PDA

View Full Version : You are the GM for an expansion team: Who would you draft among these players



JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2014, 01:54 PM
Assuming each is 20 years old and you will likely have them for their entire career, who do you draft:

Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant
LeBron James
Chris Paul

FraziersKnicks
05-11-2014, 01:59 PM
LBJ
Duncan
CP3
Kobe

In that order

poleandreel
05-11-2014, 02:10 PM
It looks like you chose someone at each position so that's why KD is omitted. However, I'd take KD and start him at SG over Kobe any day.

To answer the question: Duncan then LBJ


Not because I think Tim is better than LBJ, but because we've already seen how Duncan will age and the success he has had. It's much easier to find a wing than a top 1 PF for 12 years.

I Rock Shaqs
05-11-2014, 02:33 PM
BOOOOO!!!!

Unoriginal thread.... Lame lame lame lame boring nobody cares about this...

mngopher35
05-11-2014, 03:05 PM
LBJ
Duncan
Kobe
Paul

Poleandreel makes a good point though. I am making an assumption here that Lebron won't have a drastic decline coming up. I think Duncan is certainly a good answer here as well.

mdm692
05-11-2014, 03:09 PM
1. Duncan
2a. LBJ
2b. Kobe
4. CP3

You need an elite big man to win championships unless you're lucky enough to assemble/draft a super team like Bulls or Heat.

Tony_Starks
05-11-2014, 03:32 PM
Assuming they're all young I'm taking Deron Williams over CP3. He was clearly the better PG but got a little lazy.

JEDean89
05-11-2014, 03:50 PM
while i believe LBJ will ultimately go down as better than Duncan (who could very well get his 5th ring and 6th finals appearance this year), the fact that Duncan has accomplished so much in both the regular season and the playoffs and that he has been so humble, has taken incredible pay cuts, is an extension of the coach on the floor, and has been the very foundation on which the Spurs dominance has been built the last 16 years means that we can't just assume LBJ is gonna match. Tim Duncan is on the all time scoring rebounding and block an elite achievement. So if LBJ can keep winning rings into his 30's, can win 4+, get MVP 3+ times, and stay the course of greatness, he will definitely go down as better, his dominance is ridiculous and he was 4 years younger when he got drafted.

jerellh528
05-11-2014, 04:00 PM
From what I know right now, without speculation of what may happen in the future.
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.James
4.Paul

todu82
05-11-2014, 04:11 PM
Kobe
Lebron
Duncan
Paul

NYKnickFanatic
05-11-2014, 04:12 PM
Duncan

cmellofan15
05-11-2014, 04:36 PM
Assuming they're all young I'm taking Deron Williams over CP3. He was clearly the better PG but got a little lazy.

there was no point in their careers, aside from when Chris Paul was injured, that Deron Williams was ever better.

and if we're talking expansion team I'm assuming they're pretty thin on talent so I'd go

1. LeBron
2. Duncan
3. Paul
4. Kobe

mike_noodles
05-11-2014, 04:40 PM
I'd take Timmy or Lebron.

Crunch Time
05-11-2014, 05:00 PM
Duncan. Easier to build around a big than a wing player.

Quinnsanity
05-11-2014, 05:00 PM
LBJ
Duncan
CP3
Kobe

In that order

This

flea
05-11-2014, 05:10 PM
Duncan. Has proven he can win in almost any style of roster construction. All of the others necessarily need to play a certain style or it's unlikely they win it all.

Hotone1401
05-11-2014, 07:33 PM
I would go

1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Duncan
4. CP3

I give Kobe the edge for the simple that he's owned Duncan's teams throughout his career. It also should be notes that there is no way of knowing how Timmy would've ever done with Tony Parker. We've seen Kobe without Shaq.

Anybody putting CP3 ahead of Kobe is just being disrespectful and a complete bias hater. I don't how you could ever argue for having CP3 over a 5-time champion.

ohreally
05-11-2014, 07:37 PM
Duncan
Kobe
LeBron

flea
05-11-2014, 07:48 PM
I would go

1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Duncan
4. CP3

I give Kobe the edge for the simple that he's owned Duncan's teams throughout his career. It also should be notes that there is no way of knowing how Timmy would've ever done with Tony Parker. We've seen Kobe without Shaq.

Anybody putting CP3 ahead of Kobe is just being disrespectful and a complete bias hater. I don't how you could ever argue for having CP3 over a 5-time champion.

It also remains to be seen what Kobe can do in the playoffs without a top 2 frontcourt. Looks like we'll never see.

cmellofan15
05-11-2014, 08:09 PM
Anybody putting CP3 ahead of Kobe is just being disrespectful and a complete bias hater. I don't how you could ever argue for having CP3 over a 5-time champion.

or they're keeping things in perspective considering Kobe has only won championships with Hall of Fame big men and the greatest coach ever..

Method28
05-11-2014, 08:22 PM
I would go

1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Duncan
4. CP3

I give Kobe the edge for the simple that he's owned Duncan's teams throughout his career. It also should be notes that there is no way of knowing how Timmy would've ever done with Tony Parker. We've seen Kobe without Shaq.

Anybody putting CP3 ahead of Kobe is just being disrespectful and a complete bias hater. I don't how you could ever argue for having CP3 over a 5-time champion.

Well he's not a 5 time champ in this scenario.

I go the same as most people have said.

Duncan
LBJ
Paul
Kobe

Kobe is the least effective teammate out of the 4.

Hotone1401
05-11-2014, 08:31 PM
or they're keeping things in perspective considering Kobe has only won championships with Hall of Fame big men and the greatest coach ever..

And what has Paul won?

I just think it's a bit disrespectful to place CP3 ahead of Kobe when he hasn't won anything yet.

Kobe is proven. I get it that he's old now, injured, and many of you will jump at any chance to disrespect the man but I don't see how you could argue for having Cp3 over Kobe as your franchise player.

Hotone1401
05-11-2014, 08:32 PM
Well he's not a 5 time champ in this scenario.

I go the same as most people have said.

Duncan
LBJ
Paul
Kobe

Kobe is the least effective teammate out of the 4.

But he's also the most competitive, skilled, and determined out of the 4.

Trwood12
05-11-2014, 08:33 PM
Duncan (consistency is key)
LBJ
CP3
Kobe

Hotone1401
05-11-2014, 08:36 PM
It also remains to be seen what Kobe can do in the playoffs without a top 2 frontcourt. Looks like we'll never see.

Yes, this debate could go on forever. However, Kobe has proven himself without Shaq and that's what many critics questioned his ability to do. I just think that Tony Parker still doesn't get enough respect seeing as how he is the engine to Pop's system and has been consistently the go to guy in pressure situations with that team. I guess we'll never know how Timmy could have done without TP.

Hotone1401
05-11-2014, 08:42 PM
Duncan (consistency is key)
LBJ
CP3
Kobe

Ridiculous.

Lebron isn't consistent? Lebron as the number one choice is a no brainer.

PhillyFaninLA
05-11-2014, 08:45 PM
I'd chose Lebron than Duncan then I wanted make a choice

Trwood12
05-11-2014, 08:51 PM
Ridiculous.

Lebron isn't consistent? Lebron as the number one choice is a no brainer.

