Rookie Tim Duncan vs. Rookie Blake Griffin

[Lebron23]

Who had the better Rookie Season?

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Blake+Griffin+Sprite+Slam+Dunk+Contest+g_ngLiQz0lA l.jpg

22.5 ppg, 12.1 rpg, 3.8 apg, 0.8 spg, 0.5 bpg, 50.6 FG% - Regular Season

Clippers didn't make the playoffs - N/A

Awards

2010-2011 NBA Rookie of the Year
2010-2011 All NBA Rookie First Team
2011 NBA Slamdunk Champion
2011 NBA Western Conference All Star

Team Record: 32-50

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/1102/nba-all-star-rookies/images/tim-duncan.jpg

21.1 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 2.5 bpg 2.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 54.9 FG% - Regular Season

20.7 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 1.9 apg, 0.6 spg, 2.6 bpg, 52.1 FG% - Playoffs

Awards

1997-98 All NBA First Team
1997-98 All NBA Defensive Second Team
1998 NBA Rookie of the Year
1997-98 All NBA Rookie First Team
1998 NBA Western Conference All Star

Team Record:
56-26

[32Dayz]

Rookie Tim obviously.

Blake Griffin was insanely good as a Rookie but he wasnt on the same level as the Rookie Shaq/Duncan/Kareem/Wilts.

Defense is the biggest difference.

[TDPrime2030]

http://i51.tinypic.com/2enrp94.png

[Haymaker]

Who had the better Rookie Season?

http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Blake+Griffin+Sprite+Slam+Dunk+Contest+g_ngLiQz0lA l.jpg

22.5 ppg, 12.1 rpg, 3.8 apg, 0.8 spg, 0.5 bpg, 50.6 FG% - Regular Season

Clippers didn't make the playoffs - N/A

Awards

2010-2011 NBA Rookie of the Year
2010-2011 All NBA Rookie First Team
2011 NBA Slamdunk Champion
2011 NBA Western Conference All Star

Team Record: 32-50

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/1102/nba-all-star-rookies/images/tim-duncan.jpg

21.1 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 2.5 bpg 2.7 apg, 0.7 spg, 54.9 FG% - Regular Season

20.7 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 1.9 apg, 0.6 spg, 2.6 bpg, 52.1 FG% - Playoffs

Awards

1997-98 All NBA First Team
1997-98 All NBA Defensive Second Team
1998 NBA Rookie of the Year
1997-98 All NBA Rookie First Team
1998 NBA Western Conference All Star

Team Record:
56-26

That picture reminded me of how much I hated that all-star game just because of the uniforms(or lack of).

[b0bab0i]

Rookie Tim obviously.

Blake Griffin was insanely good as a Rookie but he wasnt on the same level as the Rookie Shaq/Duncan/Kareem/Wilts.

Defense is the biggest difference.
He also had DRob.

[senelcoolidge]

Duncan is called the "Big Fundamental" for a reason. He played 4 years of college ball. Griffin is still raw, but learning very quickly. Rookie Duncan was much more refined than rookie Griffin.

[b0bab0i]

That picture reminded me of how much I hated that all-star game just because of the uniforms(or lack of).
I actually like it better. Representing your own team. Looks good on the Rookie-Soph games.

[Lebron23]

http://i51.tinypic.com/2enrp94.png




http://assets.diylol.com/hfs/d02/0ef/c63/resized/yao-ming-meme-generator-you-fail-at-trollin-thanks-for-trying-d2bbcc.jpg

[Wonder Bread Kid]

He also had DRob.

And he still put up those numbers. :bowdown:

[Fiasco]

Blake Griffin with D-Rob would be sick.

[ballinhun8]

Not real close.


One led his team to do a 180 and get back in the playoffs.

[Warners0]

I love how people really think that was Blake Griffin's rookie year it was his second year. He could have played his rookie year and he chose not to play.

[32Dayz]

I love how people really think that was Blake Griffin's rookie year it was his second year. He could have played his rookie year and he chose not to play.

1st year playing in the NBA = Rookie Year.

:facepalm

[The_Yearning]

Are you kidding me? Rookie T. Duncan was destroying the Suns in the playoffs.

[Odinn]

Actually they were at the same age(21) in their rookie seasons.

Rookie Duncan was better than rookie Griffin and impacted much more. 23/12/4 and only 3W improvement?.. That really hurts Griffin's case in greatest rookie season debate.

[Fiasco]

Rookie Duncan was better than rookie Griffin and impacted much more. 23/12/4 and only 3W improvement?.. That really hurts Griffin's case in greatest rookie season debate.

It's not a fair comparison at all. Duncan had the better season (duh), but he also had the better team. When Brian Cook is your 3rd go-to scorer it says a lot.

[b0bab0i]

Actually they were at the same age(21) in their rookie seasons.

Rookie Duncan was better than rookie Griffin and impacted much more. 23/12/4 and only 3W improvement?.. That really hurts Griffin's case in greatest rookie season debate.
Because basketball is a "team" sport. Clippers had so many injuries throughout the season. EJ, Baron, Kaman, foye, craig smith.

[Odinn]

It's not a fair comparison at all. Duncan had the better season (duh), but he also had the better team. When Brian Cook is your 3rd go-to scorer it says a lot.
I didn't talk about record. Improvement. There is a considerable difference.

He averaged 23/12/4 and Clippers won only 3 more games compared to previous season? I think this says a lot.

[Fiasco]

I didn't talk about record. Improvement. There is a considerable difference.

He averaged 23/12/4 and Clippers won only 3 more games compared to previous season? I think this says a lot.

It says he had a crap team.

EDIT: This argument is so stupid because it completely ignores the fact that Robinson missed the season before Duncan was drafted, which is why the Spurs were so freaking terrible. The year before Robinson was out, they won 59 games with a similar roster from 1997 season. Sure, Ducan was a big part of that, but let's not act like the Spurs were some scrub team that Duncan breathed life into. I'm sure if Blake Griffin played his first year with a HOF center, the Clippers would not have been a 32 win team.

This is the first time Griffin is going to be playing with franchise player talent. Reserve your judgment until you've seen what he can do with someone who is as gifted as he is.

[Odinn]

Because basketball is a "team" sport. Clippers had so many injuries throughout the season. EJ, Baron, Kaman, foye, craig smith.
Larry Bird
Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
David Robinson
Shaquille O'Neal
Michael Jordan

All of them say hello to you. Duncan's rookie season can be compared to these players' rookie season, while Griffin's one can not.

The only reason you guys compare Duncan and Griffin, they played at the same position and their ppg-rpg-apg numbers are similar. But numbers only aren't enough to make a case for rookie Griffin against rookie Duncan.

[32Dayz]

Rookie Duncan's Best Game :
34 / 14 / 4 / 2 / 3 on 56% shooting

Rookie Griffin's Best Game :
47 / 14 / 3 / 1BLK on 80% shooting
or
44 / 15 / 7 / 2 / 1 on 58% shooting

[Warners0]

1st year playing in the NBA = Rookie Year.

:facepalm

Um no, he went through a training camp, got coached by NBA coaches got used to the NBA speed.

[32Dayz]

Um no, he went through a training camp, got coached by NBA coaches got used to the NBA speed.

