David Robinson or Tim Duncan

[Bigsmoke]

I can NEVER and i repeat... NEVER can make up my mind in this comparison. Its like I wanted to say Duncan since he won titles without David but he won them when Jordan was not in the league besides in 2003 and when Hakeem became old as hell. Plus its like David Robinson was a bigger factor and more of a challege to guard than Duncan.... atleast to me. People may say that David isnt better because he got his ass beat by Hakeem... wouldnt Hakeem do that same **** on Duncan if Duncan was him right now back in 95? As slow as Duncan is, i really dont think he can guard Hakeem any better... but still... not sure who to pick between the 2...

Robinson when he scored 71
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUn7BvZ-4ZQ

Tim Duncan mix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uN9FQ3RGjX8

[iTruWarrior]

I enjoyed watching Robinson more, but Duncan is the greater player.

Stats = Temporary thing
Stats + Rings = All-time thing
PER = GOAT :lol

[ruslan]

Are you seriously asking this question? Duncan is the reason Robinson has rings.

[Bigsmoke]

I enjoyed watching Robinson more, but Duncan is the greater player.

Stats = Temporary thing
Stats + Rings = All-time thing
PER = GOAT :lol

he's better and getting his teamates involved but David Robinson is one if not the greatest defensive player ever who can average 30 points per game

[Bigsmoke]

Are you seriously asking this question? Duncan is the reason Robinson has rings.

... i know that. But Robinson was already 34 and all injured up when he won his first ring.

[Maniak]

Tim Duncan all day every day.

Duncan is the GOAT at his position....

[Bush4Ever]

Robinson's game dropped in the playoffs.

Duncan's game raised in the playoffs during the critical times (37/16 against the Shaq Lakers and a near quadruple double against the Nets in the Finals)

When you are talking about the elite of the elite players, playoffs performances should count for much more than anything related to the regular season.

Duncan in a walk.

[iTruWarrior]

Robinson's game dropped in the playoffs.

Duncan's game raised in the playoffs during the critical times (37/16 against the Shaq Lakers and a near quadruple double against the Nets in the Finals)

When you are talking about the elite of the elite players, playoffs performances should count for much more than anything related to the regular season.

Duncan in a walk.
What up B4ever, You tired of ESPN already?

[Micku]

Robinson is probably the better individual player and Duncan is the better team player?

[Bush4Ever]

What up B4ever, You tired of ESPN already?

Yeah, that place has gone to the dogs. Even more so than usual.

I'll try this place out. Probably be in and out.

[Bush4Ever]

Robinson is probably the better individual player and Duncan is the better team player?

I think when we are evaluating elite players like this, the performances in the playoffs need to count for almost everything.

And Duncan takes any measure of performance in the playoffs, team, individual, or otherwise.

[iTruWarrior]

Yeah, that place has gone to the dogs. Even more so than usual.

I'll try this place out. Probably be in and out.
It's MeMacFan by the way..... Or are you just banned over there?

[Maniak]

Yeah, that place has gone to the dogs. Even more so than usual.

I'll try this place out. Probably be in and out.
If you are wanting to stay, try to ignore the trolls. If you avoid them and stick to talking to the smart ones, they will just fade away and become a distant voice. I wont list all trolls out, because they are easy enough to identify.

You seem like a smart and good poster though, welcome to ISH.

[Bush4Ever]

It's MeMacFan by the way..... Or are you just banned over there?


I see. No, I'm not banned. I've pretty much stopped posting there over the last 3 months.

[Sir Charles]

Prime Robinson > Duncan....:confusedshrug:

That is even thoug I Consider Him the Bigges ***** Girly Player Ever...He Was Just So Much More Talented and Athletic than Duncan

[cdbleb]

Individually Id say Robinson is overall better (Duncan is more fundamental), but overall from a standpoint of who would be more practical to take as a focal point to build a team around Id pick Duncan. Robinson was one of the most athletic bigs of all time and he was easily a top 3 center in the league over the course of his career but Duncan is irreplaceable all the way from his ability on the court to his presence in the locker room. Robinson lead by doing what needed to be done whether his team was able to win or not in the long run whereas Duncan leads by example and gets his teammates to play as a collective unit.

[godofgods]

Prime Robinson > Duncan....:confusedshrug:

That is even thoug I Consider Him the Bigges ***** Girly Player Ever...He Was Just So Much More Talented and Athletic than Duncan

The real question is: would you still say the same if Robinson plays PF and is always the one compared more favorably than Charles Barkley?

[Sir Charles]

The real question is: would you still say the same if Robinson plays PF and is always the one compared more favorably than Charles Barkley?

Don`t understand the question :confusedshrug: but a 1989 to 1998 Robinson was WAY BETTER than Duncan and he wasn`t afraid to PLAY CENTER, he never called himself a PF neither did Hakeem with Sampson

[miles berg]

Tim Duncan, easily.

Silly question, its like asking who is better between Shaq & Karl Malone. Everyone knows its Shaq.

[Sir Charles]

Tim Duncan, easily.

Silly question, its like asking who is better between Shaq & Karl Malone. Everyone knows its Shaq.

Go Check Out David Robinsons PER from ages 24 (1989) to 1998 (32) and overall EFF then shut your mouth :rolleyes:. David Robinson was a way better player than Duncan and he didn`t have much of a Cast Until his Arrial. Duncan is a better version of Daugherty while Duncan was almost Hakeem and Shaq-like in his Prime

And this is comming from an Anti Robinson Fan...:confusedshrug: I actually like Duncan Better as a Player and Game..but Robinson was Simpley a Better Player :confusedshrug:

[highwhey]

I loved how The Admiral played. One of my favorite players of all time, plus the guy looked like he could have competed in the Olympia contest, lol.

[Godfather]

Tim Duncan, easily.

Silly question, its like asking who is better between Shaq & Karl Malone. Everyone knows its Shaq.

This.

Robinson would be ringless if Timmy didn't carry his ass.

[Sir Charles]

This.

Robinson would be ringless if Timmy didn't carry his ass.

Robinson played in an ERA OF TRUE NBA STARS...not highschool ball, no handchecking and an even more watered down league than the early 90s.

[miles berg]

Go Check Out David Robinsons PER from ages 24 (1989) to 1998 (32) and overall EFF then shut your mouth :rolleyes:. David Robinson was a way better player than Duncan and he didn`t have much of a Cast Until his Arrial. Duncan is a better version of Daugherty while Duncan was almost Hakeem and Shaq-like in his Prime

And this is comming from an Anti Robinson Fan...:confusedshrug: I actually like Duncan Better as a Player and Game..but Robinson was Simpley a Better Player :confusedshrug:

Go play with your PER stats and your ERA and your OBP and your YPC, etc, etc, etc...

Ill just stick to watching them play. I was around when Robinson started, waited two years to see him start, and then watched him play over and over and over. I am within hours from San Antonio, I have gotten to see plenty of them both over the years.

Duncan is a far superior player. He is an anchor on both ends of the court in ways that only a select few have ever been. He is one of the 9 greatest players of all time and while you are busy calculating PERs Duncan is out there winning championships.

[Godfather]

Robinson played in an ERA OF TRUE NBA STARS...not highschool ball, no handchecking and an even more watered down league than the early 90s.

You idiot...

Robinson had a losing season before Duncan.

And Prime Shaq>>>Any big man Hakeem faced...

[miles berg]

Robinson played in an ERA OF TRUE NBA STARS...not highschool ball, no handchecking and an even more watered down league than the early 90s.

Robinsons best years were during the weakest era of NBA basketball I have ever seen ('94-'00). He did very well in the greatest era ever (through '93) and did fairly decent at the beginning of this century but I couldn't care less about what he did from '94-'00, those were throwaway years for the NBA in terms of competition. It was just a weak era.

[Duncan21formvp]

Don`t understand the question :confusedshrug: but a 1989 to 1998 Robinson was WAY BETTER than Duncan and he wasn`t afraid to PLAY CENTER, he never called himself a PF neither did Hakeem with Sampson
:roll:

[nbastatus]

timmy

[Sir Charles]

Go play with your PER stats and your ERA and your OBP and your YPC, etc, etc, etc...

Ill just stick to watching them play. I was around when Robinson started, waited two years to see him start, and then watched him play over and over and over. I am within hours from San Antonio, I have gotten to see plenty of them both over the years.

Duncan is a far superior player. He is an anchor on both ends of the court in ways that only a select few have ever been. He is one of the 9 greatest players of all time and while you are busy calculating PERs Duncan is out there winning championships.

Anchor on both sides?

