Vote: If you were starting a franchise, would you rather have a young Kobe or Duncan?

[WillC]

Scenario:

- You are in control of a new franchise.

- Your goal is to win multiple championships.

- Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan are both 22-years-old.

- Both players want to play for your team.

- You have an empty roster.

Who would you rather have on your team: Kobe Bryant or Tim Duncan?

Who gives you a better chance of championship success?

Please make your vote clear and give reasons for your choice.

[Batz]

Building around Duncan would be better. But the money I'd get with Kobe and his marketability is a plus if you're starting a new franchise.


So I pick Kobe. Because I'm a biased mother****er too.

[Xiao Yao You]

Duncan at any age over Kobe at any age.

[I LUV KOBE]

Kobe.. And you already know why.. :D

[WillC]

Kobe.. And you already know why.. :D

You assume too much. Please elaborate.

[DStebb716]

Kobe. More marketable. Players are more likely to want to come there because he has more appeal.

[nbarumorz]

I don't think it's much of a debate. TD is obviously an amazing player but could he have done it if he didn't have Ginobili and Parker, all three were all-star caliber players?

With Kobe the dude is marketable, more of a fan-favorite than Duncan when they are both young, and can carry a team better (IMO). Take Kobe everyday

[waseem780]

as much as i hate tim duncan , i say tim duncan .. he's sound fundamentally and HIGH bb IQ and also he's a big man with 2 MVP"S and led his team to 4 titles .. kobe is more of a star and gets u points but he only LED his team to 2 titles.

[bluechox2]

gotta go with kobe, dude still playing at a high level late in his career so thats a plus, so you know hes reliable and can carry a team for 2 decades

[I LUV KOBE]

You assume too much. Please elaborate.
Just like Batz said.. And Im biased too..

[DKLaker]

gotta go with kobe, dude still playing at a high level late in his career so thats a plus, so you know hes reliable and can carry a team for 2 decades

:cheers:

Duncan can strongly influence games but cannot take over a game....just look at his scoring averages and highest scoring games, game winners.......plus he is terrible at the FT line....and if you need a 3....he can only hit one on rare occasions. Plus he had nowhere the extended dominance of Kobe. Obvious winner here even without marketing stuff is Kobe.....not to mentioned he owned Duncan and the Spurs head to head in the playoffs :cheers: :oldlol:

[EnoughSaid]

If my goal is to win championships, I'm easily taking the GOAT PF here. No question.

[BoutPractice]

Easily Duncan. When choosing between players who are among the best of the best to ever play the game, you always go with the dominant two-way bigman.

Duncan will win you multiple championships if you surround him with decent perimeter talent. Kobe will only win you multiple championships if you surround him with... a Tim Duncan type, which is tougher to find.

[Kblaze8855]

I don't think it's much of a debate. TD is obviously an amazing player but could he have done it if he didn't have Ginobili and Parker, all three were all-star caliber players?

He did it when neither were even close to being all stars. He was out there having 34/24/6/6 games owning the league in the playoffs and winning it all when neither of them were worth much discussion. Tony might have been Bobby Jackson level in 2003 and he was outplaying Manu at the time.

[DKLaker]

He did it when neither were even close to being all stars. He was out there having 34/24/6/6 games owning the league in the playoffs and winning it all when neither of them were worth much discussion. Tony might have been Bobby Jackson level in 2003 and he was outplaying Manu at the time.

What is Duncan's playoff record head to head with the Lakers :oldlol:

[west_tip]

Duncan.

Kobe's trade demands in the summer of 2007 are the tiebreaker for me, with Duncan you know the dude isn't going to demand a trade. Also, I think he is a better teammate and a better leader than Kobe who is prone to throwing people under the bus.

[NumberSix]

Kobe. More marketable. Players are more likely to want to come there because he has more appeal.
Where have you been? :confusedshrug:

[swag2011]

I hate these type of questions b/c i always feel it's a knock to Kobe. Truthfully, you ALWAYS are supposed to pick a big man over a guard. That's just how it is.

[DKLaker]

I hate these type of questions b/c i always feel it's a knock to Kobe. Truthfully, you ALWAYS are supposed to pick a big man over a guard. That's just how it is.


It USED TO be that way.....but the reality is that this league is now very clearly run by SGs and SFs

[LikeABosh]

Duncan simply because I believe big man are more valuable.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kobe at 22? So I can skip his first couple of years of him being average?

I'll take Kobe then. He's won 5 rings with multiple supporting cast, Kobe has been the 1 consistent piece.

He's also proven he can win alongside 1 other very good player, while the rest of the team is composed of role players.

TD is hard to pass on but I feel Kobe can/will do more with less.

[Odinn]

Kobe at 22? So I can skip his first couple of years of him being average?

I'll take Kobe then. He's won 5 rings with multiple supporting cast, Kobe has been the 1 consistent piece.

He's also proven he can win alongside 1 other very good player, while the rest of the team is composed of role players.

TD is hard to pass on but I feel Kobe can/will do more with less.
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[knickballer]

I don't think it's much of a debate. TD is obviously an amazing player but could he have done it if he didn't have Ginobili and Parker, all three were all-star caliber players?

With Kobe the dude is marketable, more of a fan-favorite than Duncan when they are both young, and can carry a team better (IMO). Take Kobe everyday


Kobe has had some great players around him more so than Duncan. He played with Shaq arguably the most dominant center and then throw in other players like Pau Gasol(career 20/10 guy), Bynum, Odom, etc..

[Story Up]

There is nothing easy about this decision you ****ing idiots. I'd pick Duncs because it would be easier to build around a big then a guard. Kobe however is right there, longer longevity, hard worker, clutch as shot and very competitive. Its very very close, sick of ppl choosing one over the other and claiming it's an easy choice, clearly emphasizing your agenda and stupidity.