I guess but i'll still give him credit for his rookie year.

[Vienceslav]

Rookie Duncan's Best Game :
34 / 14 / 4 / 2 / 3 on 56% shooting

Rookie Griffin's Best Game :
47 / 14 / 3 / 1BLK on 80% shooting
or
44 / 15 / 7 / 2 / 1 on 58% shooting
How many 50 point games does Blake get this year?
My conservative prediction is 3.

[Smoke117]

Tim Duncan, easily. He was the far, far superior defensive player and he was playing in an era where you actually still be physical with the offensive player and every little bump wasn't a foul. There is no way in hell Griffin averages 8.0fta's his rookie season in 1998.

[Clippersfan86]

Duncan for reasons Fiasco and a couple others have pointed out. Griffin had 9 eight new teammates, teammates going out with injuries nonstop and a new coaching staff. From the time Griffin was drafted by the Clippers we had literally 3 head coaches. WAY too much stacked against him to turn the team around immediately but his impact is massive.

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.

Then you factor in David Robinson who was an MVP worthy player and it all makes sense. You have two players that could of won MVP and it's not hard to see why they won 56 games or w/e. The most important thing of all that you guys forgot is that Duncan was brought in during the prime of bigmen. When they were allowed to do a lot more. Be more physical, 5+ seconds back to basket etc. Now it's MUCH harder for a big man to put up stats or play D at a high level than it was then.

[Clippersfan86]

How many 50 point games does Blake get this year?
My conservative prediction is 3.

2. Multiple 40.

[Carbine]

Duncan for reasons Fiasco and a couple others have pointed out. Griffin had 9 eight new teammates, teammates going out with injuries nonstop and a new coaching staff. From the time Griffin was drafted by the Clippers we had literally 3 head coaches. WAY too much stacked against him to turn the team around immediately but his impact is massive.

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.

Then you factor in David Robinson who was an MVP worthy player and it all makes sense. You have two players that could of won MVP and it's not hard to see why they won 56 games or w/e. The most important thing of all that you guys forgot is that Duncan was brought in during the prime of bigmen. When they were allowed to do a lot more. Be more physical, 5+ seconds back to basket etc. Now it's MUCH harder for a big man to put up stats or play D at a high level than it was then.

Duncan was every bit the rebounder Griffin is. I'd say better.

Drob wasn't an MVP type player after his injury either.

[Clippersfan86]

Duncan was every bit the rebounder Griffin is. I'd say better.

Drob wasn't an MVP type player after his injury either.

Tim averaged 12+ rebounds 3 times in his career, first time being in his 7th season. Blake Griffin is NO QUESTION the hungrier, more aggressive rebounder. Have you watched Griffin play? He plays like he's a garbage player trying to get minutes. He will always be a better rebounder than Duncan ever was. Just like Barkley before him.

Griffin cracked the 13 rpg mark for a while last season until Eric Gordon went down and teams started roughing him up hardcore. Expect him to get to the 13-14 rebound range which is MUCH harder in this current era than it was in Duncan's.

David Robinson did have a drop off and you're right wasn't quite MVP level (I shouldn't of said that) but he was still a lot better/more impactful than anything Blake had on the Clippers. He put up 21.6 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 2.7 apg and 2.6 bpg with great D. He was actually a better player than rookie Duncan you can argue and he played 73 games. So it's stupid to act like Duncan carried a team who had a player that dominant on the roster with him.

Give Griffin 97-98 D Rob and see what happens.

[Miller for 3]

Tim averaged 12+ rebounds 3 times in his career, first time being in his 7th season. Blake Griffin is NO QUESTION the hungrier, more aggressive rebounder. Have you watched Griffin play? He plays like he's a garbage player trying to get minutes. He will always be a better rebounder than Duncan ever was. Just like Barkley before him.

Griffin cracked the 13 rpg mark for a while last season until Eric Gordon went down and teams started roughing him up hardcore. Expect him to get to the 13-14 rebound range which is MUCH harder in this current era than it was in Duncan's.

David Robinson did have a drop off and you're right wasn't quite MVP level (I shouldn't of said that) but he was still a lot better/more impactful than anything Blake had on the Clippers. He put up 21.6 ppg, 10.6 rpg, 2.7 apg and 2.6 bpg with great D. He was actually a better player than rookie Duncan you can argue and he played 73 games. So it's stupid to act like Duncan carried a team who had a player that dominant on the roster with him.

Give Griffin 97-98 D Rob and see what happens.

no its much easier to get rebounds when your center is Kaman/Jordan, you don't play any defense and only worry about your boxscore stats, and you play on a losing team that no one tries against. Rookie Duncan was world's better than Sophmore Griffin. Let me know when Griffin averages 10+ rebounds while playing with a HOFer, actually playing defense, and is on a good team.

[Clippersfan86]

no its much easier to get rebounds when your center is Kaman/Jordan, you don't play any defense and only worry about your boxscore stats, and you play on a losing team that no one tries against. Rookie Duncan was world's better than Sophmore Griffin. Let me know when Griffin averages 10+ rebounds while playing with a HOFer, actually playing defense, and is on a good team.

Clippers as a team were 1st in team rebounding percentage and 5th overall in rebounds. Nice try though! As a TEAM the Clippers were a very good rebounding squad outside of Griffin. Griffin's been working hard on his shot and defense... we'll see what happens.

[Odinn]

Duncan for reasons Fiasco and a couple others have pointed out. Griffin had 9 eight new teammates, teammates going out with injuries nonstop and a new coaching staff. From the time Griffin was drafted by the Clippers we had literally 3 head coaches. WAY too much stacked against him to turn the team around immediately but his impact is massive.

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.

Then you factor in David Robinson who was an MVP worthy player and it all makes sense. You have two players that could of won MVP and it's not hard to see why they won 56 games or w/e. The most important thing of all that you guys forgot is that Duncan was brought in during the prime of bigmen. When they were allowed to do a lot more. Be more physical, 5+ seconds back to basket etc. Now it's MUCH harder for a big man to put up stats or play D at a high level than it was then.
Holy sh!t.

Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg on 50.6%. (the L average; 99.6 ppg on 45.9%)
Duncan averaged 21.1 ppg on 54.9%. (the L average; 95.6 ppg on 45.0%)

nowhere near?:oldlol: :oldlol: :facepalm

[brantonli]

^^ If somebody can find the pace numbers for Clippers and Spurs, that would really tell the difference between their ppg.

[Odinn]

^^ If somebody can find the pace numbers for Clippers and Spurs, that would really tell the difference between their ppg.
1997-98 Spurs; pace 88.4 (23rd of 29) | 75.5 fga per game
2010-11 Clippers; pace 92.4 (12th of 30) | 80.4 fga per game

[Clippersfan86]

Odinn Duncan was nearly the same in terms of scoring consistently. Nowhere near the explosive scorer Griffin is. Compare Griffin's highest scoring games to Duncan's and you'll see. I suppose pace adjusted it's fair to say they are equal scorers in terms of numbers+consistency. Funny thing is Duncan had a midrange jumper and impressive arsenal yet people think Griffin only dunks.... yet somehow Griffin managed to score over a ppg more as a rookie.