Since when is Duncan a Greater Defensive Player than Robinson?
Since when is Duncan Sueperior Shot Blocker than Robinson?
Since when is Duncan Sueperior Interior Defender than Robinson
Since when is Duncan Sueperior Floor Defender than Robinson (Robinson 1.4 SPG for his Career!)
Since when is Duncan a Superior Scorer than Robinson?
FT Shooter? No!
Unstoppableness? Robinson whent 8.6 Times to the FT line for his CAREER, Duncan till now has gone 7.3...Not even Close!
Athletic Abiltieies (speed, potence, leap, agility?) A THOUSAND MILES A WAY

Rebounder? could be
Passer? Probably Not in David Robinsons Prime

A Healthy David Robinson before is 1996-97 injury HAD WAY MORE IMPACT than Duncan will ever have reason why Robinson: EFF, PER ....Robinson was Superior in his Prime and Still is in some ways.

A 1989-1998 Robinson > Duncan by Miles....

[nbastatus]

Anchor on both sides?

Since when is Duncan a Greater Defensive Player than Robinson?
Since when is Duncan Sueperior Shot Blocker than Robinson?
Since when is Duncan Sueperior Interior Defender than Robinson
Since when is Duncan a Superior Scorer than Robinson?
FT Shooter? No!
Unstoppableness? Robinson whent 8.6 Times to the FT line for his CAREER, Duncan till now has gone 7.3...Not even Close!
Athletic Abiltieies (speed, potence, leap, agility?) A THOUSAND MILES A WAY

Rebounder? could be
Passer? Probably Not in David Robinsons Prime

A Healthy David Robinson before is 1996-97 injury HAD WAY MORE IMPACT than Duncan will ever have reason why Robinson: EFF, PER ....Robinson was Superior in his Prime and Still is in some ways.

A 1989-1998 Robinson > Duncan by Miles....
dude welcome to the future.

[iTruWarrior]

This is not who has a bigger balls comparison, this is who is the better player.

and It's Tim Duncan, not even close. David Robinson was actually soft himself as he got older in his career.

[Sir Charles]

This is not who has a bigger balls comparison, this is who is the better player.

and It's Tim Duncan, not even close. David Robinson was actually soft himself as he got older in his career.

Actally Tim Duncan has the bigger balls but Robinson Was Just The BETTER PLAYER..IMPACT WISE ITS NOT EVEN CLOSE IN HIS PRIME..:confusedshrug:

[VCMVP1551]

Duncan, easily.

4 championships as the best player and Robinson has none. Robinson did win 1 as the second best player and another as a role player, but as the first option he never even made it to the finals. And don't give me that sh*t about supporting casts because the 2003 Spurs had less talent than a lot of teams that Robinson led.

Duncan had to carry that team to win a championship, and he did. Look at what he did in the finals in 6 games.

24.2 ppg, 17.0 rpg, 5.3 apg, 5.3 bpg, 49.5 FG%

Or even the entire playoff run(24 games).

24.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 5.3 apg, 3.3 bpg, 52.9 FG%

Duncan's superior low post game is what makes this so easy. That's also what made Duncan a 4 time champion. Robinson was never great with his back to the basket, while Duncan was one of the best of all time with his back to the basket. Robinson was a better defender though.

Duncan also has longevity on his side. He's still an elite player in his 12th NBA season while Robinson only had 8 or 9 elite seasons.

[Sir Charles]

Duncan, easily.

4 championships as the best player and Robinson has none. Robinson did win 1 as the second best player and another as a role player, but as the first option he never even made it to the finals. And don't give me that sh*t about supporting casts because the 2003 Spurs had less talent than a lot of teams that Robinson led.

Duncan had to carry that team to win a championship, and he did. Look at what he did in the finals in 6 games.

24.2 ppg, 17.0 rpg, 5.3 apg, 5.3 bpg, 49.5 FG%

Or even the entire playoff run(24 games).

24.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 5.3 apg, 3.3 bpg, 52.9 FG%

Duncan's superior low post game is what makes this so easy. That's also what made Duncan a 4 time champion. Robinson was never great with his back to the basket, while Duncan was one of the best of all time with his back to the basket. Robinson was a better defender though.

Duncan also has longevity on his side. He's still an elite player in his 12th NBA season while Robinson only had 8 or 9 elite seasons.

Robinson played in a WAY TOUGHER ERA....his PER/EFF is Superior in his Prime and with LESSER SUPPORING CASTS...WAY LESSER...

I like Duncan more as a Player but I have to admit Robinson was Better. Same thing with Ewing...He Was Better than Ewing ...sadly because he was one of the biggest MOST TALENTED PLAYERS and yes puss-ies ever...

[Bigsmoke]

You idiot...

Robinson had a losing season before Duncan.

And Prime Shaq>>>Any big man Hakeem faced...

the year with Robinson had a losing season was when he was injured for almost that whole season.

[Masterz313]

Robinson played in a WAY TOUGHER ERA....his PER/EFF is Superior in his Prime and with LESSER SUPPORING CASTS...WAY LESSER...

I like Duncan more as a Player but I have to admit Robinson was Better. Same thing with Ewing...He Was Better than Ewing ...sadly because he was one of the biggest MOST TALENTED PLAYERS and yes puss-ies ever...


duncan on your team = contender status for his entire career no matter who else is on the squad

other than playoffs, there's aren't stats that are gonna prove TD is superior to robinson, its purely a subjective opinion based on watching.

[Artillery]

Duncan because of his superior post-game. Robinson put up the better stats but a player like Duncan is more valuable.


Here's a video of Duncan carrying the Spurs to victory in his rookie playoff debut:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN5LdZEzWKo

[Sir Charles]

duncan on your team = contender status for his entire career no matter who else is on the squad

other than playoffs, there's aren't stats that are gonna prove TD is superior to robinson, its purely a subjective opinion based on watching.

Yean in the Watered Down Pathetic Competitive League of 2000s :rolleyes: What Great Competition Did he face other than Shaq-Bryant when D-Rob was there? :confusedshrug: ...put Duncan with the same squad that Robinson had from 1989 to 1997 and he not only wins no Champ but less games! (he is not the Scoring Threat Robinson was Neither the All Around Defender). Duncan was lucky he got to Play Robinson a Top PER and EFF Player of All Time...

[Godfather]

Yean in the Watered Down Pathetic Competitive League of 2000s :rolleyes: What Great Competition Did he face other than Shaq-Bryant when D-Rob was there? :confusedshrug: ...put Duncan with the same squad that Robinson had from 1989 to 1997 and he not only wins nothing but less!. Duncan was lucky he got to Play Robinson a Top PER and EFF Player of All Time...

I have a biased agenda. I think Charles Barkley is the greatest PF ever so I am going to do everything I can to make Duncan seem bad.

[Sir Charles]

I have a biased agenda. I think Charles Barkley is the greatest PF ever so I am going to do everything I can to make Duncan seem bad.

Duncan is asoume but he aint better than a Prime Barkley and he might just edge Malone by a bit do to his Play-Off Clutchness and More Efficient Scoring in the Clutch.

[Godfather]

Duncan is asoume but he aint better than a Prime Barkley and he might just edge Malone by a bit do to his Play-Off Clutchness and More Efficient Scoring in the Clutch.

Last time I checked 4 finals trophies and 3 finals MVP's>0 in both...

Tim Duncan is the greatest PF ever.

Rings don't lie.

[Sir Charles]

Last time I checked 4 finals trophies and 3 finals MVP's>0 in both...

Tim Duncan is the greatest PF ever.

Rings don't lie.

Rings = Teams

Stats, PER and EFF = Players and If you Play with Greater Players those Eve Rise....:violin:

[ScolaFan]

THIS THREAD IS NOW WORTHLESS:


Robinson headed to Hall of Fame
Web Posted: 04/02/2009 3:44 CDT Robinson headed to Hall of Fame
By Mike Monroe

David Robinson, the great center who helped the Spurs win two of their four championships and won two Olympic gold medals as a member of Team USA, has been informed he has been elected to the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.

A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy who was known as “The Admiral” during his days with the Spurs, Robinson will be introduced as a member of the Hall’s Class of 2009 in ceremonies scheduled for Detroit on Monday.

Robinson’s inclusion in what figures to qualify as one of the greatest Hall of Fame classes ever was confirmed Thursday by sources connected with Monday’s announcement.

Robinson’s basketball accomplishments include 1987 College Player of the Year at Navy, four first-team All-NBA selections, the 1995 NBA MVP Award, two NBA titles, and two Olympic gold medals.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/David_Robinson_headed_to_Basketball_Hall_of_Fame.h tml


:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :applause: :applause:

[Bigsmoke]

[B][SIZE="6"]



http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/David_Robinson_headed_to_Basketball_Hall_of_Fame.h tml


:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :applause: :applause:

nice

[Godfather]

Rings = Teams

Stats, PER and EFF = Players and If you Play with Greater Players those Eve Rise....:violin:

What?

Duncan was the consensus best player on every single one of his championship teams.

He is a better basketball player that Barkley because he makes everyone around him better (leadership) and wins championships.

[unbreakable]

Tim Duncan is one of the greatest defensive players.. EVER. He doesnt leave his feet and doesnt fall for jukes.. I know he'd do very well against the Dream because of his incredible fundamentals.