[thelucifer69]

TD

He 1st option in any championship run even 2007

Manu Ginobili not All star till 2005

Tony Parker not All star till 2006

Best way to start franchise is from inside, except Bulls - Michael Jordan & Heat 2012 every Champion team in last 20 yrs has Dominant Big

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

tough call, but I will go with the rule of thumb

[lilgodfather1]

Duncan.

[TheMarkMadsen]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Let me guess, Pau Gasol was 2010 MVP, and Duncans never played with a stacked supporting cast?

Duncans teams, excusing 99 have always been stacked from top to bottom.

The 09 & 10 Lakers were in no way stacked, had one of the worst benches in the leauge & had nobody other than Kobe & Pau as a scoring threat.

Go ahead, tell me how dominate Bynum was durring those finals runs?

Tell me about the inconsistent Odom.

Tell me about Trevor Ariza who was a journey man Sf who had played for several teams in 3 years.

Let's not forget DA GAWD D fish running point.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Tim Duncan, its not even close.

/thread

[Inactive]

I think you have to go with the big, if it's close. It's easier to find perimeter offensive talent, and bigs obviously have more defensive impact.

[RRR3]

Let me guess, Pau Gasol was 2010 MVP, and Duncans never played with a stacked supporting cast?

Duncans teams, excusing 99 have always been stacked from top to bottom.

The 09 & 10 Lakers were in no way stacked, had one of the worst benches in the leauge & had nobody other than Kobe & Pau as a scoring threat.

Go ahead, tell me how dominate Bynum was durring those finals runs?

Tell me about the inconsistent Odom.

Tell me about Trevor Ariza who was a journey man Sf who had played for several teams in 3 years.

Let's not forget DA GAWD D fish running point.
2003 Spurs:
Tony Parker-16/3/5 on 46/34/76 shooting
Stephen Jackson-12/4/2 on 44/32/76 shooting
Malik Rose-10/6/2 on 46% shooting
Manu Ginobili-8/2/2 on 44/35/74 shooting
Bruce Bowen-7/3/1 on 47/44/40 shooting
Grampa David Robinson-9/8/1 on 47% shooting

Let's not forget the legendary Speedy Claxton, Steve Kerr and Danny Ferry.


Stacked! :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[Freedom Kid7]

I have to go with Duncan here. Duncan's post game and defense are pretty good, he's a pretty good passing big, and his intangibles are good too (no drama). Plus, Duncan has won with different players. In 1999 he won with an old Robinson. 03 I think he was the only all star on his team (Manu and Parker developed well though). He could do it with different casts

Shame on you people that think Duncan couldn't take over games. Look at his 2003 season (Game 6 of the finals being the best). If that's not taking over, I don't know what is.

[Kblaze8855]

What is Duncan's playoff record head to head with the Lakers

What? Do you think I missed the last 15 years? Or did you not notice that I dont care for reasons which should be fairly obvious?

Until most fans are too young to remember Shaqs...Shaq will never allow Kobe to get full credit for anything that happened before 2005. In the last series Shaq played with Kobe vs the spurs?

17/19/5 blocks
11/11/3
28/14/4
28/15/5/8 blocks
32/15 on 71% shooting
19/13/5

And that...is the worst version of shaq as a Laker. 2004.

Until the people being asked just dont rememebr Shaq...nothing you point out from pre 2004 will ever get full credit far as Kobe goes. Thats just how it is.

And how it probably should be. While from time to time there were those saying Kobe was the best...the general opinion was that the best player in the NBA was Shaq for most of this stretch. And when it wasnt...it was Duncan in 2003 and KG in 2004.

How you feel about that means little to me.

They have played once since. Once is hardly a trend and 2008 isnt Duncan at his best nor does it have anything to do with who id get in each of their primes.

Kobe has had a longer stretch as an elite player. Doesnt mean hes more likely to make his team great at any particular time of that stretch.

Duncan walked in as an elite player, led his team t ota title in year 2, and has had them contending with great and average rosters every single season since. Added to that...hes caused no problems, done nothing to justify asking if hes worth the hassle, and been loved and respected by virtually everyone. I feel hes more likely to help develop chemistry and create an enviroment I could easily build a winner in.

Id take Duncan first and not hesitate for a second. Hes exactly what you want out of your franchise player.

I suppose Kobe generates more money...but thats just not an issue im considering when talking about basketball.

How many jerseys one might sell means nothing when im trying to win a game.

[Kblaze8855]

Duncans teams, excusing 99 have always been stacked from top to bottom.

Lets say Last years Bulls are in one of their brief stretches of being healthy.

Who on the 2003 Spurs isnt coming off the bench other than Tim Duncan?

Bowen over Ronnie Brewer?

[NumberSix]

Tim Duncan by a mile. Especially in this era of weak bigs.

[Hank]

It's not even close. Duncan EASILY

[tpols]

Duncan would be Minny KG 2.0 if he wasnt in the best run organization in the league for the past decade. W/o GOAT management, player development, coaching, and overall discipline on his side Duncan wouldnt have enjoyed the same success that he did.

Id take Kobe because he was simply a more dominant player.

[swi7ch]

Duncan.

He's the greatest PF of all time.

Kobe is not the greatest SG of all time.

[NumberSix]

Duncan would be Minny KG 2.0 if he wasnt in the best run organization in the league for the past decade. W/o GOAT management, player development, coaching, and overall discipline on his side Duncan wouldnt have enjoyed the same success that he did.

