PDA

View Full Version : Who is the best out of these 3 players?



Heatnation80
07-20-2015, 11:35 PM
Who do you think is the best? and why.

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

SPURSFAN1
07-20-2015, 11:47 PM
Duncan easy.

tredigs
07-21-2015, 12:17 AM
Terribly worded/constructed thread.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 12:19 AM
Terribly worded/constructed thread.

Gets to the point and easily understandable. What was so hard for you to understand?

naps
07-21-2015, 12:38 AM
What do you mean by the best? What are you looking at? If you are asking best at their respective bests/peaks then it's easily Shaq. I would take Shaq's peak over anyone in NBA history not named Jordan.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 12:51 AM
I'd take Duncan at his peak. 2003 top 3 GOAT runs.
I'd take Duncan at his longevity GOATness.
5 rings 3 FMVPs 2 MVPs 5 time the best player throughout a championship run.
17 50 win seasons if you count the 98-99 season.

sep11ie
07-21-2015, 12:51 AM
Turtles are cool.

Scoots
07-21-2015, 01:02 AM
Bunnies are fluffy

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 01:02 AM
I don't know it there has ever been a better 2way player as great as duncan.

Minimal
07-21-2015, 02:05 AM
Shaq easily

Gander13SM
07-21-2015, 02:46 AM
Shaq is the most physically dominant player I have personally ever seen (to young to remember Wilt).

Duncan is the most skilled and we'll rounded powerforward I've ever seen.

One of these guys was so physically dominant they literally changed the way the game was being played to try and make it fairer for other teams. (Although they've never admitted to it, I believe Shaq's presence and success was a deciding factor in allowing zone defense in the NBA).

The other guy is an incredible finesse player. So great fundamentally that the longevity of his career is staggering. He might break Kareems record as the oldest NBA All Star. Who knows.

I love both players and I'm not sure who was better. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. My instinct is to say this; Duncan is/was the better basketball player. But Shaq was the more physically dominant.

I have no idea why Kobe is even on this list. I would have restricted this to big men.

Supreme LA
07-21-2015, 03:42 AM
Shaq without question.

Duncan would never have been as successful without having Pop, Manu, and TP for his entire career.

PhillyFaninLA
07-21-2015, 03:46 AM
1. Duncan - never slowed up by Matt Geiger
2. Shaq - phenomenal talent, but somehow slowed up by Matt Geiger (not really anyone else)
3. Kobe - one of the most overrated players in the history of sports, he is a offensive talent but he's not top 3 and might just make the 5th spot in franchise history. Duncan and Shaq are top 10 all time guys, Kobe simply put is not. His game is not nearly as well rounded as we is given credit...but offensively is as good and dependable as anyone in history.

PhillyFaninLA
07-21-2015, 03:47 AM
edit - delete, factual but pointless post

Teufelshunde4
07-21-2015, 04:29 AM
Fair question. Between Shaq and Duncan. Who maximized their talent?

Duncan imo. While supremely gifted physically Shaq lacked the work ethic Duncan has displayed throughout his career.

Why is MJ considered GOAT? MJ's work ethic and desire to get better was equal or greater then his god given talents.

I don't feel like Shaq ever burned to be great like MJ or Duncan did.

PhillyFaninLA
07-21-2015, 05:27 AM
Who do you think is the best? and why.

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe


Real question:

Why include Kobe with 2 bigs? What made you decide these 3? I honestly don't understand the grouping

Gander13SM
07-21-2015, 05:43 AM
Shaq without question.

Duncan would never have been as successful without having Pop, Manu, and TP for his entire career.

Lmao... what?

This amuses me.

Raidaz4Life
07-21-2015, 05:46 AM
Shaq, I will always think Duncan is overrated

FraziersKnicks
07-21-2015, 05:53 AM
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

Should've made the voting public so we could name and shame the Kobe homers.

SeoulBeatz
07-21-2015, 06:15 AM
I'd take Duncan at his peak. 2003 top 3 GOAT runs.
I'd take Duncan at his longevity GOATness.
5 rings 3 FMVPs 2 MVPs 5 time the best player throughout a championship run.
17 50 win seasons if you count the 98-99 season.

Yeah if we're going by longevity then Duncan takes this easily....

but if i had to pick one player in their prime to help me win a championship, i'd pick Shaq all day.