D-ROB is a great sportsman and a great community man, but if Im a GM I take Timmy all day.

[unbreakable]

Duncan because of his superior post-game. Robinson put up the better stats but a player like Duncan is more valuable.


Here's a video of Duncan carrying the Spurs to victory in his rookie playoff debut:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN5LdZEzWKo

LOL OMG.. That was an incredible show, INCREDIBLE!!!
:pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp:

[Sir Charles]

Tim Duncan is one of the greatest defensive players.. EVER. He doesnt leave his feet and doesnt fall for jukes.. I know he'd do very well against the Dream because of his incredible fundamentals.

D-ROB is a great sportsman and a great community man, but if Im a GM I take Timmy all day.

A 1985-1995 Dream would Destroy Duncan (Ewing Superior Interior Defender, Robinson Superior Interior Defender)...so would Barkley and in a Fast Paced Game...Karl Malone would too..:confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

What?

Duncan was the consensus best player on every single one of his championship teams.

He is a better basketball player that Barkley because he makes everyone around him better (leadership) and wins championships.

No he was lucky to Play Prime with Other Great Prime Greats and Great Prime Role Players...

EFF accounts for making others Better and Barkley Ranks 10th!

Bird 6th!....

Duncan drafted in the 80s and prime in the 90s = Zero Titles

[Timmy D for MVP]

I love The Admiral (even though I can't spell it).

But Timmy is the better player by quite a bit in my mind.

And I don't think his greatness is truly gonna be recognized until he's gone which is sad.

[iTruWarrior]

I love The Admiral (even though I can't spell it).

But Timmy is the better player by quite a bit in my mind.

And I don't think his greatness is truly gonna be recognized until he's gone which is sad.
So True..... The same can be said for pretty much all international players too.

[Timmy D for MVP]

Rings = Teams

Stats, PER and EFF = Players and If you Play with Greater Players those Eve Rise....:violin:

Even Charles himself has admitted that Timmy is the GOAT PF.

Tim would excel in any era and will excel late into his career.

[Timmy D for MVP]

So True..... The same can be said for pretty much all international players too.

Or anyone that just doesn't catch people's eyes with their play.

[Sir Charles]

Even Charles himself has admitted that Timmy is the GOAT PF.

Tim would excel in any era and will excel late into his career.

Barkley schooled him at ages 34-36...

An ANGRY PRIME BARKLEY would destroy Duncan...not even Robinson or Hakeem could guard Barkley...and they had to leave their Centers

Barkey caused more Ilegal Defenses than Any other Player...

And 1989-97 Robinson was a Way Better Player than Duncan...Way Better...Go Watch the Clips...:confusedshrug:

[White Chocolate]

Admiral has the edge in scoring, but Duncan stepped up his game during the playoffs, which is something Admiral never did. Admiral was the better regular season player, but rings > stats.

[NBASTATMAN]

Tim Duncan all day every day.

Duncan is the GOAT at his position....



As a individual player robinson.. As a team player duncan.. Robinson never had the talent duncan had.. Robinson was a stud but he played vs hakeem a much better player than duncan... I would say a prime robinson vs a prime duncan would be close.. but playoffs are everything and duncan comes up a little higher.. Though if duncan had to go against hakeem duncan would get taken to school

[NBASTATMAN]

Tim Duncan is one of the greatest defensive players.. EVER. He doesnt leave his feet and doesnt fall for jukes.. I know he'd do very well against the Dream because of his incredible fundamentals.

D-ROB is a great sportsman and a great community man, but if Im a GM I take Timmy all day.


great team defender overrated individual defender.. Hakeem takes duncan to school. I have seen lesser players like turiaf give duncan problems.. Duncan has been lucky to play in a era where the league has few quality bigs... Shaq was the only player he faced that was great...

[NBASTATMAN]

Even Charles himself has admitted that Timmy is the GOAT PF.

Tim would excel in any era and will excel late into his career.


I watched as a old karl malone shut tim duncan down in the 2004 playoffs.. The Spurs have won because of great talent.. DUncan is the best player but whats up with calling him a pforward.. If they labled him truly he is a center and would be down the list around 7-9...

[Duncan21formvp]

A 1985-1995 Dream would Destroy Duncan (Ewing Superior Interior Defender, Robinson Superior Interior Defender)...so would Barkley and in a Fast Paced Game...Karl Malone would too..:confusedshrug:

No he wouldn't. Karl Malone used to torture Barkley. The difference between the Rockets and Jazz in 1997 and 1998 was that Malone was simply better than Barkley and not even close.

[White Chocolate]

No he wouldn't. Karl Malone used to torture Barkley. The difference between the Rockets and Jazz in 1997 and 1998 was that Malone was simply better than Barkley and not even close.


Malone definitely had the longevity advantage over Barkley. That was evident in 1997/8. But, Barkley's prime was definitely better than Malone's.

[Dave_520]

Robinsons best years were during the weakest era of NBA basketball I have ever seen ('94-'00). He did very well in the greatest era ever (through '93) and did fairly decent at the beginning of this century but I couldn't care less about what he did from '94-'00, those were throwaway years for the NBA in terms of competition. It was just a weak era.

While this is true generally speaking, the era of centers was still in full effect and the competition among the position was still stronger than it has been since around 1999-2000. D-Rob was a hybrid of sorts, playing in both the most and least competitive era's in the league history and doing relatively equal in both. David may have had his MVP season in 95, but his first 3 years (and remember he lost 2 to years to the Navy and 2 more to being a college graduate, so a hypothetical 2-4 years of possibilities) he was more awe-inspiring and played better in the playoffs.

(BTW, Robinson wasn't a POOR playoff performer, he simply didnt take the few games he should have to win a title and/or cement his legacy, which in reality is less than a total of 10 games)


And for the purpose of the thread, David was more of a physical specimen, a player so unique it was nearly impossible to match up with him simply no other players in the league had his physical gifts...and this obviously carried him and defined his career.

Duncan, while def not as physically imposing or naturally talented as Robinson combined a better combination of skills, mental acuity and timing to become the greatest at his position ever so for the comparison of overall basketball player, Duncan wins.

However if they were pitted against eachother in their primes, both would do what both would have done throughout their career... get their stats on each other. Duncan has never played against a player of David or Hakeem's ability.. and without question this is type of player that frustrates him the most. If I had to put stats in an avg head to head the two WOULD have head if they had played the same era against each other... I would say...

David: 24ppg, 11.5rpg, 3.5blks, 3.0ast, 1.0 steals

Tim: 19.5ppg, 13.5rpg, 2.0blks, 3.5ast. .5 steals

Not much change in their prime stats with the exception of Duncan getting a few less ppg due to Robinson's defense.

[SCdac]

Duncan's head to head stats versus Karl Malone:

Duncan (21-27 years old) - 17 wins with Spurs
Malone (33-40 years old) - 8 wins with Jazz & Lakers

Duncan: 25.2 ppg (52.8 fg%), 11.3 rpg, 3.0 apg, 0.6 spg, 2.7 bpg, 38.6 mpg
Malone: 20.7 ppg (42.9 fg%), 9.9 rpg, 4.0 apg, 1.4 spg, 0.8 bpg, 37.5 mpg

yeah Malone was older, but he did win MVP in 1997 and 1999...

here, TD hits a game winning jumper over Malone back in 2003
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWqwvE5KVW8

Tim Duncan was not some scrub going up against the worst big men ever. Dude would definitely hold his own against 90's competition. People are underrating the athleticism, agility, speed, and ball-handling skills of prime Tim Duncan. He wasn't some stiff.

[rmt]

For Duncan, winning is everything.

Robinson didn't have the same mentality - to him winning was just one of many things in his life. Physically, he was such a specimen.

Duncan, despite his lack of athleticism, is a much better player - back to the basket, makes his team mates better, clutch, etc. He has maximized his talent and had a near perfect career. He did benefit a lot from playing with Robinson, being mentored by him and by Robinson giving over the reigns of the team to him. Not many superstars are as unselfish as Robinson. And Duncan has learned well from him.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Tim Duncan was not some scrub going up against the worst big men ever. Dude would definitely hold his own against 90's competition. People are underrating the athleticism, agility, speed, and ball-handling skills of prime Tim Duncan. He wasn't some stiff.

Thank you. :applause: I say this all the time. I'm starting to think most of the board is too young to remember Duncan running the floor, dunking on guys and taking bigger players off the dribble.

[bekalc]

Its hard to compare they played in different eras. As for stats, I get the feeling that with a lesser team, Duncan's stats would be higher. Duncan's fairly unselfish and is more than willing to let other players score. Not that David was selfish but he was needed to score more.

I think that Tim had more of a killer instinct (even with his fairly mellow face) than Robinson. I.e Tim's ability to carry his team at key moments. I think that's really one of those intangible things that it in the end makes Tim more valuable than Robinson.

Talent after all is what it is, but talent alone doesn't win championships. The ability to deliver in the crunch does.