Id take Kobe because he was simply a more dominant player.
You understand that Kobe plays for the FCKING LAKERS, right? :confusedshrug:


Lol @ discrediting Duncan because he got drafted to the powerhouse San Antonio Spurs. A Franchise that has no NBA history of winning before his arrival.

[Kblaze8855]

W/o GOAT management, player development, coaching, and overall discipline on his side Duncan wouldnt have enjoyed the same success that he did.

And this is the argument being used against Duncan in favor of someone who is about to start the 14th season of his career on a team with enough talent to contend? 14 of his soon to be 17 seasons hes had a team you could realistically expect to contend.

This isnt Duncan vs Pistol Pete.

Its Duncan vs Kobe.

There is no "Well..he didnt have..." side here.

And lets not pretend the Spurs have actually been loaded with great players and young guys who exploded into stardom.

Just because they are great every year doesnt mean they have great players every year. Its Duncan, Manu, Parker, and...some guys. Just like its been for years. And Duncan was winning when it was him and...some guys.

[west_tip]

Duncan would be Minny KG 2.0 if he wasnt in the best run organization in the league for the past decade.

To be honest the exact same argument could be used against Kobe Bryant, except replace "best run" with "most glamorous".

[tpols]

And lets not pretend the Spurs have actually been loaded with great players and young guys who exploded into stardom.

Just because they are great every year doesnt mean they have great players every year.
This is EXACTLY why using teammates' names with Duncan doesnt mean much. Hes been on great teams at times.. that dont really have great players.

It doesnt make sense at first because 99% of the league doesnt work that way but San Antonio could post the best record in the league with DeJuan Blair being their most impactful player in half their games. Their overall team commitment and discipline is at unheard of levels.

And Duncan gets his status elevated past what it should be because he didnt have the names but had something else that made just as big a diference.:confusedshrug:

[tpols]

To be honest the exact same argument could be used against Kobe Bryant, except replace "best run" with "most glamorous".
It can be.. I agree.

Im just pointing it out for people acting like duncan carried scrubs OMGZ 2003!!

[goldcrow]

Duncan, just surround him with some backup defensive bigs and versatile wingmen and you're good to go. But maaan he sure is really boring to watch. No wonder why he's the big fundamental.

[roffie]

champion = duncan
market = kobe

pick your poison

[General]

champion = duncan
market = kobe

pick your poison
Champion= Kobe, Duncan
Market=Kobe

[Owl]

Scenario:

- You are in control of a new franchise.

- Your goal is to win multiple championships.

- Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan are both 22-years-old.

- Both players want to play for your team.

- You have an empty roster.

Who would you rather have on your team: Kobe Bryant or Tim Duncan?

Who gives you a better chance of championship success?

Please make your vote clear and give reasons for your choice.
Tim Duncan.

Because he can co-exist with other (and learn from) superstars, as shown with David Robinson.

Because he is loyal to his franchise (can be said of of Kobe too in terms of staying with one franchise, but the trade demands and more blatant free agent flirtation and badmouthing the front office including demanding the trade of Bynum leave him behind Duncan in this category).

Because he's an elite defender. Kobe is a good wing defender and has been a very good one. But he's been less effective defensively when carrying a large load on offense certainly doesn't have the effect of a dominant interior defender like Duncan. Yes Kobe has the defensive teams, but some of those are based on reputation, and are at a position with far less competion.

Also, I think Duncan also contributes in more areas, he doesn't score as much as Kobe but rebounds well, blocks shots (though this was sort of already covered in his defensive advantage) and passes well for his position. Kobe scores a lot at a good efficiency (largely due to his ability to get to the line), and doesn't turn the ball over a lot for a player with such high usage, and is a very good wing defender but doesn't do anything else at a notably strong rate. If he isn't scoring he can still be useful, but nowhere near the way that Duncan can.

My guess is that it might be easier to recruit/attract good players to play with Tim rather than Kobe. This is pure speculation of course but it is based on two things
1) Tim seems to have less of an ego, and has got on better with teammates.
2) Kobe's style relies on very high usage (his main advantage being that he can be efficient at that level) to the extent that has been likened to Teen Wolf (in Bill Simmons' Book of Basketball) and I suspect few superstars would choose to play with someone like that.

Against my own argument I would say that an exceptional SG is probably more scarce than an exceptional PF (though Duncan can play C where talent is most rare), but I still think Duncan has the edge.

All that said you can't wrong with either. They are both exceptional players.

[Dbrog]

Let me guess, Pau Gasol was 2010 MVP, and Duncans never played with a stacked supporting cast?

Duncans teams, excusing 99 have always been stacked from top to bottom.

The 09 & 10 Lakers were in no way stacked, had one of the worst benches in the leauge & had nobody other than Kobe & Pau as a scoring threat.

Go ahead, tell me how dominate Bynum was durring those finals runs?

Tell me about the inconsistent Odom.

Tell me about Trevor Ariza who was a journey man Sf who had played for several teams in 3 years.

Let's not forget DA GAWD D fish running point.

:biggums:


:confusedshrug: :banghead: :hammerhead: :facepalm

[Kblaze8855]

This is EXACTLY why using teammates' names with Duncan doesnt mean much. Hes been on great teams at times.. that dont really have great players.

It doesnt make sense at first because 99% of the league doesnt work that way but San Antonio could post the best record in the league with DeJuan Blair being their most impactful player in half their games. Their overall team commitment and discipline is at unheard of levels.

And Duncan gets his status elevated past what it should be because he didnt have the names but had something else that made just as big a diference.:confusedshrug:


Duncan is a hell of a lot of that "something else" and ive heard it from the mouths of his teammates. What...im gonna listen to you instead?

