Why is Tim Duncan always regarded as the unanimous best Power Forward ever?

[AI3Anthony]

Don't get me wrong, Tim Duncan is a GREAT player and will forever be known as one. But anytime I hear commentators talk about the greatest of all time at certain positions they always mention Tim Duncan like it's no contest. There are SEVERAL power forwards through out NBA history that were definitely great and put up similar or better stats then Duncan. Is it solely because of Tim Duncans NBA championships or is it something other than that that makes him unanimously earn this title.

Anyone have thoughts about this?

[Pinkhearts]

Hakeem Olajuwon

[L.Kizzle]

Unanimous? I've heard everyone from Charles Barkley to Bob Pettit to Karl Malone to Kevin Garnett.

[AI3Anthony]

Unanimous? I've heard everyone from Charles Barkley to Bob Pettit to Karl Malone to Kevin Garnett.

When you listen on TV do you really not always here them say Tim Duncan? I'm not talking about this forum and general discussion, I meant the media. They always praise Timmy.

[New York Knicks]

Unanimous? I've heard everyone from Charles Barkley to Bob Pettit to Karl Malone to Kevin Garnett.
I think the word he's looking for is 'consensus'

But it IS a message board for an urban sport so I'm not surprised by the error.

[AI3Anthony]

I think the word he's looking for is 'consensus'

But it IS a message board for an urban sport so I'm not surprised by the error.

Pretty racist. I'm also white fyi.

[Carbine]

Unanimous? I've heard everyone from Charles Barkley to Bob Pettit to Karl Malone to Kevin Garnett.

It's pretty unanimous around basketball circles. Basketball people won't put a guy with zero rings (Malone, Barkley) over a guy with four titles as the best player, and has as good or better career resume even disregarding the rings.

[Dresta]

Because he is.

[AI3Anthony]

Because he is.

Great argument.

[WhySoInsecure?]

Great argument.
If you had to pick a PF to build a team around who would you pick?

[elementally morale]

Based on accolades I have no problem with him being the best ever. Careerwise, too. But I do think he is overrated a bit, and I like the guy. When people say he is better than Shaq or than Olajuwon was, it gets insane.

At their respective peaks, Barkley has a shot over Duncan. With longevity (and extended great play) come into the equation, Malone has a very good case over Duncan.

In fact, I'm not convinced Duncan is/was a better player at his peak than prime David Robinson was. And on a last note, I'd say Tim Duncan has played canter most of his career, so I'm not even sure he should be in the discussion of best PFs to have played the game.

(Yes, I know most of you will think I've lost my mind.)

[AI3Anthony]

If you had to pick a PF to build a team around who would you pick?

I'm not saying Duncan ISN'T the best PF ever.. my question asked WHY is he considered the best ever when their have been several other great PF's...

I'd probably choose Duncan or Malone though.

[New York Knicks]

Pretty racist. I'm also white fyi.
Had nothing to do with race. And you being white proves that.

[Rekindled]

4 rings ****0t

[WhySoInsecure?]

I'm not saying Duncan ISN'T the best PF ever.. my question asked WHY is he considered the best ever when their have been several other great PF's...

I'd probably choose Duncan or Malone though.
He's a winner, he has the rings and never missed the playoffs.

[Rob123]

I think it's a tie between him and all those other power forwards with 4 rings 3 finals Mvps and 2 mvps

[AI3Anthony]

People give such smart ass answers and not legit answers.

[AI3Anthony]

He's a winner, he has the rings and never missed the playoffs.

Wow, he has NEVER missed the playoffs? You're right. damn

[Carbine]

Based on accolades I have no problem with him being the best ever. Careerwise, too. But I do think he is overrated a bit, and I like the guy. When people say he is better than Shaq or than Olajuwon was, it gets insane.

At their respective peaks, Barkley has a shot over Duncan. With longevity (and extended great play) come into the equation, Malone has a very good case over Duncan.

In fact, I'm not convinced Duncan is/was a better player at his peak than prime David Robinson was. And on a last note, I'd say Tim Duncan has played canter most of his career, so I'm not even sure he should be in the discussion of best PFs to have played the game.

(Yes, I know most of you will think I've lost my mind.)


Barkley doesn't have a case over Duncan at their peak though. He might be Tim's equal or better on the box score at the end of the game, or in a seven game series, but Tim's ability to anchor defense (which, let's face it.... is the trademark of all chamnpionship teams) and make all the plays that don't show up on a stat sheet is what separates him from Barkley who didn't have the word defend in his vocabularly.

I have yet to read an argument that makes sense putting Malone over Duncan - so since you believe Malone has a 'very good case" over Duncan, I'd challenge you to make it.

[nbacardDOTnet]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Tim%20Duncan/-5B2003106155D_Spurs_vs_Nets_cd2avi.jpg

[AI3Anthony]

^ You guys are acting like I sadi Tim Duncan is NOT the best PF. You guys are acting like I said Timmy sucks and so many are better. READ before posting.

[elementally morale]

I have yet to read an argument that makes sense putting Malone over Duncan - so since you believe Malone has a 'very good case" over Duncan, I'd challenge you to make it.


I could probably have worded it better. What I meant was: Malone has a good case over Duncan as far as longevity is concerned. Malone does NOT have a case to have had a better career than Duncan. And neither does Barkley.

Talking of peak play, I'd say Barkley has a case, and I'd call David Robinson at his peak Duncan's equal though. And, to add insult to injury, I honestly believe Duncan has played center more than he played PF.

All this doesn't change my opinion: Tim Duncan is a legit top 10 player of all time, all thngs considered. He was just never as good as prime (peak) Shaq, Hakeem or Kobe were. Careerwise... it's a different story -- he has a case over Hakeem, maybe even Shaq. Kobe's career is far from over though.

[Rose]

I've considered him a center for the last 7 or 8 years myself. IF you count him as a power forward, I can respect your decision for him. And I probably agree. But lots of others have good cases, they just lack the rings.

[Haymaker]

Timmy sucks I hope nobody takes you seriously from now on...

[iamgine]

Don't get me wrong, Tim Duncan is a GREAT player and will forever be known as one. But anytime I hear commentators talk about the greatest of all time at certain positions they always mention Tim Duncan like it's no contest. There are SEVERAL power forwards through out NBA history that were definitely great and put up similar or better stats then Duncan. Is it solely because of Tim Duncans NBA championships or is it something other than that that makes him unanimously earn this title.

Anyone have thoughts about this?
I think it's because Tim Duncan was just a complete player with a complete resume. There is nothing from his game that anyone can criticize except maybe his free throw shooting and his 'boring' persona.

No 1 guy
Championships
MVPs
Finals MVPs
Great defense
Leader
Great passer, rebounder, shotblocker
Great offense
Clutch
Step up game in the playoff
Had some historic performance
Very consistent player

Other players have some holes in one or more of those areas.

[Showtime]

He's the closest thing to Bill Russell we have today. Total team guy, cornerstone of a 4 time championship team, highest winning % in the game, and great on both ends (when healthy).

[Quata]

Dude has won 50+games every season hes played along with making all-nba and all-defense teams each year.

[Round Mound]

Peek: Barkley

Consistancy: Duncan

Longevity: Malone

Level of Game:

Duncan or Barkley

[rmt]

I could probably have worded it better. What I meant was: Malone has a good case over Duncan as far as longevity is concerned. Malone does NOT have a case to have had a better career than Duncan. And neither does Barkley.

Talking of peak play, I'd say Barkley has a case, and I'd call David Robinson at his peak Duncan's equal though. And, to add insult to injury, I honestly believe Duncan has played center more than he played PF.

All this doesn't change my opinion: Tim Duncan is a legit top 10 player of all time, all thngs considered. He was just never as good as prime (peak) Shaq, Hakeem or Kobe were. Careerwise... it's a different story -- he has a case over Hakeem, maybe even Shaq. Kobe's career is far from over though.

I disagree. I think that 2003 Duncan (especially in the playoffs) > any Kobe.

Regarding the best PF, some forget that Duncan has also anchored the best defense 98-07. Half of the game is defense - it's not all about offensive stats (Malone, Barkley).

Robinson was great offensively & defensively but IMO lacked the intangibles that Duncan has (clutchness, mental toughness, killer instinct, whatever you want to call it). Winning just wasn't as important to him.