He was just soooo dominant at his peak. Truly unguardable, well, unless you fouled him.

eso
07-21-2015, 07:07 AM
Lmao... what?

This amuses me.

Why?? Everybody on here always talks about all the help that Kobe has had over the years but over look the same thing for Duncan..

Vince70
07-21-2015, 07:58 AM
Shaq has a career PER over 26.

I beleive that is about 2.0 ahead of Duncan's and 3.0 ahead of Kobe's so that's a big enough margin for me. Shaq was ranked number one in PER for five straight seasons (98-02) and finished 2nd three times and 3rd three times.

Duncan and Kobe never lead the league in PER in their careers.

LakersIn5
07-21-2015, 08:07 AM
Shaq.

Duncan the past 5 years is just being recognized as a star just because of his reputation and team success. But he isnt putting up anything special aside from putting up nene type numbers. But since he is duncan and the spurs are very well managed and coached then 13ppg 9rpg are considered relevent in the longetivty GOATness talk.

Gander13SM
07-21-2015, 08:20 AM
Shaq.

Duncan the past 5 years is just being recognized as a star just because of his reputation and team success. But he isnt putting up anything special aside from putting up nene type numbers. But since he is duncan and the spurs are very well managed and coached then 13ppg 9rpg are considered relevent in the longetivty GOATness talk.

Lmao

1. When did you start following the nba? 4 years ago? He put up triple doubles and near quadruple doubles in the playoffs. It's not Duncan now vs Shaq in his prime. I'm pretty sure he still holds the record for the most blocks in a finals game after his 25-20-10-8 effort.

2. You clearly don't know a damn thing about the game if you think you can evaluate a players entire game by looking at their PPG and RPG. Duncan is way more skilled on both ends of the court than Shaq. And comfortably more skilled on both ends than Kobe ever was.

Gander13SM
07-21-2015, 08:25 AM
Also, Duncans defensive impact last year > any year of Kobes career.

LakersIn5
07-21-2015, 08:38 AM
Lmao

1. When did you start following the nba? 4 years ago? He put up triple doubles and near quadruple doubles in the playoffs. It's not Duncan now vs Shaq in his prime. I'm pretty sure he still holds the record for the most blocks in a finals game after his 25-20-10-8 effort.

2. You clearly don't know a damn thing about the game if you think you can evaluate a players entire game by looking at their PPG and RPG. Duncan is way more skilled on both ends of the court than Shaq. And comfortably more skilled on both ends than Kobe ever was.
Im saying about the last 5 years is people voting duncan over shaq because of longevity but duncans last 5 years have been normal. If talking about prime then shaq clearly wins. And im voting shaq then duncan then kobe. Duncan is better than kobe but no way in hell is duncan more skilled than kobe.

Gander13SM
07-21-2015, 09:34 AM
Im saying about the last 5 years is people voting duncan over shaq because of longevity but duncans last 5 years have been normal. If talking about prime then shaq clearly wins. And im voting shaq then duncan then kobe. Duncan is better than kobe but no way in hell is duncan more skilled than kobe.

How is Duncan not more skilled than Kobe? What skills does Kobe possess that are superior to Duncan?

Dade County
07-21-2015, 09:43 AM
Shaq
Timmy
Kobe


In that order.

Vee-Rex
07-21-2015, 10:23 AM
Peak best - Shaq

Career best - Duncan

Shaq was arguably the most unstoppable force to ever touch a basketball in the history of mankind. There was literally nothing. you. could. do. to. stop. him.

PhillyFaninLA
07-21-2015, 10:37 AM
Peak best - Shaq

Career best - Duncan

Shaq was arguably the most unstoppable force to ever touch a basketball in the history of mankind. There was literally nothing. you. could. do. to. stop. him.


My one issue with Shaq is that Matt Geiger could slow him up. I wonder if Shaq was playing 10 years earlier how dominant he would have been. Practically no player had the physical mass to stand there, but Matt Geiger and some of the other bigger mass guys slowed (did not stop) Shaq.

Munkeysuit
07-21-2015, 10:51 AM
Man, it's pretty hard to choose from those 3 but I chose Shaq because he was so dominant as a player, I am so glad I got to see his entire career unfold growing up because he's definitely a once in a lifetime player and character, huge possibility we'll never see another duplicate.