If I start taking credit from a teams best player for having a great coach/well run team Duncan wont even lose the most.

But im not going to start because its absurd. Im gonna make Duncan out to be less than he seems because of how Devin Brown, Jason hart, Ime Udoka and chris Quinn fit in with Carlos Silva and Joey Barotionia(made up names...but they have done just about as much as a number of spurs role players have).

Being a huge part of an enviroment that breeds chemistry is not something to knock Duncan for. Its something to give him credit for.

Perhaps not being yelled at with your whole family watching, not being called out in public over small mistakes, or made out to be a loser for failing to help him win....makes guys feel better about themselves?

Perhaps being accepting of coaching and people being critical of him makes the lesser players have to fall into line as well? Maybe when you dont go and demand a trade because the players next to you dont live up to your standards you dont make them dislike you?

Duncan helps create the chemistry and all for one mentality you want to discredit him for playing around. Why the hell should I punish that by ranking him lower?

There are Jordan/Kobe/Bird/KG types of over the top angry leaders making teammates play hard out of fear or intensity or whatever. And there are Duncan, Nash, Russell, and Magic types who seem to generate chemistry by making everyone around them comfortable and happy(not that Magic didnt have a little of both sides in him).

Both ways work for some. Russell treated everyone as his equal, wanted to hear what everyone had to say, and loved his teammates to the extent he said that he couldnt go to heaven after he left the Celtics because leaving there was a step down no matter where he went.

Jordan treated everyone like stepping stones to his goals and made them play hard by yelling, working so hard he shamed them into trying to keep up, and now and then...just punching someone.

If it works it works.

Duncans way works. And its nothing to hate on.

[RRR3]

Duncan is a hell of a lot of that "something else" and ive heard it from the mouths of his teammates. What...im gonna listen to you instead?

If I start taking credit from a teams best player for having a great coach/well run team Duncan wont even lose the most.

But im not going to start because its absurd. Im gonna make Duncan out to be less than he seems because of how Devin Brown, Jason hart, Ime Udoka and chris Quinn fit in with Carlos Silva and Joey Barotionia(made up names...but they have done just about as much as a number of spurs role players have).

Being a huge part of an enviroment that breeds chemistry is not something to knock Duncan for. Its something to give him credit for.

Perhaps not being yelled at with your whole family watching, not being called out in public over small mistakes, or made out to be a loser for failing to help him win....makes guys feel better about themselves?

Perhaps being accepting of coaching and people being critical of him makes the lesser players have to fall into line as well? Maybe when you dont go and demand a trade because the players next to you dont live up to your standards you dont make them dislike you?

Duncan helps create the chemistry and all for one mentality you want to discredit him for playing around. Why the hell should I punish that by ranking him lower?

There are Jordan/Kobe/Bird/KG types of over the top angry leaders making teammates play hard out of fear or intensity or whatever. And there are Duncan, Nash, Russell, and Magic types who seem to generate chemistry by making everyone around them comfortable and happy(not that Magic didnt have a little of both sides in him).

Both ways work for some. Russell treated everyone as his equal, wanted to hear what everyone had to say, and loved his teammates to the extent he said that he couldnt go to heaven after he left the Celtics because leaving there was a step down no matter where he went.

Jordan treated everyone like stepping stones to his goals and made them play hard by yelling, working so hard he shamed them into trying to keep up, and now and then...just punching someone.

If it works it works.

Duncans way works. And its nothing to hate on.
He was a godawful pitcher for the Cubs. LOL not that I care, being a Cards fan:pimp:

[tpols]

There are Jordan/Kobe/Bird/KG types of over the top angry leaders making teammates play hard out of fear or intensity or whatever. And there are Duncan, Nash, Russell, and Magic types who seem to generate chemistry by making everyone around them comfortable and happy(not that Magic didnt have a little of both sides in him).
.
Russell and Magic were on a different tier than the rest in terms of promoting team chemistry and a winning attitude..

Magic
Russell



Duncan
Nash


..in that regard. Duncan was and is a smart quiet guy and was in no way shape or form the charismatic leader that elevated all of his teammates games at that level. His teammates are STILL playing at extremely high levels snatching 1 seeds like candy with Duncan having a role player's impact for months on end.

It's the coaching, the delegation of responsiblity from the staff, the development of talent and fit of players.. all things Duncan doesnt have much of a hand in at all that has made the Spurs retardedly successful at breeding great teams out of thin air.

Duncan is an unselfish player who will assimilate with anyone's game, but he isnt the reason for the Spur's being so good at putting cohesive teams on the floor.. otherwise the past two years would not have happened.

[rmt]

Duncan would be Minny KG 2.0 if he wasnt in the best run organization in the league for the past decade. W/o GOAT management, player development, coaching, and overall discipline on his side Duncan wouldnt have enjoyed the same success that he did.

Id take Kobe because he was simply a more dominant player.

There was no GOAT management, player development (bunch of veterans except for TD), coaching (Pop had a 73-73 NBA record before 99 and was in danger of being fired with a 6-8 start to the 99 season) - yet they still won in 99.

Unlike Kobe, who has had the benefit of the GOAT coach (with 6 championships under his belt), MDE Shaq, desirable city where they can charge outrageous ticket prices and attract free agents, and an owner who is willing to spend and go over $90+ million in salary (unlike the cheap Peter Holt who insists on staying under the luxury tax and trades away talent like Scola to get rid of a bad contract).

2003 Duncan > any Kobe.

Duncan is a perfect franchise player - easy to build around - a rare big man (and there are so few of them) who provided great post scoring and elite rim protection and paint defense and gets along with any and everyone. No drama, no asking to be traded, no throwing team mates under the bus, no ratting on team mates, no hogging the ball, no questionable shot selection, and no rape charges.