As far as playing center - Robinson, Nesterovic, Nazr, even Oberto (doesn't have the range that Duncan has) all played center from 98 - 07. It's only in the past couple years with Bonner and Dice that Duncan's played mostly center or when Horry/Malik played.

[BlackJordan]

Oljauwon

[Patrick Chewing]

When Duncan arrived, San Antonio started winning titles.

[DeronMillsap]

Would he be the GOAT PF if he played his whole career in the Jordan era?

[Round Mound]

Would he be the GOAT PF if he played his whole career in the Jordan era?


No

Had he faced Barkley, Barkley would have outplayed him every single time

He would have held against Malone but certainly would not have lowered his scorin either.

[Artillery]

Wow, he has NEVER missed the playoffs? You're right. damn

Not to mention he's had a 50 win team for every year of his career(except for the lockout season - though they were welll above pace for that season too).

Another 50 win season this year will tie Duncan's Spurs with the Magic Johnson Lakers for the most consecutive 50 win seasons in NBA history.

[MrJohnWall]

No

Had he faced Barkley, Barkley would have outplayed him every single time

He would have held against Malone but certainly would not have lowered his scorin either.


Lol @ Mr. I cant play defense outplaying Duncan :oldlol:

Duncan would shut him down and just abuse him on offense.
Barkely wouldnt even be able to make Duncan alter a shot
It will practice for him

[SinJackal]

Wow, he has NEVER missed the playoffs? You're right. damn

He' also never failed to:

Land an All NBA team spot (most were 1st teams)

Land an All NBA Defensive team spot (most were 1st teams)

Be an All star every year (besides when the game wasn't held in 1999)

And that on top of the following achievements:

4 titles

3 Finals MVPs

2 MVPs (could've won a 3rd legitimately)

Rookie of the Year

All Star game MVP



Barely any other players period post achievements like that, much less PFs, which none do (as far as I know). He's also not just a stat machine, he's also a huge defensive presence who has the size to also play and defend centers well, not just PFs. Earlier in his career he could also D' up good perimeter SFs as well.


I think most of the confusion about Duncan comes over fans who have only seen him player over the last 2-3 years. He's not the same player he used to be after developing plantar facisitis. That definitely slowed him down noticeably. He doesn't jump much anymore, but still ends up getting a couple blocks a game and is averaging 15/11 this year anyway despite the poor stats he put up during his 3 flu games this year.

Even this year, as the player who a lot of posters here like to claim is "done", is averaging 17.1/12/2.9, 2.4 blks, 1 steal per game, on 53% shooting, if you don't count the 3 flu games that watered down his stats a bit thus far.

He's just been a really consistent and good player every year, regardless of all the people who wished and hoped and claimed he was "done" every year for the last half a dozen years.

[ILLsmak]

1. People are sheep.

2. People want to put Duncan as a PF.

If you want to switch player's true position around, I'm taking Hakeem as the GOAT PF by a considerable margin.

People compare his impact as a C with the impact of other PFs and it's not really fair. lol. Think of it this way, I can't name a player who was a PF that anchored a defense, but Duncan did.

As I said, I wouldn't even put Duncan on my all-time team at PF. I'd throw Hakeem there because Hakeem does everything a PF is supposed to better than Duncan plus he's an explosive scorer. Duncan is not an explosive scorer no matter what numbers you wanna post.

-Smak

[SinJackal]

Would he be the GOAT PF if he played his whole career in the Jordan era?

Considering that he'd be playing with a prime version of the core he won his first title with, I would say yes. Dropping Duncan for free on a 60 win team with one of the top 5-6 centers ever. . .on a team Jordan struggled to beat, I'd say they'd win at least 2-3 titles in that era, even if two of them probably would've been the ones the Rockets got when Jordan was out.

No offense to Rockets fans though, I just don't see how they'd beat the mid 90's Spurs with Duncan dropped onto it out of thin air. The Spurs' main weakness was a lack of a second star scorer, which they'd get in Timmy, all rolled into a reliable second big man defender who fouled too much and frequently didn't contest shots to help make getting the rebound easier.



1. People are sheep.

2. People want to put Duncan as a PF.

If you want to switch player's true position around, I'm taking Hakeem as the GOAT PF by a considerable margin.

People compare his impact as a C with the impact of other PFs and it's not really fair. lol. Think of it this way, I can't name a player who was a PF that anchored a defense, but Duncan did.

As I said, I wouldn't even put Duncan on my all-time team at PF. I'd throw Hakeem there because Hakeem does everything a PF is supposed to better than Duncan plus he's an explosive scorer. Duncan is not an explosive scorer no matter what numbers you wanna post.

-Smak

Scoring 22 points "explosively" and scoring 22 points period. . .there's no difference. That's probably why posting numbers doesn't matter, because points are points, where they looked flashy going in or not.

Yeah, Hakeem was a better scorer, barely. But don't forget he played on a higher paced team and played more minutes, which are what pumped up his PPG during the early/mid 90's. He was only good for an extra point per game. Not really a huge difference. Hakeem's peak scoring was superior though, he was looking good in the mid 90's.

[Big#50]

Russell and KAJ called him the best big man of this generation. Not PF. Big man. I think Russell said best he had seen.

[Ancient Legend]

Duncan has the hardware, and plays the best defense of the three, but plays like a center as others have noted.

Seriously Charles is a freaking 6'4 or 6'5 POWER FORWARD that outrebounded most of his opponents every night. These were not rebounds like Kidd's were everyone lets him have them. Charles was a master at boxing out using his wide frame. He had very good handles as well. Given his size, I would pick him as the best that I saw, but I think Duncan had a more complete game.

[SCdac]

Kevin McHale: I think he is a Power Forward. I always thought he was a Power Forward coming up...

just a few days ago, another one of the best Power Forwards of all time (6 time all-defensive team, Top-10 shot blocker in the mid-80's) commented on Duncan and his position. Of all people, I'll take his word for it. People acting like power forwards aren't supposed to have post game, and people acting like Duncan in his prime didn't have some of the best mid-range and face-up game in the league. For most of his career and all of his championships, Duncan's started next to a "pure center", something I def wouldn't call him.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/behindthemic/#20101118_btm_duncan

[Round Mound]

Lol @ Mr. I cant play defense outplaying Duncan :oldlol:

Duncan would shut him down and just abuse him on offense.
Barkely wouldnt even be able to make Duncan alter a shot
It will practice for him


So why couldnt he do this to a 34-36 year old 288 lbs overweight Barkley?

Duncan would have fouled out if he guarded Barkley.

[Round Mound]

Duncan has the hardware, and plays the best defense of the three, but plays like a center as others have noted.

Seriously Charles is a freaking 6'4 or 6'5 POWER FORWARD that outrebounded most of his opponents every night. These were not rebounds like Kidd's were everyone lets him have them. Charles was a master at boxing out using his wide frame. He had very good handles as well. Given his size, I would pick him as the best that I saw, but I think Duncan had a more complete game.


Barkley shot 58.13% 2-Point FG for 21.6 PPG (less attempts)
Duncan shot 50-51% 2-Point FG for 22 PPG (more attempts)

Barkley 23-32 would destroy Duncan 1 on 1.

Barkley mad? He`d cutt ur heart out with 40-25 and then 10 because u keep doubling at the Mid Range.

He did not have more Complate Game. He was a Better Shot Blocker and Thats it

Barkley was Better At Everything: including Post Game

[Manute for Ever!]

Barkley shot 58.13% 2-Point FG for 21.6 PPG (less attempts)
Duncan shot 50-51% 2-Point FG for 22 PPG (more attempts)

Barkley 23-32 would destroy Duncan 1 on 1.

Barkley mad? He`d cutt ur heart out with 40-25 and then 10 because u keep doubling at the Mid Range.

He did not have more Complate Game. He was a Better Shot Blocker and Thats it

Barkley was Better At Everything: including Post Game

Holy shit, you're stupid!

[alenleomessi]

Tim-4 rings
KG-1
Karl-0
Chuck-0

Chuck and Karl would have probably won if the didnt played in MJ era
Also Duncans individual resume isnt that bad either

[Semi]

maybe because he is the only "legendary" PF who has won a ring? till the 90s most of them were just enforcers, and in the 90s the rings were won by jordan, so he is the only one who you could consider the greatest because rings count very much!