ManRam
07-21-2015, 11:18 AM
I agree with those saying that Shaq was the "best", in that he was the most dominant and was the best player in their respective primes. I agree with those saying that Duncan has the best legacy of the bunch. Kobe trailing both in both respective categories is nothing to be ashamed of. Everyone else in his era does too.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-21-2015, 11:23 AM
This depends on preference.

If you look at their entire careers, it has to be Duncan. His longevity puts him ahead of the other two.

If you look at their peaks, it has to be Shaq. He was an unstopable force during his prime and that really can't be debated.

Kobe isn't a distant 3rd like some people are going to claim, but he is 3rd for me in this comparison. An argument could be made for him to be #1 on this list... he gets unbiasedly hated in this forum. But still, I think Duncan and Shaq rank just ahead of Kobe.

Personally, I prefer to judge guys on what they did at their peaks. I tend to usually rank players moreso on that criteria, so I go Shaq, Duncan, Kobe in that order. Why not Kobe ahead of Duncan if I rank them based on their prime? Because even though Kobe was more productive offensively, I think Duncan was the more efficient all around player in his prime and I'd rather build a team with him.

I can completely understand the argument for Duncan though. His career longevity could put him ahead of Shaq and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. If judging player for the entire picture is more your thing, then Duncan should be top 5 all time, probably #4 on the all time list if you look at overall career productivity. But he was never as good as prime Shaq.

Hawkeye15
07-21-2015, 01:13 PM
If I want the best chance during these players peaks to win a ring, give me Shaq for sure. If I want nearly 20 years of a player where I get a shot to build numerous teams around him and win a ring, Duncan.

Clippersfan86
07-21-2015, 01:21 PM
Shaq.

KnicksorBust
07-21-2015, 01:21 PM
Duncan because he plays consistently elite basketball on both ends of the floor and is by far the easiest to build a franchise around.

flea
07-21-2015, 01:25 PM
Duncan. Only player to prove he can win a title next to any type of star (guard, forward, or center) or no star at all. Defensive GOAT to me, top 5 scorer on the block, top 5 roll man, top 5 rebounder, and top 5 passing big man. Along with Bird, the most versatile player in NBA history and the only big man that would even qualify for such a distinction.

Clippersfan86
07-21-2015, 01:27 PM
Duncan. Only player to prove he can win a title next to any type of star (guard, forward, or center) or no star at all. Defensive GOAT to me, top 5 scorer on the block, top 5 roll man, top 5 rebounder, and top 5 passing big man. Along with Bird, the most versatile player in NBA history and the only big man that would even qualify for such a distinction.

Duncan has never won without another star. Not sure where you got that. Duncan has actually never played on a roster without being a top 5 team/supporting cast really. He's always had pretty loaded teams.

flea
07-21-2015, 01:29 PM
Duncan has never won without another star. Not sure where you got that. Duncan has actually never played on a roster without being a top 5 team/supporting cast really. He's always had pretty loaded teams.

So 2001-2004 never happened? His (uncredited) quadruple double in the Finals never happened? Unsurprising to me that you are unaware of even recent NBA history.

mightybosstone
07-21-2015, 01:41 PM
As others have said, I'm not a fan of the question of the thread or the poll. "Best" is a totally subjective term that can be interpreted a number of ways. I agree with the posters who have said that Shaq's peak was clearly the best dominant, but Duncan clearly has him beat in terms of legacy and overall career. In an all-time discussion, I'd give Duncan the edge. In a discussion of who is the better peak player, I'm taking Shaq.

I'd rank Kobe behind both guys, but not by a mile in either discussion. I've got Duncan around my top 5 all-time, Shaq at the tail end of my top 10 and Kobe just outside the top 10 at No. 11.

Avenged
07-21-2015, 01:43 PM
Shaq.

And Colby.

mightybosstone
07-21-2015, 01:45 PM
Duncan has never won without another star. Not sure where you got that. Duncan has actually never played on a roster without being a top 5 team/supporting cast really. He's always had pretty loaded teams.

This is complete nonsense. I would argue that the 2003 Spurs team is one of the few instances in NBA history where a star won a title without a legitimate No. 2 (along with Dirk in '11, Hakeem in '94 and Barry in the '70s). Parker and Manu were hardly the players they would later become and Robinson was 1,000 years old.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 01:55 PM
Lot of laker and heat fans voting for shaq.