[B]

Tim Duncan.

Because he can co-exist with other (and learn from) superstars, as shown with David Robinson.

Because he is loyal to his franchise (can be said of of Kobe too in terms of staying with one franchise, but the trade demands and more blatant free agent flirtation and badmouthing the front office including demanding the trade of Bynum leave him behind Duncan in this category).

Because he's an elite defender. Kobe is a good wing defender and has been a very good one. But he's been less effective defensively when carrying a large load on offense certainly doesn't have the effect of a dominant interior defender like Duncan. Yes Kobe has the defensive teams, but some of those are based on reputation, and are at a position with far less competion.

Also, I think Duncan also contributes in more areas, he doesn't score as much as Kobe but rebounds well, blocks shots (though this was sort of already covered in his defensive advantage) and passes well for his position. Kobe scores a lot at a good efficiency (largely due to his ability to get to the line), and doesn't turn the ball over a lot for a player with such high usage, and is a very good wing defender but doesn't do anything else at a notably strong rate. If he isn't scoring he can still be useful, but nowhere near the way that Duncan can.

My guess is that it might be easier to recruit/attract good players to play with Tim rather than Kobe. This is pure speculation of course but it is based on two things
1) Tim seems to have less of an ego, and has got on better with teammates.
2) Kobe's style relies on very high usage (his main advantage being that he can be efficient at that level) to the extent that has been likened to Teen Wolf (in Bill Simmons' Book of Basketball) and I suspect few superstars would choose to play with someone like that.

Against my own argument I would say that an exceptional SG is probably more scarce than an exceptional PF (though Duncan can play C where talent is most rare), but I still think Duncan has the edge.

All that said you can't wrong with either. They are both exceptional players.The force is strong in this one. Well said Owl

[AK47DR91]

Duncan because it's less harder to build a championship team around a big fella.

Teams led by Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem only need one or two good supporting mates. Sometimes none, in Hakeem's 1994 case and Duncan's 1999 & 2003 cases.

Kobe, you gotta give him 3 7-footers. Gasol, Bynum and Odom. Jordan had a stacked roster too with Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc or Pippen/Grant. (Added Jordan so my point didn't look like it was a shot at Kobe, cuz it wasn't)

It's a big man's game, you usually always gotta go big. Nowadays, you go with PF's more so than C's however.

[tpols]

There was no GOAT management, player development (bunch of veterans except for TD), coaching (Pop had a 73-73 NBA record before 99 and was in danger of being fired with a 6-8 start to the 99 season) - yet they still won in 99.

Unlike Kobe, who has had the benefit of the GOAT coach (with 6 championships under his belt), MDE Shaq, desirable city where they can charge outrageous ticket prices and attract free agents, and an owner who is willing to spend and go over $90+ million in salary (unlike the cheap Peter Holt who insists on staying under the luxury tax and trades away talent like Scola to get rid of a bad contract).

2003 Duncan > any Kobe.

Duncan is a perfect franchise player - easy to build around - a rare big man (and there are so few of them) who provided great post scoring and elite rim protection and paint defense and gets along with any and everyone. No drama, no asking to be traded, no throwing team mates under the bus, no ratting on team mates, no hogging the ball, no questionable shot selection, and no rape charges.
:roll:

[DKLaker]

Duncan couldn't even win back to back while Kobe twice went to 3 in a row winning 5 of 6 those finals..........hell, Kobe has been to the finals 7 times, Duncan only 4........only beat Kobe once :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Gimme Kobe for the win!!!!

[REACTION]

Champion= Kobe, Duncan
Market=Kobe

This. Both players are incredibly skilled and can lead teams to multiple championships, but I'd probably choose a young Kobe because of how much value it would add to your franchise.

[WockaVodka]

You always start with an all-time great of a big unless that perimeter player's name is Michael Jordan.

[Smoke117]

This is a joke right? Tim Duncan.

[Bandito]

Duncan because it's less harder to build a championship team around a big fella.

Teams led by Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem only need one or two good supporting mates. Sometimes none, in Hakeem's 1994 case and Duncan's 1999 & 2003 cases.

Kobe, you gotta give him 3 7-footers. Gasol, Bynum and Odom. Jordan had a stacked roster too with Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc or Pippen/Grant. (Added Jordan so my point didn't look like it was a shot at Kobe, cuz it wasn't)

It's a big man's game, you usually always gotta go big. Nowadays, you go with PF's more so than C's however.
while I concur with you Kobe didn't have the services for Bynum for huge chunks of 08 through 10 seasons because he was always injured.

[aau]

Lol @ discrediting Duncan because he got drafted to the powerhouse San Antonio Spurs. A Franchise that has no NBA history of winning before his arrival.

prior to tanking in 97 the spurs went

96 .... 59-23 4th best record
95 .... 62-20 best record in L
94 .... 55-27 6th best record
93 .... 49-33 8th best record
92 .... 47-35
91 .... 55-27 5th best record
90 .... 56-26 4th best record drob's rookie year

they may not have won any titles but
"no nba history of winning" ??!!!

drob delivered those runs singlehandedly

.

duncan has 1 fmvp without robinson
ONE

just a coincidence?

of course you'd say drob was old as mummy dust
- but he wasn't when duncan joined his team

97-98
drob 21/10/2b ps 20/9/2b
tdun 21/12/2b ps 19/14/3b

he was 32 and in military shape still

.

99 lockout title
drob rs 16/10/2b .... ps 15/10/3b .... f 16/12/3b

super pau
09 rs 19/9/1b ...... ps 18/10/2b .... f 18/9/1b
10 rs 18/11/1b .... ps 19/11/2b .... f 18/11/2b

.