[Teanett]

Holy shit, you're stupid!

he's not. on offense barkley is the better player, barkley ate people alive in the post.

[Manute for Ever!]

he's not. on offense barkley is the better player, barkley ate people alive in the post.

But there are two ends of the court, Duncan excels at both, but Round Mound wrote:

Barkley was Better At Everything: including Post Game

[Pinkhearts]

Hakeem is a power forward, and no one who is intelligent will take Duncan ahead of Hakeem.

[Round Mound]

he's not. on offense barkley is the better player, barkley ate people alive in the post.

Barkley was also a Better Creator and Passer
Barkley was also Better Floor Defender and Stealer
Barkley was also a Better Rebounder

[creepingdeath]

IMO, Timmy has played Center for most of his career, so he's not the GOAT PF. But if you were to put him into that category, yeah, he would be the best, no doubt for me.

The Big Fundamental may have had the "luck" of very good teammates in 00's (I deliberately left out his first championship squad), but so did every champion. He turned the Spurs franchise around and was the anchor of all of his teams. Oh, and additionally he's a really cool guy, something rare in the NBA circus.

[Johnni Gade]

He WAS good.

[Big#50]

Russell and KAJ called him the best big man of this generation. Not PF. Big man. I think Russell said best he had seen.
^^^ why is the Barkley groupie comparing Charles to Duncan? ^^^

[mashbelly]

Barkley was also a Better Creator and Passer
Barkley was also Better Floor Defender and Stealer
Barkley was also a Better Rebounder

:lol

[C-Webb4]

The thing is, even with ignoring his other credentials (which a lot of you seem to want to do), people say "well he didn't rebound as well as this guy." "He didn't score as well as this guy." "He didn't defend as well as this guy." The point is, there are of course people who had one or 2 aspects of their game that were better than his but his all-around game is what makes him such an incredible player. As has been said before other than FT shooting he doesn't have any real weaknesses. He scores the ball very easily and efficiently, he's a great defender, rebounder, shot blocker, passer, and his career averages are nearly unanimously higher in the playoffs where he raises his game.

[C-Webb4]

^^^ why is the Barkley groupie comparing Charles to Duncan? ^^^
Because he's an idiot.

[Samvt]

If he played for the lakers, knicks or celtics, there is no argument that he would be considered the GOAT. Funny how stuff like that works.

[ginobli2311]

If he played for the lakers, knicks or celtics, there is no argument that he would be considered the GOAT. Funny how stuff like that works.

this.

duncan is one of the best two way players of all time. he's a top 5 or so defender of all time and he gives you 21 points and 12 boards for his career on high efficiency.

guys like him don't grow on trees. he's probably the best two way big of all time other than kareem/wilt. i have duncan slightly ahead of shaq/hakeem because he was so consistent and a little bit better than hakeem on defense and light years better than shaq on defense.

he's clearly the best pf ever. barkely never played defense, and malone never got it done in the playoffs the way duncan has. i honestly think kg is the 2nd best power forward ever (i know many will disagree). both kg and duncan were complete players. they could dominate a game on both ends. kg never reached his potential because he was stuck wasting away on bad teams for the majority of his career. i just think duncan is a little bit better at pretty much everything (other than high pick and roll defense) than KG.

[TennesseeFan]

Um, because he is? WTF is this shit.

[QuebecBaller]

Hakeem Olajuwon

What?:wtf:

[Pinkhearts]

Funny how no posts here addresses the fact that Duncan is not a better PF than Hakeem.

Posts here only tell of how great he is....but no shit all great players are amazing and have little or no weaknesses.

[Sarcastic]

Why is Duncan evening being compared to Olajuwon? Hakeem was a center, not a PF.

[Pinkhearts]

Hakeem is a PF. He played PF beside Ralph Sampson in the twin towers.

Much like how Duncan played PF beside Robinson in his twin towers. They are both one and the same.

Same height and size too, if anything Duncan is bigger than Hakeem.

[lakerspng]

I think Barkley would have gotten the best of them head to head in their respective primes, and Malone probably would have as well most of the time. But... the consistency, leadership, defense and poise that Duncan brought to his team, which led them to 4 championships cannot be overcome by any statistical advantage. Duncan's clearly had the best career.

[Pinkhearts]

Malone and Barkley never beat Hakeem.

[Sarcastic]

Olajuwon played with Sampson for only about 2 years. He played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Thorpe, etc.

[Haymaker]

Olajuwon played with Sampson for only about 2 years. He played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Thorpe, etc.
This

[MasterDurant24]

Rings:
Duncan: 4
Barkley: 0
Malone: 0


Final MVP:
Duncan: 3
Barkley: 0
Malone: 0

All Defensive Teams:
Duncan: 13
Barkley: 0
Malone: 4

These facts could be a reason.

[Pinkhearts]

Olajuwon played with Sampson for only about 2 years. He played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Thorpe, etc.

And Duncan only played with Robinson for a few years and played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Bonner, etc.

Are you saying Hakeem couldn't fill in Duncan's job scope and do it better than him?

[MasterDurant24]

Hakeem is a PF. He played PF beside Ralph Sampson in the twin towers.

Much like how Duncan played PF beside Robinson in his twin towers. They are both one and the same.

Same height and size too, if anything Duncan is bigger than Hakeem.
:facepalm

Hakeem is not a PF. He played center most of his career. Hakeem plays like a true center. Now Sampson was not a true center, he played more like a forward. But It's unlikely that you're going to play a 7'3-7'4 man at power forward and a 6'10 man at center. Robinson was a true center, Duncan is a true power forward.

[Pinkhearts]

:facepalm

Hakeem is not a PF. He played center most of his career. Hakeem plays like a true center. Now Sampson was not a true center, he played more like a forward. But It's unlikely that you're going to play a 7'3-7'4 man at power forward and a 6'10 man at center. Robinson was a true center, Duncan is a true power forward.

How is this even making sense? Sampson was not a true center, but Robinson is a true center playing in the high post? Duncan is the 6'10 man at PF but Hakeem is the 6'10 man at center?

One can even argue Duncan spent most of his career at center. You can argue Gasol and Al Jeff spends most of their time at center too.

All you need to know is that Hakeem can take over Duncan's job and do it better than him. Duncan cannot hope to be as good as Hakeem. That makes Hakeem the GOAT in the position.

[DatWasNashty]

Hakeem is a PF. He played PF beside Ralph Sampson in the twin towers.

Much like how Duncan played PF beside Robinson in his twin towers. They are both one and the same.

Same height and size too, if anything Duncan is bigger than Hakeem.
What the fukk are you smoking, brah? Hakeem never played PF for a single second in his career. He was a center the moment he was drafted and Ralph, despite being considerably taller, was moved to PF.

Olajuwon's core strength was the main reason for that, along with him being more paint-oriented at that time. Ralph operated more in the high post making use of his excellent court vision.

Even if Hakeem is better than Duncan, it's irrelevant to the conversation because he never played PF.

As for the topic, yes Duncan is the best PF I've ever seen and it isn't even close. Barkley, Malone and Garnett were all very good but none were better.

[Pinkhearts]

What the fukk are you smoking, brah? Duncan never played PF for a single second in his career. He was a center the moment he was drafted and Robinson, despite being considerably taller, was moved to PF.

Duncan's core strength was the main reason for that, along with him being more paint-oriented at that time. Robinson operated more in the high post making use of his excellent court vision.

Hmmm this doesn't seem wrong either does it?

[DatWasNashty]

Malone and Barkley never beat Hakeem.
Do you not remember the Jazz getting the better of the Rockets in 1997 and 1998?

[Sarcastic]

And Duncan only played with Robinson for a few years and played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Bonner, etc.

Are you saying Hakeem couldn't fill in Duncan's job scope and do it better than him?

Duncan played with DRob for about 5-6 years. Half of his titles are as PF and the other half are at center.

This thread is about Duncan as a PF. If you want to stop listing him as a PF, and put him at center, then the comparisons to Barkley and Malone need to stop, and the comparisons to Shaq, Wilt, Russel, and Kareem need to start.

Personally, I always thought he was a center.