Tony_Starks
07-21-2015, 02:18 PM
Kobe

then Shaq

then Duncan

Tony_Starks
07-21-2015, 02:27 PM
This depends on preference.

If you look at their entire careers, it has to be Duncan. His longevity puts him ahead of the other two.

If you look at their peaks, it has to be Shaq. He was an unstopable force during his prime and that really can't be debated.

Kobe isn't a distant 3rd like some people are going to claim, but he is 3rd for me in this comparison. An argument could be made for him to be #1 on this list... he gets unbiasedly hated in this forum. But still, I think Duncan and Shaq rank just ahead of Kobe.

Personally, I prefer to judge guys on what they did at their peaks. I tend to usually rank players moreso on that criteria, so I go Shaq, Duncan, Kobe in that order. Why not Kobe ahead of Duncan if I rank them based on their prime? Because even though Kobe was more productive offensively, I think Duncan was the more efficient all around player in his prime and I'd rather build a team with him.

I can completely understand the argument for Duncan though. His career longevity could put him ahead of Shaq and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. If judging player for the entire picture is more your thing, then Duncan should be top 5 all time, probably #4 on the all time list if you look at overall career productivity. But he was never as good as prime Shaq.



I don't agree but this a very reasonable rationale. I part ways when we talk Duncan vs Kobe in longevity. Duncan has had very efficient longevity but he has been in maintenance mode for a long time production wise with throwback games here and there but mostly pedestrian numbers.

Up until the Achilles injury Kobe was still playing at top tier superstar level, with that last season he got run into the ground being one of the best of his career.

The fact that both of them were 1st team all NBA that year tells you that you can really flip a coin at this point.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 02:51 PM
I don't agree but this a very reasonable rationale. I part ways when we talk Duncan vs Kobe in longevity. Duncan has had very efficient longevity but he has been in maintenance mode for a long time production wise with throwback games here and there but mostly pedestrian numbers.

Up until the Achilles injury Kobe was still playing at top tier superstar level, with that last season he got run into the ground being one of the best of his career.

The fact that both of them were 1st team all NBA that year tells you that you can really flip a coin at this point.

Is that the year the spurs were 1st seed and the lakers barely made the playoffs?

mngopher35
07-21-2015, 02:57 PM
As others have said if we are talking at their peak I take Shaq but for career rank I give Timmy the slight edge. I have these two right next to each other all time so it really could go either way between them.

ILLUSIONIST^248
07-21-2015, 03:06 PM
Who do you think is the best? and why.

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe


Kobe
Duncan
Shaq


Kobe is the best player by a slim margin. Why you ask? Because I said so

chitownbulls
07-21-2015, 03:21 PM
People are mentioning Duncan's longetivity a lot but, Shaq was an unstoppable force from 93-05. And had a few all star worthy years in 06, 07, and 09. If I were to start a franchise and was being given Shaq from 93-05, there's no question I would take Shaq over Duncan.

Tony_Starks
07-21-2015, 03:28 PM
I don't agree but this a very reasonable rationale. I part ways when we talk Duncan vs Kobe in longevity. Duncan has had very efficient longevity but he has been in maintenance mode for a long time production wise with throwback games here and there but mostly pedestrian numbers.

Up until the Achilles injury Kobe was still playing at top tier superstar level, with that last season he got run into the ground being one of the best of his career.

The fact that both of them were 1st team all NBA that year tells you that you can really flip a coin at this point.

Is that the year the spurs were 1st seed and the lakers barely made the playoffs?


The year Nash and Gasol stayed hurt, Dwight was fresh off back surgery missing games and Kobe went down for the season?

Yes, that was the year.

flea
07-21-2015, 03:48 PM
People are mentioning Duncan's longetivity a lot but, Shaq was an unstoppable force from 93-05. And had a few all star worthy years in 06, 07, and 09. If I were to start a franchise and was being given Shaq from 93-05, there's no question I would take Shaq over Duncan.

People mention his longevity because he probably has the best decline along with Kareem in NBA history, kept his team in contention almost every year as its best player, and even won a ring as his team's best player during that decline. Shaq was getting fat and ring-chasing for 5 different teams in his 30s. Duncan already has 1000 more playoff minutes than Shaq age 31+ and he's not done.