We haven't seen how LeBron will age. The fact that Duncan is still putting up 15, 8, 3, and 2 at 38 years old is insane. Especially the 2 blocks. Don't get my wrong, LeBron is a fantastic player but we have no idea what will happen when his athleticism starts to dwindle. Just look at what KG is doing at 37..

flea
05-11-2014, 08:51 PM
Yes, this debate could go on forever. However, Kobe has proven himself without Shaq and that's what many critics questioned his ability to do. I just think that Tony Parker still doesn't get enough respect seeing as how he is the engine to Pop's system and has been consistently the go to guy in pressure situations with that team. I guess we'll never know how Timmy could have done without TP.

Nah we do know. He won a title without Parker in a twin towers setup and he won a title when Parker was a rookie and very one-dimensional.

Trwood12
05-11-2014, 08:54 PM
And what has Paul won?

I just think it's a bit disrespectful to place CP3 ahead of Kobe when he hasn't won anything yet.

Kobe is proven. I get it that he's old now, injured, and many of you will jump at any chance to disrespect the man but I don't see how you could argue for having Cp3 over Kobe as your franchise player.

When has CP3 been on a championship team besides now? Do you honestly think Kobe would have won those rings with the teams that CP3 has had?

flea
05-11-2014, 09:06 PM
When has CP3 been on a championship team besides now? Do you honestly think Kobe would have won those rings with the teams that CP3 has had?

Paul did have some solid teams in New Orleans periodically, so you can't say he had complete garbage (like what Lebron had many years). The year they lost to the Spurs (story for a lot of promising teams in the last decade) was very solid with Chandler, West, and a still effective Peja.

Trwood12
05-11-2014, 09:21 PM
Paul did have some solid teams in New Orleans periodically, so you can't say he had complete garbage (like what Lebron had many years). The year they lost to the Spurs (story for a lot of promising teams in the last decade) was very solid with Chandler, West, and a still effective Peja.

But they weren't championship contenders like Kobe had

JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2014, 09:35 PM
BOOOOO!!!!

Unoriginal thread.... Lame lame lame lame boring nobody cares about this...

Then don't read.

JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2014, 09:44 PM
I would go

1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Duncan
4. CP3

I give Kobe the edge for the simple that he's owned Duncan's teams throughout his career. It also should be notes that there is no way of knowing how Timmy would've ever done with Tony Parker. We've seen Kobe without Shaq.

Anybody putting CP3 ahead of Kobe is just being disrespectful and a complete bias hater. I don't how you could ever argue for having CP3 over a 5-time champion.

I don't see the sense of giving it to Kobe because 'his teams' beat Duncan. Duncan's team also beat him, but they don't even play the same position. If Shaq out played Ducan, then it makes no sense to pick Kobe over Duncan if Shaq is the one who outplayed Duncan.

Kobe only beat Duncan without Shaq once, and that was when he had two All-Stars in the front court (Bynum and Pau) and Duncan was playing with one.

You also compare losing Parker to Shaq as if Parker gives Duncan as much help as Shaq gave Kobe.

If you want to compare, compare David Robinson and Shaq. Duncan won twice with DRob and we've seen him win twice without him. So... done.

xxplayerxx23
05-11-2014, 09:46 PM
Assuming they're all young I'm taking Deron Williams over CP3. He was clearly the better PG but got a little lazy.

In no world was deron ever better then Paul. Paul was always the better player

JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2014, 09:52 PM
Nah we do know. He won a title without Parker in a twin towers setup and he won a title when Parker was a rookie and very one-dimensional.

+1

Duncan won without DRob.
Kobe won without Shaq.


The Parker comparison is invalid. It's not like when Kobe won without Shaq he was the only player on the roster. He had Pau and Bynum (TWO All-Star centers) Ron ARtest (a DPOY) and Lamar Odom (a 6th MOY).

Duncan has never played with a player as dominant as Shaq since his first couple seasons with DRob (Robinson's level of play dropped rapidly after he hit 30).

Also, as fr as impact on the game goes, I think Pau has a far great impact than Parker. Duncan has won with Avery Johnson starting at point... he doesn't need a great point guard... Parker is great, but let's not pretend he's at CP3 level or something.

If there were a point guard as dominant as his position as Shaq was a C, then CP3 would be the only comparable player. Saying 'Duncan hasn't won without Parker' is not only not true (1999), but in comparing it to Shaq it is misleading. Shaq was, the entire time Kobe played with him, the BEST player at his position. Parker has never been anywhere near the best point guard in the game. He's often finished in the top five, but...


If somebody want to make an argument for Kobe over Duncan, they will need more than a 'Duncan never won without Parker' reason.

cmellofan15
05-11-2014, 09:58 PM
Also, if I'm being honest, I'm putting Kobe at the bottom because he's by far the most selfish player on that list. Accolades and such aside, the other guys have proven themselves to be great team players and Kobe has been bordering on the title of ball hog his whole career. High usg, low efficiency. And don't get me wrong, he's used it to his advantage and has proven to be effective without utilizing the team around him, but that's not who I'm building my new franchise around.

Method28
05-11-2014, 10:08 PM
When has CP3 been on a championship team besides now? Do you honestly think Kobe would have won those rings with the teams that CP3 has had?

Paul did have some solid teams in New Orleans periodically, so you can't say he had complete garbage (like what Lebron had many years). The year they lost to the Spurs (story for a lot of promising teams in the last decade) was very solid with Chandler, West, and a still effective Peja.

I watched just about every game cp3 has ever played and I'll tell you that Hornets team probably would've missed or barely made the playoffs without him.

They had a one dimensional chandler who was not the defensive force at that point in his career, a one dimensional Peja and West who was more attitude than talent.

West had a solid jumper from mid range, a good baby hook and was an OK passer from the post. . that's it. He rarely tried on defense and was too undersized to be effective on the boards.

Without cp3 on that team to give them open looks they would be very average. Now if all of these players would've been at their peak together. ..now we're talking lol

cmellofan15
05-11-2014, 10:09 PM
I watched just about every game cp3 has ever played and I'll tell you that Hornets team probably would've missed or barely made the playoffs without him.

They had a one dimensional chandler who was not the defensive force at that point in his career, a one dimensional Peja and West who was more attitude than talent.

West had a solid jumper from mid range, a good baby hook and was an OK passer from the post. . that's it. He rarely tried on defense and was too undersized to be effective on the boards.

Without cp3 on that team to give them open looks they would be very average. Now if all of these players would've been at their peak together. ..now we're talking lol

I think you're overestimating them a little hahah

raiderfaninTX
05-11-2014, 10:10 PM
Hard choice between lebron and duncan but the fact the lebron plays some shut down defense at time and can score almost at will puts him over duncan IMO. Just depends if you want a big man first you obviously go ducan.

NBA_Starter
05-11-2014, 10:11 PM
Duncan. Easier to build around a big than a wing player.

and he has the character to stay his whole career.

THE MTL
05-11-2014, 10:29 PM
Lebron James lead a crap Cleveland roster to the finals and multiple playoff appearances.

Duncan is amazing but always had a good roster. Kobe missed the playoffs in his one season where he was truly alone. Chris Paul also lead a semi-crappy Hornets roster in 2008 and essentially created himself an allstar in David West. If I could get 2008 CP3 every year, I would put him second.

1. LBJ
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. CP3

cmellofan15
05-11-2014, 10:31 PM
and he has the character to stay his whole career.

well he's never had a reason to leave San Antonio, the other three have had plenty.

koreancabbage
05-11-2014, 11:07 PM
Duncan
LBJ
Kobe
CP

Duncan because of his character, always loyal, and non-confrontational. LBJ 2nd because he might leave your team because you did a ****** job on the roster BUT he can play with anyone on any roster. young 20 year old Kobe was alright but he wasn't as defined as LBJ or Duncan right off the bat - Kobe had to learn a lot and improve since day 1. LBJ and Duncan were factors already earlier in their careers.