[ShaqAttack3234]

(BTW, Robinson wasn't a POOR playoff performer, he simply didnt take the few games he should have to win a title and/or cement his legacy, which in reality is less than a total of 10 games)

Ehh, Robinson had some embarrassing moments. Like in '94, coming off a 30/11/5/3 season on 51% shooting, he loses to a lower seeded Jazz team and averages just 20/10 on 41% shooting in the series.

We all know about the '95 WCF

Hakeem Olajuwon- 35.3 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4.2 to, 4.1 bpg, 1.3 spg, 56 FG%
David Robinson- 23.8 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 4.5 to, 2.2 bpg, 1.5 spg, 44.7 FG%

The 2 players played at roughly the same level during the regular season, so there's no excuse to get outplayed that badly. Not only were Robinson's numbers noticeably worse than his season numbers, but he lost with homecourt while Dream torched him and shattered his regular season numbers, in fact, he had the series of his career.

In 1996 Robinson's Spurs lost to a lower seeded Jazz team in the 2nd round. David hardly played like a superstar in the elimination game with just 17 and 8. For the series he averaged just 19.3 ppg, 9 rpg on 47.5% shooting.

That covers his 3 peak years(1994-1996) which all ended up in disappontment. At Robinson's best, he came close to matching or matched some of his regular season numbers, but more often than not, he fell short of those, well short.

His teams overachieved in the regular season and based on the regular season alone, he'd probably be top 10 all time. If he was going to win as the best player on his team, I don't think he was ever going to be comfortable having to score 25-30 in the playoffs, Maybe a role like Garnett's on the 2008 Celtics would have suited him better, in fact, in some ways, I think his mindset is similar to Garnett's.

[Dave_520]

Ehh, Robinson had some embarrassing moments. Like in '94, coming off a 30/11/5/3 season on 51% shooting, he loses to a lower seeded Jazz team and averages just 20/10 on 41% shooting in the series.

We all know about the '95 WCF

Hakeem Olajuwon- 35.3 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4.2 to, 4.1 bpg, 1.3 spg, 56 FG%
David Robinson- 23.8 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 4.5 to, 2.2 bpg, 1.5 spg, 44.7 FG%

The 2 players played at roughly the same level during the regular season, so there's no excuse to get outplayed that badly. Not only were Robinson's numbers noticeably worse than his season numbers, but he lost with homecourt while Dream torched him and shattered his regular season numbers, in fact, he had the series of his career.

In 1996 Robinson's Spurs lost to a lower seeded Jazz team in the 2nd round. David hardly played like a superstar in the elimination game with just 17 and 8. For the series he averaged just 19.3 ppg, 9 rpg on 47.5% shooting.

That covers his 3 peak years(1994-1996) which all ended up in disappontment. At Robinson's best, he came close to matching or matched some of his regular season numbers, but more often than not, he fell short of those, well short.

His teams overachieved in the regular season and based on the regular season alone, he'd probably be top 10 all time. If he was going to win as the best player on his team, I don't think he was ever going to be comfortable having to score 25-30 in the playoffs, Maybe a role like Garnett's on the 2008 Celtics would have suited him better, in fact, in some ways, I think his mindset is similar to Garnett's.

I like your analysis and think it is a fair one. Maybe I was pitting too much weight in his early playoff performances than his latter ones as an overall baseline judgment of his playoff performances.

David was unique and odd in many ways...one of which was the fact his playoff performances (at least statistically) tended to get poorer as he grew older and more experienced. I tend to believe that it was due to 1)the league learned how best defend him (physically) and it was a very physical league still, and secondly David never had a second post/block scorer, which is what best complimented his game (and I always wondered why teams never surrounded him with better post scorers in his career).

You a Shaq fan? Care to have a friendly Robinson, Shaq debate :D.

I think their careers parallel each other interestingly.

[SCdac]

His teams overachieved in the regular season and based on the regular season alone, he'd probably be top 10 all time. If he was going to win as the best player on his team, I don't think he was ever going to be comfortable having to score 25-30 in the playoffs, Maybe a role like Garnett's on the 2008 Celtics would have suited him better, in fact, in some ways, I think his mindset is similar to Garnett's.

I agree with most of this. Robinson was relied upon so much, and rightly so, but like Garnett it was just too much for them as the best players on their respective rosters. David needed more than a 33 year old Dale Ellis or Sean Elliott (who was a solid player, but not exactly perennial all-star calibre), just like I think Garnett needed a bit more than just Latrell Sprewell and 34 year old Cassell. Should both of them have performed better (or to their averages at least) in the playoffs? Certainly. D-Rob left alot of heads hanging in San Antonio. But no doubt he had to carry a huge load, more than he was capable of, apparently. Utah Jazz and Malone always seemed to be a roadblock for the Spurs, both in the regular season and post season, just a bad match up regardless of seeding.... It's not to say that Robinson was an utter failure in every playoff series or game though - like in 93 when he put up 20 points, 17 rebounds, 11 assists, and 7 blocks in game 4 to push the Spurs over Clyde Drexler's Blazers, or when he averaged 30.0 PPG to nearly sweep Charles Barkley's / Kevin Johnson's Suns in 96. Some bigs nowadays would dream of achieving even some of Robinson's lesser averages and success.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I like your analysis and think it is a fair one. Maybe I was pitting too much weight in his early playoff performances than his latter ones as an overall baseline judgment of his playoff performances.

David was unique and odd in many ways...one of which was the fact his playoff performances (at least statistically) tended to get poorer as he grew older and more experienced. I tend to believe that it was due to 1)the league learned how best defend him (physically) and it was a very physical league still, and secondly David never had a second post/block scorer, which is what best complimented his game (and I always wondered why teams never surrounded him with better post scorers in his career).

You a Shaq fan? Care to have a friendly Robinson, Shaq debate :D.

I think their careers parallel each other interestingly.

I agree that David in his prime with another post scorer would have helped, I mean even past his prime with Duncan, they played beautifully. The best high/low combo I've seen. Robinson's offensive game always revolved around his quickness, athleticism and shooting ability. In the halfcourt, he'd usually face up and hit a mid-range jumper or drive to the basket and finish or get fouled in which case he'd usually hit the free throws. And he was great in the open court. With his back to the basket, he could hit a turnaround jumper, though it wasn't as effective vs other players around his size and he did have an awkward looking hook, that was fairly effective, though he was never as comfortable as when he could basically play like a 7 foot SF offensively. For some reason, it never translated as well to the playoffs. I'll always give him credit for being a phenomenal passer from the high post. We all know about his defense.

But, honestly, I don't think Shaq and Robinson is that good of a comparison.

Orlando Shaq vs prime Robinson, would be a better comparison, but even then, a 3rd year Shaq in '95, played much better vs Olajuwon than Robinson did. In LA? Not to sound like a homer, but no contest, IMO. His game raised to a ridiculous level in 2000 and 2001, particularly in the playoffs when he had back to back 30+/15+ playoff runs with 2 finals series that were among the best ever, including 1 against that year's DPOY, Dikembe Mutombo and the other in 2000, came while he had to carry his team completely due to Kobe's injury and inconsistent play in the finals. He slipped a bit in '02, but again raised his game in the playoffs and still played well the following 2 years while raising his game in the playoffs. Hell, even in '98, his game stepped up another notch in the playoffs when he averaged 30+/10+/3+ on 61% shooting and you have to wonder what would have happened had his teammates not choked in the WCF(Van Exel shot 24%, Jones shot 41%, Kobe shot 37%, Campbell shot 21%, Fisher shot 35%, Fox shot 41% and Horry shot 36%. Shaq averaged 32 ppg on 56% shooting in the series which shows you how much they depend on him offensively.

Granted, I'll admit that Shaq had his postseason failures such as '94, '97 and '99, but he had a ton of success. I'll also admit that for the most part, Shaq was blessed to be in better situations than Robinson, but again, you can't fault him for that because he won those years and he did so by raising his game in the playoffs to levels Robinson never did.

As a player, despite his free throw weakness and Robinson's defensive advantage, I prefer Shaq. I feel Shaq was a better, more unstoppable scorer and this is because he was/is, IMO the strongest player in league history and like Robinson a freak athlete and while he didn't have much range, he perfected his low post game with quick spins, counter moves, the drop step, one-handed turnarounds, jump hooks, reverse pivot and he became an excellent passer out of the double team. I'd also say he was a better rebounder, Robinson was no slouch there, but people forget about Shaq's rebounding, particularly on the offensive boards.

Even defensively, Robinson certainly has the edge, but I feel Shaq's impact is underrated there. He was never great at guarding the pick and roll and generally wouldn't contest jump shots, but he was always a good post defender, an elite shot blocker and rebounder and most importantly, the most intimidating player in the paint I've ever seen. After players started seeing that he'd put you on the floor if you tried to dunk on him, you stopped seeing players try.

