Is Tim Duncan the most overrated player of this decade?

[heyhey]

Just browsing some of those top player lists in th other threads. many people claim that Duncan is the number 1 player of the 2000s and it's not even a discusssion. I just don't get that. Duncan has never dominated statistically on the level of a Shaq, Kobe or Lebron. Head to head he has more often than not came up small against Kobe. people claim that he's the consummate winner and laud him for his consistency. But somehow forget that everytime he wins he's had a STACKED team.

in 1999 and 2003, he's played with top 12 BIG MAN in history DAVID RObinson. and Robinson was still dominant in 1999. 2003 team had the greatest collection of role players in a championship team in a long time. Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu, etc.

Since 2003, he's played with top 5 PG in the league Tony Parker and GREATEST euro player of all time Manu Ginobli. Yet he never catches any flack for having great help.

Tim Duncan is 3rd best player of this decade top 3 goes like this

Kobe Bryant
Shquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan

The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:

[DoubleTech]

how do call a guy the most overrated player of the decade AND a top 3 player of the decade in the same post?


and I guess Kobe didn't have any help winning his titles... he did it all by himself.

(shaq had the least amount of help.. obviously because he's the MDE)

[Andrei89]

Stupid post

/end thread

[ginobli2311]

NO.....in fact, duncan still might be slightly under-rated. he's the best two way player ever behind MJ in my opinion.

[GregOstertag]

be honest, OP. the reason you created this thread was to pimp Kobe as the #1 player of this decade.

[Yung D-Will]

Go watch Prime Duncan


Then Go Kill yourself

Then Come Back to Life


And Delete this thread

[heyhey]

NO.....in fact, duncan still might be slightly under-rated. he's the best two way player ever behind MJ in my opinion.

alright now you have become a caricature of yourself. Tim Duncan's defense is overrated, the dude gets shatted on by Amare Stoudmare of all people.

[Allstar24]

:oldlol:

Tim Duncan is overrated from what angle??

The best players of the decade are: 1. Duncan 2. Kobe 3. Shaq/KG

[mamba24]

alright now you have become a caricature of yourself. Tim Duncan's defense is overrated, the dude gets shatted on by Amare Stoudmare of all people.

why the grief for all the oldies, id like to see how the current crop of players who do SPEED do when they are in their 30's.

[Yung D-Will]

alright now you have become a caricature of yourself. Tim Duncan's defense is overrated, the dude gets shatted on by Amare Stoudmare of all people.
Lol Tim Duncan aka Most blocks in a playoff series all time, AKA One of the best help defenders of all time Aka One of the best overall defenders of all time.

[ginobli2311]

alright now you have become a caricature of yourself. Tim Duncan's defense is overrated, the dude gets shatted on by Amare Stoudmare of all people.

tim duncan has the 2nd best defensive rating of all time. he's extremely versatile as a defender. he can guard centers and forwards. he can show on the high pick and roll and recover to protect the paint. he's one of the best defensive rebounders ever and he protects the rim very well without fouling. he's easily one of the 10 best defenders of all time dude. easily.....

[Yung D-Will]

A.K.A Tied the record for most blocks in a playoff game

[boozehound]

yeah, clearly not. hey hey with another brilliant thread.

[Yung D-Will]

Wait's for madmax1 to come in telling us how Kg is better then Duncan

And how Kg should be ranked higher all time

[boozehound]

Am i the only one who thinks of the gay guy on family guy (oh Noes) when I see this poster? Hey Hey girlfriend!

[heyhey]

tim duncan has the 2nd best defensive rating of all time.
:roll: :roll: :roll: Come on rook, you can't use arbitrary numbers such as defensive rating to substantiate your point. Why don't you go to youtube and start educating yourself bout the game brah.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuBQ0ARo0Eo

I'll take Shaq's physicality over Duncan's versatility any day of the week. Versatile is just another way of saying he's above average in all respects. Shaq was dominant defender in the post. He changed the way offensive plays were drawn up. You can't say that bout Duncan brah.

[ginobli2311]

:roll: :roll: :roll: Come on rook, you can't use arbitrary numbers such as defensive rating to substantiate your point. Why don't you go to youtube and start educating yourself bout the game brah.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuBQ0ARo0Eo

I'll take Shaq's physicality over Duncan's versatility any day of the week. Versatile is just another way of saying he's above average in all respects. Shaq was dominant defender in the post. He changed the way offensive plays were drawn up. You can't say that bout Duncan brah.

sorry dude. you won't get any support on here. duncan was infinitely better on defense than shaq.

[jlauber]

Players like Russell, Magic, and Duncan get short-changed because of their stats (particularly their scoring stats.) They deserve to be ranked more because of their rings and overall W-L record. How many losing teams has Duncan played on?

[JtotheIzzo]

Duncan is now OVER-rated.

ISH...just when you think it couldn't get worse.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Horrible post, I was going to make a thread about how underrated Duncan gets. From the moment Duncan entered the league until 2008 which spans over 10 seasons, every year you could expect 55-60 wins and a good playoff run. He's one of the best playoff performers of all time.

Duncan was just a monster in the 2003 playoffs, punishing power forwards in the post, taking center soff the dribble, making great passes, blocking shots left and right without leaving his feet for fakes, dominating on the boards, running the floor, hitting straight away 15-18 footers or his patented 12-15 foot bank shots as well as a veriety of turnaround shots and fakes in the post.

I also don't see why people think his stats aren't that impressive.

2002- 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg, 50.8 FG%, 79.9 FT% on a team that averaged just 90 possessions per game.

To put that in perspective, he was 2nd in rebounding, 4th in scoring, 4th in blocks and 9th in FG%. While carrying an unimpressive cast to 58 wins.

In 2003 he had a similar season, 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg, 51.3 FG%, 71 FT% and in the playoffs, 24.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 5.3 apg, 3.3 bpg 52.9 FG% and in the finals, he averaged 24/17/5/5.

Duncan's 2003 playoff run was one of the best of all time.

[jlauber]

Duncan is now OVER-rated.

ISH...just when you think it couldn't get worse.

It WILL get worse, too. 10-20 years from now, posters will claim that THEIR current star, John Smith-Jones would have KILLED Duncan had they played H2H. Most posters here believe that the WNBA players of today would rout the NBA All-Stars of the 60's.

[mamba24]

Wait's for madmax1 to come in telling us how Kg is better then Duncan

And how Kg should be ranked higher all time

The only thing KG is better at compared to Duncan is getting on all Fours and Barking...Duncan lacks that classy bit.

[Yung D-Will]

The only thing KG is better at compared to Duncan is getting on all Fours and Barking...Duncan lacks that classy bit.
Don't forget jumpshooting lol

[crisoner]

Ummmm h3ll no.

How is the greatest power forward that ever played overrated? Give Duncan his just dues. I bet if he played in NY or LA this would not be a debate.

[GregOstertag]

It's funny how as soon as Tim Duncan loses a step on defense and has "only" a 50 win year he's become "the most overrated player of the decade". :hammerhead:

[krismas1211]

lol at calling Manu the greates Euro player of all time

[gpfanz]

Tim Duncan

The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:

Heard of KoMe???

[Kellogs4toniee]

alright now you have become a caricature of yourself. Tim Duncan's defense is overrated, the dude gets shatted on by Amare Stoudmare of all people.

http://rlv.zcache.com/dont_feed_the_troll_sticker-p217202502037330062qjcl_400.jpg

[Harison]

Welcome to ignore, mr. troll OP. :banghead:

[AirJordan&Magic]

:wtf:

[Horatio33]

Go watch Prime Duncan


Then Go Kill yourself

Then Come Back to Life


And Delete this thread

Then kill yourself again.

[Yung D-Will]

Then kill yourself again.
thanks i forgot

[NBASTATMAN]

NO.....in fact, duncan still might be slightly under-rated. he's the best two way player ever behind MJ in my opinion.


I take Hakeem over Duncan but Duncan may be the third best two way player since MJ... I would take Kareem over all of them on the all time list..

[heyhey]

thanks i forgot

why are you two wishing for my death over a discussion of basketball players? Listen to some Marley brah, ONE LOVE.:applause: :rockon: :bowdown:

[Yung D-Will]

why are you two wishing for my death over a discussion of basketball players? Listen to some Marley brah, ONE LOVE.:applause: :rockon: :bowdown:

You're saying a top 10 player of all time who's accomplished more then 95% of the players ever to play the game is overrated.

[heyhey]

You're saying a top 10 player of all time who's accomplished more then 95% of the players ever to play the game is overrated.

overrated simply means rated above what one should be rated. It's all relative. Kobe Bryant is overrated if people are saying he's on par with MJ. But he's still better than 95% of the world yes. but if people are saying he's better than MJ he's overrated.

Tim Duncan is the top 10 plaer of all time yes, but when people say that it's not an argument that he's better than Kobe and Shaq from 2000-2009 then he's overrated because its highly contestable.

Here, I just disagreed with you without wishing bad fate upon you.

http://lyricsmusic.name/img/posters/160/51245.jpg

[GOBB]

Horrible post, I was going to make a thread about how underrated Duncan gets. From the moment Duncan entered the league until 2008 which spans over 10 seasons, every year you could expect 55-60 wins and a good playoff run. He's one of the best playoff performers of all time.