CP is a distance 4th because he seems injury proned and hasn't done anything to warrant a discussion with the 3 ahead of him.

edit: adding to this - Does Kobe demand a trade right off the bat? or are you drafting for the LA Lakers? lol

naps
05-11-2014, 11:43 PM
LeBron
Duncan
Kobe


I am not too sure why CP3 is an option here though. I love CP3 but his post-season runs don't really speak loud (Yes I am aware he hasn't had enough years of talented teams but still his post-season runs were too short IMO). CP3 is also not as durable as other three guys on the list above which is a very important facet of being the face of a franchise.

Lloyd Christmas
05-12-2014, 01:51 AM
Duncan
Lebron
Kobe
Paul

Deadpool
05-12-2014, 02:07 AM
https://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/213524278.jpg?1293204747

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 02:27 AM
Duncan won with a league MVP Robinson on his team for his first ring. Robinson wasn't the scoring champ, 4 1st all nba 10 total, defensive player of the year and 4 1st defensive team 8 total ect... but he did put up better numbers and had a bigger impact then prime Gasols during the 1999 finals. After that Duncan had the best bench player ever ginobi, who also put better numbers in the 2005 finals then prime Gasol, and finals mvp Parker who took control of this team and also put up better numbers then prime Gasol, with a long list of hall of fame players.

Prime gasol was a scorer and Parker and ginobli had a higher finals average then gasol's best. Old Rob was pretty much a prime gasol with gasol only averaging 1 more point and Rob +2 rebounds.

With that said I go

Kobe
Duncan
Paul
James

clehmun
05-12-2014, 03:16 AM
When you win, every player on the roster is that much better.
I've never agreed to someone saying Kobe only won because he had the best front court or Duncan only won because he had the best 6th man plus Tony Parker and Pop.

You have to understand that Gasol is what he is today because he won those rings. People consider him a great because he won two with Kobe. Ginobili is considered to some as the best 6th man ever because he won with the Spurs! Tony Parker with zero rings would be just another Monta Ellis type player. But he's one of the best PGs in the NBA because he won with Duncan, Pop and Manu.

Karl Malone would be in consideration for the Top PF in history if he were able to win a ring or two.

So you can't say Kobe only won because he had hall of fame front courts. I don't know if Gasol can make the hall of fame if he never won with Kobe. And look where Bynum is right now?

If Clippers win two straight this year and next, you will all rank Griffin and Deandre much higher than they are right now. And that's fair. But can I then say CP3 only won because he had great big men?

Winning takes the players to the next level. From good to great, great to hall of fame worthy, and hall of fame to historical greats (Top 15 all time).

You got players stuck at hall of fame level (stockon, malone, barkley) because they never won. They are argubly just as good as the Duncans, Kobes, etc but were never in the situation to win (MJ).

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 04:28 AM
When you win, every player on the roster is that much better.
I've never agreed to someone saying Kobe only won because he had the best front court or Duncan only won because he had the best 6th man plus Tony Parker and Pop.

You have to understand that Gasol is what he is today because he won those rings. People consider him a great because he won two with Kobe. Ginobili is considered to some as the best 6th man ever because he won with the Spurs! Tony Parker with zero rings would be just another Monta Ellis type player. But he's one of the best PGs in the NBA because he won with Duncan, Pop and Manu.

Karl Malone would be in consideration for the Top PF in history if he were able to win a ring or two.

So you can't say Kobe only won because he had hall of fame front courts. I don't know if Gasol can make the hall of fame if he never won with Kobe. And look where Bynum is right now?

If Clippers win two straight this year and next, you will all rank Griffin and Deandre much higher than they are right now. And that's fair. But can I then say CP3 only won because he had great big men?

Winning takes the players to the next level. From good to great, great to hall of fame worthy, and hall of fame to historical greats (Top 15 all time).

You got players stuck at hall of fame level (stockon, malone, barkley) because they never won. They are argubly just as good as the Duncans, Kobes, etc but were never in the situation to win (MJ).

Great stuff agree %100 about the winning. I thought KG was the best PF but Duncan won to much to even call them equals.

Gasol never made any of the NBA first teams. His resume is not that good at all. Blake griffin is already accomplishing more then Gasol. Cant see him making it to the hall.

Shammyguy3
05-12-2014, 10:56 AM
Duncan won with a league MVP Robinson on his team for his first ring. Robinson wasn't the scoring champ, 4 1st all nba 10 total, defensive player of the year and 4 1st defensive team 8 total ect... but he did put up better numbers and had a bigger impact then prime Gasols during the 1999 finals. After that Duncan had the best bench player ever ginobi, who also put better numbers in the 2005 finals then prime Gasol, and finals mvp Parker who took control of this team and also put up better numbers then prime Gasol, with a long list of hall of fame players.

Prime gasol was a scorer and Parker and ginobli had a higher finals average then gasol's best. Old Rob was pretty much a prime gasol with gasol only averaging 1 more point and Rob +2 rebounds.

With that said I go

Kobe
Duncan
Paul
James

Kobe played with arguably the most dominant force in the history of the game (you know, the big guy Shaq). So using Robinson as Duncan's teammate to discredit him, but only to put Kobe ahead of Duncan is so silly. Kobe's teams were loaded, and prime Pau Gasol > prime Tony Parker. All in all, Kobe's rosters were every bit as talented as Duncan's, they've each played for phenomenal coaches.

I don't think there's any way you can pick Chris Paul ahead of Lebron James either, and with that said I think your reasoning as a whole gets discredited (even if it made sense to me).

LongIslandIcedZ
05-12-2014, 11:09 AM
People seem to be missing the fact that you get these players for their entire careers.

Duncan is 38 and is still killing it. As awesome as Lebron is, I don't know if he'll be able to crush it at 38.

For that reason,

Duncan
Lebron


Kobe
CP3

Tony_Starks
05-12-2014, 11:35 AM
Kobe
Duncan
Lebron
CP3

The_Jamal
05-12-2014, 12:26 PM
Duncan
LBJ
Kobe
CP3

Iggz53
05-12-2014, 12:26 PM
If we're discrediting Kobe's rings because of playing with Shaq or Gasol, let's go ahead and discredit LeBron's success for playing with Wade AND Bosh.

My list goes like this:

1. LeBron
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. CP3

People seem to forget just how good Kobe was in his prime, AND his longevity. If the question is picking a franchise player at 20, I'd much rather have Kobe's long and prosperous career than CP3's career thus far, as great as he's been. Also imo it's easier to build around a SG than a PG.

Shammyguy3
05-12-2014, 12:33 PM
If we're discrediting Kobe's rings because of playing with Shaq or Gasol, let's go ahead and discredit LeBron's success for playing with Wade AND Bosh.

My list goes like this:

1. LeBron
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. CP3

People seem to forget just how good Kobe was in his prime, AND his longevity. If the question is picking a franchise player at 20, I'd much rather have Kobe's long and prosperous career than CP3's career thus far, as great as he's been. Also imo it's easier to build around a SG than a PG.