Reality here is Duncan's success was a combination of him, the Spurs system and always being surrounded with top shelf teammates. Let's see how Griffin does next to Paul. I think 25 ppg, 13 rpg and 4+ apg this year is not out of the question. If he also improved his defense and shot that will rival prime Duncan, or at least be close. IN HIS SECOND SEASON. It's scary because Duncan's growth from rookie to prime wasn't that significant. Griffin's growth from college to end of his rookie season was much greater.

This dude is being compared to Duncan and he's RAW. Imagine when Griffin becomes more controlled and refined? If Griffin wins at least 2 rings with the Clippers and stays healthy, stays with Chris Paul his entire career.. he will be recognized as the greatest PF of all time. Greater than Duncan... greater than Malone... greater than Barkley.

[Odinn]

Odinn Duncan was nearly the same in terms of scoring consistently. Nowhere near the explosive scorer Griffin is. Compare Griffin's highest scoring games to Duncan's and you'll see. I suppose pace adjusted it's fair to say they are equal scorers in terms of numbers+consistency. Funny thing is Duncan had a midrange jumper and impressive arsenal yet people think Griffin only dunks.... yet somehow Griffin managed to score over a ppg more as a rookie.
The funny thing you changed your argument from "nowhere near" to "equal".

Sorry but we all know how you're "optimist" about Griffin&Clippers.

[Odinn]

This dude is being compared to Duncan and he's RAW. Imagine when Griffin becomes more controlled and refined? If Griffin wins at least 2 rings with the Clippers and stays healthy, stays with Chris Paul his entire career.. he will be recognized as the greatest PF of all time. Greater than Duncan... greater than Malone... greater than Barkley.
There you go.:oldlol: :oldlol: :roll: :roll: :applause:

Thanks for supporting my claim.:oldlol:

[yobore]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=Y&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=mp_per_g_req&c1stat=&c1comp=gt&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=Y&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=mp_per_g_req&c1stat=&c1comp=gt&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per
Some advanced stats for comparison. Definitely Duncan but Blake was awesome too and now he's paired up with the only other active player ahead of him on those lists

[Clippersfan86]

The funny thing you changed your argument from "nowhere near" to "equal".

Sorry but we all know how you're "optimist" about Griffin&Clippers.

I changed it because you made a good, fair point. What does that have to do with anything? We'll see. I'm more than content to let the Clippers do the talking this year. I've been saying this team would be great since last year and people laughed at me. I'm going to say this. This coming season the Clippers are going to wreck teams and come playoff time anybody who gets them is going to be very unhappy. Teams aren't going to look forward to playing the Clippers like old times.

Many of the fans lashing out now saying crap like "Well they still aren't that good" will be watching their team getting blown out and tucking their tails and disappearing from ISH for a while. It's okay though because I'm going to be in all the game threads calling out the people who get owned that talked trash. Also going to be calling out the people who suddenly are cool with the Clippers when just last week they were bagging on the team.

It's awesome because now that all the old cliches "same old Clippers" can't be used.. people resort to denial. Comments like "It's okay CP3 will leave anyways". It's entertaining to me.

[rmt]

Reality here is Duncan's success was a combination of him, the Spurs system and always being surrounded with top shelf teammates. Let's see how Griffin does next to Paul. I think 25 ppg, 13 rpg and 4+ apg this year is not out of the question. If he also improved his defense and shot that will rival prime Duncan, or at least be close. IN HIS SECOND SEASON. It's scary because Duncan's growth from rookie to prime wasn't that significant. Griffin's growth from college to end of his rookie season was much greater.

This dude is being compared to Duncan and he's RAW. Imagine when Griffin becomes more controlled and refined? If Griffin wins at least 2 rings with the Clippers and stays healthy, stays with Chris Paul his entire career.. he will be recognized as the greatest PF of all time. Greater than Duncan... greater than Malone... greater than Barkley.

TD did not have top shelf teammates in '03 - 38 year old DRob, rookie manu, 2nd year, 20 year old TP. I don't think of Griffin as a true rookie - one year spent traveling with the team, attending practices, learning the plays, adjusting to NBA life, knowing your teammates, etc is a big part of being a rookie.

It's telling that a lot your hopes for the 2 rings/recognition as the greatest PF of all time is dependent on playing with a superstar who is currently a better player than Griffin. Too bad TD didn't have a Chris Paul or John Stockton passing him the ball. Instead he played with Tony (can't pass the ball) Parker and had to create his own shots.

Anyway, the ability to anchor the defense is the (big) difference ignoring the difference in style. Griffin is the anti-thesis of TD - athletic, explosive, raw.

[MooseJuiceBowen]

this thread is ****ing terrible you are just feeding the clipper trolls

[SCdac]

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.

:facepalm

some people should seriously study the game more.

In the last 20 games or so leading into the '98 playoffs, Duncan was averaging a solid 27.1 PPG, and in stretches of the season he was scoring a little better (27.8 PPG closer february). Top 10 in scoring, Top 5 in blocks, 2nd best in rebounding behind Rodman.

Rookie Duncan would be the best player in the game right now IMO. either him or Lebron.

[Bigsmoke]

The one who played defense.

lol dumb question dude. Timmy!

[Clippersfan86]

:facepalm

some people should seriously study the game more.

In the last 20 games or so leading into the '98 playoffs, Duncan was averaging a solid 27.1 PPG, and in stretches of the season he was scoring a little better (27.8 PPG closer february). Top 10 in scoring, Top 5 in blocks, 2nd best in rebounding behind Rodman.

Rookie Duncan would be the best player in the game right now IMO.

We'll see what happens dude. It's a dumb idea to go off on a long tangent of Duncan vs Griffin due to the fact that Griffin is 22 going into his second season. He has more upside than Duncan ever did.. but he also is more injury prone and less fundamentally sound. Let's give Griffin time to prove himself. Point is.. he had an all time great season. Not Duncan level but definitely in that tier of rookie.

[AngelEyes]

Rookie Duncan was superior. A much wider variety of offensive moves and a far better defender. Duncan was a lot more polished in his rookie year.

[Odinn]

We'll see what happens dude. It's a dumb idea to go off on a long tangent of Duncan vs Griffin due to the fact that Griffin is 22 going into his second season. He has more upside than Duncan ever did.. but he also is more injury prone and less fundamentally sound. Let's give Griffin time to prove himself. Point is.. he had an all time great season. Not Duncan level but definitely in that tier of rookie.
That was my point at first. You don't know some facts and keep talking about presumptive arguments. Both, Duncan and Griffin, were at their 21 in their rookie season.

You said "good, fair point" but you should realize that facts before posting.

[G-train]

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.


Fez, to say he was 'no where near the scorer' is just plain wrong. Duncan was an elite low post scorer in his rookie season. He was probably a better scorer than Griffin. Cool, you can argue that. But to say he was 'no where near the scorer' just makes me lose all respect for you on this topic.

[NugzHeat3]

Rookie Duncan is nearly as good as prime Duncan. The guy was extremely complete and polished going into his rookie year; anybody who remembers him at Wake Forest will tell you the same.

The only thing I can say Duncan improved on is his passing mainly due to adjusting to double teams.