Duncan was just a monster in the 2003 playoffs, punishing power forwards in the post, taking center soff the dribble, making great passes, blocking shots left and right without leaving his feet for fakes, dominating on the boards, running the floor, hitting straight away 15-18 footers or his patented 12-15 foot bank shots as well as a veriety of turnaround shots and fakes in the post.

I also don't see why people think his stats aren't that impressive.

2002- 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg, 50.8 FG%, 79.9 FT% on a team that averaged just 90 possessions per game.

To put that in perspective, he was 2nd in rebounding, 4th in scoring, 4th in blocks and 9th in FG%. While carrying an unimpressive cast to 58 wins.

In 2003 he had a similar season, 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg, 51.3 FG%, 71 FT% and in the playoffs, 24.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 5.3 apg, 3.3 bpg 52.9 FG% and in the finals, he averaged 24/17/5/5.

Duncan's 2003 playoff run was one of the best of all time.

Seriously you need to make that thread if it wasnt already made. I'm sure its been made in the past by someone (I'd have to do a search). But I think you do good jobs when it comes to the details of it all.

His passing ability was always impressive to me. It often goes unnoticed. Playoff stats in 2003 playoffs you posted was 5.3apg. Do people realize how money that is?

[ukplayer4]

Seriously you need to make that thread if it wasnt already made. I'm sure its been made in the past by someone (I'd have to do a search). But I think you do good jobs when it comes to the details of it all.

His passing ability was always impressive to me. It often goes unnoticed. Playoff stats in 2003 playoffs you posted was 5.3apg. Do people realize how money that is?



come on man you know that thread has been made every year since 04- as soon as the playoffs come around and the kids see his box scores go from 20/11/3/3 in 30 mpg to 26/14/4/3 in 37 mpg that thread gets made, regular like clock work every year for the past 6. thats because the same kids have usually made 65-80 threads through the regular season pointing out how duncan has fallen off and is declining and how the spurs will never contend again.

[The_Yearning]

Go watch Prime Duncan


Then Go Kill yourself

Then Come Back to Life


And Delete this thread

First time I'm ever agreeing with this guy.

BANG!

[jlauber]

I am amazed at some topics here.

Duncan being over-rated? I don't think I have ever read anyone here saying that he was the greatest player ever. That would be about the only time that I might argue with his place in NBA history. But he is certainly in the conversation of top-10, and maybe even top-5.

Of course his resume speaks volumes about what kind of a player he REALLY was. I don't think he is losing sleep over a few opinions on this forum.

[BlueandGold]

One of the few players to win rookie of the year, Finals MVP and be voted in all-nba defensive 1st team and all-nba 1st team in the same season. 3 NBA Finals MVPs, 2 league MVPs, voted in 13 all-defensive teams and 13 all-NBA teams.

[jlauber]

One of the few players to win rookie of the year, Finals MVP and be voted in all-nba defensive 1st team and all-nba 1st team in the same season. 3 NBA Finals MVPs, 2 league MVPs, voted in 13 all-defensive teams and 13 all-NBA teams.

EXACTLY! If that is being over-rated, then I would think that 99% of the players who have ever played in the NBA would love to be called "over-rated."

[White Chocolate]

I don't recall Duncan ever being overrated. Even when he was winning titles, people were putting Garnett over him.

[rmt]

Head to head he has more often than not came up small against Kobe. people claim that he's the consummate winner and laud him for his consistency. But somehow forget that everytime he wins he's had a STACKED team.

Those who claim that Duncan has come up short against Kobe conveniently forget that from 2005 until LAL was gift-wrapped Gasol, LAL couldn't even make it far enough to play the Spurs and got repeatedly knocked out by PHX. Spurs would have dominated LAL in those years.


in 1999 and 2003, he's played with top 12 BIG MAN in history DAVID RObinson. and Robinson was still dominant in 1999. 2003 team had the greatest collection of role players in a championship team in a long time. Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu, etc.

So rookie Manu, 2nd year Parker (who repeatedly got benched for Speedy Claxton) and streaky SJax were the greatest collection of role players?


Since 2003, he's played with top 5 PG in the league Tony Parker and GREATEST euro player of all time Manu Ginobli. Yet he never catches any flack for having great help.

Parker was a #28 pick and Manu - #57. They improved and blossomed under Duncan, who didn't throw them under the bus. It's laughable that Kobe fans knock Duncan for having great help as if the MDE, top 7-8 player of all time and one of the best post players in the game today (in their primes) aren't great help.


Tim Duncan is 3rd best player of this decade top 3 goes like this

Kobe Bryant
Shquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan

The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:

No, Tim Duncan is the GOAT power forward who makes his team mates better. One wonders how much further up the GOAT list he would be playing in a market like LA with the MDE, a free-spending owner like Jerry Buss and under a coach like Phil Jackson instead of #28 and #57 picks and a stingy, "under luxury tax" owner like Holt in small market SA.

[Bigsmoke]

meh IMO, Timmy was the player of the decade.

[DwightHowardMVP]

Just browsing some of those top player lists in th other threads. many people claim that Duncan is the number 1 player of the 2000s and it's not even a discusssion. I just don't get that. Duncan has never dominated statistically on the level of a Shaq, Kobe or Lebron. Head to head he has more often than not came up small against Kobe. people claim that he's the consummate winner and laud him for his consistency. But somehow forget that everytime he wins he's had a STACKED team.

in 1999 and 2003, he's played with top 12 BIG MAN in history DAVID RObinson. and Robinson was still dominant in 1999. 2003 team had the greatest collection of role players in a championship team in a long time. Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu, etc.

Since 2003, he's played with top 5 PG in the league Tony Parker and GREATEST euro player of all time Manu Ginobli. Yet he never catches any flack for having great help.

Tim Duncan is 3rd best player of this decade top 3 goes like this

Kobe Bryant
Shquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan

The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:


Cant help but to agree. He is a top 15 player of all time. But he is overrated.

[Sound and Fury]

Come on, OP.

If we're going to look at the "Player of the Decade" for 2000-2010, we can pretty quickly narrow it down:

Shaq - last great season was 2004, still "pretty darn good" through 2006, not much from 2007 onward. Barely half the decade... doesn't get it done (he was a beast in the 2nd half of the '90s and the 1st half of the '00s but that doesn't get you player of the 2000-2010 decade). Shaq was better than Duncan in 2000-2003, and was pretty close in 2004 ("healing on company time" hurt his impact because he was out so much) but has *clearly* been worse than Duncan (and Kobe, and LeBron, and Wade, and a bunch of other guys) for 6 years now (2005-2010). That's over half the decade. Take "Shaq's best 10 years" and yes, he's more dominating than "Duncan's 10 best years." But that's not what we're doing.

LeBron, Wade - Kind of like Shaq in reverse. Not yet in the league during the early part of the decade.

This leaves us with, really, about 5 candidates:

Steve Nash - 2-time MVP in the decade, but didn't rise to "elite" status until about 2005 and still doesn't play much defense. Best shooter/passer of the decade? Maybe. But with no NBA Finals appearances, not the "best player."

Dirk Nowitzki - Won an MVP, made a finals appearance, but no rings. Darn good player, great shooter for a big man, but has not been able to lead a team to a title.

Kevin Garnett - Won an MVP, was in the "elite" player class from 2000 until 2009 (due to injuries). One championship ring (with Celtics), possibly two (we'll know after Game 7). The debate for "best PF of the decade" has gone back and forth between him and Duncan. Duncan has 3 rings this decade (and another in '99), though, so I give the edge to Duncan.

Kobe Bryant - Has made 7 NBA Finals appearances (4 with Shaq, 3 with Gasol), won 4 rings, possibly 5 (we'll know after Game 7), won an MVP, considered an "elite" player the entire decade, though sometimes a bad/selfish teammate (especially in 2005-2006).

Tim Duncan - Has made 3 NBA Finals appearances in the decade (made a fourth in '99), won 3 rings (4 total), won an MVP, considered and "elite" player the entire decade. An "elite" player the entire decade with the possible exception of slipping out of the "elite" to "really darn good" class the past year due to injuries.

As far as I'm concerned, the Player of the Decade is a contest between Kobe and Tim Duncan and, frankly, you can argue either side until you're blue in the face (Kobe's a better scorer and shooter and a better one-on-one defender since he could cover PGs, SGs, and SFs in his prime; Duncan is a better teammate, has better shot selection, could change a game defensively by intimidating a whole team in the middle with rebounding and shot-blocking).

Sorry, it's hard to call someone who is either the #1 or #2 player of the decade (the margin either way is razor-thin, and it's hard to directly compare Kobe's and Tim's skills directly because one is a wing player and the other is a pivot player, thus requiring completely different skill sets) overrated.

[JustinJDW]

Tim Duncan overrated? :wtf:

He has four Championships, three Finals MVP's and two Regular Season MVP's.
He won both a Championship and Finals MVP in his damn Sophmore Season. (Talk about a sophmore slump)
He has never missed the Playoffs.
He never had anything less than a 50-Win Season.
He has made the All-NBA Team and All-Defensive Team every single Season of his damn career.