Few points. Firstly, there's a difference between Kobe playing with a prime Shaq and Lebron playing with an end-of-his-peak Wade and prime Bosh. Secondly, someone was using Duncan's teammates as a reason to not place him ahead of Kobe, who had just as good of teams around him if not better. Thirdly, that guy put CP3 ahead of Lebron :laugh2: so i was playing devil's advocate a little bit.

I think it's stupid to have CP3 in this discussion. There are three better options to put in this debate than him: Dirk, Garnett, and Wade.

1. Tim Duncan
2. Lebron James
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Dwyane Wade
7. Chris Paul

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 01:03 PM
Kobe played with arguably the most dominant force in the history of the game (you know, the big guy Shaq). So using Robinson as Duncan's teammate to discredit him, but only to put Kobe ahead of Duncan is so silly. Kobe's teams were loaded, and prime Pau Gasol > prime Tony Parker. All in all, Kobe's rosters were every bit as talented as Duncan's, they've each played for phenomenal coaches.

I don't think there's any way you can pick Chris Paul ahead of Lebron James either, and with that said I think your reasoning as a whole gets discredited (even if it made sense to me).

I wasn't trying to discredit Duncan just some on here seem to forgot Duncan actually played on stacked teams. 3 spurs teammates put up better numbers during the finals then either of gasol's finals(Parker 2007, ginobli 2005, rob 1999).

U say prime gasol > prime Parker? Parker actually has a finals mvp where he took the team over in 2007 from Duncan. Every year after that he's lead the team in scoring and out scoring prime gasol every year since then. I can't see one year where prime gasol even came close to prime Parker.

ManRam
05-12-2014, 01:15 PM
I wasn't trying to discredit Duncan just some on here seem to forgot Duncan actually played on stacked teams. 3 spurs teammates put up better numbers during the finals then either of gasol's finals(Parker 2007, ginobli 2005, rob 1999).

U say prime gasol > prime Parker? Parker actually has a finals mvp where he took the team over in 2007 from Duncan. Every year after that he's lead the team in scoring and out scoring prime gasol every year since then. I can't see one year where prime gasol even came close to prime Parker.

Duncan was SOOO much better than Parker throughout the entirety of the 2007 playoffs. Parker had a slightly better Finals, sure. But in the first three rounds Duncan was on another level. Duncan was also a first-team All-NBA player. Parker didn't even crack the 3rd team. That was Duncan's team...Parker just had a better 4 game stretch in the Finals. If him winning a Finals MVP is the only evidence you have to suggest that Parker was better in his prime, well, it's a pretty weak argument. Nothing else suggests that's true.

Also, you could make a strong argument that Gasol had a better playoffs than Kobe in their second win. At the very least, he played better individually in the playoffs during both of those Finals wins than Parker did in any of his three :shrug: I don't think it's close really.

Not that I think it really matters. Gasol's career as a whole has been better. I think it would foolish not to take him over Parker. His numbers all around are better, in both the regular season and the playoffs.



My list jives with the polling consensus. The gap between the top-3 is pretty tight though, especially because they're all such ridiculously different players.

Miltstar
05-12-2014, 01:26 PM
I take Duncan because he leads by example and can basically be a 2nd coach on the floor for you, LBJ is a close second. Paul and Kobe are both great but there are plenty of players I'd take over the both of them. Kobe is no better than McGrady, Carter, Iverson, etc etc he just found himself in a better situation

ManRam
05-12-2014, 01:34 PM
I take Duncan because he leads by example and can basically be a 2nd coach on the floor for you, LBJ is a close second. Paul and Kobe are both great but there are plenty of players I'd take over the both of them. Kobe is no better than McGrady, Carter, Iverson, etc etc he just found himself in a better situation

T-Mac's prime certainly rivaled Kobe's. But Carter and Iverson? Come on man. At the very least Kobe's sustained success over such a longer period of time means something. T-Mac started a HEAVY decline when he was just 28. Kobe was winning rings in his early 30s. Yes, he was in better situations more consistently than those guys, but he was still a better player.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 01:38 PM
I wasn't trying to discredit Duncan just some on here seem to forgot Duncan actually played on stacked teams. 3 spurs teammates put up better numbers during the finals then either of gasol's finals(Parker 2007, ginobli 2005, rob 1999).

U say prime gasol > prime Parker? Parker actually has a finals mvp where he took the team over in 2007 from Duncan. Every year after that he's lead the team in scoring and out scoring prime gasol every year since then. I can't see one year where prime gasol even came close to prime Parker.

You seem to have left out in 2003 where Tim carried a team much more than Kobe ever has (not bashing but it was an incredible run). You also mention 2007 where Parker won finals MVP, but for what? a sweep against a team they wrere clearly going to win? Tim's Defense was much more impactful and he had a better overall playoffs throughout. In the 2010 playoffs Gasol had a better PER, TS%, and double the WS/48 on about the same amount of ppg. Parker had a little over 2 more assists per game while Gasol had over 7 rebounds more per game. Gasol was a more impactful player at the time.

To say there isn't one year where prime Gasol even comes close to Parker is completely ridiculous. Then you have James behind Paul. It is quite obvious you have serious bias towards players and let it affect your decision making.

Shammyguy3
05-12-2014, 01:43 PM
Duncan was SOOO much better than Parker throughout the entirety of the 2007 playoffs. Parker had a slightly better Finals, sure. But in the first three rounds Duncan was on another level. Duncan was also a first-team All-NBA player. Parker didn't even crack the 3rd team. That was Duncan's team...Parker just had a better 4 game stretch in the Finals. If him winning a Finals MVP is the only evidence you have to suggest that Parker was better in his prime, well, it's a pretty weak argument. Nothing else suggests that's true.

Also, you could make a strong argument that Gasol had a better playoffs than Kobe in their second win. At the very least, he played better individually in the playoffs during both of those Finals wins than Parker did in any of his three :shrug: I don't think it's close really.

Not that I think it really matters. Gasol's career as a whole has been better. I think it would foolish not to take him over Parker. His numbers all around are better, in both the regular season and the playoffs.



My list jives with the polling consensus. The gap between the top-3 is pretty tight though, especially because they're all such ridiculously different players.

In response to Bostonjorge, this post should suffice. I will point out though, that the two rings Pau won with the Lakers he posted 19/11/3 with 2 blocks on a 61.0ts% 125 ORtg .222 Ws/48 (actually lead the playoffs in total win shares in 2010) and a 23.0 PER. In comparison, Tony Parker in 2007 averaged 21/3.5/6 with a 52.3ts% 103 ORtg .100 WS/48 (third in WS on the Spurs, behind both Duncan and Manu) and an 18.7 PER.

Statistically, Pau flushes Parker based on their most recent finals appearances. And like ManRam said, Parker had a better 4 game stretch than Duncan after Duncan carried that team in the first three rounds. So what?

pebloemer
05-12-2014, 01:44 PM
1. LeBron
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. Paul

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 02:01 PM
Duncan was SOOO much better than Parker throughout the entirety of the 2007 playoffs. Parker had a slightly better Finals, sure. But in the first three rounds Duncan was on another level. Duncan was also a first-team All-NBA player. Parker didn't even crack the 3rd team. That was Duncan's team...Parker just had a better 4 game stretch in the Finals. If him winning a Finals MVP is the only evidence you have to suggest that Parker was better in his prime, well, it's a pretty weak argument. Nothing else suggests that's true.

Also, you could make a strong argument that Gasol had a better playoffs than Kobe in their second win. At the very least, he played better individually in the playoffs during both of those Finals wins than Parker did in any of his three :shrug: I don't think it's close really.