[DatWasNashty]

What the fukk are you smoking, brah? Duncan never played PF for a single second in his career. He was a center the moment he was drafted and Robinson, despite being considerably taller, was moved to PF.

Duncan's core strength was the main reason for that, along with him being more paint-oriented at that time. Robinson operated more in the high post making use of his excellent court vision.

Hmmm this doesn't seem wrong either does it?

Except that Hakeem was always considered and listed as a center while Duncan has always been listed as a power forward. And no, Robinson never had excellent court vision so you're wrong there.

[Pinkhearts]

Yea so which one should it be? We all know Duncan and Olajuwon are one and the same kind. Either you compare them both as PFs, or compare both as centers.

I would just compare all of them as bigs. Or I would look at it this way: If I need to pick someone for the PF spot, I will definitely pick Hakeem to play there first.

[Pinkhearts]

Except that Hakeem was always considered and listed as a center while Duncan has always been listed as a power forward. And no, Robinson never had excellent court vision so you're wrong there.

Oh so now you are only arguing who is the GOAT player that is listed as PF. Hmm maybe Lebron should convert and list himself as PF and he will instantly become the best PF. Could happen eventually you know. Maybe Durant will one day list himself as PF and challenge for the GOAT player at PF too.

[DatWasNashty]

Oh so now you are only arguing who is the GOAT player that is listed as PF. Hmm maybe Lebron should convert and list himself as PF and he will instantly become the best PF. Could happen eventually you know. Maybe Durant will one day list himself as PF and challenge for the GOAT player at PF too.
How will James instantly become the best PF when he wouldn't come close to being as effective as he is now (thanks to his non-existent post-game)? Same with Durant. They're listed as SFs anyway and it'll stay that way for the rest of their careers so your point is moot.

Fact is Duncan is listed as a PF. Hakeem was listed as a C ever since he was drafted. Deal with it.

[Hagbard]

Olajuwon played with Sampson for only about 2 years. He played center the rest of his career after that, when he was alongside Thorpe, etc.
Olajuwon played C with Sampson. Sampson played PF. Olajuwon at that time didn't have nearly enough versatility in his game to play forward.

[Hagbard]

Yea so which one should it be? We all know Duncan and Olajuwon are one and the same kind. Either you compare them both as PFs, or compare both as centers.

I would just compare all of them as bigs. Or I would look at it this way: If I need to pick someone for the PF spot, I will definitely pick Hakeem to play there first.
If I needed to pick one guy to play PF, out of everybody, I'd pick Bill Russell. But alas, he never played a game at PF in his life. Kind of like Olajuwon.

[Pinkhearts]

Duncan played C with Robinson. Robinson played PF. Duncan at that time didn't have nearly enough versatility in his game to play forward.

Again, nothing wrong with this statement.

Tsk tsk at all of you being all picky over player listings. If Duncan can claim himself as PF and be GOAT, so can Lebron. You don't need a post game to be a PF, Dirk is considered by many to be the best today but his post game sucks.

Just learn to deal with the fact who the better player is. Don't be blinded by stupidly arbitrary listings.

[SinJackal]

Hakeem is a power forward, and no one who is intelligent will take Duncan ahead of Hakeem.

Nearly everyone on here has Duncan above Hakeem on their GOAT lists. So either most people on here, "aren't intelligent", as you say it, or it's just you that isn't.



IMO, Timmy has played Center for most of his career, so he's not the GOAT PF. But if you were to put him into that category, yeah, he would be the best, no doubt for me.

The Big Fundamental may have had the "luck" of very good teammates in 00's (I deliberately left out his first championship squad), but so did every champion. He turned the Spurs franchise around and was the anchor of all of his teams. Oh, and additionally he's a really cool guy, something rare in the NBA circus.

He actually hasn't played center for most of his career. That's a broken, incorrect assessment a lot of new or selective memoried fans have because all they're thinking of is the Duncan of the last 2-3 years. Prior to that, he almost never played center. Here's a quick history lesson on Spurs' centers since Duncan was drafted.

Duncan is drafted and plays alongside David Robinson, a career center who has, to my knowledge, never once played PF in his entire life, short of doing so during an All-Star or Team USA game. He has never played PF during his regular NBA career. Which means from 1997-2003, Duncan did not play center. He's not going to play the position of a player who's a better defender than him at that position when Duncan has been a lifetime PF up to that point. To think he actually did, and that DRob played PF, is a logic fail on the highest level. At absolute most, Duncan played very limited center duties the last year of Robinson's career, when DRob's minutes dipped under 30 a game (rounded) for the first time in his career. The year before that, they had plenty of stop-gap filler centers throughout the season to play the extra minutes at C for them, so it only happened in 2003. And it was more a point of, they couldn't afford or find anyone good enough to actually play center worth a crap, and just had PFs. Duncan was one of the two PFs they had during that time that could actually play as and defend a center worth a damn. They certainly didn't want him to play as one, which was obvious because. . .

Once Robinson retired, the Spurs signed Rasho Nesterovic, who started for the Spurs at center for the next two 1/2 years. Before you even suggest it, Nesterovic is a lifetime center who doesn't play PF. Again, at worst, Duncan played very limited duties at center when Rasho was on the bench. Less than 10 minutes a game that first year. In 2005, they traded for Nazr Mohammed, completely removing Duncan from that center role. Mohammed and Nesterovic shared the Spurs' center duties for the next 2 seasons. Tim Duncan played 0 minutes at center during that time.

So far, at most, Duncan played less than 10 minutes at center per game for about 1 1/2 seasons. And we're already nearly 10 years into his career.

In '05-'06, they signed more centers, and a PF who can play center. Duncan continued to play 0 minutes at that spot.

'06-'07, Spurs sign Francisco Elson to replace Mohammed. Another career center. They signed several scrub centers at this point, feeling the pressure of having a huge team salary in a small market city which means it's very difficult to draw a decent free agent center as they cannot overpay for one to draw them to their less-than-attractive location. Most players would rather play for a shitty Knicks team because it's NY and more money, than a contending Spurs team, as you get less exposure and respect for playing there than many other places.

During the 2007 offseason, the Spurs, sensing these free agent center troubles were not going to end, they draft Tiago Splitter to stop the bleeding. A play who decided to stay overseas because he could make more money. Which posed a new problem. The Spurs, for the first time, did not have a legit starting center. All they had was Oberto, who started at that spot. Oberto's defense at C was very poor, as he wasn't long enough to guard some of the bigger guys, so Duncan would always D' up the best big man on the opposing team, whether it was a center or a PF. While Oberto was playing out of position, he was still their center. Due to his average defensive and offensive abilities, Duncan played the "center role" for most of the game for the first time in his career. And this is TEN YEARS INTO HIS CAREER dude, and only because Splitter didn't come over. If he did, that would've never happened. Also during that season, the Spurs traded for Kurt Thomas, who filled their backup center role for the next few seasons. The Spurs also trade the rights to Luis Scola this year, since for the fifth year in a row they were getting no signal but that he wouldn't show up yet again. Rather than continue to pay for his rights and not get a single game out of him, they traded him to Houston. Subsequently he settled his contract dispute with his team and came over to play in the NBA for the Rockets. Thanks a lot Scola, the Spurs could've used you. :banghead:

2008, their center depth becomes almost an embarrassment. Matt Bonner is their starting center. It's no surprise that the Spurs started to fall off when it comes to wins ever since they ceased to be able to field a decent center every night (an issue that could not be resolved except through the draft, due to the poor ability of small market teams to draw free agent centers with nothing to offer but league minimum or a MLE). And good luck drafting a halfway decent center when the best you get is the 24-26th pick in the draft every year. Any decent center goes before 10-15 every time, as they're such a rare find. Duncan begins to play the prototypical center role for most of every game now for the first time, as the Spurs have no choice but to play him there. Matt Bonner, Oberto, and Drew Gooden were their only other options. Again, it amazes me why people wonder why they dropped off. They only had one decent big man for the last 4 seasons. They would even joke around and ask David Robinson if he ever thought about coming out of retirement to play center for the Spurs because they badly needed one. He laughed and said he could maybe give them a good five minutes then he'd have to sit down for the rest of the half. The sad thing was, they probably weren't fully joking when they asked him that question.