Tim Duncan is the definition of consistency and a class act. Proven winner. And he doesn't stirr up shit in the locker and trash former teams like Shaq, and doesn't demand trades or be a problem in the locker room like Kobe use to be.

He is without a doubt the greatest Power Forward in NBA History. And he rarely ever gets talked about from anyone. How the **** is he overrated? Unless a thread gets created about him, his name gets mentioned like once a week on ISH.

Get real OP.

[Duncan21formvp]

Just browsing some of those top player lists in th other threads. many people claim that Duncan is the number 1 player of the 2000s and it's not even a discusssion. I just don't get that. Duncan has never dominated statistically on the level of a Shaq, Kobe or Lebron. Head to head he has more often than not came up small against Kobe. people claim that he's the consummate winner and laud him for his consistency. But somehow forget that everytime he wins he's had a STACKED team.

in 1999 and 2003, he's played with top 12 BIG MAN in history DAVID RObinson. and Robinson was still dominant in 1999. 2003 team had the greatest collection of role players in a championship team in a long time. Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu, etc.

Since 2003, he's played with top 5 PG in the league Tony Parker and GREATEST euro player of all time Manu Ginobli. Yet he never catches any flack for having great help.

Tim Duncan is 3rd best player of this decade top 3 goes like this

Kobe Bryant
Shquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan

The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:

The guy has 3 finals mvp's and 2 league mvp's. That is more than either Shaq or Kobe.

And the Spurs were a losing franchise before Duncan ever came. Kobe and Shaq had to go to an organization that won titles already in order to win.

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

I always felt that KG was over rated.
But, even now, KG is playing Gasol evenly.... and for some reason folks think Gasol is a premiere big man. So in KG's aging years, he is also a premiere big man.

[Dresta]

f*cking idiotic thread, seriously.

[magnax1]

He deserves most of the credit he gets. Hes not Dominant like Shaq was like some people make him out to be though.

[godofgods]

You are confusing Duncan with Kobe.

[jlauber]

He deserves most of the credit he gets. Hes not Dominant like Shaq was like some people make him out to be though.

Shaq at his PEAK is probably right there with MJ, Wilt, and Kareem at their PEAKs...maybe even the most dominant. And, his CAREER has been VERY under-rated here, as well. The man has played 18 seasons, the vast majority of which he has been among the top-5 players in the league, and probably top-3. He should have won more MVPs.

I think where Duncan has a slight edge, is in his all-around game, and his ability to elevate the play of his teammates. I wouldn't necessarily say that he has been better, longer...but IMHO, his team's have been slightly more consistent...which, I believe, is a reflection of his play. But, he was never the dominant player that Shaq was, at his peak.

I personally have Duncan at #6 and Shaq at #7, but I wouldn't have a problem switching either of them.

My problem, in many of these "all-time" lists, is those that rank Olajuwon in the top-10. I just can't see two rings, and three finals placing him in the top-10. Perhaps #10, but I just can't see him any higher.

And, yes, I realize that Chamberlain "only" has two rings, as well, but as I have said MANY times, he was within an eyelash of having as many as FIVE more (and a few points here-or-there in his final season, and he might have had six.) And, when you factor in that he essentially OWNS the NBA Record Book, there is simply no comparison between him and Olajuwon.

[MAC system]

:oldlol:

Tim Duncan is overrated from what angle??

The best players of the decade are: 1. Duncan 2. Kobe 3. Shaq/KG

Idiot.

1 Shaq
2 Duncan
3 Kobe



4 KG

[asdf1990]

lol, give me a prime duncan over kobe any day of the week. there is a reason ppl call him the greatest pf ever.

[Yung D-Will]

He deserves most of the credit he gets. Hes not Dominant like Shaq was like some people make him out to be though.
Again every time you post you show you never watched Prime Duncan. Prime Duncan was ungurdable period. You know screw Prime Duncan, Duncan in his rookie season was even ungurable.



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

Yes that's Duncan's first playoff game as a rookie.


And yes before you say it I know he's lucky and also he's just not dominant which is why he draws double teams in his rookie season on like every possesion yet still scores.


I don't get why I spend my time arguing with the guy who thought Duncan's best season was 2004

[Yung D-Will]

I know it hurts your inner Kg Homer. But please watch the vid you might learn
something about a top 10 player of all time

LOl everyone watch the vid

[Yung D-Will]

Shaq at his PEAK is probably right there with MJ, Wilt, and Kareem at their PEAKs...maybe even the most dominant. And, his CAREER has been VERY under-rated here, as well. The man has played 18 seasons, the vast majority of which he has been among the top-5 players in the league, and probably top-3. He should have won more MVPs.

I think where Duncan has a slight edge, is in his all-around game, and his ability to elevate the play of his teammates. I wouldn't necessarily say that he has been better, longer...but IMHO, his team's have been slightly more consistent...which, I believe, is a reflection of his play. But, he was never the dominant player that Shaq was, at his peak.

I personally have Duncan at #6 and Shaq at #7, but I wouldn't have a problem switching either of them.

My problem, in many of these "all-time" lists, is those that rank Olajuwon in the top-10. I just can't see two rings, and three finals placing him in the top-10. Perhaps #10, but I just can't see him any higher.

And, yes, I realize that Chamberlain "only" has two rings, as well, but as I have said MANY times, he was within an eyelash of having as many as FIVE more (and a few points here-or-there in his final season, and he might have had six.) And, when you factor in that he essentially OWNS the NBA Record Book, there is simply no comparison between him and Olajuwon.
Who would you rank higher then him? Cause I see don't see anyone besides

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Kareem
Wilt
Russel
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

That have an argument over him. Hakeem dominated in ways few players could just ask that to David Robinson. As a Jazz fan and knowing how frustrating Jordan's bulls were I guess I can sympathize with Hakeem considering the circumstances.

[jlauber]

Who would you rank higher then him? Cause I see don't see anyone besides

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Kareem
Wilt
Russel
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

That have an argument over him. Hakeem dominated in ways few players could just ask that to David Robinson. As a Jazz fan and knowing how frustrating Jordan's bulls were I guess I can sympathize with Hakeem considering the circumstances.


Well, Kobe has FOUR rings, SEVEN Finals, an MVP, a Finals MVP, a scoring title (35.4 ppg in a season in which the NBA averaged 97 ppg), was probably the best player of the entire decade of the 00's (can Hakeem claim he was the best player of the 90's?), and Kobe has had some HUGE games (81 point game, and I think an even greater game with his 62-61 win over the NBA Finalist Mavs)...

That would put Hakeem at #10. BUT, and I know that I will get ripped for this...I have Oscar at #9 (and ahead of Bird.) Why? I SAW him play. He was a combination of Jordan and Magic in the 60's. His only drawback was that he played with inferior rosters in a league that was dominated by the greatest dynasty in professional sports history.

IMHO...

Russell, Magic, Kareem, MJ, Wilt, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Oscar, and Bird...

JMHO of course. You really can't go wrong with adding Olajuwon to the bottom of that list, though.

[Yung D-Will]

Well, Kobe has FOUR rings, SEVEN Finals, an MVP, a Finals MVP, a scoring title (35.4 ppg in a season in which the NBA averaged 97 ppg), was probably the best player of the entire decade of the 00's (can Hakeem claim he was the best player of the 90's?), and Kobe has had some HUGE games (81 point game, and I think an even greater game with his 62-61 win over the NBA Finalist Mavs)...

That would put Hakeem at #10. BUT, and I know that I will get ripped for this...I have Oscar at #9 (and ahead of Bird.) Why? I SAW him play. He was a combination of Jordan and Magic in the 60's. His only drawback was that he played with inferior rosters in a league that was dominated by the greatest dynasty in professional sports history.

IMHO...

Russell, Magic, Kareem, MJ, Wilt, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Oscar, and Bird...

JMHO of course. You really can't go wrong with adding Olajuwon to the bottom of that list, though.

That just completely contradicted your reason for keeping Hakeem out the top 10. Since Oscar only has 1 ring
If you're talking about Talent wise Hakeem was the most skilled big man of all time. And on the defensive end he was dominant.

[R-Pattz]

I only think he's overrated when people compare him to KG...or maybe actually when people act like that's not even a comparison. They were both awesome.

[Yung D-Will]

I only think he's overrated when people compare him to KG...or maybe actually when people act like that's not even a comparison. They were both awesome.

If you're talking about comparing peak Garnett and Peak duncan it's a close comparison. But if you're talking about All time who's the greater player it's Duncan by far cause he has a resume that few can challenge.

[jlauber]

That just completely contradicted your reason for keeping Hakeem out the top 10. Since Oscar only has 1 ring
If you're talking about Talent wise Hakeem was the most skilled big man of all time. And on the defensive end he was dominant.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, of course, but in Oscar's case, I compare his talent to MJ's. Had MJ languished on teams like his '86 or '87 Bulls for most of his career, do you think he would still have won six rings? Because, aside from the last 3-4 years of his career, and when he was no longer a physical force, Oscar was every bit the player that MJ was.

