins a ring this year, I'd say without much hesitation that his 5 rings are more impressive to me than Russell's 11.

Wouldn't you consider his 4 now still more impressive than Russ's 11?

amos1er
05-31-2013, 09:22 PM
i think russell is generally the most overrated basketball player, but i really would have a hard time saying he's not in the top 15.

Ya, I have him in the 10-15 range for sure.

amos1er
05-31-2013, 09:23 PM
Wouldn't you consider his 4 now still more impressive than Russ's 11?

For sure. Russell had extremely stacked teams and was never the clear cut top contributor. He was most of the time a wheel in a cog.

amos1er
05-31-2013, 09:23 PM
If Duncan wins a ring this year, I'd say without much hesitation that his 5 rings are more impressive to me than Russell's 11.

Looks like we actually agree.

amos1er
05-31-2013, 09:24 PM
I think if Duncan wins Finals MVP with the title that he could make a case for 2nd best player of all time

Wow...thats quite a proclamation!!!

bagwell368
05-31-2013, 10:05 PM
For sure. Russell had extremely stacked teams and was never the clear cut top contributor. He was most of the time a wheel in a cog.

In 9 of his 13 years he was #1, but his #2-6 top teammates were vastly better than all the other teams they played in outside of 4 years. No other player ever had that advantage.

OceanSpray
06-01-2013, 02:20 PM
Didn't Russell win 2 rings as a player coach for the Celtics? Dude had a stacked team and that was why Wilt never won as many as he should've. Bill Russell is overrated. He's the greatest winner, but definitely not even close to being the greatest players. He's had the most help of any superstar in NBA history and people seem to forget that. Bill would never survive in Wilt's position. Bill isn't even top 15 in my opinion.

JordansBulls
06-01-2013, 03:02 PM
Didn't Russell win 2 rings as a player coach for the Celtics? Dude had a stacked team and that was why Wilt never won as many as he should've. Bill Russell is overrated. He's the greatest winner, but definitely not even close to being the greatest players. He's had the most help of any superstar in NBA history and people seem to forget that. Bill would never survive in Wilt's position. Bill isn't even top 15 in my opinion.

What happened from 1966 to 1969 when Wilt had HCA 3 years of the 4 seasons? Wilt only won 1 of those series. I agree before 1966 that Russell had a much better team, but from 1966 onward Wilt had as much talent if not more.

bagwell368
06-02-2013, 06:21 AM
What happened from 1966 to 1969 when Wilt had HCA 3 years of the 4 seasons? Wilt only won 1 of those series. I agree before 1966 that Russell had a much better team, but from 1966 onward Wilt had as much talent if not more.

In 1965-66 the 76'ers won 1 more game than the Celts, but had a lower SRS. In the playoffs only Wilt showed up (posting a massive 28.0/30.2/3.0). Greer was brutal, Walker wasn't very good, and Cunningham was sub-brutal in his rookie year. Tough to win when players #2-4 suck.

In 1966-67 the 76'ers stomped the Celts 4-1 in the ECF. Easily one of the 12 greatest teams of all time.

In 1967-68 Chet Walker (3rd best player) had a terrible playoffs, and Billy Cunningham (4th best player got hurt and only played 3 of the 13 playoff games)

In 1968-69 the Lakers were 5th in SRS (tied for 2nd best record). It was a 3 man team in a way familiar to fans of the modern game. Baylor had a meh regular season and was pathetic in the playoffs (11, 5, and 8 points in the middle 3 games - including a 1 for 6 at the FT line in Game 4, a 1 point loss. which would have made the Series 3-1 LAL instead of 2-2 if they had won). Wilt himself was off - which given his career 28.7/28.7 vs Russell across over 140 career games is a bit hard to explain. Still with only West playing out of his mind (only Finals MVP on a losing team) vs a very savvy Celts team that had secured Bailey Howell a few years earlier to help the declining Russell on the inside, it seems the outcome was ordained.

BTW, Russell coached the defense. Havlicek coached the offense. But they were not full time coaches, Red still handled many of the regular duties of a Coach. Russell was listed as Coach because Russell was talking retirement, and Red was able to stop that and help move the sport, the Country, and Boston towards a more equitable future. Yet another of Red's master strokes.