2000 drob
rs 18/9/2b .... ps 23/14/3b

dead man numbers?

.

03 finals . . . drob 11/7/2b 61% 30mpg

09 finals . . . bynum 6p 4r 36% 20mpg

but kobe can't win without dominant big man
lmao

.

they're both winners

give me the most exciting show on earth (including the jersey
sales) over the most sleep-inducing player of this lifetime

er'day

[Timmy D for MVP]

I'm not sure at all how you could pick Kobe.

The answer is Duncan. If your goal is to put yourself in the best position to win how could you not pick Duncan as your center piece? The defensive impact alone makes him the superior choice.

[RaininTwos]

They are both top 10 talents, both durable and had amazing primes. I think I would go with Kobe, but there isn't a wrong choice.

[The Iron Fist]

I'm not sure at all how you could pick Kobe.

The answer is Duncan. If your goal is to put yourself in the best position to win how could you not pick Duncan as your center piece? The defensive impact alone makes him the superior choice.
Duncan never had to be part of a rebuilding process. He was always on good teams. Even when he was drafted as a number one guy, it was because the Spurs tanked to get him.

[aau]

I'm not sure at all how you could pick Kobe.


i know for a fact that was said when
buss chose kobe over shaq , and

i'm sure that's what portland and houston
said when they passed on jordan

[aau]

smart money says take the big guy everytime

it's a big man's league , except

oden - durant

.

no doubt big men protect the basket and the paint
but it's interesting that of the 44 fmvp awards

BIGS 16 . . . . NONS 28

outside of the shaq/td 99-03 five year run the
nons have 28 of the remaining 39 trophies

take away the couple of bones jordan threw at
hakeem it'd be that many more for the nons

.

of course it's easier to measure the big man's impact , both
visually and numerically ... blocks- rebounds- alterations

there are no numbers for ball - help - deny and disrupt on the
perimeter ,, beat to spot , cod , forced shots , contests
deflections , pressure entry pass , force bad pass
travelling , traps , doubles , help against
penetration and no baseline
just to name a few

on top of all that , in most cases - defend the oppositions best
player and most skilled athlete in a greater coverage area

.

PFs don't face offensive juggernauts every nite

since 1980 only 17 PFs has averaged 20ppg

just 5 have made a dent in the playoffs

only 1 has a fmvp

.

most people totally can't relate to the impact of playmakers
as strongly evidenced by a guy that reached 9 finals in 11
seasons - won 5 titles ,, 3 fmvp and owner of 2nd goat
finals run in league history - being omitted from the
ISH Top-10 playoff fmvp run list entirely . . . . . .

like cats do that er'day

.

perspective

lebron G6 closeout 26/11/13 . . . . . great game , , right?

since 1985
only 4 players have done this in a playoff game

.

magic avg 26/8/13 in the 87 finals

vs BOS the defending champs

.

i'll let it drop now

jus sayin

[Thethirdguy]

Kobe and it has nothing to do with basketball.

Kobe has more star power and its not even close. Star power brings money. Money gives you flexibility. Why do you think New York wants to keep Lin so badly? Because he's a brand in himself.

If i was STARTING a franchise id take Kobe hands down for this reason alone. Can't really go wrong with either one of them anyways

[Timmy D for MVP]

Duncan never had to be part of a rebuilding process. He was always on good teams. Even when he was drafted as a number one guy, it was because the Spurs tanked to get him.

What does that have to do with anything?

[jlauber]

I would probably take Duncan, for some the reasons listed already, BUT, it would be close. People forget that Kobe was the better player in the majority of their post-season H2H's.

[percolator]

Duncan easy. Defensive and offensive anchor in the paint. One of the smartest, most skilled big men to ever play the game.

On offense the guy really had everything. Textbook low post game, great passer, could step out and hit outside shots, automatic bank shot from the wings, money face up 18 footer, the handles and quickness to take opposing bigs off the dribble from two dribble territory, and a monster finisher at the rim in his prime. IMO he's second only to Hakeem Olajuwon for having the complete offensive package you want out of a big man.

Kobe's obviously an all time great guard, but he also had the good fortune of playing with one of the 2 or 3 most dominant centers of all time, and later with Pau Gasol. It's an old adage but given the choice you always build big and from the inside out. We saw how Kobe led teams fared without a dominant big man.

[The Iron Fist]

What does that have to do with anything?
Everything. He has been on a contending team since day one and has never had to be a part of the rebuilding process.

[The Iron Fist]

Duncan easy. Defensive and offensive anchor in the paint. One of the smartest, most skilled big men to ever play the game.

On offense the guy really had everything. Textbook low post game, great passer, could step out and hit outside shots, automatic bank shot from the wings, money face up 18 footer, the handles and quickness to take opposing bigs off the dribble from two dribble territory, and a monster finisher at the rim in his prime. IMO he's second only to Hakeem Olajuwon for having the complete offensive package you want out of a big man.

Kobe's obviously an all time great guard, but he also had the good fortune of playing with one of the 2 or 3 most dominant centers of all time, and later with Pau Gasol. It's an old adage but given the choice you always build big and from the inside out. We saw how Kobe led teams fared without a dominant big man.
Pau is not dominant and never has been.

[Timmy D for MVP]

Everything. He has been on a contending team since day one and has never had to be a part of the rebuilding process.

When has Kobe been a part of a true rebuild? The only time Kobe had struggles with the talent around him he was thinking about walking.

But still, what does that have to do with anything at all in regards to the question? I'm quite confused. The fact that he has been on good teams from day one doesn't take away from the fact that he is the better selection.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Unless Pop is my coach I'm taking Kobe.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Duncan easily

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Pau is not dominant and never has been.