Look at the guy's #s post all star break when they made him the focal point of the offense and Robinson took a complete backseat. Duncan gradually took the team over.

Griffin definitely isn't as good as him. That said, he's pretty raw at the moment. Players peak differently. He's not close to being a finished product like Duncan nearly was.

[G-train]

We'll see what happens dude. It's a dumb idea to go off on a long tangent of Duncan vs Griffin due to the fact that Griffin is 22 going into his second season. He has more upside than Duncan ever did.. but he also is more injury prone and less fundamentally sound. Let's give Griffin time to prove himself. Point is.. he had an all time great season. Not Duncan level but definitely in that tier of rookie.

Duncan's upside was the greatest power forward ever :facepalm
Adn he arguably did it.
How can you have more upside than that?
come on now fez

[RRR3]

Duncan for reasons Fiasco and a couple others have pointed out. Griffin had 9 eight new teammates, teammates going out with injuries nonstop and a new coaching staff. From the time Griffin was drafted by the Clippers we had literally 3 head coaches. WAY too much stacked against him to turn the team around immediately but his impact is massive.

Duncan's defense and all around player put him ahead but people saying it's not even close are ignorant. Yes Duncan is better defensively but he's also nowhere near the scorer, rebounder or passer of rookie Griffin. Sure Duncan was a solid-good post passer as a big but not Griffin level.

Then you factor in David Robinson who was an MVP worthy player and it all makes sense. You have two players that could of won MVP and it's not hard to see why they won 56 games or w/e. The most important thing of all that you guys forgot is that Duncan was brought in during the prime of bigmen. When they were allowed to do a lot more. Be more physical, 5+ seconds back to basket etc. Now it's MUCH harder for a big man to put up stats or play D at a high level than it was then.
Bullshit. :facepalm Griffin averaged exactly .2 more points per game than Duncan and also exactly .2 more rebounds per game than Duncan. :facepalm
Plus, he had to compete with David Robinson for rebounds as opposed to Chris Kaman and DeAndre Jordan. Blake also got more FT's, which is probably partially due to the new handchecking rules. Just saying. I don't think Griffin was better offensively (I think Duncan was), and even if he was, it was a very marginal difference, whereas rookie Duncan obliterated Griffin on D. So no, it really isn't close. Plus, last time I checked, Duncan is known as an elite passer for his position.

[Bigsmoke]

We'll see what happens dude. It's a dumb idea to go off on a long tangent of Duncan vs Griffin due to the fact that Griffin is 22 going into his second season. He has more upside than Duncan ever did.. but he also is more injury prone and less fundamentally sound. Let's give Griffin time to prove himself. Point is.. he had an all time great season.
Not Duncan level but definitely in that tier of rookie.

Duncan's rookie season was better though.

just look back

-All NBA First Team "AS A F'ing ROOKIE"
-Destoyed Antonio McDyess and the Suns in the first round
-Matched 22 rebounds against Dennis Rodman
-Played killer defense.

Blake had a amasing rookie season, no doubt! a better rookie campain than LeBron if u ask me, but Duncan was just NBA ready from the start.

[blacknapalm]

duncan was better in the post. griffin is more raw and a better ball handler, passer in the open court/in motion. over the years, duncan mostly improved on his jumper, passing and defense. i really can't ever see griffin making the impact duncan made on defense. griffin just doesn't have the instincts, positioning skills or timing and he has short arms.

[Clippersfan86]

Bullshit. :facepalm Griffin averaged exactly .2 more points per game than Duncan and also exactly .2 more rebounds per game than Duncan. :facepalm
Plus, he had to compete with David Robinson for rebounds as opposed to Chris Kaman and DeAndre Jordan. Blake also got more FT's, which is probably partially due to the new handchecking rules. Just saying. I don't think Griffin was better offensively (I think Duncan was), and even if he was, it was a very marginal difference, whereas rookie Duncan obliterated Griffin on D. So no, it really isn't close. Plus, last time I checked, Duncan is known as an elite passer for his position.

What are you looking at? Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg to Duncan's 21.1. Considering how unrefined and raw he is... that shows how dominant he is on offense. He also put up over a full assist more than rookie Duncan. Sure Duncan was more skilled but on offense Blake Griffin is clearly more effective/dominant rookie vs rookie.

[G-train]

Duncan's rookie season was better though.

just look back

-All NBA First Team "AS A F'ing ROOKIE"
-Destoyed Antonio McDyess and the Suns in the first round
-Matched 22 rebounds against Dennis Rodman
-Played killer defense.

Blake had a amasing rookie season, no doubt! a better rookie campain than LeBron if u ask me, but Duncan was just NBA ready from the start.

Lebron's rookie season, out of HS, was just obscenely good. At roughly Griffins age he came 2nd in MVP voting.

[Clippersfan86]

Duncan's rookie season was better though.

just look back

-All NBA First Team "AS A F'ing ROOKIE"
-Destoyed Antonio McDyess and the Suns in the first round
-Matched 22 rebounds against Dennis Rodman
-Played killer defense.

Blake had a amasing rookie season, no doubt! a better rookie campain than LeBron if u ask me, but Duncan was just NBA ready from the start.

All NBA team is clearly a popularity contest. Doesn't mean shi*. How about this.


First unanimous ROY winner since David Robinson in '89.

First rookie since Allen Iverson in '96 to score 40+ twice.

Only rookie in NBA history to have a 44, 15 and 7 game on that efficiency besides Oscar Robertson.

Only rookie in NBA history to have a 47 and 14 game on so little shots besides MICHAEL JORDAN.

One of 3 rookies in NBA history to average 22+ ppg, 12+rpg and 3.5+ apg. The other two were Kareem and Elgin Baylor.



I'm sorry but spin it how you want... Duncan slightly better for defensive reasons but to act like they are a full class apart is silly.

[AngelEyes]

What are you looking at? Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg to Duncan's 21.1. Considering how unrefined and raw he is... that shows how dominant he is on offense. He also put up over a full assist more than rookie Duncan. Sure Duncan was more skilled but on offense Blake Griffin is clearly more effective/dominant rookie vs rookie.

I know Griffin averaged more assists than Duncan did in his rookie year, but I don't think that's enough to make the case that he is a superior passer than Rookie Duncan. Duncan was very refined in every facet in his rookie season.

[Odinn]

What are you looking at? Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg to Duncan's 21.1. Considering how unrefined and raw he is... that shows how dominant he is on offense. He also put up over a full assist more than rookie Duncan. Sure Duncan was more skilled but on offense Blake Griffin is clearly more effective/dominant rookie vs rookie.
Haven't you done with being hammered?

21.1 ppg on 0.549fg and 0.662ft
22.5 ppg on 0.506fg and 0.642ft, how would this one is clearly more effective? Just give it up.

[Clippersfan86]

I know Griffin averaged more assists than Duncan did in his rookie year, but I don't think that's enough to make the case that he is a superior passer than Rookie Duncan. Duncan was very refined in every facet in his rookie season.

You guys don't realize you're actually arguing for Griffin. For all Duncan's superior refinement, fundamentals and skill on offense how did Griffin surpass him offensively as a rookie?

[Clippersfan86]

Haven't you done with being hammered?