AND, before someone jumps all over me for that comment, remember...I have Oscar at #9, and MJ at #4.

As for Hakeem being the most skilled...maybe so, but can you tell me that he was more dominant than Kareem, Shaq, and Wilt? AND, furthermore, where do we rank Russell, who was a 2-time college champion before Boston; he took Boston to a title in his first season; he won 10 more rings in the next 12 years; and after he retired, Boston plummetted to a 34-48 record. Clearly, Russell's impact goes beyond whatever stats that he put up.

[Yung D-Will]

I guess you've watched him more then me but I think you're really pushing it on the Oscar-Jordan comparisons. Right now I have Oscar at my 11 and Jordan at my 1

[jlauber]

I guess you've watched him more then me but I think you're really pushing it on the Oscar-Jordan comparisons. Right now I have Oscar at my 11 and Jordan at my 1

I wouldn't argue with Olajuwon over Oscar...to Olajuwon's credit, he DOMINATED in his two title runs. "Pace" is always held against the Big-O's accomplishments, but he nearly had FOUR Triple-Double seasons. He had SIX 30+ ppg seasons. SIX assist titles. And, take Wilt out of the 60's, and Oscar was the most efficient player of the decade.

In any case, if I drop Oscar out of the top-10, then it becomes a battle between Bird and Olajuwon for 9-10.

[PHILA]

Hakeem was the most skilled big man of all time.

http://i46.tinypic.com/xn6w5t.jpg

[Yung D-Will]

http://i46.tinypic.com/xn6w5t.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLKWSYtA7do

[jlauber]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLKWSYtA7do

Fatal9 might have something to say about a Kareem-Hakeem matchup...

[PHILA]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLKWSYtA7do

Olajuwon did indeed have the top footwork of any big man in league history, however Abdul-Jabbar and Walton were the most skilled offensively.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I wouldn't argue with Olajuwon over Oscar...to Olajuwon's credit, he DOMINATED in his two title runs. "Pace" is always held against the Big-O's accomplishments, but he nearly had FOUR Triple-Double seasons. He had SIX 30+ ppg seasons. SIX assist titles. And, take Wilt out of the 60's, and Oscar was the most efficient player of the decade.

In any case, if I drop Oscar out of the top-10, then it becomes a battle between Bird and Olajuwon for 9-10.

Basketball Reference had a great article about Oscar's '62 season.

Comparing Lebron's '08 season and Oscar's '62 season.

Now Lebron averaged 30 ppg, 7.9 rpg and 7.2 apg, but in 40.4 mpg. Oscar averaged 30.8 ppg, 12.5 rpg and 11.4 apg in 44.3 mpg. Oscar's Royals averaged 124.7 possessions per game while Lebron's Cavs averaged 90.2.

I don't agree with basketball reference's formula of just adjusting numbers by pace.

Give Oscar the same amount of FGA and points per shot at Lebron's 2008 pace, same percentage of his teams rebounds and assists in 40.4 mpg and he averages 20.3 ppg, 7.2 rpg and 7.7 apg on 15.1 FGA.

Anyone with a brain can tell that the 60's numbers are inflated to some extent when compared to more recent numbers and without them, I seriously doubt Oscar would make any top 10 lists or even be in the discussion.

And :roll: at Oscar above Olajuwon and Bird. Oscar didn't even make the finals until he played with Kareem and won his only title as a sidekick. Bird is a top 5 player, IMO.

[PHILA]

Oscar didn't even make the finals until he played with Kareem and won his only title as a sidekick. As for individual talent, you cannot name 10 players clearly ahead of O. He played for an incompetent, racist organization. I am sure you have also read William J. Simmons book noting that the Royals were moved to the East, where powerhouses like Boston & Philadelphia were. Not to neglect the Maurice Stokes tragedy.




'Running a team is a business for them. Well my business is playing. I'd performed as well as any player ever had, and the team needed to pay me accordingly. If they couldn't, then they shouldn't be in business.

I was told the matter wasn't up for negotiation.

If there was another league (this was a couple years before the ABA formed), I might have jumped to it as soon as I left the office. Instead, I did what I could do, which was to hold out. I didn't call them. They didn't call me. It was a cold war, and it stretched for days. For a week. Two. "Listen," one anonymous Royal told Sports Illustrated, "they can cut me 25% and give it to Oscar if it means bringing him back. That's how important he is to us." It's probably a good thing that the guy did not identify himself or repeat that sentence around the front office. They might have done it.

I called one of the reporters I knew in New York and said I wanted to be traded.

The way the Royals front office dealt with negotiations angered me more than their ridiculous contract offer. At this point in my career, I said I deserved respect, not ultimatums. They had refused to negotiate. They'd come to the table with a crazy, ridiculously low offer and refused to budge. They were the ones putting pressure on me. If I want to make any deal at all if I want to play ball and help the team, now I'm the one who has to cave. On top of this, management starting leaking untruths in the press, inflating my demands and publishing my salary. In one statement, management would say it was unethical to discuss contract negotiations in the press. In the next sentence, the same general manager would discuss the details of my existing contract.

I wasn't going to be bullied or blackmailed by the Royals management. I told the press I was negotiating a barnstorming tour. I said I was going to play locally, out on the West Coast, maybe in Florida. It wasn't true, but the Globetrotters were still around so there had to be some money made in touring. Why not find out?

Five days before the season opened, I came to contract terms with the Royals. I signed for about $70,000, various bonuses based on the gate, and the use of a car.

Two seasons later, we went through the entire standoff again.

That year I ended up missing training camp and the entire exhibition season. The press in Cincinnati started to heap abuse on me. Greedy was the word they chose.

When I sat down with Pepper Wilson that year, I said, "If I am greedy, I learned from you."

Management just looked at me. What could they possibly say? Who is greedier - the guy who wants to get paid what he is worth, or the team that indentures its players through perpetually unfair and rigged contracts and refuses to pay those players what they are worth?

The truth is, management in Cincinnati wasn't very effective. Before I ever came into the league, they had a chance to draft Bill Russell, and they chose not to do it. They whiffed on Willis Reed. They had the #1 draft picks for two straight years - Bob Boozer and Jerry Lucas. Those guys signed with other leagues; hell; the only reason they ever came to the Royals and made us a decent team was because the ABL folded and they had nowhere else to go. In 1967, when the ABA first formed, the first pick of their draft was a 6'9 forward named Mel Daniels. Mel ended up being one of the best players in the ABA. I believe he won their MVP award in the league's second year, and I know that his jersey was among the first to be retired by the Indiana Pacers. Well, guess what team he abandoned so he could join a league that, at that point, did not even exist?

Reporters always called Pepper Wilson one of the most popular general managers in the league. He was a nice man, but maybe all the other GM's loved him so much because he couldn't make a good draft pick, couldn't swing any shrewd trades. If I gave you a list of the player Cincinnati drafted while I was with them, you'd have to be a hard-core basketball fan to recognize any of them.

By contrast, the Celtics would reload and restock. Tom Heinsohn's gone? Here comes Don Nelson. Sam Jones is retiring? Here comes John Havlicek. Here comes Jo Jo White. Some of it was luck. One year Tom Wood was sitting next to Red Auerbach at a draft meeting in New York. Boston had won the title again, so naturally they had the bottom choice. Auerbach turned to Wood and said, "What am I going to do? This is a pretty frail group left. . . There's some kid from Ohio State here with a funny name - Havlicek - what do you hear about him?"

Wood told him, "All I know is that our scout claims he's a better ballplayer than Lucas, but we've already got Lucas. So it doesn't make any difference."

"Well," says Auerbach, "he's only 6'4 and awfully short for the pros. I guess I've got no other choice. What the hell. I'll take him."

So help me, that's how the Celtics stumbled onto Havlicek.

If you look at professional basketball and how a team builds a winning franchise, it's pretty simple. You have to restock your team with good draft picks, and you have to make key trades. The teams that don't, don't win. Flatly put, we could not do it. After we traded Bob Boozer, we traded other key players. We got rid of Tom Hawkins. Fought with Happy Hairston. Management kept bringing in guards to replace me when we needed forwards and centers. We got rid of one forward, Bob Love, because he had a speech impediment. The team thought he was dumb, so they traded him to Chicago. Of course he became a superstar there. We had one pick, Larry Chaney from Arkansas, who wasn't married. But we drafted Dave Zollner, who was married. Larry Chaney was a far better player, but we kept Dave, because he was white and was married. That's how the Cincinnati Royals did things.'

[bdreason]

He's the 2nd best player in the NBA in the past decade. Even if you called him #1, he wouldn't be the "most" overrated player of the decade.


The most overrated played of the decade is probably Kobe Bryant... but the media is mostly to blame for that.

[bdreason]

And Oscar is one of the most overrated players in the history of the NBA. I see many people puting him in the top 10 players of all time. :confusedshrug:

[jlauber]

Basketball Reference had a great article about Oscar's '62 season.

Comparing Lebron's '08 season and Oscar's '62 season.

Now Lebron averaged 30 ppg, 7.9 rpg and 7.2 apg, but in 40.4 mpg. Oscar averaged 30.8 ppg, 12.5 rpg and 11.4 apg in 44.3 mpg. Oscar's Royals averaged 124.7 possessions per game while Lebron's Cavs averaged 90.2.