Not that I think it really matters. Gasol's career as a whole has been better. I think it would foolish not to take him over Parker. His numbers all around are better, in both the regular season and the playoffs.



My list jives with the polling consensus. The gap between the top-3 is pretty tight though, especially because they're all such ridiculously different players.
What gasol numbers are we talking about? Parker has out scored gasol since the 2007 finals. Every single playoffs Parker numbers have been way above gasol's. Your argument is gasol has but up better number then Parker, which is false. Parker has 7 years( 08-13) where he beats gasol's 09 and 10 playoff run. Seems pretty one sides to me.

Shammyguy3
05-12-2014, 02:17 PM
What gasol numbers are we talking about? Parker has out scored gasol since the 2007 finals. Every single playoffs Parker numbers have been way above gasol's. Your argument is gasol has but up better number then Parker, which is false. Parker has 7 years( 08-13) where he beats gasol's 09 and 10 playoff run. Seems pretty one sides to me.

Explain how Parker has 7 years where he outproduces Gasol's 09 and 10 playoff performances.

ManRam
05-12-2014, 02:29 PM
What gasol numbers are we talking about? Parker has out scored gasol since the 2007 finals. Every single playoffs Parker numbers have been way above gasol's. Your argument is gasol has but up better number then Parker, which is false. Parker has 7 years( 08-13) where he beats gasol's 09 and 10 playoff run. Seems pretty one sides to me.

That's ridiculous. I'd love to see you back that up.

All you care about is points per game, I'm guessing?

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 02:31 PM
You seem to have left out in 2003 where Tim carried a team much more than Kobe ever has (not bashing but it was an incredible run). You also mention 2007 where Parker won finals MVP, but for what? a sweep against a team they wrere clearly going to win? Tim's Defense was much more impactful and he had a better overall playoffs throughout. In the 2010 playoffs Gasol had a better PER, TS%, and double the WS/48 on about the same amount of ppg. Parker had a little over 2 more assists per game while Gasol had over 7 rebounds more per game. Gasol was a more impactful player at the time.

To say there isn't one year where prime Gasol even comes close to Parker is completely ridiculous. Then you have James behind Paul. It is quite obvious you have serious bias towards players and let it affect your decision making.

Duncan did dominate Parker up until the finals. Kobe out played shaq 2001 and 2002 in the first 3 rounds. Out scored shaq both years and closed out every important game with shaq on the bench in closing moments in 1 possession games. Kobe led the lakers in scoring every time they eliminated Duncan from the playoffs. While Duncan dominated shaq. But shaq got the finals mvp every time against the easier east teams just like Parker did. So if shaq is getting most of credit then the same should go to Parker.

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 02:35 PM
That's ridiculous. I'd love to see you back that up.

All you care about is points per game, I'm guessing?
Well gasol is a score and passer never nothing more. Never a good defender or reb. Only averaged more then 10 Rebs twice his whole career. Parker scored more and and had more assist.

Blake Griffin will score and rebound more these playoffs then gasol has.

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 02:39 PM
I'm changing my list

Kobe
Duncan
James



Paul

Left 3 slots for players I would rather have but don't want to diss paul the best PG in the league.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 02:41 PM
Duncan did dominate Parker up until the finals. Kobe out played shaq 2001 and 2002 in the first 3 rounds. Out scored shaq both series and closed out every important game with shaq on the bench in closing moments in 1 possession games. Kobe led the lakers in scoring every time they eliminated Duncan from the playoffs. While Duncan dominated shaq. But shaq got the finals mvp every time against the easier east teams just like Parker did. So if shaq is getting most of credit then the same should go to Parker.

+1

ManRam
05-12-2014, 02:49 PM
Well gasol is a score and passer never nothing more. Never a good defender or reb. Only averaged more then 10 Rebs twice his whole career. Parker scored more and and had more assist.

Blake Griffin will score and rebound more these playoffs then gasol has.

:confused:

I think you're confusing "not absolutely elite" with "not good". Because he's always been a VERY good defender and rebounder, just not one of the 5 or often 10 best. But again, you're making it more and more clear that all you can see are points and rebounds...raw values, nonetheless (the Griffin comment).

albertajaysfan
05-12-2014, 03:10 PM
And what has Paul won?

I just think it's a bit disrespectful to place CP3 ahead of Kobe when he hasn't won anything yet.

Kobe is proven. I get it that he's old now, injured, and many of you will jump at any chance to disrespect the man but I don't see how you could argue for having Cp3 over Kobe as your franchise player.

I understand what you are saying. Kobe has accomplished a ton.

Now let's set that obvious fact aside for a moment, for the purpose of this thread.

We have a really weird time machine that makes people the same age, 20. We use on the 4 players mentioned by the OP. They have accomplished nothing because we are at the start of their career. Now choose.

See how Kobe's accomplishments are meaningless in this scenario?

Now even bringing them back in. What has Kobe won without an elite frontcourt? We do know what he can do without them. Put insane counting stats on dreadful teams is what I have seen.

Riodagoat
05-12-2014, 03:17 PM
As much as I love Lebron, I would have to go with Duncan.
Big men with skills such as him don't grow on trees. And I think this was an easier decision as well because we've already Timmy play for a long a time and we have an idea of how he will age. Lebron is still in his prime so it's hard to speculate how he would look like in 5-7 years.

So my list would be
1. Duncan
2. Bron
3. Kobe
4. CP

Iggz53
05-12-2014, 03:21 PM
Few points. Firstly, there's a difference between Kobe playing with a prime Shaq and Lebron playing with an end-of-his-peak Wade and prime Bosh. Secondly, someone was using Duncan's teammates as a reason to not place him ahead of Kobe, who had just as good of teams around him if not better. Thirdly, that guy put CP3 ahead of Lebron :laugh2: so i was playing devil's advocate a little bit.

I think it's stupid to have CP3 in this discussion. There are three better options to put in this debate than him: Dirk, Garnett, and Wade.

1. Tim Duncan
2. Lebron James
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Dwyane Wade
7. Chris Paul

Oh I wasn't responding to you Shams. I just saw a lot of people here placing CP3 above Kobe, and using Kobe's teammates as the sole reason for his rings. Which I expected because 1) CP3 is in his prime 2) Kobe hasn't played in a year 3) Kobe is the most polarizing player on PSD, where his fanatics and critics drive each other insane and stretch the opposition further on the spectrum. But yeah, your list is probably what I would rank as well.

Method28
05-12-2014, 03:47 PM
Few points. Firstly, there's a difference between Kobe playing with a prime Shaq and Lebron playing with an end-of-his-peak Wade and prime Bosh. Secondly, someone was using Duncan's teammates as a reason to not place him ahead of Kobe, who had just as good of teams around him if not better. Thirdly, that guy put CP3 ahead of Lebron :laugh2: so i was playing devil's advocate a little bit.

I think it's stupid to have CP3 in this discussion. There are three better options to put in this debate than him: Dirk, Garnett, and Wade.

1. Tim Duncan
2. Lebron James
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Dwyane Wade
7. Chris Paul

Oh I wasn't responding to you Shams. I just saw a lot of people here placing CP3 above Kobe, and using Kobe's teammates as the sole reason for his rings. Which I expected because 1) CP3 is in his prime 2) Kobe hasn't played in a year 3) Kobe is the most polarizing player on PSD, where his fanatics and critics drive each other insane and stretch the opposition further on the spectrum. But yeah, your list is probably what I would rank as well.