21.1 ppg on 0.549fg and 0.662ft
22.5 ppg on 0.506fg and 0.642ft, how would this one is clearly more effective? Just give it up.

Effective is the same as efficient? Effective... in the sense that Griffin attracts more defensive attention and still produces more. 2nd in the NBA in points in the paint, just behind Howard. Duncan was more efficient and better defensively. Griffin is more overpowering and impactful on offense.

[AngelEyes]

You guys don't realize you're actually arguing for Griffin. For all Duncan's superior refinement, fundamentals and skill on offense how did Griffin surpass him offensively as a rookie?

I don't think Griffin necessarily surpassed him offensively as a rookie. Just because he put up better numbers than Duncan means he surpassed him? Duncan played on a team with a still very capable David Robinson and a flury of good role players. If you put a 21/22 year old Tim Duncan on the 2011 Clippers I would expect him to put up similar if not better numbers than Griffin.

[SCdac]

We'll see what happens dude. It's a dumb idea to go off on a long tangent of Duncan vs Griffin due to the fact that Griffin is 22 going into his second season. He has more upside than Duncan ever did.. but he also is more injury prone and less fundamentally sound. Let's give Griffin time to prove himself. Point is.. he had an all time great season. Not Duncan level but definitely in that tier of rookie.

How are you measuring that? and what are you implying... that Griffin will most likely become better? Um, ok. Anything can happen, obviously. Griffin may very well not become better, even if he stayed injury free. That would not be that surprising, given how good Duncan is/was. I'm a big Griffin fan, have been since the moment I saw him play in person, it was actually the first time him and Duncan had ever gone head to head, a preseason game in SA prior to BG going down for a whole season. Even in a preseason game, I could tell Blake has "it"... Having said that, Tim Duncan is a top-10 player of all time, not just "because", but because he earned it with this powerful and consistent game from day 1. People forget that, like Griffin will be, Duncan in his prime was a perennial league-leader in Dunks. Duncan was very athletic, explosive, and quick. Your post I quoted just shows a bad combination of ignorance and excessive admiration in BG.

[Clippersfan86]

I don't think Griffin necessarily surpassed him offensively as a rookie. Just because he put up better numbers than Duncan means he surpassed him? Duncan played on a team with a still very capable David Robinson and a flury of good role players. If you put a 21/22 year old Tim Duncan on the 2011 Clippers I would expect him to put up similar if not better numbers than Griffin.

Honestly I'm over it. Spurs have been talking a bunch of trash and I can't wait to watch the Clippers blow them out. I'm not interested in this conversation anymore TBH. Duncan was the better rookie. Nothing to argue about. People are underrating Griffin. I can already see when he puts up 25+ ppg this year people crying about how he's spoon fed by CP3 and couldn't do it on his own.

[jjayfive]

duncan...

[NuggetsFan]

Duncan. Not close. Blake was easily one of the worst PF's in the league defensively. Duncan literally murders him in this area so much so that there isn't even a conversation to be had. Offensively Blake was alot more raw and honestly don't see him putting up 22 on a team that was headed to the playoffs last year(obviously there'd be different circumstances). Think statistically he benefited with the injuries\having the entire team ran through him. Obviously he was ready for that but not in the same sense Duncan was IMO.

Offensively give me a guy with Duncan's low post moves over an extra 1.1 ppg. Esp when you factor in how much easier it is nowadays to get to the line. Rebounding wise could probably go either way. Blake had the higher motor\athletic ability\hunger so could probably say him or Duncan.

Duncan came in ready to go tho. Blake was def more raw. Think it's kinda unfair to make this question to Blake. Blake had a crazy rookie season but because of the gap defensively between the two it makes it easy to answer IMO. An extra 1.3 points a game and a few more assists can't overcome that.

[Clippersfan86]

How are you measuring that? and what are you implying... that Griffin will most likely become better? Um, ok. Anything can happen, obviously. Griffin may very well not become better, even if he stayed injury free. That would not be that surprising, given how good Duncan is/was. I'm a big Griffin fan, have been since the moment I saw him play in person, it was actually the first time him and Duncan had ever gone head to head, a preseason game in SA prior to BG going down for a whole season. Even in a preseason game, I could tell Blake has "it"... Having said that, Tim Duncan is a top-10 player of all time, not just "because", but because he earned it with this powerful and consistent game from day 1. People forget that, like Griffin will be, Duncan in his prime was a perennial league-leader in Dunks. Duncan was very athletic, explosive, and quick. Your post I quoted just shows a bad combination of ignorance and excessive admiration in BG.

It's common sense dude. If someone VERY raw who's relying on athleticism... is putting up 22.5 ppg, 12 rpg and 4 apg... he's obviously got NASTY upside. Especially combined with his amazing work ethic and bball IQ like Duncan had. Duncan from his rookie year to his prime didn't have nearly as much to improve on as Griffin will.

[Odinn]

Effective is the same as efficient? Effective... in the sense that Griffin attracts more defensive attention and still produces more. 2nd in the NBA in points in the paint, just behind Howard. Duncan was more efficient and better defensively. Griffin is more overpowering and impactful on offense.
You're just telling stories to make Griffin look better.

Duncan averaged 21.1 ppg on 54.9% in a team which averaged 92.5 ppg. (21.1/92.5=22.81% ratio)
Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg on 50.6% in a team which averaged 98.6 ppg. (22.5/98.6=22.82% ratio)

Exact same.

Griffin averaged 1.1apg more. And Duncan shot better 4.3% from the field and 2% from the line.

And still you're claiming rookie Griffin clearly better than rookie Duncan offensively.

[Clippersfan86]

You're just telling stories to make Griffin look better.

Duncan averaged 21.1 ppg on 54.9% in a team which averaged 92.5 ppg. (21.1/92.5=22.81% ratio)
Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg on 50.6% in a team which averaged 98.6 ppg. (22.5/98.6=22.82% ratio)

Exact same.

Griffin averaged 1.1apg more. And Duncan shot better 4.3% from the field and 2% from the line.

And still you're claiming rookie Griffin clearly better than rookie Duncan offensively.

It's my opinion. I think Griffin is the more dominant offensive player as a rookie, Duncan the better all around rookie. You don't have to agree. You seem salty as fu** about Griffin lately though.

[Miller for 3]

Clippers trolls are the worst. I cant wait till you guys dont win 35 games and continue to hype up a player who plays no defense and only cares about stats

[RRR3]

What are you looking at? Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg to Duncan's 21.1. Considering how unrefined and raw he is... that shows how dominant he is on offense. He also put up over a full assist more than rookie Duncan. Sure Duncan was more skilled but on offense Blake Griffin is clearly more effective/dominant rookie vs rookie.

I made an error. Regardless, you're not accounting for pace and different eras. I also don't think you realize how great Malone Barkley Duncan KG Pettit were when you say Griffin could be the GOAT PF. Anything's possible, of course, but....

Duncan has put up seasons of 26/13/4/1/3, and 23/13/4/1/3, among some other amazing years, and this is all while being an amazing defender. He's also had playoff runs of 28/14/5/1/4, 25/5/5/1/3 and 24/15/4/1/3.