I don't agree with basketball reference's formula of just adjusting numbers by pace.

Give Oscar the same amount of FGA and points per shot at Lebron's 2008 pace, same percentage of his teams rebounds and assists in 40.4 mpg and he averages 20.3 ppg, 7.2 rpg and 7.7 apg on 15.1 FGA.

Anyone with a brain can tell that the 60's numbers are inflated to some extent when compared to more recent numbers and without them, I seriously doubt Oscar would make any top 10 lists or even be in the discussion.

And :roll: at Oscar above Olajuwon and Bird. Oscar didn't even make the finals until he played with Kareem and won his only title as a sidekick. Bird is a top 5 player, IMO.

And of course, in a "perimeter-oriented" NBA, which, BTW, it was in the 60's (take a look at those players who averaged 30 ppg in the decade of the 60's...aside from Wilt, of course), Oscar would only be taking 15 shots per game, at his PEAK. AND, once again, in 2008, the NBA shot .457 from the field. In Oscar's 61-62 season, he shot .478 in a league that shot .426 (and in 62-63, he shot .518 in a league that shot .441.)

But, go ahead, and once again diminish the players of the 60's. And, carrying it even further, into the early 70's. Which would mean that Kareem, at his PEAK, would have been something around a 22-10 guy in the current NBA. And, of course, Wilt would be a 22-14 guy at his best, as well, right?

[heyhey]

And of course, in a "perimeter-oriented" NBA, which, BTW, it was in the 60's (take a look at those players who averaged 30 ppg in the decade of the 60's...aside from Wilt, of course), Oscar would only be taking 15 shots per game, at his PEAK. AND, once again, in 2008, the NBA shot .457 from the field. In Oscar's 61-62 season, he shot .478 in a league that shot .426 (and in 62-63, he shot .518 in a league that shot .441.)

But, go ahead, and once again diminish the players of the 60's. And, carrying it even further, into the early 70's. Which would mean that Kareem, at his PEAK, would have been something around a 22-10 guy in the current NBA. And, of course, Wilt would be a 22-14 guy at his best, as well, right?

:roll: :roll: brah come on son. Is this post for real? No one needs to diminish the 60s, anyone with eyes can tell you that NBA is a different animal than what it was in the 60s. The brand of basketball they played then is an oldman pick up game at the YMCA compared to basketball from 80s onward.
Lebron would probably averaged 40 PPG on 55% shooting if he was in the 60s, only reason he doesn't shoot 60% is cause of racism.

pics speak for themselves.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0906/nba.lakers.history.in.finals/images/elgin-baylor.jpg

you think fat stubby white man with thick thighs are playing guard in the NBA today?:roll: :confusedshrug:

[ShaqAttack3234]

As for individual talent, you cannot name 10 players clearly ahead of O. He played for an incompetent, racist organization. I am sure you have also read William J. Simmons book noting that the Royals were moved to the East, where powerhouses like Boston & Philadelphia were. Not to neglect the Maurice Stokes tragedy.

Individual talent? In no order, Olajuwon, Kobe, Jordan, Bird, Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Lebron and David Robinson off the top of my head.

All time rankings? Again in no order, Duncan, russell, Kobe, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kareem, Jordan, Wilt and Olajuwon are the top 10.


And of course, in a "perimeter-oriented" NBA, which, BTW, it was in the 60's (take a look at those players who averaged 30 ppg in the decade of the 60's...aside from Wilt, of course), Oscar would only be taking 15 shots per game, at his PEAK. AND, once again, in 2008, the NBA shot .457 from the field. In Oscar's 61-62 season, he shot .478 in a league that shot .426 (and in 62-63, he shot .518 in a league that shot .441.)

But, go ahead, and once again diminish the players of the 60's. And, carrying it even further, into the early 70's. Which would mean that Kareem, at his PEAK, would have been something around a 22-10 guy in the current NBA. And, of course, Wilt would be a 22-14 guy at his best, as well, right?

I'm not saying the adjustment is accurate, but that's the modern equivalent of Oscar's stats, 20/7/8 which is still a great statline. But I'd bet he be a lot closer to 20/7/8 than 31/12/11.

I think he'd average over 20 ppg as well with his size and mid-range game at the point guard position. I could see something like 25 ppg.

Kareem at his peak would be anywhere in the 27-32 ppg range, 13-14 rpg range, IMO. He did average almost 32 ppg on great efficiency and a normal 40 mpg in 1971.

And Wilt's '62 season by formula adjusted to 31/16/2 so I don't see your complaint there.

[jlauber]

:roll: :roll: brah come on son. Is this post for real? No one needs to diminish the 60s, anyone with eyes can tell you that NBA is a different animal than what it was in the 60s. The brand of basketball they played then is an oldman pick up game at the YMCA compared to basketball from 80s onward.
Lebron would probably averaged 40 PPG on 55% shooting if he was in the 60s, only reason he doesn't shoot 60% is cause of racism.

pics speak for themselves.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0906/nba.lakers.history.in.finals/images/elgin-baylor.jpg

you think fat stubby white man with thick thighs are playing guard in the NBA today?:roll: :confusedshrug:

Yep...Wilt would be killed by today's players. ALL of whom are taller, bigger, stronger, faster, and can jump higher. Hell, he wouldn't even make a YMCA team today.

Not sure where YOU rank Kareem, but players like Thurmond and Wilt held him to 45% shooting, while he was shooting nearly 60% for much of the decade of the 80's. Fatal9 would tell you that Kareem hung a 42 ppg average on Hakeem in a three-game matchup in the '86 season. Oh, BTW, a white 6-9 center by the name of Cowens did a pretty good job against Kareem in the Finals in '74. Players like Unseld, Hayes, Walton, Lanier...they at were at least competitive with him (not saying that they outplayed him, though.)

But, yep...NONE of those guys would be worth a damn today. Same with McAdoo, Dr. J, Maravich (who was white BTW), Hawkins, Barry (who was white BTW), Archibald, West (who was white BTW), and many others.

[jlauber]

Individual talent? In no order, Olajuwon, Kobe, Jordan, Bird, Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Wilt, Lebron and David Robinson off the top of my head.

All time rankings? Again in no order, Duncan, russell, Kobe, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kareem, Jordan, Wilt and Olajuwon are the top 10.



I'm not saying the adjustment is accurate, but that's the modern equivalent of Oscar's stats, 20/7/8 which is still a great statline. But I'd bet he be a lot closer to 20/7/8 than 31/12/11.

I think he'd average over 20 ppg as well with his size and mid-range game at the point guard position. I could see something like 25 ppg.

Kareem at his peak would be anywhere in the 27-32 ppg range, 13-14 rpg range, IMO. He did average almost 32 ppg on great efficiency and a normal 40 mpg in 1971.

And Wilt's '62 season by formula adjusted to 31/16/2 so I don't see your complaint there.

Well, once again, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

[heyhey]

Yep...Wilt would be killed by today's players. ALL of whom are taller, bigger, stronger, faster, and can jump higher. Hell, he wouldn't even make a YMCA team today.

Not sure where YOU rank Kareem, but players like Thurmond and Wilt held him to 45% shooting, while he was shooting nearly 60% for much of the decade of the 80's. Fatal9 would tell you that Kareem hung a 42 ppg average on Hakeem in a three-game matchup in the '86 season. Oh, BTW, a white 6-9 center by the name of Cowens did a pretty good job against Kareem in the Finals in '74. Players like Unseld, Hayes, Walton, Lanier...they at were at least competitive with him (not saying that they outplayed him, though.)

But, yep...NONE of those guys would be worth a damn today. Same with McAdoo, Dr. J, Maravich (who was white BTW), Hawkins, Barry (who was white BTW), Archibald, West (who was white BTW), and many others.

Wilt is the exception that proves the RULE. Wilt was a true NBA level athlete that played in an era of mostly unathletic players hence he dominated on a level never seen before and never has been seen since. so it reall doesn't help your point.

Wilt in the modern league would be some one like a David Robinson still TOP bigman but certainly not scoring 100 pts. Unless you believe that wilt can do that today then I'm just like :roll: :roll:

by the 70s more talented players were coming in, there was salary increase during that time as well as more progressive view on race. Hence players in the 70s are more akin to modern NBA players.

I'm actually very partial to 60s NBA cause I'm a long time lover of Converse sneakers brah.

[jlauber]

Wilt is the exception that proves the RULE. Wilt was a true NBA level athlete that played in an era of mostly unathletic players hence he dominated on a level never seen before and never has been seen since. so it reall doesn't help your point.

Wilt in the modern league would be some one like a David Robinson still TOP bigman but certainly not scoring 100 pts. Unless you believe that wilt can do that today then I'm just like :roll: :roll:

by the 70s more talented players were coming in, there was salary increase during that time as well as more progressive view on race. Hence players in the 70s are more akin to modern NBA players.

I'm actually very partial to 60s NBA cause I'm a long time lover of Converse sneakers brah.

Now you are willing to accept that the players of the 70's were "more akin" to the modern player. (Your original point was from the 80's.)