Statistically, their regular season peaks/prime are close, but I've never seen a player double teamed more than Shaq and I've never seen a player that physical and that has a huge impact that goes beyond stats because you can't measure how much that wears down and demoralizes a team. Shaq also has the clear advantage as far as longevity,

Had Robinson played up to his potential in the playoffs in the mid 90's and not been injured in '96-'97, this would be a better comparison, IMO.

[SinJackal]

First of all. . .Spurs are my favorite team, and Robinson and Duncan are two of my favorite 3 players ever (along with MJ). So clearly I'm not going to be hating on either of them here. However. . .



You idiot...

Robinson had a losing season before Duncan.

And Prime Shaq>>>Any big man Hakeem faced...

Robinson was injured and out for almost that entire season. You're the idiot. At least look something up if you are going to pretend you know about something when you clearly didn't beforehand. Embarrassing.



Admiral has the edge in scoring, but Duncan
stepped up his game during the playoffs, which is something Admiral never did. Admiral was the better regular season player, but rings > stats.

Then I guess Robert Horry is better than MJ, Duncan, Kobe, Robinson, Hakeem, and Shaq? He has more rings. And rings > Stats, right? Pfft.

Robinson never had a full team like Ginobili, Parker, Bowen, and everyone else when he was in his prime. His situations was basically similar to LeBron's with the Cavs. Clearly the best player on the team, had to carry the team and do practically everything, and was gassed by time they got to the postseason. Besides, he only really preformed 'below his season average" twice in the postseason. Everyone keeps talking about it like those 3 weeks out of his career somehow define his entire life. They don't, sorry.

How bad was he playing his rookie year in the playoffs? What's that? He owned? Hmm, what about the year after that? He shot almost 70% with 25/14 a game!? That doesn't seem like choking to me.

Before Duncan played for the Spurs, Robinson was averaging almost identical stats to Duncan's career playoffs stats. Duncan has had bad years in the playoffs too. Nearly everyone has. Not to mention DRob was a superior defender.

He didn't perform worse than Duncan overall. People just keep looking to one or two series out of dozens because those are the only highlight vids they've seen.


I watched as a old karl malone shut tim duncan down in the 2004 playoffs.. The Spurs have won because of great talent.. DUncan is the best player but whats up with calling him a pforward.. If they labled him truly he is a center and would be down the list around 7-9...

Exactly. PF is a far more thin position when it comes to GOAT, compared to Center. Does anyone consider Duncan better than Wilt? Shaq? Kareem? Russel? No. However, Duncan is a PF, not a center. Duncan just started playing center a few years ago. Bosh and Amar'e aren't centers either, they just get stuck having to play C because there are barely any centers worth paying right now.


DRob is very underrated when it comes to GOAT ranking. 2 rings, 2 gold medals, NBA defensive player of the year (and always near tops when he didn't win that award), MVP award, rookie of the year award, has lead the league in points, rebounds, and blocks at least once each (Duncan zero times for any stat), and was always in the running for MVP, and DPY every year until his back injury.

DRob has a higher career PER, a higher TS%, has more win shares, and was clearly a better offensive and defensive player.

Duncan is better in: longevity, rings, and teams played on. Now again, Duncan is one of my top 3 fav' players ever. But to say he's somehow "way better" than DRob is ludicrious. Look more closely.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I agree with most of this. Robinson was relied upon so much, and rightly so, but like Garnett it was just too much for them as the best players on their respective rosters. David needed more than a 33 year old Dale Ellis or Sean Elliott (who was a solid player, but not exactly perennial all-star calibre), just like I think Garnett needed a bit more than just Latrell Sprewell and 34 year old Cassell. Should both of them have performed better (or to their averages at least) in the playoffs? Certainly. D-Rob left alot of heads hanging in San Antonio. But no doubt he had to carry a huge load, more than he was capable of, apparently. Utah Jazz and Malone always seemed to be a roadblock for the Spurs, both in the regular season and post season, just a bad match up regardless of seeding.... It's not to say that Robinson was an utter failure in every playoff series or game though - like in 93 when he put up 20 points, 17 rebounds, 11 assists, and 7 blocks in game 4 to push the Spurs over Clyde Drexler's Blazers, or when he averaged 30.0 PPG to nearly sweep Charles Barkley's / Kevin Johnson's Suns in 96. Some bigs nowadays would dream of achieving even some of Robinson's lesser averages and success.

Robinson did also have a monster series vs LA in the '95 WCSF, and I think these examples are why you can't just say Player X can't win as the best player on his team. For example, Garnett won as the best player on the '08 Celtics, but really he was only 1.A or 1.B offensively and he had a great 3rd option and only had to average 20 ppg in the playoffs and 19 in the regular season, I could definitely see Robinson winning in that role.

But could I see Robinson or Garnett winning in the Shaq/Duncan/Hakeem role or Kareem's role in 1971 and 1980? No. Maybe if Cassell wasn't injured in the 2004 WCF, we may ahve seen Garnett pull it off, but that would just be an assumption. Garnett's track record shows that he wasn't a player who would go out and consistently take over games offensively and average 25+ ppg which is what many of his teams probably needed. Robinson did do that in the regular season, but for whatever reason, he just couldn't consistently do it in the playoffs.

However, both players possessed great all around skillsets, particularly with their versatility and perimeter skills offensively,elite and versatile defensive ability, passing and rebounding.

But I can't put either of them in the class of Kareem/Shaq/Duncan/Hakeem who are all on a different level than Robinson/Garnett/Ewing and Moses Malone, IMO.

[rmt]

Its hard to compare they played in different eras. As for stats, I get the feeling that with a lesser team, Duncan's stats would be higher. Duncan's fairly unselfish and is more than willing to let other players score. Not that David was selfish but he was needed to score more.

I think that Tim had more of a killer instinct (even with his fairly mellow face) than Robinson. I.e Tim's ability to carry his team at key moments. I think that's really one of those intangible things that it in the end makes Tim more valuable than Robinson.

Talent after all is what it is, but talent alone doesn't win championships. The ability to deliver in the crunch does.

Totally agree with this post. With the all-time greats, so little separates them. If you compare them by skill and stats, Robinson seems superior (very much like Garnett). But when it comes down to crunch time (which is when championships are won), Duncan's intangibles deliver.

[ThaRegul8r]

PF is a far more thin position when it comes to GOAT, compared to Center.

During the time Duncan actually played in the league, PF was by far the most stacked competition compared to center.

[Dave_520]

Well when I meant their careers paralleled interestingly, I meant more from a career/team/championship/rivalry standpoint. As much as I love Robinson, I am a realist and Shaq was the most dominant player of his Era and a top 15 player ever. I have him as the 5th best center of all time, and only that low because of the legendary status of Wilt, Jabbar and Russell. I also have Hakeem ahead of him.

In reality, Shaq would offensively dominate each of those guys, although each of them is more well rounded than Shaq as well.

I put Hakeem in the four spot because I watched his 94 and 95 performances when I was in highschool and to this day, they were the best overall performances I have ever seen (Shaq in 2000 against the Nets was another).

So from a unstoppable, dominance stand point he could go number one all time... but I have him at five due to the more well rounded games of Jabbar, Wilt, Russell and Hakeem.

[wang4three]

David Robinson was the better player, Duncan had the better career.

[necya]

David Robinson was the better player, Duncan had the better career.

intelligent post.

the fact is 00's suck so much....
put Malone, ewing, robinson, Barkley in the 00's and they would have accomplished what TD did. don't misunderstand, Duncan is for me the best player of the decade and is with Malone and Barkley the best PF ever.

at the other hand, put duncan in the 90's and we would have face the reality like all those mamouth players....MJ so no rings.

this decade was horrible for the nba, comparing to the last 2 decades.

you are comparing a cheese (C) in ritz restaurant (90's) and a steak (PF) in a mcdonald (00's)

[Court Vision]

Too much emphasis gets placed on Duncan being considered the GOAT PF. Not by his fault, he played in a weak era. On top of that, PF has been a weak position and his biggest competitors Barkley (never won), Malone (never won), and Garnett (wasted his prime in Minnesota) never had the situation (team and era) that Tim has had.

I consider Robinson the slightly better player, but Duncan's legacy is far greater.

With the all time greats at center (Wilt, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, Jabbar, etc), he gets lost in the shuffle.

[Disaprine]

David Robinson was the better player, Duncan had the better career.
This

[ShaqAttack3234]

David Robinson was the better player, Duncan had the better career.

No he wasn't. Duncan had the better career because he was the better player. Robinson was better at driving to the basket, running the floor and he was a more prolific regular season scorer.

Duncan was the better post player, more clutch, a better leader and a better defensive anchor. Being a leader and being clutch are intangibles and they factor into who the better player is. That's why Duncan was better at carrying a team.

[wang4three]

No he wasn't. Duncan had the better career because he was the better player. Robinson was better at driving to the basket, running the floor and he was a more prolific regular season scorer.

Duncan was the better post player, more clutch, a better leader and a better defensive anchor. Being a leader and being clutch are intangibles and they factor into who the better player is. That's why Duncan was better at carrying a team.