My sole reason does not include his teammates. It would include Kobe's attitude on an expansion team. I feel Kobe would be a horrible teammate in that position. Plus I see the other three getting more out of their bad team than Kobe.

Yankeefan213
05-12-2014, 04:19 PM
LBJ
Kobe
Duncan
CP3

In that order

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2014, 04:37 PM
What gasol numbers are we talking about? Parker has out scored gasol since the 2007 finals. Every single playoffs Parker numbers have been way above gasol's. Your argument is gasol has but up better number then Parker, which is false. Parker has 7 years( 08-13) where he beats gasol's 09 and 10 playoff run. Seems pretty one sides to me.


There is more to the game than points-per-game.

Gasol's first three full seasons with the Lakers, he was close to 20/10 each year. Gasol's FG% is much better.

If you asked any GM who they'd draft at the age of 20: Gasol or Parker, every one who actually earns their pay check would pick Gasol.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2014, 04:53 PM
:confused:

I think you're confusing "not absolutely elite" with "not good". Because he's always been a VERY good defender and rebounder, just not one of the 5 or often 10 best. But again, you're making it more and more clear that all you can see are points and rebounds...raw values, nonetheless (the Griffin comment).

+1

Gasol is averaging 9.2 boards per game on his career in 35 minutes. That is pretty good rebounding in my books. He's always been a decent shot blocked and one-on-one defender (he got Howard fouled up pretty quick in 08).

And if somebody (the guy you are replying to) is going to say that all Gasol can do is score and pass, and then say Parker is better, when those are the same things Parker does well... I don't get that, especially if Gasol is a far better rebounder and has a bigger impact on defense an those are the things the person is criticizing Gasol for.

Method28
05-12-2014, 05:20 PM
:confused:

I think you're confusing "not absolutely elite" with "not good". Because he's always been a VERY good defender and rebounder, just not one of the 5 or often 10 best. But again, you're making it more and more clear that all you can see are points and rebounds...raw values, nonetheless (the Griffin comment).

+1

Gasol is averaging 9.2 boards per game on his career in 35 minutes. That is pretty good rebounding in my books. He's always been a decent shot blocked and one-on-one defender (he got Howard fouled up pretty quick in 08).

And if somebody (the guy you are replying to) is going to say that all Gasol can do is score and pass, and then say Parker is better, when those are the same things Parker does well... I don't get that, especially if Gasol is a far better rebounder and has a bigger impact on defense an those are the things the person is criticizing Gasol for.

Hey.....HEY! You stop making sense...right now!

Bostonjorge
05-12-2014, 05:26 PM
There is more to the game than points-per-game.

Gasol's first three full seasons with the Lakers, he was close to 20/10 each year. Gasol's FG% is much better.

If you asked any GM who they'd draft at the age of 20: Gasol or Parker, every one who actually earns their pay check would pick Gasol.

If they new nothing of what they would become then yea gasol wins. If they did know then Parker wins easily. Jerry west who's worth more then his paycheck had a "almost" 20/10 Gasol and traded him away. Gasol is already close to done in the NBA. A solid role player at best. Parker in the other hand almost took home his second finals MVP last year. Some consider Parker the best PG in the league.

Method28
05-12-2014, 05:30 PM
There is more to the game than points-per-game.

Gasol's first three full seasons with the Lakers, he was close to 20/10 each year. Gasol's FG% is much better.

If you asked any GM who they'd draft at the age of 20: Gasol or Parker, every one who actually earns their pay check would pick Gasol.

If they new nothing of what they would become then yea gasol wins. If they did know then Parker wins easily. Jerry west who's worth more then his paycheck had a "almost" 20/10 Gasol and traded him away. Gasol is already close to done in the NBA. A solid role player at best. Parker in the other hand almost took home his second finals MVP last year. Some consider Parker the best PG in the league.

Parker wouldn't be finals MVP on an expansion team man. That's what this whole thing is about. Either way, Gasol was a top 2 big man in the league in his prime. Always take the big man. Size matters in the NBA.

SPURSFAN1
05-12-2014, 05:49 PM
Tim Duncan wins this hands down. Anyone not picking him is a disgrace.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:06 PM
There is more to the game than points-per-game.

Gasol's first three full seasons with the Lakers, he was close to 20/10 each year. Gasol's FG% is much better.

If you asked any GM who they'd draft at the age of 20: Gasol or Parker, every one who actually earns their pay check would pick Gasol.

Not necessarily. Well it's obvious GM's would pick Gasol because of his height and variety of skills. But if I were a GM having to pick PG to run my system I would surely pick Parker. I can't believe how much Parker is still disrespected. Year in and year out the guy is destroying opposing PG's (supposedly top 5) in every postseason. That system of Pop and the success of Timmy would never be without Tony's unique ability to get into and score in the paint.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:09 PM
Parker wouldn't be finals MVP on an expansion team man. That's what this whole thing is about. Either way, Gasol was a top 2 big man in the league in his prime. Always take the big man. Size matters in the NBA.

You're right size does matter especially when drafting players. But to say Parker would never win Finals MVP on a expansion team means what exactly? I surely hope you're not suggesting Gasol could win one. Gasol is a great complementary player but never has he led. He's basically a less athletic and more skilled Bosh. A great complementary star. Parker's ability to lead a team as the engine of the offense and score in every pressure situation for the Spurs makes him more likely an MVP than Gasol.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:14 PM
If they new nothing of what they would become then yea gasol wins. If they did know then Parker wins easily. Jerry west who's worth more then his paycheck had a "almost" 20/10 Gasol and traded him away. Gasol is already close to done in the NBA. A solid role player at best. Parker in the other hand almost took home his second finals MVP last year. Some consider Parker the best PG in the league.


I agree with you that Parker deserves more attention when people speak about top PG's in the league. I mean, he practillay destroys all of the supposed top PG's every postseason.

I disagree about Pau being just a solid role player. I would say Gasol is a great complementary big man with a unique set of skills for his ability to pass out of the high post and score in the low post. But he isn't anything more than a complementary player. Tony Parker on the other hand could lead any team with his style of play.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:16 PM
Would anyone have a problem with my suggestion that Tony Parker is the best PG in the league?

What other PG would you pick over him to win a title? Is there anyone with his unique ability to consistently get into the paint and finish? I can't think of any.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:27 PM
+1

Gasol is averaging 9.2 boards per game on his career in 35 minutes. That is pretty good rebounding in my books. He's always been a decent shot blocked and one-on-one defender (he got Howard fouled up pretty quick in 08).

And if somebody (the guy you are replying to) is going to say that all Gasol can do is score and pass, and then say Parker is better, when those are the same things Parker does well... I don't get that, especially if Gasol is a far better rebounder and has a bigger impact on defense an those are the things the person is criticizing Gasol for.

Gasol does have a better impact on defense because of his length. In comparing the two though, I see Parker shouldering more responsibility as the PG of any team usually does aside from the triangle. Gasol isn't the player that you can depend on in pressure situations or to carry any team. Parker has the ability to creat his own shot, score in EVERY pressure and key situation. He's basically the Spurs go to guy.

I think in this case you can't just throw out numbers and expect to find the answer. The role of each player is significant and the fact that Pau was more a complementary player and that Parker has led his team is the biggest difference.