Well, I have watched these Finals, and everyone bragging up Rajon Rondo...

I remember Walt Frazier in the 60's and 70's, and I'm sorry, Frazier would shred Rondo. Why is that important? In the '70 Finals, most everyone recalls Frazier's sensational game seven (which was not good enough to get him a Finals MVP BTW)...but take a look at the first SIX games of that series. Jerry West absolutely owned Frazier. Furthermore, Frazier was one of several players who attempted to guard Maravich in the game in which the Pistol went off for 68 points.

I have long felt that 7-2 Artis Gilmore should be in the HOF. He was a great center in the 70's, and among the best in the 80's. Yet, take a look at the '69-70 NCAA championship game. 6-8 Sidney Wicks just crushed him.

BTW, how about Bill Walton's backup at UCLA (and, like Walton, he was white), leading the NBA in rebounding in the 79-80 season (in a league that had Moses Malone and Kareem.)

Rick Barry, who was white, led the NBA in scoring in the 66-67 season (in a season in which Wilt played.) He would average 31 ppg in the 74-75 season, and win the Finals MVP. John Havlicek (white BTW) was a star player for the Russell-led Celtics during the 60's. He also won the Finals MVP in the 73-74 season, and would have several 20+ ppg seasons in the 70's, including 29 ppg in one of them.

The point being, that there were many players from the 60's, and early 70's that were great for many seasons into the 70's (and even into the 80's.) Gus Johnson was doing aerial acrobatics in the 60's, followed by Dr. J in the 70's. Maravich was a good, but not great scorer in the early 70's, but by the mid-to-late 70s, he led the league in scoring at 31 ppg and then 27 ppg. McAdoo had a couple of the greatest seasons in NBA history in the mid-70's. Connie Hawkins was a great players in the 70's, but he missed the prime of his career in the 60's, because he was banned by the NBA.

West, Barry, Russell, Thurmond, Havlicek, Bellamy, Reed, Greer, Sam Jones, and yes, OSCAR, were all GREAT players in the 60's. Several of them were GREAT in the 70's.

These "era discussions" are interesting. At what point did the NBA become what it is today? Is Howard a better player today, than Shaq was in 2000? Is Howard a better player, today, than Olajuwon in '95? Is Howard a better player today, than Moses Malone in '83? Is Howard a better player today, than Kareem in '72? Is Howard a better player today, than Wilt in '67?

Is Kobe a better player today, than MJ in '92, or '87? Is he better than West in '69? Or Oscar in '63? Is Bosh better today, than Duncan in '03? Is he better than Malone in '97? Is he better than Barkley in '93? Is he better than McHale in '86? Better than Hayes in '77, or McAdoo in '74, or Lucas in '65?

Gervin, Thompson, Free, Dantley, Worthy, Magic, Bird, Walton, Baylor, ...could ANY of those guys play today?

When someone here can come up with a DEFINITE time frame when the NBA went from the 60's, to the game that it is today, let me know the year...

[cavsfanatic]

Wow that's a dumb thread!

[Finn T-Mac]

..he had stacked team with Robinson, Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu,

Only one in his prime from that group would be Bowen during that time. Then you even compare Kobe to this who in your mind never had a stacked team with him :hammerhead:

Greatest PF ever. Period.

[mamba24]

Haters will always hate the great ones. They cant accept greatness and the will and determination one has to be great.

Get off your sorry arse and do something with your life, instead of fabricating stories about those who have a name compared to those of you who sit behind a computer and an avatar and alot of other things in between.

Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron, Wade, KG, PP, Ray...and the List goes on...stop moaning.

I love how the MJ stans come out when kobe is being compared or the kobe stans when lebron is being compared and soo on. The point of comparison is greatness not D*ck size.

You EARN GREATNESS and alot of the superstars are just that.

I admire their work ethic and consistency, all you need to do is use the same motivation and maybe you can make your hating lives a little better.

[Yung D-Will]

Again every time you post you show you never watched Prime Duncan. Prime Duncan was ungurdable period. You know screw Prime Duncan, Duncan in his rookie season was even ungurable.



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

Yes that's Duncan's first playoff game as a rookie.


And yes before you say it I know he's lucky and also he's just not dominant which is why he draws double teams in his rookie season on like every possesion yet still scores.


I don't get why I spend my time arguing with the guy who thought Duncan's best season was 2004
madmax1 make sure to watch it don't miss Duncan's non dominance

[magnax1]

madmax1 make sure to watch it don't miss Duncan's non dominance
So you think hes as dominant as Shaq was? Because that really isn't even arguable. Shaq from 98-02 was an automatic two points if you gave it to him in the post. Was Duncan a great player? Yes, but hes not plain unstoppable like Shaq. As far as Scoring goes, it was more difficult to slow down Shaq then Jordan. I don't remember anyone slowing Down Shaq in those years like Payton did in 96 for Jordan.

[Yung D-Will]

So you think hes as dominant as Shaq was? Because that really isn't even arguable. Shaq from 98-02 was an automatic two points if you gave it to him in the post. Was Duncan a great player? Yes, but hes not plain unstoppable like Shaq. As far as Scoring goes, it was more difficult to slow down Shaq then Jordan. I don't remember anyone slowing Down Shaq in those years like Payton did in 96 for Jordan.

Not as dominant as Shaq but he was damn dominant and unguradble .Duncan had all the moves with his back to the basket, had range and got to the foul line at will.

Duncan was more dominant on the defensive end though that's for sure.
But Duncan's performances in 03 can be matched by very few.

That's why he's the GOAT Pf

And I'm dissapointed you replied to quick to have watched the video

[magnax1]

Not as dominant as Shaq but he was damn dominant and unguradble .Duncan had all the moves with his back to the basket, had range and got to the foul line at will.

Duncan was more dominant on the defensive end though that's for sure.
But Duncan's performances in 03 can be matched by very few.

That's why he's the GOAT Pg
I can agree with all of that, except that hes the GOAT PG.

[Yung D-Will]

I can agree with all of that, except that hes the GOAT PG.

I'm sry I meant PF.

And Kg hardly has an argument over Malone.


Btw Duncan's accomplishments and carrying a rebuilding team in 2003 to a championship is one of the main reason he's regarded as the GOAT PF

[magnax1]

I'm sry I meant PF.

And Kg hardly has an argument over Malone.


Btw Duncan's accomplishments and carrying a rebuilding team in 2003 to a championship is one of the main reason he's regarded as the GOAT PF
Hes a great player, and I don't really want to argue. We have a difference in opinion. No big deal.
All I have to say is that Duncan has a case for best PF ever, but so do other players. KG and Barkley in their primes both meant as much to their teams as Duncan did from 01-05. Barkley later degenerated into a fat jump shooting idiot and KG's teams were incapable of winning anything unless Jordan or Wilt were leading them.
And I didn't watch the Duncan video (or all of it at least) because I could post a video of KG or Barkley at their best and say they were the better then Duncan.

[Yung D-Will]

Hes a great player, and I don't really want to argue. We have a difference in opinion. No big deal.
All I have to say is that Duncan has a case for best PF ever, but so do other players. KG and Barkley in their primes both meant as much to their teams as Duncan did from 01-05. Barkley later degenerated into a fat jump shooting idiot and KG's teams were incapable of winning anything unless Jordan or Wilt were leading them.
And I didn't watch the Duncan video (or all of it at least) because I could post a video of KG or Barkley at their best and say they were the better then Duncan.

But that wasn't even close to Duncan's best

That was a 30-10-8 game an a rookie in his first playoff game.


Please show me that

[Yung D-Will]

The point of the video was to show that Duncan's been a top player since his rookie season.And has dominated in a way that Garnett,Barkley,and Malone did for most of his career(But a bit better) But the different is Duncan lead his team to the big stage and won it 4 times. That's exactly why this debate stopped after 2007 and why Kg wasn't in the disccusion for player of the decade

[ShaqAttack3234]

and KG's teams were incapable of winning anything unless Jordan or Wilt were leading them.

I don't understand this, Wilt never carried a team to a title. He won 2 titles, but had 2 of the most stacked teams of all time. Kareem, Duncan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe and Rick Barry have all won with less talented teams than Wilt's 2 title teams.

[magnax1]

I don't understand this, Wilt never carried a team to a title. He won 2 titles, but had 2 of the most stacked teams of all time. Kareem, Duncan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe and Rick Barry have all won with less talented teams than Wilt's 2 title teams.
Rick Barry won the same amount of Titles in the 70's as Kareem with a much weaker team, does that mean Barry's prime= Kareem's prime? I'm just going off the little I can find of Wilt. From what I've seen of his prime, he seems like the best player prime vs. prime ever. Other times he seems like an idiot though.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Rick Barry won the same amount of Titles in the 70's as Kareem with a much weaker team, does that mean Barry's prime= Kareem's prime? I'm just going off the little I can find of Wilt. From what I've seen of his prime, he seems like the best player prime vs. prime ever. Other times he seems like an idiot though.

That wasn't what I mean, I meant your comment of "only Jordan and Wilt" could carry those. Which suggests that Wilt was among the players who proved to be the best at carrying teams to championships. Even Jordan always had a ton of talent, I guess 1998 was the most impressive in that sense due to Pippen's injury.