I don't see how you can qualify Duncan as a better leader than Robinson. Do you have any quotes from teammates saying that? Both of them are quite outstanding, honorable individuals, but I don't think you have any sort of measuring stick that has shown Duncan to be a better leader.

David Robinson may have not had the career that Tim Duncan has had, but absolutely nothing I've seen has indicated that Tim could do something that David couldn't, or already hasn't shown. Score? No. Rebound? No. Block shots? No. Pass? No. In fact, he's better than Tim in some of those areas. Who cares if he's a better post scorer when David was scoring at an efficiently rate? A better defensive anchor? I certainly think not. There aren't a lot of things I've seen Tim Duncan do, that I've said, "David Robinson couldn't do that." However, there are plenty of things I've seen David do that I could say that Tim couldn't.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I don't see how you can qualify Duncan as a better leader than Robinson. Do you have any quotes from teammates saying that? Both of them are quite outstanding, honorable individuals, but I don't think you have any sort of measuring stick that has shown Duncan to be a better leader.

Avery Johnson even said he didn't think Robinson was a good leader in the mid 90's. Robinson's production consistently dropped in the playoffs, Duncan was the opposite. Robinson looked passive in the playoffs.


David Robinson may have not had the career that Tim Duncan has had, but absolutely nothing I've seen has indicated that Tim could do something that David couldn't, or already hasn't shown. Score? No. Rebound? No. Block shots? No. Pass? No. In fact, he's better than Tim in some of those areas. Who cares if he's a better post scorer when David was scoring at an efficiently rate? A better defensive anchor? I certainly think not. There aren't a lot of things I've seen Tim Duncan do, that I've said, "David Robinson couldn't do that." However, there are plenty of things I've seen David do that I could say that Tim couldn't.

Post scoring is important, it's the same reason why nobody would take the current Chris Bosh over Tim Duncan circa 2007 offensively.

Robinson was much more athletic than Duncan and as a result, he could do a lot of things that Duncan couldn't do. However, he didn't use his talent nearly as well as Duncan. I didn't see Robinson regularly just taking complete control of playoff games like Duncan did.

I certainly wouldn't call Robinson a better rebounder or passer either. Maybe equal, and Robinson could be called a better shot blocker, but I'll take Duncan to anchor a defense. He was consistent, blocked shots without leaving his feet, played tough post defense ect.

I can't imagine Duncan getting lit up for 35 ppg on 56% shooting like Robinson did in the '95 WCF.

And that isn't the only disastrous performance Robinson had in the playoffs. He averaged only 20/10 on 41% shooting vs Utah in a first round exit in '94, a series he had homecourt advantage in and in '96? Same thing except in the second round, he averaged just 19/9 on 48% shooting. Name series that bad from prime Tim Duncan.

Hell, in '98 when Robinson was still an elite player and a 20/10 guy, he shot under 40% vs Utah in the semi-finals.

Robinson seemed like a good guy and a classy guy, but that doesn't equate to how well you can lead a team. Vince Carter also seems like a nice guy, but who would you say is a better leader, Carter or Jordan? I think we all know the answer despite the fact that most people would agree that Carter seems like a much nicer and classier guy.

[rmt]

If I'm looking for 71 or 81 point games and highlight reels, give me Robinson or Kobe.

If I'm looking for some one to take over in deciding games of NBA Finals, give me Duncan.

If I'm looking for both, give me MJ.

Robinson didn't call Duncan "the man" and "my answer to prayer" during his HOF induction speech for nothing.

[AirJordan23]

I can't imagine Duncan getting lit up for 35 ppg on 56% shooting like Robinson did in the '95 WCF.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/amare-stoudemire.jpg

This man begs to differ.

[wang4three]

Avery Johnson even said he didn't think Robinson was a good leader in the mid 90's. Robinson's production consistently dropped in the playoffs, Duncan was the opposite. Robinson looked passive in the playoffs.

How did Avery contrast that to Duncan?



Post scoring is important, it's the same reason why nobody would take the current Chris Bosh over Tim Duncan circa 2007 offensively.

You're really going to compare a prime offensive David Robinson to Chris Bosh's prime? That's stupid. That's like me saying I'd take prime David Robinson over Al Jefferson, offensively. The two are not comparable.




I can't imagine Duncan getting lit up for 35 ppg on 56% shooting like Robinson did in the '95 WCF.

I can, cause Hakeem was better than the both of them.



And that isn't the only disastrous performance Robinson had in the playoffs. He averaged only 20/10 on 41% shooting vs Utah in a first round exit in '94, a series he had homecourt advantage in and in '96? Same thing except in the second round, he averaged just 19/9 on 48% shooting. Name series that bad from prime Tim Duncan.

2002 against the Lakers. Duncan shot 42%.



Robinson seemed like a good guy and a classy guy, but that doesn't equate to how well you can lead a team. Vince Carter also seems like a nice guy, but who would you say is a better leader, Carter or Jordan? I think we all know the answer despite the fact that most people would agree that Carter seems like a much nicer and classier guy.

Once again, you're taking lower level players and just using them in an irrelevant analogy. When has Vince Carter ever been on the level of David Robinson? Give me a ****ing break here. Vince Carter? Chris Bosh? Are you joking? And this is coming from a Net fan who liked Vince.

[Eldrunko247]

Robinson was the Tracy McGrady of centers.

[wang4three]

small correction.

Am I reading something wrong?

From the box scores it seems like Tim Duncan shot:

Game 1: 9-30
Game 2: 10-19
Game 3: 9-26
Game 4: 9-15
Game 5: 11-23

That's 48/113 or 42.48%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01/gamelog/2002/

[ShaqAttack3234]

How did Avery contrast that to Duncan?

Do you remember ANYONE questioning Duncan's leadership.


You're really going to compare a prime offensive David Robinson to Chris Bosh's prime? That's stupid. That's like me saying I'd take prime David Robinson over Al Jefferson, offensively. The two are not comparable.

Ok, better example, most choose Gasol over Bosh these days, now Bosh scores more, but Gasol is easily the better post player.


I can, cause Hakeem was better than the both of them.

As far as I remember, Hakeem didn't light anyone else up for 35 ppg, much less on 56% shooting with the exception of a 4 game series that he lost in the 80's.


2002 against the Lakers. Duncan shot 42%.

Yes, but look at his rebounding numbers and credit Shaq for his defense. Duncan went to work against Horry and Walker, but Shaq took away his post game and his length bothered Duncan's bank shot. And that's one series. A series the Spurs weren't even favored in.


Once again, you're taking lower level players and just using them in an irrelevant analogy. When has Vince Carter ever been on the level of David Robinson? Give me a ****ing break here. Vince Carter? Chris Bosh? Are you joking? And this is coming from a Net fan who liked Vince.

I'm not trying to compare either to Robinson, I'm saying, being a nice guy or a classy guy doesn't necessarily equate to good leadership on a basketball court. And the other example was that scoring more doesn't necessarily mean that scoring is better. Here's another example. Karl Malone routinely scored more than Olajuwon.

[Posterized]

Am I reading something wrong?

From the box scores it seems like Tim Duncan shot:

Game 1: 9-30
Game 2: 10-19
Game 3: 9-26
Game 4: 9-15
Game 5: 11-23

That's 48/113 or 42.48%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01/gamelog/2002/
No you're right, I did it wrong, I averaged his FG % from each game and it rounded up.

[wang4three]

Do you remember ANYONE questioning Duncan's leadership.

Hell, if you're really asking, I don't even remember Avery calling out David. And it must have not really been that bad since Avery played a part in David's retirement ceremony as well as David playing a part in Avery's retirement ceremony.



Ok, better example, most choose Gasol over Bosh these days, now Bosh scores more, but Gasol is easily the better post player.

Is it solely because Gasol is better post player that they're picking Bosh over Gasol? I think people are picking Gasol over Bosh because of the all around package, including passing, rebounding, and shot blocking. As scorers, I don't think many are saying one is that much better than the other.



As far as I remember, Hakeem didn't light anyone else up for 35 ppg, much less on 56% shooting with the exception of a 4 game series that he lost in the 80's.

I could go find it, but don't really have the time. Either way, the way that Hakeem played in that series, I don't think it would've matter if a prime Bill Russell was guarding him. He would've gotten his, regardless.



Yes, but look at his rebounding numbers and credit Shaq for his defense. Duncan went to work against Horry and Walker, but Shaq took away his post game and his length bothered Duncan's bank shot. And that's one series. A series the Spurs weren't even favored in.

He won the MVP that year and statistically, it was his best year of his career. It wouldn't have been a stretch of the Spurs were to beat the Lakers that series.



I'm not trying to compare either to Robinson, I'm saying, being a nice guy or a classy guy doesn't necessarily equate to good leadership on a basketball court.

Tim Duncan is a nice guy. As far as I've watched him play, he seems nice and classy. He's certainly not on Jordan or Shaq's level of ego. You're picking out a trait that David and Tim BOTH share.