Barkley? Dude was a 6'6 PF, won an MVP over MICHAEL JORDAN in 1992-93, and had seasons of 23/15/5/2/2, 28/12/3/1/1, 26/13/5/2/1, 28/10/4/2/1 and 26/12/5/2/1. Also had playoff runs of 25/16/6/2/1, 25/15/4/1/1, 27/14/4/2/1, 28/13/5/3/1 and 26/13/3/1/1.

Malone? Insane longevity, also won an MVP over MJ (although it's debated by many). Had seasons of 28/12/2/1/1, 31/11/3/2/1, 25/12/4/2/2, 27/10/5/2/1, etc. Also had playoff runs of 30/12/2/1/1, 27/10/4/2/1, 26/11/3/1/1, 30/13/3/1/1, etc.

KG? One of the most versatile players at any position in NBA history, won MVP putting up 24/14/5/2/2. Also had years of 23/13/6/1/2, 22/14/6/2/1, 22/13/4/1/2, etc. Also had playoff runs of 24/15/5/1/2, 20/11/3/1/1 (past his prime), and 27/16/5/2/2.

Pettit? Career average of 26/16/3 had years going 31/19/4, 28/20/3, 29/16/3, etc. Career playoff averages of 26/15/3, including runs going 30/17/3, 32/15/3 and 29/18/3.

[Clippersfan86]

Clippers trolls are the worst. I cant wait till you guys dont win 35 games and continue to hype up a player who plays no defense and only cares about stats

Is that a guarantee from you? That the Clippers only win 35 games? I'll bet you they win 45-50 this year in 66. Chris Kaman arrived in New Orleans today and said the team is looking amazing in camp and he thinks they can easily win 50+ with Paul. I think you're letting your bitterness cloud your judgement.

[Odinn]

It's my opinion. I think Griffin is the more dominant offensive player as a rookie, Duncan the better all around rookie. You don't have to agree. You seem salty as fu** about Griffin lately though.
Unconscious fans like you, truly disturbing.

Griffin can average 25+ ppg for 9-10 years and still can not be called goat pf. Karl Malone averaged 25 ppg for his entire career. He averaged 25+ ppg for 11 straight seasons(12 total) and still Duncan is the goat pf...

Griffin will become one of the greatest pfs ever. But your claims and "opinions" just trashes.

Deal with it.:cheers:

[RRR3]

Is that a guarantee from you? That the Clippers only win 35 games? I'll bet you they win 45-50 this year in 66. Chris Kaman arrived in New Orleans today and said the team is looking amazing in camp and he thinks they can easily win 50+ with Paul. I think you're letting your bitterness cloud your judgement.
50-16? Bullshit. And look, in NBA history, there have been a few players who right away people were saying they'd be all-time greats. Magic, Bird, Shaq, MJ, LBJ, Chamberlain, Big O, etc. You really think BG is in their class? I don't think he is or ever will be. Great player who will probably have a great career but I don't see him reaching that tier.

[Clippersfan86]

I made an error. Regardless, you're not accounting for pace and different eras. I also don't think you realize how great Malone Barkley Duncan KG Pettit were when you say Griffin could be the GOAT PF. Anything's possible, of course, but....

Duncan has put up seasons of 26/13/4/1/3, and 23/13/4/1/3, among some other amazing years, and this is all while being an amazing defender. He's also had playoff runs of 28/14/5/1/4, 25/5/5/1/3 and 24/15/4/1/3.

Barkley? Dude was a 6'6 PF, won an MVP over MICHAEL JORDAN in 1992-93, and had seasons of 23/15/5/2/2, 28/12/3/1/1, 26/13/5/2/1, 28/10/4/2/1 and 26/12/5/2/1. Also had playoff runs of 25/16/6/2/1, 25/15/4/1/1, 27/14/4/2/1, 28/13/5/3/1 and 26/13/3/1/1.

Malone? Insane longevity, also won an MVP over MJ (although it's debated by many). Had seasons of 28/12/2/1/1, 31/11/3/2/1, 25/12/4/2/2, 27/10/5/2/1, etc. Also had playoff runs of 30/12/2/1/1, 27/10/4/2/1, 26/11/3/1/1, 30/13/3/1/1, etc.

KG? One of the most versatile players at any position in NBA history, won MVP putting up 24/14/5/2/2. Also had years of 23/13/6/1/2, 22/14/6/2/1, 22/13/4/1/2, etc. Also had playoff runs of 24/15/5/1/2, 20/11/3/1/1 (past his prime), and 27/16/5/2/2.

Pettit? Career average of 26/16/3 had years going 31/19/4, 28/20/3, 29/16/3, etc. Career playoff averages of 26/15/3, including runs going 30/17/3, 32/15/3 and 29/18/3.

All good. Griffin will have a lot of time surpassing Duncan no question. He would have to have a near perfect health bill and win rings with the Clippers and cement his legacy. He can definitely pass up KG, Pettit, Dirk if it goes very well for him. Barkley and Malone will be harder to pass. Remember Griffin is getting off to a faster start than all of them besides maybe Duncan statistically. Then you add the best playmaker in the game to feed him?

His career is about to REALLY take off.

[Clippersfan86]

Unconscious fans like you, truly disturbing.

Griffin can average 25+ ppg for 9-10 years and still can not be called goat pf. Karl Malone averaged 25 ppg for his entire career. He averaged 25+ ppg for 11 straight seasons(12 total) and still Duncan is the goat pf...

Griffin will become one of the greatest pfs ever. But your claims and "opinions" just trashes.

Deal with it.:cheers:

Malone also didn't win any rings you retard. If Griffin throws some rings in with Malone's stats he will have a strong case for GOAT PF. You realize Malone put up 15 ppg as a 22 year old rookie right? Oh that's right.. too retarded to do your own research.

[RRR3]

Malone also didn't win any rings you retard. If Griffin throws some rings in with Malone's stats he will have a strong case for GOAT PF. You realize Malone put up 15 ppg as a 22 year old rookie right? Oh that's right.. too retarded to do your own research.
How dare Malone lose to the GOAT!

[Clippersfan86]

50-16? Bullshit. And look, in NBA history, there have been a few players who right away people were saying they'd be all-time greats. Magic, Bird, Shaq, MJ, LBJ, Chamberlain, Big O, etc. You really think BG is in their class? I don't think he is or ever will be. Great player who will probably have a great career but I don't see him reaching that tier.

So basically will he be a top 10 player of all time? Of course that's unlikely. Does he have top 20 of all time potential though? Yes. So does his new PG CP3. He doesn't need to be Michael Jordan or Shaq. He's playing with another lock for the HOF. They have a chance to be a new version of Stockton/Malone which will be incredible.

BTW I said 45-50 wins. 50-16 really isn't that far fetched for such a loaded team with two superstars and being young and fresh. Only team in the NBA with a better duo is Wade/Lebron and they aren't nearly as balanced. CP3/Griffin is going to work together so well you're going to be shocked man.

RRR I'm willing to bet you will become a big fan soon and root for the Clippers as a second team. I can feel it lol.

[RRR3]

So basically will he be a top 10 player of all time? Of course that's unlikely. Does he have top 20 of all time potential though? Yes. So does his new PG CP3. He doesn't need to be Michael Jordan or Shaq. He's playing with another lock for the HOF. They have a chance to be a new version of Stockton/Malone which will be incredible.