But the primes are closer than most posters think. NBA fans worship PPG, as though they exist in a vacuum but w/e, and Shaq was a slightly better volume scoreer in prime. But when you start looking at playoff performance you realize how close it really is. Duncan is one of the few players who actually (a) gets better in the playoffs and (b) takes on a bigger role when he needs to. So let's look at prime performances in playoffs:

Shaq Playoffs (age 21-30):

136 GP and 5465 MP

37.3/17.1/4.3 per 100 possessions with 114 offensive rating and 104 defensive rating.

24.0 total WS (17.4 offensive, 6.6 defensive) for a .211 WS/48 rate. .568 TS%, 6.7 BPM, 12.0 VORP, on 31.6 USG%.

5 Finals, 3 rings.

Duncan Playoffs (ages 21-30)

138 GP and 5537 MP

32.3/17.0/4.8 per 100 possession with a 111 offensive rating and 97 defensive rating

25.6 total WS (14.6 offensive, 11.0 defensive) for a .222 WS/48 rate. .560% TS%, 7.5 BPM, 13.3 VORP, 28.9 USG%.

4 Finals, 4 rings.

Pretty hard to say there's an appreciable difference in overall statistical profile, and remember that's just prime.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 03:52 PM
People mention his longevity because he probably has the best decline along with Kareem in NBA history, kept his team in contention almost every year as its best player, and even won a ring as his team's best player during that decline. Shaq was getting fat and ring-chasing for 5 different teams in his 30s. Duncan already has 1000 more playoff minutes than Shaq age 31+ and he's not done.

But the primes are closer than most posters think. NBA fans worship PPG, as though they exist in a vacuum but w/e, and Shaq was a slightly better volume scoreer in prime. But when you start looking at playoff performance you realize how close it really is. Duncan is one of the few players who actually (a) gets better in the playoffs and (b) takes on a bigger role when he needs to. So let's look at prime performances in playoffs:

Shaq Playoffs (age 21-30):

136 GP and 5465 MP

37.3/17.1/4.3 per 100 possessions with 114 offensive rating and 104 defensive rating.

24.0 total WS (17.4 offensive, 6.6 defensive) for a .211 WS/48 rate. .568 TS%, 6.7 BPM, 12.0 VORP, on 31.6 USG%.

5 Finals, 3 rings.

Duncan Playoffs (ages 21-30)

138 GP and 5537 MP

32.3/17.0/4.8 per 100 possession with a 111 offensive rating and 97 defensive rating

25.6 total WS (14.6 offensive, 11.0 defensive) for a .222 WS/48 rate. .560% TS%, 7.5 BPM, 13.3 VORP, 28.9 USG%.

4 Finals, 4 rings.

Pretty hard to say there's an appreciable difference in overall statistical profile, and remember that's just prime.

Now do past 30. NVM we know who got that one. lol

Saddletramp
07-21-2015, 04:31 PM
If all three are 18-19 and in next year's draft and I know how effective they can be, I'll pick Shaq everytime and not think twice about it. If he's gone, I'd take Duncan, then Kobe.

Kobe's got that fire every GM/owner/coach loves and Duncan has been tremendous (in one system that makes Diaw look great) for a long time but Shaq was just too dominant.

NYKnickFanatic
07-21-2015, 04:41 PM
Kobe seems out of place here. Why is he there with two bigs? :eyebrow:

Between Duncan and Shaq, it's tough. Shaq was pretty damn dominant.

tredigs
07-21-2015, 05:02 PM
Gets to the point and easily understandable. What was so hard for you to understand?

Because peak, prime and career can all be different answers to different people. "Who's the best?" means nothing without any context as to what that question is actually asking. And it's just lazy.

A better way to ask: "1st question: Knowing everything we know about these 3 players and their careers, you have the chance to re-draft them to your team as rookies to your teams. Who do you choose, and why? 2nd question: You have the chance to trade for 1 of these three players and will get them on your squad only for their prime 10 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? 3rd Question: You have the opportunity to build around one of these three players for their absolute peak 3 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? Don't think like a money-hungry owner, either. The only goal in acquiring these players is to win championships."

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 05:32 PM
Because peak, prime and career can all be different answers to different people. "Who's the best?" means nothing without any context as to what that question is actually asking. And it's just lazy.