I have seen nothing to suggest Wilt or even Jordan for that matter could carry less talent to a title than Kareem, Shaq, Olajuwon and Duncan, but particularly Wilt.

[jlauber]

I don't understand this, Wilt never carried a team to a title. He won 2 titles, but had 2 of the most stacked teams of all time. Kareem, Duncan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe and Rick Barry have all won with less talented teams than Wilt's 2 title teams.

You are amazing....

KAREEM won ONE title, with OSCAR...and with NO COMPETITION. That was the ONLY title HE won. MAGIC CARRIED LA to FIVE titles in the 80's. The one that Kareem had an argument for was in '85...but Magic was every bit as responsible that year. Magic missed almost all of '89, and the Lakers were SWEPT. Kareem was horribly outplayed by Malone, and the Lakers were SWEPT. Even in the '80 Finals, for all of Kareem's greatness, MAGIC, withOUT Kareem, put up a 42-15 game in game six to LEAD the Lakers to a title.

Meanwhile, Wilt LED the 67 76ers to the title, with TWO other HOFers, against typical FIVE that Boston had...and they ANNIHILATED Boston. ALL Wilt did in that series was outscore Russell, 22-10 per game, outassist Russell, per game, 10-6, outrebound Russell, per game, 32-23, and outshot Russell, per game, .556 to .358. BTW, in the clinching game five, Wilt outscored Russell, 29-4 (22 in the first half), outshot Russell, 10-16 to 2-5, outassisted Russell, 13-7, and outrebounded Russell, 36-21.

AND, in the 71-72 post-season, Chamberlain, by virtually ALL accounts, outplayed Kareem, and took over in the final quarter of the clinching game six, to lead LA back from a 4th quarter deficit. And, while West was mired in a post-season long shooting slump, Chamberlain DOMINATED the Knicks, particularly in game five (24 points,10-14 shooting, 29 rebounds, 10 blocks...while the ENTIRE Knick team had a TOTAL of 39 rebounds)...and won the Finals MVP.

AN, Wilt was NEVER outplayed by an opposing center in the post-season!!!!

Get the hell outta here with this DAMN anti-Wilt crap you have been spewing on this forum.

[OnceInADECADE]

kobe Bryant Hands Down Is The Most Overrated Player Hands Down!

[magnax1]

That wasn't what I mean, I meant your comment of "only Jordan and Wilt" could carry those. Which suggests that Wilt was among the players who proved to be the best at carrying teams to championships. Even Jordan always had a ton of talent, I guess 1998 was the most impressive in that sense due to Pippen's injury.

I have seen nothing to suggest Wilt or even Jordan for that matter could carry less talent to a title than Kareem, Shaq, Olajuwon and Duncan, but particularly Wilt.
Jordan's most impressive was 98? Other then the last game, his team was still easily more talented, however 92, and 93 he beat much more talented teams.
I know Wilt never won with an extremely weak, but he pulled some average teams to battle near even with one of the most talented teams ever in the 60's Lakers.

[ShaqAttack3234]

You are amazing....

Your are senile.


KAREEM won ONE title, with OSCAR...and with NO COMPETITION. That was the ONLY title HE won. MAGIC CARRIED LA to FIVE titles in the 80's. The one that Kareem had an argument for was in '85...but Magic was every bit as responsible that year. Magic missed almost all of '89, and the Lakers were SWEPT. Kareem was horribly outplayed by Malone, and the Lakers were SWEPT. Even in the '80 Finals, for all of Kareem's greatness, MAGIC, withOUT Kareem, put up a 42-15 game in game six to LEAD the Lakers to a title.

You're talking out of your ass as usual. Magic carried the Lakers? :roll: Kareem was EASILY the best player on the Lakers in 1980, one game doesn't change that. I Guess Jamaal Wilkes was also better than Kareem? He had 37/10 in that game 6.

And 1982? Kareem was still their first scoring option go to guy down the stretch and defensive anchor.


Meanwhile, Wilt LED the 67 76ers to the title, with TWO other HOFers, against typical FIVE that Boston had...and they ANNIHILATED Boston. ALL Wilt did in that series was outscore Russell, 22-10 per game, outassist Russell, per game, 10-6, outrebound Russell, per game, 32-23, and outshot Russell, per game, .556 to .358. BTW, in the clinching game five, Wilt outscored Russell, 29-4 (22 in the first half), outshot Russell, 10-16 to 2-5, outassisted Russell, 13-7, and outrebounded Russell, 36-21.

You don't carry a team when you're the 4th leading scorer in the finals and tied for second in the playoffs while a teammate outscores you by 6 ppg. Wilt was the best player on his team, but that team was stacked with talent, one of the most talented teams of all time.


AND, in the 71-72 post-season, Chamberlain, by virtually ALL accounts, outplayed Kareem, and took over in the final quarter of the clinching game six, to lead LA back from a 4th quarter deficit. And, while West was mired in a post-season long shooting slump, Chamberlain DOMINATED the Knicks, particularly in game five (24 points,10-14 shooting, 29 rebounds, 10 blocks...while the ENTIRE Knick team had a TOTAL of 39 rebounds)...and won the Finals MVP.

Kareem outscored him by over 20 ppg, was much more efficient and Wilt barely outrebounded him. Get the **** out of here you delusional Wilt fanboy


AN, Wilt was NEVER outplayed by an opposing center in the post-season!!!!

Kareem in '72, Russell in '69.....


Get the hell outta here with this DAMN anti-Wilt crap you have been spewing on this forum.

:roll: What's the matter, Jeff? You take this quite personally don't you? I suggest you leave this forum, you have more important things to do like cleaning off your stained Wilt poster hanging above your bed.

[jlauber]

Your are senile.



You're talking out of your ass as usual. Magic carried the Lakers? :roll: Kareem was EASILY the best player on the Lakers in 1980, one game doesn't change that. I Guess Jamaal Wilkes was also better than Kareem? He had 37/10 in that game 6.

And 1982? Kareem was still their first scoring option go to guy down the stretch and defensive anchor.



You don't carry a team when you're the 4th leading scorer in the finals and tied for second in the playoffs while a teammate outscores you by 6 ppg. Wilt was the best player on his team, but that team was stacked with talent, one of the most talented teams of all time.



Kareem outscored him by over 20 ppg, was much more efficient and Wilt barely outrebounded him. Get the **** out of here you delusional Wilt fanboy



Kareem in '72, Russell in '69.....



:roll: What's the matter, Jeff? You take this quite personally don't you? I suggest you leave this forum, you have more important things to do like cleaning off your stained Wilt poster hanging above your bed.


Kareem played TWO decent games against Wilt in the '71-72 WCF's, and threw up bricks, or watched Wilt knocking his shots all over the court the rest of the series...but don't take MY word for it...

How about a MILWAUKEE sportswriters perspective?

"Kareem’s Image as Best Suffered in Buck Defeat
Bob Wolf
The Milwaukee Journal, April 24, 1972

When the Milwaukee Bucks won the National Basketball Association championship a year ago, there was talk that they had a dynasty in the making.

But their dynasty ended before it really began, and Kareem Abdul Jabbar’s reputation as the greatest center of all time was tarnished in the process.

Abdul-Jabbar failed to outplay either Nate Thurmond of the Golden State Warriors or Wilt Chamberlain of the Los Angeles Lakers in the playoffs, and his inability to contain Chamberlain finally made the difference in the Laker series that ended in disaster at the Arena Saturday
Matter of Muscle

In the first round series with the Warriors, Abdul-Jabbar outrebounded Thurmond 95-89, but was outscored, 127-114. The Bucks won the series, four games to one.

In the semifinal series with the Lakers, Abdul-Jabbar had a tremendous edge in scoring, 202-67, but was outrebounded, 116-105, and was outmuscled by a greater margin than that. He actually reached the point on occasion where he was intimidated by Chamberlain as he headed toward the basket, and who ever heard of the big Buck being intimidated?

The Lakers eliminated the Bucks in six games, and the turning point occurred, with the series tied 2-2, when Chamberlain took advantage of his tremendous advantage in weight and strength and began pushing Abdul-Jabbar around. Wilt is listed at 275 pounds but probably weighs 290, to Abdul-Jabbar’s 230.

Perhaps the best illustration of Abdul-Jabbar’s difficulties lay in his shooting averages. He shot .574 in the regular season but only .437 in the playoffs ― .405 against Thurmond and .457 against Chamberlain.

Because of the strong defensive work of his two veteran rivals, Abdul-Jabbar often was forced away from his favorite shooting positions. He took hook shots from 12 to 15 feet away instead of from 8 to 10, and sometimes he even resorted to 15 foot jump shots.

Keep It Up

As Chamberlain put it after the fifth game in Los Angeles, which the Lakers won, 115-90, “Tonight Kareem was taking jump shots. That’s something he doesn’t usually do, but I hope he keeps on doing it.”

Abdul-Jabbar took more jump shots Saturday as the Lakers ended the series with a 104-100 victory, and Bucks Coach Larry Costello said, “I don’t want Kareem taking 15 footers. You do that and you’re just not playing your game.”