Pau Gasol (arguably best PF in the NBA 09/10) and was he the most important piece in the triangle offense. Then you had Lamar Odom (Versatile and incredibly underrated) and Andrew Bynum (even though he wasn't always fit) to give the Lakers the best big man rotation in the league.

[Kews1]

I'll be starting my franchise with a big man, Timmy D.

[The Iron Fist]

Pau Gasol (arguably best PF in the NBA 09/10) and was he the most important piece in the triangle offense. Then you had Lamar Odom (Versatile and incredibly underrated) and Andrew Bynum (even though he wasn't always fit) to give the Lakers the best big man rotation in the league.
He was the final piece, not most important. Still doesnt make him dominant. And Odom, lol. The most inconsistent player ever.

[kennethgriffin]

people saying duncan are dumb

you could go with either one and be really successful ... both won allot.... both top 10 players ever... both champions, all league defenders... both great lengevity



the deal breaker is kobe bryant being a global icon and top 5 image/name/sales all time status

while duncan is one of the least popular, least drawing, least selling, least marketable and non factor name wise in nba history

that right there should make it a no brainer... kobe got the lakers a multi billion dollar tv deal. he made the lakers waaaay more money than duncan ever made the spurs..


its like picking between bret hart and kurt hennig back in the day.. both equally tallented... but only one really got over with the fans and made the company allot of money..

no contest

kobe all day....

[Kews1]

people saying duncan are dumb

you could go with either one and be really successful ... both won allot.... both top 10 players ever... both champions, all league defenders... both great lengevity



the deal breaker is kobe bryant being a global icon and top 5 image/name/sales all time status

while duncan is one of the least popular, least drawing, least selling, least marketable and non factor name wise in nba history

that right there should make it a no brainer... kobe got the lakers a multi billion dollar tv deal. he made the lakers waaaay more money than duncan ever made the spurs..


its like picking between bret hart and kurt hennig back in the day.. both equally tallented... but only one really got over with the fans and made the company allot of money..

no contest

kobe all day....

my hypothetical franchise was only looking for wins, not hypothetical popularity & TV Deals, :confusedshrug:

[percolator]

Pau is not dominant and never has been.

I didn't say he was, but at the time he was one of the best all-round bigs in the league, and he probably had the biggest impact in the two finals the Lakers won. He's not a consistently dominant player, but he was playing like it when the Lakers were winning

[TheMarkMadsen]

Lets say Last years Bulls are in one of their brief stretches of being healthy.

Who on the 2003 Spurs isnt coming off the bench other than Tim Duncan?

Bowen over Ronnie Brewer?

Tony parker & manu EASILY start, if not both then atleast one. Stephen Jackson would play meaningfull minutes, as would David Robinson.

The bulls offense is so in need of scoring from somebody not named Drose that I believe they wouldn't either start Drose at the 2 & start parker at the point.

Or

They start manu over an aging rip hamilton.

And with Thibs as coach, D rob & Malik rose would have seen some run in place of Boozer at times. They wouldn't start over him, but they'd easily take significant minutes away.

And yeah, Bowen > Brewer? Bruce was a better defender & could actually hit a jumpshot.

[WillC]

I've counted the votes and there is a clear winner: Tim Duncan.

Kobe Bryant: 14
Tim Duncan: 30

Kobe Bryant

Batz
I LUV KOBE
DStebb716
nbarumorz
bluechox2
DKLaker
TheMarkMadsen
tpols
REACTION
aau
RaininTwos
Thethirdguy
Kobe 4 The Win
kennethgriffin

Tim Duncan

Xiao Yao You
waseem780
EnoughSaid
BoutPractice
west_tip
LikeABosh
Story Up
thelucifer69
bleedinpurpleTwo
lilgodfather1
Kiddlovesnets
Inactive
Freedom Kid7
Kblaze8855
NumberSix
Hank
swi7ch
goldcrow
Owl
rmt
B

[roffie]

count me in for duncan too, so 31.

[abuC]

Duncan, without even thinking twice.

[JaE_BLiZZy]

So mostly Laker fans voted Kobe, :oldlol:

[TheeBeast]

Can't choose. Its gonna depend the basketball/coaching system and also the players the two would play with.

But since Kobe's my favorite I'd choose him.

[Horatio33]

Duncan.

[Odinn]

Let me guess, Pau Gasol was 2010 MVP, and Duncans never played with a stacked supporting cast?

Duncans teams, excusing 99 have always been stacked from top to bottom.

The 09 & 10 Lakers were in no way stacked, had one of the worst benches in the leauge & had nobody other than Kobe & Pau as a scoring threat.

Go ahead, tell me how dominate Bynum was durring those finals runs?

Tell me about the inconsistent Odom.

Tell me about Trevor Ariza who was a journey man Sf who had played for several teams in 3 years.

Let's not forget DA GAWD D fish running point.
You didn't even watch at least a game from Duncan's 2003 title run, did you?:roll: :roll:

Proven idiot.

[Odinn]

[QUOTE=WillC]I've counted the votes and there is a clear winner: Tim Duncan.