Pfeifer
05-12-2014, 06:32 PM
Would anyone have a problem with my suggestion that Tony Parker is the best PG in the league?

What other PG would you pick over him to win a title? Is there anyone with his unique ability to consistently get into the paint and finish? I can't think of any.

How many teams have a Tim Duncan to open up the lanes? Not that I disagree but I would like to see if he's as effective on another team.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 06:38 PM
Duncan did dominate Parker up until the finals. Kobe out played shaq 2001 and 2002 in the first 3 rounds. Out scored shaq both years and closed out every important game with shaq on the bench in closing moments in 1 possession games. Kobe led the lakers in scoring every time they eliminated Duncan from the playoffs. While Duncan dominated shaq. But shaq got the finals mvp every time against the easier east teams just like Parker did. So if shaq is getting most of credit then the same should go to Parker.

Maybe 2001, but certainly not 2002. You say he had more points, yet don't disclose that it was .2ppg more on over 4 shots per game more as well. You also are completely ignoring the way defenses played them as well. Shaq was the best player in the league at the time. The defenses focused on him, doubled him, all eyes were on him once he got it (same with Duncan in 2007). I like that you mention the spurs because they are a team that is excellent at focusing on slowing down the best players (see james 2007 and how they played him as well, at times almost putting a wall around him).

So while I don't mean to take anything away from Kobe Shaq was actually the more important part especially when you factor in that he too was the anchor on defense and was a monster on the boards (something you seem to give almost no credit to at all).

In 2009-2010 Kobe was the best player on the team and had much of the defenses attention as well (although not the same as Shaq, but very few players could compare). This is part of the reason that when I hear people say Pau deserved finals MVP or was more important in 2010 I disagree. I think the gap is closer because of impact defensively but to me Kobe was the key to that team as well. In none of these situations can you remove one of these players and they still win, I am just talking about bigger impact on the game.

It seems like you generally look at ppg and decide from there who is better. There are plenty other factors to a game and Duncan and Shaq had a bigger impact in the playoffs for their respective team's championships. You also narrow it down to parts of the playoffs which are already small enough. When looking at the impact each had on their teams Shaq and Duncan had more. 2001 was very close, I can see an argument that year but as I said above when two players are close on impact I give more credit to the better player receiving more of the defensive attention and gameplanning (Shaq in 2001, Kobe in 2010).

In 2001 and 2002 Shaq recieved more of the defenses attention, had more ppg in the playoffs, a better PER, better TS% and a better WS/48 (actually 2001 it was a tie, which was certainly Kobe's best case here as he played amazing). On top of this Shaq dominated the boards and was the defensive anchor which is a very big part of the game, especially come playoff time. The same can be said for Duncan in 2007 on the above.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:40 PM
How many teams have a Tim Duncan to open up the lanes? Not that I disagree but I would like to see if he's as effective on another team.

Well he seems pretty effective even when Timmy's on the bench. Parker has the rare ability to blow by every opposing PG in the league and finish in the paint. His mid-range game is deadly as well too. I don't know...I think a player like KG teamed up with Parker would've been something great to see also.

I don't know man. I just came to this realization last season after always dismissing Parker as a top PG. It wasn't til then that I realized how great he really is. Literally, every postseason this guy is destroying every defense that is thrown at him. His success and leadership in the postseason has really changed my opinion of his place in the game.

flea
05-12-2014, 06:47 PM
He's a fine finisher and developed his midrange game once he got into his late 20s, but let's not kid ourselves. CP3 is the best PG because both ends of the floor matter.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:53 PM
He's a fine finisher and developed his midrange game once he got into his late 20s, but let's not kid ourselves. CP3 is the best PG because both ends of the floor matter.

I agree that both ends of th floor matter. Individually, CP3 is the superior player. I just find it strange that CP3's limited size has an effect on his impact when it comes to postseason play while Tony Parker just continues to shine. In this case, Parker's ability to get into the paint and finish plays huge in the postseason.

In terms of who I would pick to win a title? When you take into account how much individual defense matters in the postseason for the PG position, especially when it's more important for PG's to be great at pick and roll defense, I'm taking Tony Parker everytime quite honestly.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 06:55 PM
He's a fine finisher and developed his midrange game once he got into his late 20s, but let's not kid ourselves. CP3 is the best PG because both ends of the floor matter.

Even just on the offensive end it is CP3.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 06:58 PM
Even just on the offensive end it is CP3.

Can you elaborate? I really just can't see how CP3 is more effective than Parker in the playoffs?

flea
05-12-2014, 06:58 PM
Even just on the offensive end it is CP3.

I agree.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 07:01 PM
I agree that both ends of th floor matter. Individually, CP3 is the superior player. I just find it strange that CP3's limited size has an effect on his impact when it comes to postseason play while Tony Parker just continues to shine. In this case, Parker's ability to get into the paint and finish plays huge in the postseason.

In terms of who I would pick to win a title? When you take into account how much individual defense matters in the postseason for the PG position, especially when it's more important for PG's to be great at pick and roll defense, I'm taking Tony Parker everytime quite honestly.

Parkers offensive rating in the playoffs is 104 throughout his career. CP3's is 118. Cp3 has slightly more points, a lot more assists and slightly more (.2) more turnovers per game. A slightly lower usage as well. PER, TS% and WS/48 (even with losing teams while PArker has been on great ones) all favor Paul as well. I disagree that his "limited size has affected him in the playoffs when Tony "continues to shine". The biggest difference for them is Duncan, Pops, and their teams.

Edit:

If you would like me to elaborate without stats then Paul is always the main focus of the other teams defense (maybe it is starting to shift to Griffin, but I believe it is still him). Parker has taken that role on himself now but it hasn't always been that way. With this he still is able to get his own numbers while dishing out basically 10 apg. If you watch them run the pick and roll it is amazing some of the pass he can set his big man up with. He also is a better 3 point shooter so he forces the floor to be spread more as well. He just does more overall on better efficiency on that end of the floor.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2014, 07:03 PM
Gasol does have a better impact on defense because of his length. In comparing the two though, I see Parker shouldering more responsibility as the PG of any team usually does aside from the triangle. Gasol isn't the player that you can depend on in pressure situations or to carry any team. Parker has the ability to creat his own shot, score in EVERY pressure and key situation. He's basically the Spurs go to guy.

I think in this case you can't just throw out numbers and expect to find the answer. The role of each player is significant and the fact that Pau was more a complementary player and that Parker has led his team is the biggest difference.

I agree with that 100%. But I think it works for both players.

When Kobe brings the ball up and Gasol is in the post, it is a LOT easier to score with Gasol AND Bynum in the post than it is with Luke Walton and Kwame Brown. It's not like Kobe won without Shaq and with NOBODY He won without Shaq and WITH Gasol and Bynum.

Another poster was comparing Kobe without Shaq to Duncan without Parker, but Gasol played a huge roll in Kobe sansShaq success.

Duncan won without DRob and he won with Avery Johnson as the starting point guard. He can win with almost any roster.

Kobe can also win with different rosters.

As for Parker being their go-to guy, the reason he has such an easy time creating is because he's playing in a very well coached system that keeps the floor spread and has a guy like Duncan that defenses STILL have to focus on, even at 38.


Kobe is one of the best to ever play the game. And so is Duncan. They have BOTH had great supporting casts.