"Another lock"? WTF CP3 is the only guy who I can say with certainty will be a HOF'er. BG has played ONE F*cking season. ...Westbrook/Durant, Melo/Stat are pretty damn good duos as well. And I don't have a team, there's no team where I live (STL). I'm not a Heat fan. LeBron is one of my favorite players, there's a difference. I'm not a real fan of any team, so no I won't be a Clippers fan. I'll cheer for them depending on who they're playing.

[Clippersfan86]

"Another lock"? WTF CP3 is the only guy who I can say with certainty will be a HOF'er. BG has played ONE F*cking season.

How many people would say if he stays healthy Blake isn't a HOF player? Is it even a question? Even if he never improves and stays at 22 ppg, 12 rpg and 4 apg for the rest of his career and wins at a decent level that's a lock for first ballot HOF.

[Odinn]

Malone also didn't win any rings you retard. If Griffin throws some rings in with Malone's stats he will have a strong case for GOAT PF. You realize Malone put up 15 ppg as a 22 year old rookie right? Oh that's right.. too retarded to do your own research.
:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

You're getting even dumber.

But glad to see about your optimist approach about the rings.:oldlol: They are too easy to get.:roll:

[Clippersfan86]

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

You're getting even dumber.

But glad to see about your optimist approach about the rings.:oldlol: They are too easy to get.:roll:

You have major comprehension difficulties. I already said before multiple times on this forum that Griffin getting into GOAT PF talks is predicated on winning rings. He's unlikely to have the combination of longevity+stats+rings of Duncan. Obviously if he doesn't win at least 2 rings there is no case.

Just saying many consider Malone to be comparable to Duncan without rings. Same with Barkley, both of which have no rings. Imagine if you could have Barkley/Malone stats AND 2 rings. Then it becomes a discussion obviously. You need to move on old timer. The Spurs era is ending and your bitterness towards Griffin/Clippers is going to grow stronger unless you just accept the facts that it's Griffin's time to shine.

[RRR3]

How many people would say if he stays healthy Blake isn't a HOF player? Is it even a question? Even if he never improves and stays at 22 ppg, 12 rpg and 4 apg for the rest of his career and wins at a decent level that's a lock for first ballot HOF.

Larry Johnson: 19/11/4 his rookie year.
Ralph Sampson: 21/11/2 his rookie year.
Terry Cummings: 24/11/3 his rookie year.

Are they HOF'ers? :confusedshrug:

[AngelEyes]

How many people would say if he stays healthy Blake isn't a HOF player? Is it even a question? Even if he never improves and stays at 22 ppg, 12 rpg and 4 apg for the rest of his career and wins at a decent level that's a lock for first ballot HOF.

I think it's assumed that if healthy Griffin will make the hall of fame. There aren't many fowards in the last 20-30 years who have his combination of athleticism, size and effort. The thing is you can never assume health. I never expected McGrady to fall off the way he has, but it happened.

[Clippersfan86]

I think it's assumed that if healthy Griffin will make the hall of fame. There aren't many fowards in the last 20-30 years who have his combination of athleticism, size and effort. The thing is you can never assume health. I never expected McGrady to fall off the way he has, but it happened.

Definitely true. Which is why I ALWAYS throw in IF healthy. Obviously if Griffin has a massive injury soon and never reaches all star level again he's not a HOF player.

[RRR3]

I think it's assumed that if healthy Griffin will make the hall of fame. There aren't many fowards in the last 20-30 years who have his combination of athleticism, size and effort. The thing is you can never assume health. I never expected McGrady to fall off the way he has, but it happened.
McGrady will still make the HOF (hopefully :D). Griffin ain't reaching peak T-Mac's (2002-03) level and you can quote me on that.

[Clippersfan86]

Larry Johnson: 19/11/4 his rookie year.
Ralph Sampson: 21/11/2 his rookie year.
Terry Cummings: 24/11/3 his rookie year.

Are they HOF'ers? :confusedshrug:

Griffin has something they didn't have. Basketball IQ and an elite work ethic. All of those players underachieved. Griffin's work ethic has been compared to Kobe by Lakers reporters... and many around the league. Those guys aren't in the same class mentally as Griffin. BTW Ralph Sampson was a 7'4 center... and we are discussion PF's.

[Odinn]

You have major comprehension difficulties. I already said before multiple times on this forum that Griffin getting into GOAT PF talks is predicated on winning rings. He's unlikely to have the combination of longevity+stats+rings of Duncan. Obviously if he doesn't win at least 2 rings there is no case.

Just saying many consider Malone to be comparable to Duncan without rings. Same with Barkley, both of which have no rings. Imagine if you could have Barkley/Malone stats AND 2 rings. Then it becomes a discussion obviously. You need to move on old timer. The Spurs era is ending and your bitterness towards Griffin/Clippers is going to grow stronger unless you just accept the facts that it's Griffin's time to shine.
You're the one who talks about ifs all the time. If he gets multiple rings... We even don't know Griffin is or is not a true playoff-performer and you're talking about the rings already. You just need to calm down.

[SCdac]

You're the one who talks about ifs all the time. If he gets multiple rings... We even don't know Griffin is or is not a true playoff-performer and you're talking about the rings already. You just need to calm down.

Even rings and future accolades aside...

Duncan's rookie season > Griffin's rookie season.

[Clippersfan86]

You're the one who talks about ifs all the time. If he gets multiple rings... We even don't know Griffin is or is not a true playoff-performer and you're talking about the rings already. You just need to calm down.

You're the one who's dragged this on man because you can't handle the idea that Duncan and the Spurs are done and Griffin and the Clippers era is happening. I already said Duncan= better rookie and you couldn't let it go. You wanted to cry about how I said I personally feel Griffin is no question the better offensive player.

Frankly you're not interesting me or challenging me enough to where I feel inclined to continue this. I feel like we are talking in circles and all I can say is wait and see. I said Griffin would dominate this year as a rookie and people laughed at me. Then they saw it.

[rmt]

All NBA team is clearly a popularity contest. Doesn't mean shi*.

All NBA team might be a popularity contest but for veterans - not rookies. Veterans might get voted on because of reputation, familiarity, etc. but not rookies. It'd take outstanding performance for a rookie to get voted on over established veterans with long-standing reputations/history (see, ironically, Duncan on the last All-Star team). And it's not like rookie TD had flash, personality or lots of media hype.

[Smoke117]

What are you looking at? Griffin averaged 22.5 ppg to Duncan's 21.1. Considering how unrefined and raw he is... that shows how dominant he is on offense. He also put up over a full assist more than rookie Duncan. Sure Duncan was more skilled but on offense Blake Griffin is clearly more effective/dominant rookie vs rookie.

It's also a different era. Like i said in my first post...there is no way in hell Griffin averages 8 fta's a game pre rule changes. Griffin plays in the soft ball era. Duncan's rookie year was played when this was still a mens league and not a boys league. But either way it can't discounted how much easier Duncan had it playing next to David Robinson. In 1998 Robinson was still the best player on the team, he was the defensive anchor, led the team in scoring...there's a reason Tim Duncans fg% never came close to reaching the high it did his rookie season. That was David Robinson's last year as a real star player. Either way what separates them is the defense. Tim Duncan was already an all nba defensive player his rookie year and Blake Griffin is a mediocre defensive player who makes practically no difference on the court as far as defense goes.