A better way to ask: "1st question: Knowing everything we know about these 3 players and their careers, you have the chance to re-draft them to your team as rookies to your teams. Who do you choose, and why? 2nd question: You have the chance to trade for 1 of these three players and will get them on your squad only for their prime 10 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? 3rd Question: You have the opportunity to build around one of these three players for their absolute peak 3 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? Don't think like a money-hungry owner, either. The only goal in acquiring these players is to win championships."

Who's the best means who ranks higher in your all-time list. I thought that was very straight forward. A mixture of all three. Remember that for the next time.

tredigs
07-21-2015, 07:17 PM
Who's the best means who ranks higher in your all-time list. I thought that was very straight forward. A mixture of all three. Remember that for the next time.

No, child. That generally means "who had the best or most accomplished career?". Even then, everyone has their own standards of what they rate higher in an All-Time list. You're just jumping to a conclusion based on your interpretation of the question. That could be the least important aspect he and others think about when asking who the best player is.

Hawkeye15
07-21-2015, 08:46 PM
No, child. That generally means "who had the best or most accomplished career?". Even then, everyone has their own standards of what they rate higher in an All-Time list. You're just jumping to a conclusion based on your interpretation of the question. That could be the least important aspect he and others think about when asking who the best player is.

No, he is jumping to his homer wagon, per usual.

Look, I have Duncan in my tier along with Shaq, where it means I can LIVE with an argument that they are on the same level, flip them, whatever. But by no means was his career better than Shaq's, and vice versa.

Shaq was better in his peak, that can't be debated. At all. Duncan had a much longer prime. That really can't be debated either, especially when you factor in his resurgence after we all thought he was done.

But if we were to ask, "what player in history are you taking in a 5 year period to win as many titles as possible", Shaq wipes the floor with both of these guys, and why is Kobe even here?

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 08:49 PM
:laugh: I'm just here eating some chips laughing at both of ya. lol

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 08:51 PM
If all 3 of these players were up for the draft. I'm getting Duncan for everything he brings to the table on offense and defense and longevity. I also don't want a ring chaser. I don't know why Kobe is on this list tbh.

SeoulBeatz
07-21-2015, 09:24 PM
My one issue with Shaq is that Matt Geiger could slow him up. I wonder if Shaq was playing 10 years earlier how dominant he would have been. Practically no player had the physical mass to stand there, but Matt Geiger and some of the other bigger mass guys slowed (did not stop) Shaq.

Lol can't tell if serious. Matt Geiger might have slowed him down for a game or two, but that was an anomaly. Shaq could overpower anyone and everyone in the league. Plus his coordination and mobility for a guy of his freakish size is something we may never see again.

KnicksorBust
07-21-2015, 09:46 PM
Duncan + Shaq and Duncan + Kobe both win more titles than Shaq + Kobe.

Hawkeye15
07-21-2015, 09:58 PM
:laugh: I'm just here eating some chips laughing at both of ya. lol

of course you are laughing. You are a complete flip flopper. You try and tell us Duncan is this player who was so amazing, he lifted teams to championships with minimal help, but then in another thread, defend Parker/Ginoboli/D-Rob as these great players.

Can't have it all buddy. Duncan is a top 8 player ever, but he didn't have the impact Shaq did in his peak, and he had really awesome help for his entire career. Is he amazing? Yep. Do you overrate him, and ever Spur? Yep. And the reason I don't care about your arguments is that you pick and choose when to defend, or put down your own teams players. Consistency bud, you lack it....

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 10:10 PM
of course you are laughing. You are a complete flip flopper. You try and tell us Duncan is this player who was so amazing, he lifted teams to championships with minimal help, but then in another thread, defend Parker/Ginoboli/D-Rob as these great players.

Can't have it all buddy. Duncan is a top 8 player ever, but he didn't have the impact Shaq did in his peak, and he had really awesome help for his entire career. Is he amazing? Yep. Do you overrate him, and ever Spur? Yep. And the reason I don't care about your arguments is that you pick and choose when to defend, or put down your own teams players. Consistency bud, you lack it....

I'm one of the most consistent posters here. :confused:

PhillyFaninLA
07-21-2015, 11:25 PM
Lol can't tell if serious. Matt Geiger might have slowed him down for a game or two, but that was an anomaly. Shaq could overpower anyone and everyone in the league. Plus his coordination and mobility for a guy of his freakish size is something we may never see again.