I'd pick Duncan because I like his style of game (team-first, doesn't dominate the ball) and because he is a big man and it is easier to build around a big than a guard.

slashsnake
05-12-2014, 07:06 PM
I'd pick Duncan because I like his style of game (team-first, doesn't dominate the ball) and because he is a big man and it is easier to build around a big than a guard.

Agree 100% with you there. I almost would pick Kobe just because I like him the most, but with the GM hat on, gotta go Duncan then Lebron.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 07:08 PM
Parkers offensive in the playoffs is 104 throughout his career. CP3's is 118. Cp3 has slightly more points, a lot more assists and slightly more (.2) more turnovers per game. A slightly lower usage as well. PER, TS% and WS/48 (even with losing teams while PArker has been on great ones) all favor Paul as well. I disagree that his "limited size has affected him in the playoffs when Tony "continues to shine". The biggest difference for them is Duncan, Pops, and their teams.

If the biggest difference is Pop, Duncan, and their teams then can I bring up the point about CP3's style of game? Tony Parker is obviously a system PG who can play the traditional pick and roll offense as well. It's been noted that CP3 is really only as impactful as he is when the offense is built through him. I liken it to Phil Jackson's comparison of CP3 & D-Will (when he was good). So do you think CP3 would be just as successful as Parker in the Spurs system?

I get that you're a stat guy but you can't always expect numbers to tell you the whole story. There are so many different variables and so many other aspects of the game that you must take into account with the stats you give.

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 07:11 PM
I agree with that 100%. But I think it works for both players.

When Kobe brings the ball up and Gasol is in the post, it is a LOT easier to score with Gasol AND Bynum in the post than it is with Luke Walton and Kwame Brown. It's not like Kobe won without Shaq and with NOBODY He won without Shaq and WITH Gasol and Bynum.

Another poster was comparing Kobe without Shaq to Duncan without Parker, but Gasol played a huge roll in Kobe sansShaq success.

Duncan won without DRob and he won with Avery Johnson as the starting point guard. He can win with almost any roster.

Kobe can also win with different rosters.

As for Parker being their go-to guy, the reason he has such an easy time creating is because he's playing in a very well coached system that keeps the floor spread and has a guy like Duncan that defenses STILL have to focus on, even at 38.


Kobe is one of the best to ever play the game. And so is Duncan. They have BOTH had great supporting casts.

I'd pick Duncan because I like his style of game (team-first, doesn't dominate the ball) and because he is a big man and it is easier to build around a big than a guard.

While we have differing opinions I glad you see the point I was trying to make. I'm not trying to discredit Duncan. I guess I'm just sick of how little Tony is appreciated among NBA fans.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 07:17 PM
If the biggest difference is Pop, Duncan, and their teams then can I bring up the point about CP3's style of game? Tony Parker is obviously a system PG who can play the traditional pick and roll offense as well. It's been noted that CP3 is really only as impactful as he is when the offense is built through him. I liken it to Phil Jackson's comparison of CP3 & D-Will (when he was good). So do you think CP3 would be just as successful as Parker in the Spurs system?

I get that you're a stat guy but you can't always expect numbers to tell you the whole story. There are so many different variables and so many other aspects of the game that you must take into account with the stats you give.

I actually edited it without stats. I don't think Paul would have a problem at all with being in a different role, he is just as if not more versatile on that end imo. As I said he is the better shooter so he can spread the floor out more off-ball. Tony Parker actually has the higher usage anyways so I don't see the system holding him back much. What I meant by the Duncan and Pop statement is that the winning has more to do with them, since Cp3 has never had that. I am not saying that his success as a player comes from them (although I would love to see what Pops could do with a CP3 type player).

You can bring up the style of game for CP3 but can you explain why you think playing on the Spurs in their system would hurt him?

Hotone1401
05-12-2014, 07:30 PM
I actually edited it without stats. I don't think Paul would have a problem at all with being in a different role, he is just as if not more versatile on that end imo. As I said he is the better shooter so he can spread the floor out more off-ball. Tony Parker actually has the higher usage anyways so I don't see the system holding him back much. What I meant by the Duncan and Pop statement is that the winning has more to do with them, since Cp3 has never had that. I am not saying that his success as a player comes from them (although I would love to see what Pops could do with a CP3 type player).

You can bring up the style of game for CP3 but can you explain why you think playing on the Spurs in their system would hurt him?

I think of CP3 as the ultimate ball-dominating PG. He's been that way through high school and college as well. Rightfully so because has all the skills so it would only be wise to have the offense built around him. In a system, I just don't see all of his skills being used and that's not a knock on him.

mngopher35
05-12-2014, 07:42 PM
I think of CP3 as the ultimate ball-dominating PG. He's been that way through high school and college as well. Rightfully so because has all the skills so it would only be wise to have the offense built around him. In a system, I just don't see all of his skills being used and that's not a knock on him.

Alright, I can agree with that. Just because he hasn't had the opportunity to run a great system with great players doesn't mean I think he couldn't though. If you could tell me why you think it wouldn't work for him maybe that would help?

Like I said he has a lower usage and much better all around stats while being the focal point his entire career in the playoffs. Would Parker exceed in that situation? We can play with hypotheticals but from what I see and from the stats Paul is the better, more skilled offensive player. When you add defense to the mix it is even more obvious who is better all around.

kmoneyjuice
05-12-2014, 08:57 PM
LBJ
Duncan
CP3
Kobe

In that order

This is the correct answer

b@llhog24
05-12-2014, 09:04 PM
Timmy
Bron
Cp3
Kobe

ATX
05-12-2014, 09:19 PM
I think the voting is correct for the question. James by a sizable majority, then Duncan…Bryant, Paul. All fantastic options, but the first three are proven champions.

b@llhog24
05-12-2014, 10:01 PM
.

TrueFan420
05-12-2014, 10:12 PM
Disappointed. Thought this thread was gonna have a list of players from every team in the nba roster spots 9 to bottom of the bench. And we pick x amount of players to start our team. With say the first overall draft pick as well.

basketfan4life
05-13-2014, 07:03 AM
According to most, the most accomplished player goes last and i am still not surprised. Well done PSD.

HoopsDrive
05-13-2014, 10:56 AM
Duncan. Would rather build around a dominant big than a wing player.

Kaner
05-13-2014, 12:09 PM
Should have added Shaq to the pole for a center would have been interesting 3 way race between Shaq, Duncan, Lebron.

Like everyone else is saying its between Duncan and Lebron for me with just the slightest of edges to Lebron. It seems you can pretty much plug him onto any roster and they become instant contenders.

mjm07
05-13-2014, 12:24 PM
According to most, the most accomplished player goes last and i am still not surprised. Well done PSD.

so if Russell was on the list you'd pick him?

Miltstar
05-13-2014, 12:24 PM
T-Mac's prime certainly rivaled Kobe's. But Carter and Iverson? Come on man. At the very least Kobe's sustained success over such a longer period of time means something. T-Mac started a HEAVY decline when he was just 28. Kobe was winning rings in his early 30s. Yes, he was in better situations more consistently than those guys, but he was still a better player.

Like I said, he found himself in a better situation, Carter is still playing at a high level, just never had Shaq or Gasol to make him a hero

Miltstar
05-13-2014, 12:25 PM
Should have added Shaq to the pole for a center would have been interesting 3 way race between Shaq, Duncan, Lebron.

Like everyone else is saying its between Duncan and Lebron for me with just the slightest of edges to Lebron. It seems you can pretty much plug him onto any roster and they become instant contenders.

This, and then it pretty much comes down to philosophy