2009, the Spurs draft DeJuan Blair with the pick they got from trading Luis Scola (ironic), but Blair is not large enough to play center. Still, for the first time, they had a decent secondary big man. Of course, he has no ACLs. In any case, good news for the Spurs is that they actually signed multiple players who were capable of playing center. Antonio McDyess and Theo Ratliff. They also signed Richard Jefferson this season, which honestly, for the first time since I've been a Spurs fan, was the first time I remember even one decent free agent ever signing with the team. I was shocked to hear they got all three of those guys in one season. Blown away even.

At this point, Duncan was pretty ingrained as playing as a center anyway. His movement had been diminished due to his bad knee, and he'd gotten used to that role anyway. Still, he split duties there with McDyess, who could actually play the position. Duncan was still the primary defender and rebounder; however, which leads most fans to consider him to have still been the team's center. An acceptable point of view, but if you watched the games, you can't ignore the fact that McDyess played that position a very good portion of the time.

2010: The Spurs finally get Splitter to sign, ending their three year drought of lacking a real center. This also happens to be the first year they have multiple legitimate bigs on their team at the same time, for the first time since early last decade. Blair, McDyess, Splitter, and Duncan (notice I didn't say Matt Bonner :lol )

Splitter is not 100% healthy yet, so you haven't seen him start at center just yet (if you've watched more than the one game that was on ESPN thus far anyway), so Duncan's still, for now, filling their center role for the starting lineup. McDyess splits the duties their with Duncan at the moment, including when both are on the floor at once. They sort of take turns being the center.


So to sum up, it's very incorrect to say Duncan's been a center for most of his career. He's only been basically forced to be the team's center the last few years since they've had no other options. He's been a center out of neccessity, not because he actually is one.

In the end, Duncan is not a center. He's a Power Forward that's so good, and so big, he can actually play center and pull it off to the point he actually looks like a legitimate center. I don't really understand why that is a knock against him as a PF. If anything, it should bolster his status since he can do more than the people who are competing with him for that title.

[Pinkhearts]

If I needed to pick one guy to play PF, out of everybody, I'd pick Bill Russell. But alas, he never played a game at PF in his life. Kind of like Olajuwon.

Why would you pick Bill Russell? He has no outside game and no high post offense. His strength is defending the basket which he can do best as a center. His offense is already limited, pulling him out further will just expose his lack of offensive skills further.

This is the kind of discussion we should be having. Why each player is the best PF. The GOAT. Not Duncan has more rings than Malone, then Duncan is listed as PF and Hakeem at C. Just discuss who can actually play the damn position the best.

[Pinkhearts]

Only you think Duncan is better than Hakeem Sinjackal Hahaha

[Anaximandro1]

When people say he is better than Shaq or than Olajuwon was, it gets insane.

At their respective peaks, Barkley has a shot over Duncan. With longevity (and extended great play) come into the equation, Malone has a very good case over Duncan.

In fact, I'm not convinced Duncan is/was a better player at his peak than prime David Robinson was. And on a last note, I'd say Tim Duncan has played canter most of his career, so I'm not even sure he should be in the discussion of best PFs to have played the game.

(Yes, I know most of you will think I've lost my mind.)

so arrogant but also so wrong...

[Hagbard]

Why would you pick Bill Russell? He has no outside game and no high post offense. His strength is defending the basket which he can do best as a center. His offense is already limited, pulling him out further will just expose his lack of offensive skills further.

This is the kind of discussion we should be having. Why each player is the best PF. The GOAT. Not Duncan has more rings than Malone, then Duncan is listed as PF and Hakeem at C. Just discuss who can actually play the damn position the best.
Russell limited his own game offensively, because he understood that not just the majority, but the HUGE majority of the game was defense and little things. He knew he had a team full of offensive weapons, so concentrated on the...oh, 90% of the game that isn't scoring. And was the best ever at that.

Could he replace Dirk Nowitzki in the Mav's O without missing a beat? Of course not. But he could do all the things offensively that a Zach Randolph or Al Jefferson (if he were still playing PF) or...let's just go ahead and say it, Tim Duncan does. And he'd easily replace Duncan as the best defensive PF on the planet...which is saying something, since Duncan has easily lapped the field in that respect for over a decade.

[Hagbard]

Despite which, I'd still be a boob if I called Russell the GOAT PF. Since he never was one.

GOAT PF is Duncan. Hakeem can square off with Russell et al in the C discussion.

[Fuhqueue]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Tim%20Duncan/-5B2003106155D_Spurs_vs_Nets_cd2avi.jpg
QFT

[SinJackal]

Only you think Duncan is better than Hakeem Sinjackal Hahaha

I guarantee you most of this board has Duncan ranked higher than Hakeem on their GOAT lists. Feel free to ask them.

Or, open any GOAT list thread. On most lists, Hakeem is ranked 9-10 at most, if at all in their top 10's. Most people have Duncan between 7-8, which is higher than most people have Hakeem. The lowest I've seen Duncan ranked on a non anti-Duncan/Spurs troll's list was 9, with Bird above him and Hakeem below him (ranked lower because they put Kobe above him. They were Kobe fans).

Of course, I couldn't care less what you think. You're the only person here with logic bad enough to think a player who played PF in college, and was a PF the first 5 years of his career, including being a PF for 10 of his 13 years, is somehow a career center, and that a career center magically turns into a PF just because he plays with Duncan, who was a PF that you think was a center because he played as one ten years later. You're also the only person here who thinks Hakeem, who calls himself a center, who nearly everyone else calls a center, who's played center for nearly every year of his career, was a career PF.

What kind of broken ass logic is that? It's like you think everyone under 6'11" is automatically a PF regardless of what position he actually plays or everyone including himself says he plays, and that everyone 6'11"+ apparently is a center, unless they're playing with Duncan, then they're automatically a power forward because it's Tim Duncan, even though he's a PF

The Tim Duncan PF Algorithm Theorem. :facepalm

[Round Mound]

For me he plays like a Center but if wan`t put him at CF then its ok

But at CF there has never been a better player than Hakeem.

[wakencdukest]

I think it's because Tim Duncan was just a complete player with a complete resume. There is nothing from his game that anyone can criticize except maybe his free throw shooting and his 'boring' persona.

No 1 guy
Championships
MVPs
Finals MVPs
Great defense
Leader
Great passer, rebounder, shotblocker
Great offense
Clutch
Step up game in the playoff
Had some historic performance
Very consistent player

Other players have some holes in one or more of those areas.


I agree with this.

[New York Knicks]

Number of seasons Duncan hasn't won 50 games (except shortened season) = 0

How many players have done that?

[BlueandGold]

Pretty racist. I'm also white fyi.

how the hell is "urban hotspot" racist?

[kabalcage]

GOAT PF Contenders: Barkley, Malone and Duncan

1) Barkley didn't play defense, you can throw his name out the window.

- So now, it's Duncan vs Malone.

2) Malone wilted under pressure and never won the big one.
3) Duncan was a winner.

- And if anybody remembers. Jordan left in 1999 and the league was left to Karl Malone. Malone won MVP and the Jazz flamed out of the playoffs. 2nd year Tim Duncan goes on to win the whole thing and finals MVP.

Therefore, Duncan is the best PF out of all time.

[2LeTTeRS]

I still think KG was just as good. He's shown that when he had talent he is just as successful as Duncan, unfortunately he spent a lot of his career without a good supporting cast.

[bokes15]

They have "Tim Duncan appreciation day" on NBA.com today. And truly, even though i've never liked the Spurs i've appreciated him more as he aged because he's really a throwback big man with skills that we don't see in today's league anymore. No flash, all substance, and that's why even later in his career he's still so solid because he never depended on his athleticism to get by. Props to the big fundamental, and yes he is IMHO the greatest of all time at his position.

[Kurosawa0]

Duncan was the best player on 4 championship teams. No other power forward has even come close to that.

[mrpuente]

Sin Jackal is nasty:oldlol: :applause: :applause:

[steve]

Number of seasons Duncan hasn't won 50 games (except shortened season) = 0

How many players have done that?
Not only that, but he wasn't bounced from the playoffs in the first round until his 13th season (not including the '00 playoffs when he was hurt and didn't play).