[ballinhun8]

Why do you keep saying the Spurs are done???



I think this is where your clippers mentality comes in. Successful franchises like the Spurs don't just go away and rebuild for 10 years like other bad teams. They consistently find gems in the draft no matter where they select and can attract FAs that are afterthoughts thY fit their system.


This is where having a great coach in Pop helps out. You better hope VDN doesn't **** this up. Rose became a MVP and changed his whole game after he left.

[impact145]

rookie tim duncan without a doubt,duncan was more skilled,he relied on his skilled rather then his athleticism,blake griffin is still raw,still needs to work on some things.

[Droid101]

Not real close.


One led his team to do a 180 and get back in the playoffs.
You are a joke. David Robinson returning from injury did the "180." They were firmly in the playoffs the season before D.Rob went down.

[L.Kizzle]

As far as we know, Blake is Walt Bellamy. Hi scoring rookie on a suck team who made the all star team.

[Micku]

Rookie year? Duncan.

Mainly because he played better defense. He made the nba all 2nd defensive team that year. And he was more efficient on the offense. Duncan was pretty explosive back then, but Blake Griffin is more so. Regardless, Blake is a stud and has a lot of potential. Especially since he and CP3 could turn the Clippers around into something relevant if healthy. Best thing to happen to them in a while.

[Fiasco]

You are a joke. David Robinson returning from injury did the "180." They were firmly in the playoffs the season before D.Rob went down.

Bingo.

[HylianNightmare]

gimme tim

[Tha Catalyst]

Odinn Duncan was nearly the same in terms of scoring consistently. Nowhere near the explosive scorer Griffin is. Compare Griffin's highest scoring games to Duncan's and you'll see. I suppose pace adjusted it's fair to say they are equal scorers in terms of numbers+consistency. Funny thing is Duncan had a midrange jumper and impressive arsenal yet people think Griffin only dunks.... yet somehow Griffin managed to score over a ppg more as a rookie.

Reality here is Duncan's success was a combination of him, the Spurs system and always being surrounded with top shelf teammates. Let's see how Griffin does next to Paul. I think 25 ppg, 13 rpg and 4+ apg this year is not out of the question. If he also improved his defense and shot that will rival prime Duncan, or at least be close. IN HIS SECOND SEASON. It's scary because Duncan's growth from rookie to prime wasn't that significant. Griffin's growth from college to end of his rookie season was much greater.

This dude is being compared to Duncan and he's RAW. Imagine when Griffin becomes more controlled and refined? If Griffin wins at least 2 rings with the Clippers and stays healthy, stays with Chris Paul his entire career.. he will be recognized as the greatest PF of all time. Greater than Duncan... greater than Malone... greater than Barkley.
What!!! Duncan never played with a Chris Paul caliber player and he won 4 titles and 3 FMVP's along with 2 MVP's and many all defensive team selections. Griffin will not overtake Duncan with 2 titles, why would he. Same as Wade would not overtake Bryant with another title. I hate that the players I grew up idolizing are being severely underrated. Why is it if the new generation achieve significantly less that they should be remembered as better players? Who creates this BS logic? There is every chance that none of this new generation of players (Lebron, Wade, Griffin, Durant, Rose) ever reach the Bryant/Duncan/Shaq all-time status. Lebron is the only one I give any chance of reaching top-10 all time. Griffin is not necessarily more talented than Barkley, and will need 3-4 titles along with at least 2 MVPs (at least 2 if he isn't making all defensive teams) to reach the top 10. Being one of the best players of all time is so prestigious because it isn't easy, every 'next big thing' will not reach that level, actually a very high percentage fail to reach those levels despite having very successful careers.

Sorry about the rant, just pay Tim Duncan the respect he deserves as when it is all said and done, he will most likely sit above Wade/Griffin/Rose whoever when it is done. Start comparing their all time ratings when said players have achieved even half of what he has done. Thankyou.

[Big#50]

Blake Griffin is an athletic freak. LoL but you guys are actually saying he is a better rebounder. Duncan was never have an empty stats type of guy. Come on, ISH, stop letting teens make accounts.

[SCdac]

Griffin will not overtake Duncan with 2 titles, why would he.

Because he plays for the clippers, and clippers fans are like on cloud 9 right now (not that they shouldnt be), and the mere teaming up of Griffin and Paul means that they're going to be swimming in rings, and because it'll look flashy while it's happening it must mean that they're leaving every other great player in the dust. blah blah blah... Duncan won his first two rings with point guards of 33 year old Avery Johnson and a 19 year old Parker... For Griffin, it'll take arguably the best point guard in the game, somebody who could potentially win MVP in his own right, or a Finals MVP if they got there ... Yet, somehow, that's going to make Griffin the GOAT PF :rolleyes:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Because he plays for the clippers, and clippers fans are like on cloud 9 right now (not that they shouldnt be), and the mere teaming up of Griffin and Paul means that they're going to be swimming in rings, and because it'll look flashy while it's happening it must mean that they're leaving every other great player in the dust. blah blah blah... Duncan won his first two rings with point guards of 33 year old Avery Johnson and a 19 year old Parker... For Griffin, it'll take arguably the best point guard in the game, somebody who could potentially win MVP in his own right, or a Finals MVP if they got there ... Yet, somehow, that's going to make Griffin the GOAT PF :rolleyes:

Tim's had David Robinson, Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker for his career

[SCdac]

Tim's had David Robinson, Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker for his career

Tim had some great teams... (he MADE most of them great)

did he play with a player the calibre of Chris Paul in his second year? No.

Robinson - 33 - 16 ppg
Elliott ----- 30 - 11 ppg
Avery ----- 33 - 10 ppg
Elie ------- 35 - 10 ppg
Jackson --- 31 - 6 ppg
Kerr ------- 33 - 4 ppg
Kersey ---- 36 - 3 ppg

those are the guys who played the most minutes in Duncan's first championship (his second season)...

Call me crazy, but I don't see Griffin and his raw skills and lack of defensive impact taking that team to a title, let alone sweeping a team with Shaq-Kobe and nearly sweeping KG's team too.

Duncan went on to average 27.4 of the Spurs 84.8 ppg in the Finals.

Replace Avery or rookie Parker with Chris Paul (!) , and Duncan might have more than 4 rings.

Have to respect with Duncan accomplished. We're not talking "fantasy basketball" in which stats mean everything, it's kind of the opposite, it's how you get those stats, and what did they mean to the team.

[Legends66NBA7]

Tim's had David Robinson, Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker for his career

Robinson was on the downside of his career after that injyr and was gone by 2003, with not that much support in that championship run.
Bowen played one way and that was defense, wasn't there in 1999.
Manu was a rookie in 2003.
Parker was a 2nd year player by 2003.

None of these guys have been in the same time frame for each of those championship runs with Duncan for his "career". Duncan has been the flat out better player. Sure, in 2007 Finals MVP went to Parker, but nobody thinks he was the best player on that team.

You have to also factor in this: Duncan's presence has made both Manu and Parker better players for their careers.