As I said Matt Geiger and other bigs with some mass slowed up but not stopped Shaq. My point it would we be talking about him as an all time great or just a fringe hall of famer is he played in an era with bigger bigs. Shaq saw a decline in great big men...again I'm not questioning whether Shaq is great, a force, or a hall of famer...I'm just making the point that Geiger slowed him up on a regular basis, even Eric Montross slowed him up a little.

Shaq was so much bigger and stronger than just about every other big in the league, of course they couldn't stop him. If he played in an era with bigger centers (mass wise) then I wonder if he would have been in the conversation for a top 5 or top 10 player, but he would still be a hall of famer.

My other point was, I chose Tim Duncan souly because of the way Matt Geiger slowed up Shaq.

Hawkeye15
07-22-2015, 01:17 AM
I'm one of the most consistent posters here. :confused:

right, with your flip flopping, depending on what Spur you need to pimp.

KnicksorBust
07-22-2015, 07:04 AM
Gets to the point and easily understandable. What was so hard for you to understand?

Because peak, prime and career can all be different answers to different people. "Who's the best?" means nothing without any context as to what that question is actually asking. And it's just lazy.

A better way to ask: "1st question: Knowing everything we know about these 3 players and their careers, you have the chance to re-draft them to your team as rookies to your teams. Who do you choose, and why? 2nd question: You have the chance to trade for 1 of these three players and will get them on your squad only for their prime 10 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? 3rd Question: You have the opportunity to build around one of these three players for their absolute peak 3 seasons. Who do you choose, and why? Don't think like a money-hungry owner, either. The only goal in acquiring these players is to win championships."

Duncan, Duncan, Shaq

I also think the 1st question is the most important of all 3. You?

basch152
07-23-2015, 12:22 AM
What do you mean by the best? What are you looking at? If you are asking best at their respective bests/peaks then it's easily Shaq. I would take Shaq's peak over anyone in NBA history not named Jordan.

Prime olajuwon over shaq EASILY.

Better defender, better passer, could stretch the floor with his shot, juste better at about everything.

numba1CHANGsta
07-23-2015, 01:04 AM
Duncan could never win consecutive championships unlike what Shaq and Kobe did. Shaq was so dominate but Kobe won more rings and won them consecutively twice.

Jayb587
07-23-2015, 01:57 AM
kobe because he has more rings than shaq and has dunked on Duncan a gazillion times lmao.

Gander13SM
07-23-2015, 03:48 AM
Prime olajuwon over shaq EASILY.

Better defender, better passer, could stretch the floor with his shot, juste better at about everything.

Olajuwon was the more skilled player for sure. But Shaq's physical dominance was something to behold

Gander13SM
07-23-2015, 03:51 AM
Duncan could never win consecutive championships unlike what Shaq and Kobe did. Shaq was so dominate but Kobe won more rings and won them consecutively twice.

Does winning rings consecutively really mean more? Like if two players win 3 rings each, one does it in 3 years (3 peat) then doesn't make the finals for the next 3 years. Meanwhile the other wins 1 every second year (so 3 rings over 6 years) and makes the finals even in the years he hasn't won. You would value the former over the latter simply because they won all of theirs in a shorter time frame?

And isn't rings a reflection of the team as opposed to an individual? It's not like Kobe didn't have Shaq when he threepeated. Or Gasol the other two times. Plus the rest. I mean is having Phil Jackson and his version of Winters triangle not a big factor?

There's a lot to consider here. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't know... it seems like pointing to rings and the way they were won is an over simplification.

basch152
07-23-2015, 04:49 AM
Olajuwon was the more skilled player for sure. But Shaq's physical dominance was something to behold

so was olajuwons. His speed and strength combination are completely unmatched in NBA history

nickdymez
07-23-2015, 06:26 AM
The kobe jealousy on this forum is real sad. Really sad.

nickdymez
07-23-2015, 06:28 AM
Nevermind, going through this thread it's the usual suspects. Although the op seems new, but it looks like he will fit in just fine here at psd.

JasonJohnHorn
07-23-2015, 07:19 AM
Shaq may have been the most dominant, but he was not the best player. Even in his autobiography he said he always wished he could step back and shoot like Garnett and Duncan.

Shaq was a beast in the post (largely because he got away with a lot of offensive fouls), and he was a great passing big man and a great rebounder.