[The_Yearning]

Rings:
Duncan: 4
Barkley: 0
Malone: 0


Final MVP:
Duncan: 3
Barkley: 0
Malone: 0

All Defensive Teams:
Duncan: 13
Barkley: 0
Malone: 4

These facts could be a reason.


Lmao

[kizut1659]

Russell limited his own game offensively, because he understood that not just the majority, but the HUGE majority of the game was defense and little things. He knew he had a team full of offensive weapons, so concentrated on the...oh, 90% of the game that isn't scoring. And was the best ever at that.

Could he replace Dirk Nowitzki in the Mav's O without missing a beat? Of course not. But he could do all the things offensively that a Zach Randolph or Al Jefferson (if he were still playing PF) or...let's just go ahead and say it, Tim Duncan does. And he'd easily replace Duncan as the best defensive PF on the planet...which is saying something, since Duncan has easily lapped the field in that respect for over a decade.

No he couldn't - he shot 45% for his career and never hit 50% during a single season. If he would have averaged more shot attempts, his FG% would be even lower.

[JustinJDW]

If he played for the lakers, knicks or celtics, there is no argument that he would be considered the GOAT. Funny how stuff like that works.This.

And it pains me to read all these posts of biased people who clearly haven't watched the Spurs over the past decade and a half just try to use common false misconceptions and myths that they hear other people say, in an attempt to sound like they know what they are talking about.

:facepalm

So I'm just going to quote a guy who really knows what he is talking about, and is completely right in everything he is saying. But I'm sure you biased and nut-hugging fanboys are just going to pretend its not there, but whatever.


He actually hasn't played center for most of his career. That's a broken, incorrect assessment a lot of new or selective memoried fans have because all they're thinking of is the Duncan of the last 2-3 years. Prior to that, he almost never played center. Here's a quick history lesson on Spurs' centers since Duncan was drafted.

Duncan is drafted and plays alongside David Robinson, a career center who has, to my knowledge, never once played PF in his entire life, short of doing so during an All-Star or Team USA game. He has never played PF during his regular NBA career. Which means from 1997-2003, Duncan did not play center. He's not going to play the position of a player who's a better defender than him at that position when Duncan has been a lifetime PF up to that point. To think he actually did, and that DRob played PF, is a logic fail on the highest level. At absolute most, Duncan played very limited center duties the last year of Robinson's career, when DRob's minutes dipped under 30 a game (rounded) for the first time in his career. The year before that, they had plenty of stop-gap filler centers throughout the season to play the extra minutes at C for them, so it only happened in 2003. And it was more a point of, they couldn't afford or find anyone good enough to actually play center worth a crap, and just had PFs. Duncan was one of the two PFs they had during that time that could actually play as and defend a center worth a damn. They certainly didn't want him to play as one, which was obvious because. . .

Once Robinson retired, the Spurs signed Rasho Nesterovic, who started for the Spurs at center for the next two 1/2 years. Before you even suggest it, Nesterovic is a lifetime center who doesn't play PF. Again, at worst, Duncan played very limited duties at center when Rasho was on the bench. Less than 10 minutes a game that first year. In 2005, they traded for Nazr Mohammed, completely removing Duncan from that center role. Mohammed and Nesterovic shared the Spurs' center duties for the next 2 seasons. Tim Duncan played 0 minutes at center during that time.

So far, at most, Duncan played less than 10 minutes at center per game for about 1 1/2 seasons. And we're already nearly 10 years into his career.

In '05-'06, they signed more centers, and a PF who can play center. Duncan continued to play 0 minutes at that spot.

'06-'07, Spurs sign Francisco Elson to replace Mohammed. Another career center. They signed several scrub centers at this point, feeling the pressure of having a huge team salary in a small market city which means it's very difficult to draw a decent free agent center as they cannot overpay for one to draw them to their less-than-attractive location. Most players would rather play for a shitty Knicks team because it's NY and more money, than a contending Spurs team, as you get less exposure and respect for playing there than many other places.

During the 2007 offseason, the Spurs, sensing these free agent center troubles were not going to end, they draft Tiago Splitter to stop the bleeding. A play who decided to stay overseas because he could make more money. Which posed a new problem. The Spurs, for the first time, did not have a legit starting center. All they had was Oberto, who started at that spot. Oberto's defense at C was very poor, as he wasn't long enough to guard some of the bigger guys, so Duncan would always D' up the best big man on the opposing team, whether it was a center or a PF. While Oberto was playing out of position, he was still their center. Due to his average defensive and offensive abilities, Duncan played the "center role" for most of the game for the first time in his career. And this is TEN YEARS INTO HIS CAREER dude, and only because Splitter didn't come over. If he did, that would've never happened. Also during that season, the Spurs traded for Kurt Thomas, who filled their backup center role for the next few seasons. The Spurs also trade the rights to Luis Scola this year, since for the fifth year in a row they were getting no signal but that he wouldn't show up yet again. Rather than continue to pay for his rights and not get a single game out of him, they traded him to Houston. Subsequently he settled his contract dispute with his team and came over to play in the NBA for the Rockets. Thanks a lot Scola, the Spurs could've used you. :banghead:

2008, their center depth becomes almost an embarrassment. Matt Bonner is their starting center. It's no surprise that the Spurs started to fall off when it comes to wins ever since they ceased to be able to field a decent center every night (an issue that could not be resolved except through the draft, due to the poor ability of small market teams to draw free agent centers with nothing to offer but league minimum or a MLE). And good luck drafting a halfway decent center when the best you get is the 24-26th pick in the draft every year. Any decent center goes before 10-15 every time, as they're such a rare find. Duncan begins to play the prototypical center role for most of every game now for the first time, as the Spurs have no choice but to play him there. Matt Bonner, Oberto, and Drew Gooden were their only other options. Again, it amazes me why people wonder why they dropped off. They only had one decent big man for the last 4 seasons. They would even joke around and ask David Robinson if he ever thought about coming out of retirement to play center for the Spurs because they badly needed one. He laughed and said he could maybe give them a good five minutes then he'd have to sit down for the rest of the half. The sad thing was, they probably weren't fully joking when they asked him that question.

2009, the Spurs draft DeJuan Blair with the pick they got from trading Luis Scola (ironic), but Blair is not large enough to play center. Still, for the first time, they had a decent secondary big man. Of course, he has no ACLs. In any case, good news for the Spurs is that they actually signed multiple players who were capable of playing center. Antonio McDyess and Theo Ratliff. They also signed Richard Jefferson this season, which honestly, for the first time since I've been a Spurs fan, was the first time I remember even one decent free agent ever signing with the team. I was shocked to hear they got all three of those guys in one season. Blown away even.

At this point, Duncan was pretty ingrained as playing as a center anyway. His movement had been diminished due to his bad knee, and he'd gotten used to that role anyway. Still, he split duties there with McDyess, who could actually play the position. Duncan was still the primary defender and rebounder; however, which leads most fans to consider him to have still been the team's center. An acceptable point of view, but if you watched the games, you can't ignore the fact that McDyess played that position a very good portion of the time.

2010: The Spurs finally get Splitter to sign, ending their three year drought of lacking a real center. This also happens to be the first year they have multiple legitimate bigs on their team at the same time, for the first time since early last decade. Blair, McDyess, Splitter, and Duncan (notice I didn't say Matt Bonner :lol )

Splitter is not 100% healthy yet, so you haven't seen him start at center just yet (if you've watched more than the one game that was on ESPN thus far anyway), so Duncan's still, for now, filling their center role for the starting lineup. McDyess splits the duties their with Duncan at the moment, including when both are on the floor at once. They sort of take turns being the center.


So to sum up, it's very incorrect to say Duncan's been a center for most of his career. He's only been basically forced to be the team's center the last few years since they've had no other options. He's been a center out of neccessity, not because he actually is one.

In the end, Duncan is not a center. He's a Power Forward that's so good, and so big, he can actually play center and pull it off to the point he actually looks like a legitimate center. I don't really understand why that is a knock against him as a PF. If anything, it should bolster his status since he can do more than the people who are competing with him for that title.

[Big#50]

How is this even making sense? Sampson was not a true center, but Robinson is a true center playing in the high post? Duncan is the 6'10 man at PF but Hakeem is the 6'10 man at center?