But Chamberlain’s dominating presence obviously had much to do with Abdul-Jabbar’s change in tactics, and Wilt’s performance against the man who supposedly had usurped his title as king of the giants must have been one of the most satisfying of his long career."

Or this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain#cite_note-86

"In the post-season, the Lakers defeated the Chicago Bulls in a sweep,[85] then went on to face the Milwaukee Bucks of young superstar center and regular-season MVP Kareem Abdul-Jabbar again. The matchup between Chamberlain and Abdul-Jabbar was hailed by LIFE magazine as the greatest matchup in all of sports. Chamberlain would help lead the Lakers past Jabbar and the Bucks in 6 games.[85] Particularly, Chamberlain was lauded for his final Game 6 performance, which the Lakers won 106–100 after trailing by 10 points in the fourth quarter: he scored 24 points and 22 rebounds, played a complete 48 minutes and outsprinted the younger Bucks center on several late Lakers fast breaks.[86] Jerry West called it "the greatest ball-busting performance I have ever seen."[86] Chamberlain performed so well in the series that TIME magazine stated, "In the N.B.A.'s western division title series with Milwaukee, he (Chamberlain) decisively outplayed basketball's newest giant superstar, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, eleven years his junior."[87]"

Or this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain#cite_note-86

"Chamberlain almost always outscored and out rebounded Russell in every encounter. Russell no doubt almost always had the better teams. Abdul Jabbar played 20 seasons to Wilts 13, and yet Chamberlain has several thousand more lifetime rebounds. In the twilight of his career, a 35 year old Wilt led the Lakers to victory over the Bucks and a 25 year old Jabbar during the 1972 playoffs. Even more astounding, was wilt blocked 20 shots in two consecutive games in that series, and 11 of those blocked shots were on Kareem. Who the heck ever did that to Jabbar. Makes you wonder what Wilt would have done in his prime. As great as Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, and Magic Johnson were, none of them had the impact or dominance of Wilt Chamberlain. The rules of the game were altered upon Wilts arrival into the league. Modern day fans talk of Shaq being the greatest center of all-time. Does anyone out there think Shaq could have blocked 11 Kareem shots in two games? Shaq wouldn't have been able to leap high enough to block a skyhook. That statistic alone, should be enough to convince anyone of Wilts athleticism."


As for the '69 Finals...

Give me an example of where Russell was a better player.

Despite an incompetent coach, Wilt outscored Russell, 12-9 per game. Outrebounded Russell, per game, 25-22 per game. I have no idea what their FG% were, but for the post-season, Wilt shot .545, while Russell shot .423.

In game five, Wilt outrebounded Russell, 31-13.

In game seven with his COACH keeping him on the bench in the last five minutes, and after the Lakers had cut a 17 pt deficit down to seven points, ...Wilt STILL thoroughly outplayed Russell. He outscored him, 18-6, outshot him, 7-8 to 2-7, and outrebounded him, 27-21. BTW, Wilt got as many rebounds on TWO successive possessions with his injured knee in that game, as Russell did in the entire 4th quarter.

Sorry, but Wilt was NEVER outplayed by ANY other center in his 13 year playoff career.

[leonuxury]

yes
i agree with you
tim is a great player，but not the NO1 in 2000s

[ShaqAttack3234]

[QUOTE=jlauber]Kareem played TWO decent games against Wilt in the '71-72 WCF's, and threw up bricks, or watched Wilt knocking his shots all over the court the rest of the series...but don't take MY word for it...

How about a MILWAUKEE sportswriters perspective?

[COLOR="DarkRed"]"Kareem

[Yung D-Will]

Keep spamming the board, troll....

Logic tells us that Wilt did not outplay Kareem in the 1972 WCF, he just had a MUCH better time. West and Goodrich were better than ANY Bucks not named Kareem and it's not even close and despite Oscar being injured(I believe he didn't play in the elimination game) it was still a very close 6 game series, so close that the Bucks outscored the Lakers in the series. Once again, Kareem outscored Wilt by over 20 ppg and was more efficient in the series, you can't ignore that, yet you love to bring up the Lakers injuries in 1971.

And how did Russell outplay Wilt in the '69 finals? Hmm, he shut down Wilt and came much closer to matching his scoring than he was suppose to and his team beat the heavily favored Lakers on their home floor in game 7. And prior to game 6, Wilt had averaged 10.7 ppg, horrible for a guy who averaged 20+ during the season, had Wilt played anywhere close to his usual level, that series doesn't even go 7 games. And LA had a chance to close out Boston in game 6, but Wilt had just 8 points.

I wouldn't call him a troll, I'd call him a and old school homer though

[DKLaker]

Is Duncan a great player....YES, as good as Kobe....only if you're smoking crack.

[Puffy]

Duncan is not only the most overrated player of this decade, he's the most overrated player in history. Dude was a good big man but no better than prime KG, C Webb, or Rasheed Wallace. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time then got charles barkley on his nutts hyping him up to no end. The reffs also loved the dude and gave him serious preferential treatment throughout his career.

I could back up my case with statistics but I don't have time.

[Anaximandro1]

Is Duncan a great player....YES, as good as Kobe....only if you're smoking crack.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Himan12]

http://lolblog.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/fail.png

[Big#50]

Duncan is not only the most overrated player of this decade, he's the most overrated player in history. Dude was a good big man but no better than prime KG, C Webb, or Rasheed Wallace. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time then got charles barkley on his nutts hyping him up to no end. The reffs also loved the dude and gave him serious preferential treatment throughout his career.

I could back up my case with statistics but I don't have time.
Trolling hard. 2003 was Duncan winning a ring by himself. Duncan and the Spurs getting help from the zebras is laughable.

[ThaRegul8r]

Just browsing some of those top player lists in th other threads. many people claim that Duncan is the number 1 player of the 2000s and it's not even a discusssion. I just don't get that. Duncan has never dominated statistically on the level of a Shaq, Kobe or Lebron. Head to head he has more often than not came up small against Kobe. people claim that he's the consummate winner and laud him for his consistency. But somehow forget that everytime he wins he's had a STACKED team.

in 1999 and 2003, he's played with top 12 BIG MAN in history DAVID RObinson. and Robinson was still dominant in 1999. 2003 team had the greatest collection of role players in a championship team in a long time. Prime Stephen Jax, Bruce Bowen, tony parker, Manu, etc.

Since 2003, he's played with top 5 PG in the league Tony Parker and GREATEST euro player of all time Manu Ginobli. Yet he never catches any flack for having great help.

So rookie Manu, 2nd year Parker (who repeatedly got benched for Speedy Claxton) and streaky SJax were the greatest collection of role players?

I always find it funny how no matter what basketball board I go to, Duncan detractors engage in revisionist history and act like 2003 Tony Parker was the same Tony Parker he eventually became.

And many times they turn out to be people who have an agenda to pull Duncan down in order to elevate Kobe in order to win Player of the Decade honors.


Tim Duncan is 3rd best player of this decade top 3 goes like this

Kobe Bryant
Shquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan

Yep. Nothing new here.


The Spurs Front Office is the GOAT for assembling such great teams for Tim Duncan tho. :rockon:

The Rockets put Hakeem, Charles Barkley and Scottie Pippen together and they won nothing.

The Portland Trail Blazers of 1999

[Yung D-Will]

I always find it funny how no matter what basketball board I go to, Duncan detractors engage in revisionist history and act like 2003 Tony Parker was the same Tony Parker he eventually became.


What people don't realize is 2003 was supposed to be a rebuilding year. That team wasn't expected to go anywhere but then Duncan just exploded and led them to a 58 wins season and got his finals mvp.

[Big#50]

What people don't realize is 2003 was supposed to be a rebuilding year. That team wasn't expected to go anywhere but then Duncan just exploded and led them to a 58 wins season and got his finals mvp.
I think they won 60 that year. A rookie Manu, a second year TP that was benched for Speedy in key moments, Stephen Jackson who was a decent player then, an old broken down Robinson. I want to see anyone win a ring with that. Nobody would, not even Shaq.

[Yung D-Will]

I think they won 60 that year. A rookie Manu, a second year TP that was benched for Speedy in key moments, Stephen Jackson who was a decent player then, an old broken down Robinson. I want to see anyone win a ring with that. Nobody would, not even Shaq.

O yea it was 60.
Probably only Hakeem and Duncan


1993-1994 Houston Rockets(58-24):

Pg: Kenny Smith/Sam Cassell/Scott Brooks
Sg: Vernon Maxwell/Mario Elie/Larry Robinson
Sf: Robert Horry/Chris Jent/Matt Bullard
Pf: Otis Thorpe/Carl Herrera/Earn Crueton
C: Hakeem Olajuwon/Richard Petruska/Eric Riley



2002-2003 San Antonio Spurs(60-22):

Pg: [b]Tony Parker/Steve Kerr/Speedy Claxton
Sg: Stephen Jackson/Manu Ginobili
Sf: Bruce Bowen/Steve Smith/Danny Ferry
Pf: ]Tim Duncan/Malik Rose
C: [b]David Robinson/Kevin Willis/Mengke Bateer