[Big#50]

Is this shit serious? Tim Duncan is better than anyone not named Jordan and Jabbar. Tim is a better defender than DROB. Blocks aren't everything. Duncan could have beaten Jordan as well. The Suns, Sonics, Jazz took him to six games and he needed game winners against the Suns and Jazz to not go to game 7. Duncan gets no respect and that's fine. Real fans of the NBA know what's up. Most have him anywhere from 9 to 6 in their top ten. I have him at 3. Duncan would have been great in any era. You guys act like Duncan didn't. Accomplish anythinjg. Duncan would have sick numbers in the sorry ass 80's and 90's. Duncan is a once in a lifetime player. Robinson was too nice to get tough when the going got rough. Not Duncan he'd post 27 and 18 on your ass if you did that.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hell, if you're really asking, I don't even remember Avery calling out David. And it must have not really been that bad since Avery played a part in David's retirement ceremony as well as David playing a part in Avery's retirement ceremony.

I don't think Avery disliked Robinson, but he saw what many fans saw, and that is that Robinson wasn't comfortable being the leader on a team. I could see him winning a title as the best player in a role like Garnett's on the 2008 Celtics where he didn't have to be the undisputed number 1 option offensively, but I just don't think he had it in him to carry the load in the playoffs like Duncan did in '03.


Is it solely because Gasol is better post player that they're picking Bosh over Gasol? I think people are picking Gasol over Bosh because of the all around package, including passing, rebounding, and shot blocking. As scorers, I don't think many are saying one is that much better than the other.

Well, that also helps prove my point, the fact that you say they're about equal as scorers despite Bosh consistently scoring more.


I could go find it, but don't really have the time. Either way, the way that Hakeem played in that series, I don't think it would've matter if a prime Bill Russell was guarding him. He would've gotten his, regardless.

Maybe, but to that degree? Robinson just didn't look like he was fighting in that series.


He won the MVP that year and statistically, it was his best year of his career. It wouldn't have been a stretch of the Spurs were to beat the Lakers that series.

Ehhh, Robinson barely played in that series(and yes I do acknowledge Robinson as a very valuable role player in his later years) and the Shaq/Kobe duo would have been hard to beat considering Duncan had a rookie Tony Parker as his second option that series and he didn't even have the SG combo of Ginobili or a productive Stephen Jackson that he had the following year. That Spurs team really wasn't that good, they were in transition and I've always been impressed that Duncan made them as good as they were.


Tim Duncan is a nice guy. As far as I've watched him play, he seems nice and classy. He's certainly not on Jordan or Shaq's level of ego. You're picking out a trait that David and Tim BOTH share.

I never said that being a nice guy means you can't be a leader. What I said in response to your statement about how David was an outstanding and honorable individual, I said that really means very little as far as leading a team in the playoffs.

The difference was, Duncan's game rose in the playoffs while Robinson's dropped and Duncan had that killer instinct. Remember his 37/16 close out game vs the Lakers or his 21/20/10/8 close out game vs the Nets? I mean after losing game 1 of the '03 WCF(with a 40/15/7 game BTW) and losing homecourt advantage, he responded with a 32/15/5/3 game, a 34/24/6/6 game and a 21/20/7/4 game to not only get HCA back, but put Dallas in a 3-1 hole.

[thesnowman22]

There is no comparison here. From a natural talent standpoint, Robinson was great. But NOONE in their right mind who knows ANYTHING about the NBA should put Robinson above Duncan. Not even CLOSE. His lack of flair punishes him all the time, but Duncan is one of the greatest ever.

[SinJackal]

During the time Duncan actually played in the league, PF was by far the most stacked competition compared to center.

You apparently didn't read what you were quoting when you replied. The list for GOAT centers is much more stacked competition than PF. Does that mean every GOAT PF plays right now? No. What were you even thinking when you posted that?



No he wasn't. Duncan had the better career because he was the better player. Robinson was better at driving to the basket, running the floor and he was a more prolific regular season scorer.

Duncan was the better post player, more clutch, a better leader and a better defensive anchor. Being a leader and being clutch are intangibles and they factor into who the better player is. That's why Duncan was better at carrying a team.

Duncan was not a better leader, nor was he a better defensive anchor. Robinson is easily one of the best defensive players ever. The Spurs' team defense in the Duncan era was superior to the Robinson era.



Avery Johnson even said he didn't think Robinson was a good leader in the mid 90's. Robinson's production consistently dropped in the playoffs, Duncan was the opposite. Robinson looked passive in the playoffs.



Post scoring is important, it's the same reason why nobody would take the current Chris Bosh over Tim Duncan circa 2007 offensively.

Robinson was much more athletic than Duncan and as a result, he could do a lot of things that Duncan couldn't do. However, he didn't use his talent nearly as well as Duncan. I didn't see Robinson regularly just taking complete control of playoff games like Duncan did.

I certainly wouldn't call Robinson a better rebounder or passer either. Maybe equal, and Robinson could be called a better shot blocker, but I'll take Duncan to anchor a defense. He was consistent, blocked shots without leaving his feet, played tough post defense ect.

I can't imagine Duncan getting lit up for 35 ppg on 56% shooting like Robinson did in the '95 WCF.

And that isn't the only disastrous performance Robinson had in the playoffs. He averaged only 20/10 on 41% shooting vs Utah in a first round exit in '94, a series he had homecourt advantage in and in '96? Same thing except in the second round, he averaged just 19/9 on 48% shooting. Name series that bad from prime Tim Duncan.

Hell, in '98 when Robinson was still an elite player and a 20/10 guy, he shot under 40% vs Utah in the semi-finals.

Robinson seemed like a good guy and a classy guy, but that doesn't equate to how well you can lead a team. Vince Carter also seems like a nice guy, but who would you say is a better leader, Carter or Jordan? I think we all know the answer despite the fact that most people would agree that Carter seems like a much nicer and classier guy.

Nearly everything you said in that post was wrong, assuming, or laughable.


Avery Johnson has never said David Robinson was a bad leader. Show us a video of this nonsense, or you're straight up lying. Avery's only said good things about him.

Did you seriously just compare CHRIS BOSH to DAVID ROBINSON? With such an insulting comparison, you're clearly showing your colors as a Robinson hater. That's like comparing Shaq to Shawn Bradley. Don't do it.

Also, Duncan would not have defended '95 Dream any better. He was unstoppable that year. He was nearly unstoppable the year before as well, when he carried his team of roleplayers to the finals, and won.

You cited two bad scoring series for Robinson, but both were against the same Jazz team. i.e., Karl Malone, Ostertag, etc. He didn't play that well against that team, so? Tim Duncan gets absolutely smashed by Amar'e year after year. He's been smashed more times than Robinson has, and by inferior players. Duncan can't stop Carlos Boozer either, and does not play well against, surprise, the same team, the Jazz, even during his last playoff run.

So spare me your bs about how Robinson played only above average against the Jazz, and only above his career standards on offense while not being able to properly stop all of Hakeem's low post moves at an acceptable enough level. Duncan has had just as many, if not even more shady playoff experiences, as I have already pointed out.


Also, in perhaps an even more insulting comparison than the Chris Bosh one, you even claim Vince Carter is a classier guy than David Robinson. This proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that you don't know shit about DRob besides basketball reference stats.

David Robinson is arguably the classiest guy in the history of the NBA. He even has an award named after him because of it.

Give everyone here a break with your ignorant Robinson bashing. You've been replying to everyone's posts bashing Robinson day after day. Wtf is your problem with him exactly?

[rmt]

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/amare-stoudemire.jpg

This man begs to differ.

I believe that the Spurs' strategy back then was cover the 3 point line, hound Nash and let Amare have his. Pretty successful plan. They weren't going to risk Duncan getting in foul trouble trying to guard Amare as Duncan still got his on the other side of the court. That's why they eventually got Shaq to try to guard Duncan.

[necya]

how can you rate TD over Robinson defensively???

i agree with wang4three.

but how many games have you seen of the spurs between 90-95? he just has led his team each year with good records, without a great support, like a true leader.

and what about the answer in game 3 and 4 of the WCF in 95? everyone saw the rockets finishing the job and the spurs did respond. unfortunately, Hakeem was unstoppable in this series.

Duncan is the reason i still watch nba during the 00's but don't say he is a better player than the Admiral. he has titles because of the different era, don't forget that.

[Dave_520]

I find it a bit of an oxymoron to say Robinson was a better player but Duncan had a better career. What I think is safer to say is Robinson had a higher ceiling and more natural athleticism but Duncan fulfilled his potential and proved to be a better basketball player, especially during the playoffs.

Whether Robinson could have won a title with a different team we will never know. It doesnt mean Rob wasnt a leader, it just means he wasnt good enough and his team wasnt good enough at the time. He proved to be, much like Garnett, a perfect fit for the second option on an elite team. Nothing in the world wrong with that.