One can even argue Duncan spent most of his career at center. You can argue Gasol and Al Jeff spends most of their time at center too.

All you need to know is that Hakeem can take over Duncan's job and do it better than him. Duncan cannot hope to be as good as Hakeem. That makes Hakeem the GOAT in the position.
Duncan is better than Hakeem. Hakeem played in the 80's and 90's when everyone had sick numbers. Duncan was a beter defender despite the numbers. Hakeem was faster. Duncan has a bigger frame. Duncan is a better passer, low post defender, 1 on1 defender, just as good a scorer. Duncan has a way higher bball IQ and is a better leader. 4 rings does not hurt either.

[Big#50]

I still think KG was just as good. He's shown that when he had talent he is just as successful as Duncan, unfortunately he spent a lot of his career without a good supporting cast.
When KG won a ring he was a sidekick. GTFOH with this shit.

[GiveItToBurrito]

Because he's roughly equivalent to KG, Barkley, and Malone but won a shit-ton of titles. It's basically the same reason Kobe is considered better than Wade for their careers or that people forget about Gilmore.

[LJJ]

When KG won a rong he was a sidekick. GTFOH with this shit.

Yeah but they were all sidekicks. Three great sidekicks.

[2LeTTeRS]

When KG won a rong he was a sidekick. GTFOH with this shit.

He was past his prime, and had the same role on that team as Tiimmy had in 07.

[Big#50]

Yeah but they were all sidekicks. Three great sidekicks.
When KG won a ring it was Pierce who had the big plays and shots. KG was there to defend and rebound.

[Big#50]

He was past his prime, and had the same role on that team as Tiimmy had in 07.
LoL you did not watch the 07 season, did you?

[2LeTTeRS]

LoL you did not watch the 07 season, did you?

Yep....been watching since about 94, what about you? I've made it known several times that I'm not as impressed with Duncan as some others are. I don't mean that as an insult to him, just my personal opinion.

[Harison]

Duncan was the best player on 4 championship teams. No other power forward has even come close to that.
"Teams" is a keyword, some people forget its not one-man team. Duncan had very good teams for most of his career, so its unreasonable to attribute all those championships just to him forgetting with whom he was playing with. Like KG was the best player on '08 Celtics, but he wasnt the only reason they won. Or '09-10 Lakers - as great as Kobe is, he has flat out awesome team.

Conversely, if you would stick Duncan, KG, Kobe, etc. to crappy teams like Minny, Lakers '05-07, etc. they arent winning anything.

[ILLsmak]

Scoring 22 points "explosively" and scoring 22 points period. . .there's no difference. That's probably why posting numbers doesn't matter, because points are points, where they looked flashy going in or not.


Points are points, but scoring different ways affects the momentum of the game. Duncan is a great player, but he's more of an 'offense scorer.' Hakeem was more of a dump it down to him and get out of his way type of scorer. Plus, as I said, Hakeem is way more suited for the PF position than Duncan is. I dunno how anyone can argue that.

Duncan would take a huge hit in production if he played with a real C, and that's why I don't understand people listing him as a PF. I'll name him as an all-time great big man, but he lacks a lot of the things I think make a good PF. And he can't really guard good PFs. That's why someone like Amare shit all over him.

-Smak

[shootingcomets]

duncan by himself with bunch of scrubs is enough to get to the playoffs while the same can't be said for KG and kobe

[G.O.A.T]

"Teams" is a keyword, some people forget its not one-man team. Duncan had very good teams for most of his career, so its unreasonable to attribute all those championships just to him forgetting with whom he was playing with. Like KG was the best player on '08 Celtics, but he wasnt the only reason they won. Or '09-10 Lakers - as great as Kobe is, he has flat out awesome team.

Conversely, if you would stick Duncan, KG, Kobe, etc. to crappy teams like Minny, Lakers '05-07, etc. they arent winning anything.

I don't think that's completely fair to Duncan.

How do we know Chauncey Billups don't blossom with Duncan?

Duncan won in 58 games in 2002 and a title in 2003 with very underwhelming rosters.

Some players are just easier to play with, they bring out the best in others. I think based on his career, Duncan is probably one of those guys.

Just look how many guys go to SA play well and are useless to the rest of the NBA after they leave.

I think the "basketball is a team game" thing works both ways. The better your team is the lower your stats will be and the better player you are, the better you make your teammates. So it's like punishing a guy for being good at playing a team game.

[C-Webb4]

duncan by himself with bunch of scrubs is enough to get to the playoffs while the same can't be said for KG and kobe
Actually Kobe and KG both did take a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs, so i'm not really sure where you're going with that regardless of the fact that I support your side of the argument. :lol

[C-Webb4]

Points are points, but scoring different ways affects the momentum of the game. Duncan is a great player, but he's more of an 'offense scorer.' Hakeem was more of a dump it down to him and get out of his way type of scorer. Plus, as I said, Hakeem is way more suited for the PF position than Duncan is. I dunno how anyone can argue that.

Duncan would take a huge hit in production if he played with a real C, and that's why I don't understand people listing him as a PF. I'll name him as an all-time great big man, but he lacks a lot of the things I think make a good PF. And he can't really guard good PFs. That's why someone like Amare shit all over him.

-Smak
Quite honestly if you don't think that Duncan has hit a TON of momemtum changing points over the course of his career, you obviously have not watched very much of him play. Whether it's a thunderous dunk, a dream shake, or a plain bread and butter banker off the glass, it changes the momentum of the game when a guy can take it over at will when his team needs him, and Duncan has fit that bill for his entire career.

[SCdac]

Points are points, but scoring different ways affects the momentum of the game. Duncan is a great player, but he's more of an 'offense scorer.' Hakeem was more of a dump it down to him and get out of his way type of scorer. Plus, as I said, Hakeem is way more suited for the PF position than Duncan is. I dunno how anyone can argue that.

Duncan would take a huge hit in production if he played with a real C, and that's why I don't understand people listing him as a PF. I'll name him as an all-time great big man, but he lacks a lot of the things I think make a good PF. And he can't really guard good PFs. That's why someone like Amare shit all over him.

-Smak

Wow, the way you regard Duncan.... you'd think he was merely Elton Brand :rolleyes:

If you think prime Duncan was not the kind of player you could dump the ball into, and get basically an automatic bucket... I'd suggesting watching some of his game from the early 2000's.... the guy was a beast.

We're talking about a player that was ROTY, All-NBA first team, and All-Defensive second team... in the SAME season... A season after that he was a Finals MVP.

A player who in 2002 scored more points than Kobe, Iverson, McGrady, Shaq,
Garnett, Dirk, Payton, Malone, etc..... to finish with 25.5 PPG on a team with the one of the slowest paces in the league.

[Harison]

I don't think that's completely fair to Duncan.

How do we know Chauncey Billups don't blossom with Duncan?

Duncan won in 58 games in 2002 and a title in 2003 with very underwhelming rosters.

Some players are just easier to play with, they bring out the best in others. I think based on his career, Duncan is probably one of those guys.

Just look how many guys go to SA play well and are useless to the rest of the NBA after they leave.

I think the "basketball is a team game" thing works both ways. The better your team is the lower your stats will be and the better player you are, the better you make your teammates. So it's like punishing a guy for being good at playing a team game.
Those "underwhelming rosters" were far better than KG (most of the years in Minny) or Kobe (rebuilding Lakers) had to deal with.

Its also fair to say some superstars make teammates better (like KG made Cassell All-star), but again its not the reason why championship Spurs or '08 Celtics were so good. For example, like 60+% GMs voted KG as the best leader in NBA that year, Duncan got 11% votes, but its obvious you only can churn the butter out of milk, you cant churn it out of s*** :oldlol:

Thats why when comparing superstars, we also have to remember the context - teams, coaches, competition, injuries, etc. No reasonable fan can say "x player is better than y, because he has n rings", it doesnt work this way. Rings are one of the criterion, but far from only one.

[shootingcomets]

Actually Kobe and KG both did take a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs, so i'm not really sure where you're going with that regardless of the fact that I support your side of the argument. :lol

kobe missed the playoffs in 04-05 with players like Vlade Divac, Caron Butler, Lamar Odom


KG missed playoffs with Latrell Sprewell and Sam Cassell


Duncan never missed playoffs so yea...