However, Duncan had more range, was as good a rebounder (just a little smaller), a better passer, and a FAR better and more agile defender. When Shaq played Sabonis and Sabonis stepped outside, Shaq let his team cover him; Duncan would cover guys like that himself. Shaq couldn't, because he wasn't quick enough to move back to the paint.


Kobe, on offense, is more diverse than Duncan, but they play drastically different positions, so it is hard to compare. That said, Kobe never had the kind of impact on defense that Duncan had.

Gander13SM
07-23-2015, 07:23 AM
so was olajuwons. His speed and strength combination are completely unmatched in NBA history

Yes but compared to Shaq his physicality isnt anything. Shaq is the most physically dominant player since Wilt.

nastynice
07-23-2015, 07:23 AM
How is Duncan not more skilled than Kobe? What skills does Kobe possess that are superior to Duncan?

Its tough since both are different positions, but both players are extremely skilled, but I'd have to say Kobe's definitely more skilled because he truly has a complete offensive game. Its hard to hold that against duncan since he's a big, but what duncan could do inside kobe could do inside, and what duncan can do inside kobe could do outside. Duncan is extremely skilled, so its no knock on him, but kobe is definitely the more skilled of the two because his versatility is completely on a different level

nastynice
07-23-2015, 07:31 AM
Prime olajuwon over shaq EASILY.

Better defender, better passer, could stretch the floor with his shot, juste better at about everything.

I would also take olajuwon over shaq, but "easily" is a complete overstatement.

Shaq over duncan, "easily", ok I understand, but taking someone OVER shaq, easily should never be in that sentence.

basch152
07-23-2015, 07:52 AM
I would also take olajuwon over shaq, but "easily" is a complete overstatement.

Shaq over duncan, "easily", ok I understand, but taking someone OVER shaq, easily should never be in that sentence.

It becomes quite easy when you not only consider he was a better player on the court, but also a significantly harder worker and better teammate.

Gander13SM
07-23-2015, 12:21 PM
Its tough since both are different positions, but both players are extremely skilled, but I'd have to say Kobe's definitely more skilled because he truly has a complete offensive game. Its hard to hold that against duncan since he's a big, but what duncan could do inside kobe could do inside, and what duncan can do inside kobe could do outside. Duncan is extremely skilled, so its no knock on him, but kobe is definitely the more skilled of the two because his versatility is completely on a different level

Kobe is not as good in the post as Duncan. And even if he was I assumed we were talking about their entire game not just offense.

Hawkeye15
07-23-2015, 02:36 PM
Shaq may have been the most dominant, but he was not the best player. Even in his autobiography he said he always wished he could step back and shoot like Garnett and Duncan.

Shaq was a beast in the post (largely because he got away with a lot of offensive fouls), and he was a great passing big man and a great rebounder.

However, Duncan had more range, was as good a rebounder (just a little smaller), a better passer, and a FAR better and more agile defender. When Shaq played Sabonis and Sabonis stepped outside, Shaq let his team cover him; Duncan would cover guys like that himself. Shaq couldn't, because he wasn't quick enough to move back to the paint.


Kobe, on offense, is more diverse than Duncan, but they play drastically different positions, so it is hard to compare. That said, Kobe never had the kind of impact on defense that Duncan had.

I am sure either would love to be able to back anyone in the world down right under the basket at will, and dunk everytime help doesn't come......

Thumper 88
07-23-2015, 03:52 PM
I'd take Duncan at his peak. 2003 top 3 GOAT runs.
I'd take Duncan at his longevity GOATness.
5 rings 3 FMVPs 2 MVPs 5 time the best player throughout a championship run.
17 50 win seasons if you count the 98-99 season.

You listed a lot of team stats

Thumper 88
07-23-2015, 03:53 PM
I think Shaq was probably the dominate player at each of their respected peaks

Thumper 88
07-23-2015, 03:56 PM
I think Shaq was the most dominant player at his peak.

Thumper 88
07-23-2015, 03:57 PM
I think Shaq was the most dominant player at his peak.

If we are taking career then give me Duncan.

If we are taking rapes then give me Kobe.

basch152
07-23-2015, 07:11 PM
I hope someday you get falsely accused of rape do wr can sit around and make fun of how ****** of a person you are.

Not even close to a kobe fan either