[magnax1]

Prime vs. Prime? They're pretty much equal. In the regular season Robinson was on another level, though his played dropped off a bit and Duncans picked up a bit so that in the playoffs they were pretty much equal on offense and Robinson was probably still a bit better on defender. Though for his whole career, I'd take Duncan pretty easily. He had a much longer prime then Robinson and more productive years.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan was not a better leader, nor was he a better defensive anchor. Robinson is easily one of the best defensive players ever. The Spurs' team defense in the Duncan era was superior to the Robinson era.

You're a ****ing moron. Look at '94-'96, Robinson's 3 year peak. He was knocked out of the playoffs each year and was well below his standard in each of those series.



Nearly everything you said in that post was wrong, assuming, or laughable.

Nope, a laughable statement would be disputing that Duncan was a superior leader.



Avery Johnson has never said David Robinson was a bad leader. Show us a video of this nonsense, or you're straight up lying. Avery's only said good things about him.

I'm not lying asshole, others have mentioned the quote as well, I believe it was in '95 or '96.


Did you seriously just compare CHRIS BOSH to DAVID ROBINSON? With such an insulting comparison, you're clearly showing your colors as a Robinson hater. That's like comparing Shaq to Shawn Bradley. Don't do it.


Can you ****ing read?!


I'm not trying to compare either to Robinson


Also, Duncan would not have defended '95 Dream any better. He was unstoppable that year. He was nearly unstoppable the year before as well, when he carried his team of roleplayers to the finals, and won.

Then why is that every team in the playoffs defended Olajuwon better than Robinson did? Shaq did a much better job guarding Olajuwon and he wasn't considered as good defensively as Robinson or Duncan for that matter.


You cited two bad scoring series for Robinson, but both were against the same Jazz team. i.e., Karl Malone, Ostertag, etc. He didn't play that well against that team, so? Tim Duncan gets absolutely smashed by Amar'e year after year. He's been smashed more times than Robinson has, and by inferior players. Duncan can't stop Carlos Boozer either, and does not play well against, surprise, the same team, the Jazz, even during his last playoff run.

Duncan won that series vs Boozer, if we're talking about series they won as negatives. Here's an embarrassing one from Robinson's prime.

1995 1st round- 19 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.3 apg, 1.3 bpg, 42.9 FG%

Yet I didn't bring that up before because the Spurs won the series. And was Duncan embarrassed on both ends like this?

Hakeem Olajuwon- 35.3 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4.2 to, 4.1 bpg, 1.3 spg, 56 FG%
David Robinson- 23.8 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 4.5 to, 2.2 bpg, 1.5 spg, 44.7 FG%

Look at their regular season numbers, they were almost identical. Yet in the playoffs, Robinson's points dropped by 4 ppg, his shooting % plummeted, he was outrebounded, his assists dropped, his turnovers went way up.....



So spare me your bs about how Robinson played only above average against the Jazz, and only above his career standards on offense while not being able to properly stop all of Hakeem's low post moves at an acceptable enough level. Duncan has had just as many, if not even more shady playoff experiences, as I have already pointed out.

:roll: Did Duncan lose in the 1st round in his prime? Much less twice? And Robinson hasn't had the high points that Duncan has had in the playoffs. Did Robinson even make it to the finals as the franchise player? Much less win 4?


Also, in perhaps an even more insulting comparison than the Chris Bosh one, you even claim Vince Carter is a classier guy than David Robinson. This proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that you don't know shit about DRob besides basketball reference stats.

This proves to me that you lack basic reading comprehension. When did I say Carter was classier? Never, I said, like Robinson, he seems like a nice and classy guy, but that doesn't mean he's a good leader.


Give everyone here a break with your ignorant Robinson bashing. You've been replying to everyone's posts bashing Robinson day after day. Wtf is your problem with him exactly?

I have no problems with Robinson personally, however I do have problems with asinine statements such as "Robinson was as good of a leader as Duncan".

You got any more crap for me to disprove, I'll be happy to do it, it's not difficult.

[KingBeasley08]

My first post in this forum, both are/were great players but I think that Duncan was a better team player. He raised his game during the post season many times (almost had that quadruple double). However, Robinson was a beast when he played.

[Rake2204]

I intentionally bypassed all the inevitable back and forth going on (I know, it's a message board, that's what you're supposed to do) but just off of who I preferred to watch play the most: David Robinson. He's my favorite player of all-time. He's actually one of my favorite people of all-time. My dad was my #1 role model but somehow, David was right behind. What a great guy he seems to be.

I also like Tim, but nothing like David.

[Semi]

duncan all day

[necya]

Duncan won that series vs Boozer, if we're talking about series they won as negatives. Here's an embarrassing one from Robinson's prime.

1995 1st round- 19 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.3 apg, 1.3 bpg, 42.9 FG%

Yet I didn't bring that up before because the Spurs won the series. And was Duncan embarrassed on both ends like this?

Hakeem Olajuwon- 35.3 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 5 apg, 4.2 to, 4.1 bpg, 1.3 spg, 56 FG%
David Robinson- 23.8 ppg, 11.3 rpg, 2.7 apg, 4.5 to, 2.2 bpg, 1.5 spg, 44.7 FG%

Look at their regular season numbers, they were almost identical. Yet in the playoffs, Robinson's points dropped by 4 ppg, his shooting % plummeted, he was outrebounded, his assists dropped, his turnovers went way up.....


you are just unfair.
first round series against the nuggets. he played against Mutombo and all centers in this period used to struggle a bit when they played the Mont.

Do you think Ewing escape of this statement? of course not, any of robinson, olajuwon, o'neal or ewing average more than 22pts againt mutombo. and ewing struggled the most.

and what did ewing do against cartwright in ECR1 in 91 ?? why you don't talk out this series? Ewing : 17pts 10rbd 40%FG

it happens to the greatest to struggle, olajuwon in 90, 91.

and stop comparing playoffs performances of 90's and 00's. put robinson in the 00's with parker ginobili horry and bowen and they will grab the same amount of championships.

put duncan with the spurs of the 90's and the spurs would have the same number of rings : 0

i'm consterned by your bad faith, and i'm obliged to recal the bad times of those players.
they, ewing-rob-td, all were great players but every great players of the 90's didn't have the chance to play in the weak 00's. that's all.

[JtotheIzzo]

Are you seriously asking this question? Duncan is the reason Robinson has rings.

why was this thread not ended after this post...f*cking kids:smh:

[ShaqAttack3234]

you are just unfair.
first round series against the nuggets. he played against Mutombo and all centers in this period used to struggle a bit when they played the Mont.

Do you think Ewing escape of this statement? of course not, any of robinson, olajuwon, o'neal or ewing average more than 22pts againt mutombo. and ewing struggled the most.

Shaq averaged 33/16/5/3 on 57% shooting vs Mutombo and a very good defensive team in the 2001 finals.


and what did ewing do against cartwright in ECR1 in 91 ?? why you don't talk out this series? Ewing : 17pts 10rbd 40%FG

it happens to the greatest to struggle, olajuwon in 90, 91.

Isn't this a Robinson vs Duncan thread?


and stop comparing playoffs performances of 90's and 00's. put robinson in the 00's with parker ginobili horry and bowen and they will grab the same amount of championships.

put duncan with the spurs of the 90's and the spurs would have the same number of rings : 0

How the hell do you know that? The fact is, Duncan proved himself as a champion as the franchise player, Robinson did not. Duncan's production rose in the playoffs, Robinson's dropped. Duncan's 2003 cast was not better than Robinson's 1995 or 1996 casts.


i'm consterned by your bad faith, and i'm obliged to recal the bad times of those players.
they, ewing-rob-td, all were great players but every great players of the 90's didn't have the chance to play in the weak 00's. that's all.
:rolleyes:

[Anaximandro1]

David Robinson was the better player, Duncan had the better career.
:hammerhead: Tim had the better career because he was the better player.

Playoffs

Duncan 170 Games 23.0 pts (50.2%),12.4 rb,3.5 ast,2.6 blk

Robinson 123 Games 18.1 pts (47.9%),10.6 rb,2.3 ast,2.5 blk

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html


Tim Duncan destroying the Suns in his first NBA playoffs game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_fD0QA5g1E

[necya]

:hammerhead: Tim had the better career because he was the better player.

Playoffs

Duncan 170 Games 23.0 pts (50.2%),12.4 rb,3.5 ast,2.6 blk

Robinson 123 Games 18.1 pts (47.9%),10.6 rb,2.3 ast,2.5 blk

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html


Tim Duncan destroying the Suns in his first NBA playoffs game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_fD0QA5g1E

are you aware of being an asshole?

take the players at the same age
Robinson : 21,8ppg 11,7rbd 2,8ast 2,5blk
counting after 97 he had a major back injury (his stats in playoffs were better than duncan) and he faced better teams.

Rob had also a near quadruple double game :
1993 WCR1 G4 : 20pts 17rbd 11ast 7blk

even if those kind of things don't show who is better...