[magnax1]

Because he's roughly equivalent to KG, Barkley, and Malone but won a shit-ton of titles. It's basically the same reason Kobe is considered better than Wade for their careers or that people forget about Gilmore.
Pretty much this. Duncan is no doubt great, but the exaggerations of how well he played in his peak really get on my nerves. Him and Hakeem both get extreme exaggerations of how well they played in their prime (like saying Hakeem=Prime Jordan or Duncan=Prime Bird, which I've heard for both multiple times) of course this isn't the opinion of the majority, but its surprising how many believe it.

Just look how many guys go to SA play well and are useless to the rest of the NBA after they leave.
Like who? The only guys I remember being a big part of Duncan's teams and leaving are SJax and Turkeyglue, who both were much better after they left.

[C-Webb4]

kobe missed the playoffs in 04-05 with players like Vlade Divac, Caron Butler, Lamar Odom


KG missed playoffs with Latrell Sprewell and Sam Cassell


Duncan never missed playoffs so yea...
Tim Duncan has never in his entire career played with a team as bad as the one Kobe missed the playoffs with. That team was so bad it had Chris Mihm, and Chucky Atkins as full time starters. And their bench was D-league standards. Caron Butler and Odom and an old ass Divac coming off the bench isn't enough to take a team to the playoffs in a loaded Western Conference that actually took 45 wins to get there.

[Big#50]

Yep....been watching since about 94, what about you? I've made it known several times that I'm not as impressed with Duncan as some others are. I don't mean that as an insult to him, just my personal opinion.
that is cool. Your opinion is just as valid as mine. But you said he had the same role as KG, and that is just stupid.

[SinJackal]

Points are points, but scoring different ways affects the momentum of the game. Duncan is a great player, but he's more of an 'offense scorer.' Hakeem was more of a dump it down to him and get out of his way type of scorer. Plus, as I said, Hakeem is way more suited for the PF position than Duncan is. I dunno how anyone can argue that.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but so am I to mine. If someone does some thundering dunk on a fast break, the home crowd gets excited sure, but then what? That was just two points. If they were already down by 12 because Duncan's been packing his shots left and right and methodically putting in bucket after bucket, what momentum does that add?

The way you're saying all that, you say explosive scoring is somehow more special because it helps you win more than non-explosive scoring. . .even if that scoring isn't even coming at better volumes or through the natural flow of his team's offense. I don't need to do anything more than point out the career records of any "explosive player" you want to compare him to, both in the regular season and postseason, to explain how explosive scoring on an inferior player doesn't give them a magical leg up just because it's more interesting to watch. Duncan's been winning since day 1, and despite his advanced age and bad knee, he's still winning. In fact, the Spurs are 10-1 right now, which is the best record they've ever started a season with. :condusedshrug:

And before the inevitable "he isn't as good" and "he has plenty of good players on his team now" comments, we know that. But I've watched all 11 of the Spurs games this year, and I can confidently tell you that the Spurs play extremely well when he's on the floor, and fairly average when it he isn't. Even when he had the flu for three games and didn't score or rebound much, his off ball movement, constant screen setting, and the mere threat of his presence on the floor makes his teammates MUCH better. That's another thing that sets him apart from those other PFs. Duncan has never been a black hole. He's never been a "give me the ball and let me score" guy. Some people may claim that's a negative, but real fans know it isn't. A guy who does his thing no matter what kind of offense is run is better than a guy who must have the ball and work with it to do his thing. Assuming the two players being compared put up similar offensive numbers.



Duncan would take a huge hit in production if he played with a real C, and that's why I don't understand people listing him as a PF. I'll name him as an all-time great big man, but he lacks a lot of the things I think make a good PF. And he can't really guard good PFs. That's why someone like Amare shit all over him.

Duncan did play with a real center, his name was David Robinson. The stats he put up when playing with a real center were actually arguably the best he's put up in his entire career. At least, his scoring was certainly the highest of his career. His scoring went down when he started playing as a center, then back up once the Spurs got a real C for him to play with again, then back down once he got stuck playing C again. So technically you have it backwards. :P I think you're just assuming he'd put up worse stats, but didn't even bother looking up his numbers before you posted that to see the truth. S'ok though, happens sometimes.

Also, as for Amar'e, he played well against Duncan because they never double team him. Amar'e shits on everyone who doesn't double team him. Their gameplan is to never double team an opposing player, that way roleplayers can never play off of the talents of the star players on their team. A gameplan which has made S.A. successful against a lot of teams over the years. Sure, star guys can go off on them, regardless of what position they're at. Chris Paul might blow them up for 34-38 points. Amar'e might smash them for 40. D Rose might nearly score 40. But they lose the game since they let stars score and take their own teammates out of the game. You see guys standing around watching stars do all the work, getting tired, then getting shit on on the defensive end. Then once the game's close and everyone's still standing around, suddenly a help defender pokes the ball away from Amar'e on a few straight possessions, or Chris Paul gets trapped in the corner, and turns the ball over, and suddenly they can't figure out why they're losing at home with 30 seconds left when the game was so close the whole way.

And please name all the "things a good PF has that he lacks". That'll be an interesting read, since I can't think of one he lacks that a big man needs besides highlight reel dunking; an unimportant aspect of the game.

Are you going to say defense? Because he's been an All NBA defensive team player every year of his career.

Scoring? He averages 20+ for his career.

Rebounding? He averages 11+ for his career.

Efficiency? He averages 51% FG%.

Passing perhaps? He averages 3 for his career. More than most PFs.

Shot blocking? He averages over 2.

Steals? He gets one a game, and pokes the ball away from players often to another teammate, which he doesn't get credit for despite that he caused the steal.

Does he foul too much? No, he usually is near bottom of the league for starting bigs.

He also makes his teammates better, so you can't use that argument. As I already pointed out, the Spurs always play much better when he's on the floor, regardless of whether or not he's scoring. Also, no matter where in the draft the Spurs get a player, they magically always do well in S.A.. The only constants have been Duncan and Popovich.

Did he post losing seasons? No, no matter who's been on his team, he's won.

Did he ever miss the playoffs? No.

Lose in first round? Once, when he was missing his second best player.

The only aspects of his game that are "lacking" are guard and SF traits. 3pt shooting, high FT%, high assist numbers, and high steal totals. Those are not big man traits. Some bigs can do some of that, but it's not something that's considered a neccessity. The best bigs of the last 15 years didn't do any of that (Duncan and Shaq). They did their actual job better than everyone else. Asking for any more than typical big man traits is just being nitpicky to have an argument since you can't argue that he lacks in any area you need your big man to be successful in.

[SCdac]

Tim's first playoff game .... 21 years old

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

32 points
10 rebounds
1 assist
1 steal
2 blocks
57.1 FG%

dude was making all kinds of buckets :applause:

[AI3Anthony]

Why am I getting negative rep for this thread??? I never said Tim WASNT THE BEST. And I keep getting neg repped for one of the most popular and heated topics on this forum right now. SORRY for stirring up some discussion. Jesus people are ridiculous.
:confusedshrug:

[Nastradamus]

Duncan is a head of Barkley,Malone etc. His wins and his defense are just way too far ahead of those guys.

[ninephive]

Oh so now you are only arguing who is the GOAT player that is listed as PF. Hmm maybe Lebron should convert and list himself as PF and he will instantly become the best PF. Could happen eventually you know. Maybe Durant will one day list himself as PF and challenge for the GOAT player at PF too.
Hahahaha except for the fact that Lebron is nowhere close to the winner Duncan is. Duncan was working on title #4 about this time in his career and all Lebron can do is talk..."not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7." My favorite part was when DWade started laughing when Lebron went past 7 imaginary titles. Look, let's win 1 finals GAME before we start talking 7+ titles. Anyway, Uh put Lebron at any position...he wouldn't be even close to GOAT anything except overrated media clown. And Durant?!? Ok now we're just getting stupid. Are you really talking about someone who has never even won a playoff series? Oh what has it all come to? Are you serious?

[Round Mound]

Tim is a great player: one of the few ones that has a post game today

but had he played a gainst a prime Barkley he would have suffered

Also Malone.

Today`s NBA is soft as hell, it all favours perimeter oriented superstars.