Kobe Bryant: 14
Tim Duncan: 30

Kobe Bryant

Batz
I LUV KOBE
DStebb716
nbarumorz
bluechox2
DKLaker
TheMarkMadsen
tpols
REACTION
aau
RaininTwos
Thethirdguy
Kobe 4 The Win
kennethgriffin

Tim Duncan

Xiao Yao You
waseem780
EnoughSaid
BoutPractice
west_tip
LikeABosh
Story Up
thelucifer69
bleedinpurpleTwo
lilgodfather1
Kiddlovesnets
Inactive
Freedom Kid7
Kblaze8855
NumberSix
Hank
swi7ch
goldcrow
Owl
rmt
B

[swag2011]

So mostly Laker fans voted Kobe, :oldlol:

and mostly laker/kobe haters voted for Duncan, what's your point? :confusedshrug:

[JaE_BLiZZy]

and mostly laker/kobe haters voted for Duncan, what's your point? :confusedshrug:
U sound mad bro, lol. Just stating the obvious.

[RIP CITY]

Not an easy decision but from a purely basketball perspective I would take Tim Duncan. Duncan is easier to build around and dominant big men are harder to acquire. Duncan has won more with less than arguably any superstar ever IMO. Duncan's 4 Championships have come with 4 fairly different supporting casts, yes their have been some mainstays like Robinson, Parker and Ginobili but all 3 of those players have had their ups and downs on the 4 Championship teams.

The first Championship was with Robinson still playing at a significantly high level, by the second Robinson was just a very good role player and he was retired for the 2nd two Championships. Parker was not on the first Championship team, was regularly replaced in the 4th quarter of Playoff games in favor of Speedy Claxton for the 2nd (including the Championship clinching game), was a borderline All-Star in the 3rd and an All-Star in the 4th. Ginobili wasn't on the first Championship team, was a bench spark plug on the 2nd and All-Star level player for the second two.

Outside of Robinson in 1999 to 2000, Duncan has never played with a legitimate Superstar next to him and the supporting casts around him have changed alot over the years. The 3rd and 4th Championship teams were relatively the same in terms of Duncan, Ginobili, Parker and Bowen being the mainstays but there have been alot guys revolving in and out besides those 4. The first two Championships are completely different rosters. The list of players that have rings because of Duncan is ridiculous.

Kobe Bryant has had considerably more talent around him and his first 3 Championship teams didn't have nearly as much turnover as the Spurs have had. He also played with another Top 10 All-Time player for all 3 of those Championships. Now, I'm not one of those people that feel Shaq carried Kobe to rings. In my personal opinion, Shaq and Kobe were equals on the second two Championship teams and Kobe was just as important. But that's just something Duncan never had, a running mate of that caliber and I feel like if he did, he would have won even more Championships. Not to mention, I think the Shaq and Kobe Lakers underachieved overall because the two couldn't get along, something that is partly Kobe's fault (just as much Shaq's fault IMO).

Someone mentioned that Duncan never won back-to-back Championships and what I said above I believe is the reason why. With both of Kobe's separate Championship runs the Lakers kept the majority of the team together after winning, basically the Top 8 players stayed every year and if anything, they added people. With the Spurs, they changed alot of pieces every year, win or lose and never made alot of big name additions. The first two, completely different teams. The second two, Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Bowen, Horry, the rest changed pretty frequently both in terms of staying on the roster and players roles on the team. Popovich is a doghouse Coach, you can fall out of favor with him quickly. Admittedly, the core of Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Bowen and Horry stayed together for quite a while but Duncan won Championships with 3 completely different teams overall (99/03/05). Again, not a knock on Kobe, he's won with 2 completely different teams as well.

Overall, I just feel like it's easier to build a team around Duncan. He's the ultimate franchise player. He was absolutely dominant on both ends of the floor, great Leader, unselfish, can mesh with any type of player/team, willing to take less money to help add pieces to the team, completely loyal to the franchise, never a distraction on or off the court and is one of the Top 10 Players of All-Time, THE best Power Forward ever.

If you add in marketability, then I'd probably lean towards Kobe because it's not like you can't win with Kobe as your franchise player, he's one of the 10 Greatest Players ever too. Personally as an owner though, marketability wouldn't be one of my priorities. If I own an NBA team I'm already filthy rich anyway, I want to win at all costs.

[rmt]

Not an easy decision but from a purely basketball perspective I would take Tim Duncan. Duncan is easier to build around and dominant big men are harder to acquire. Duncan has won more with less than arguably any superstar ever IMO. Duncan's 4 Championships have come with 4 fairly different supporting casts, yes their have been some mainstays like Robinson, Parker and Ginobili but all 3 of those players have had their ups and downs on the 4 Championship teams.

The first Championship was with Robinson still playing at a significantly high level, by the second Robinson was just a very good role player and he was retired for the 2nd two Championships. Parker was not on the first Championship team, was regularly replaced in the 4th quarter of Playoff games in favor of Speedy Claxton for the 2nd (including the Championship clinching game), was a borderline All-Star in the 3rd and an All-Star in the 4th. Ginobili wasn't on the first Championship team, was a bench spark plug on the 2nd and All-Star level player for the second two.

Outside of Robinson in 1999 to 2000, Duncan has never played with a legitimate Superstar next to him and the supporting casts around him have changed alot over the years. The 3rd and 4th Championship teams were relatively the same in terms of Duncan, Ginobili, Parker and Bowen being the mainstays but there have been alot guys revolving in and out besides those 4. The first two Championships are completely different rosters. The list of players that have rings because of Duncan is ridiculous.

Kobe Bryant has had considerably more talent around him and his first 3 Championship teams didn't have nearly as much turnover as the Spurs have had. He also played with another Top 10 All-Time player for all 3 of those Championships. Now, I'm not one of those people that feel Shaq carried Kobe to rings. In my personal opinion, Shaq and Kobe were equals on the second two Championship teams and Kobe was just as important. But that's just something Duncan never had, a running mate of that caliber and I feel like if he did, he would have won even more Championships. Not to mention, I think the Shaq and Kobe Lakers underachieved overall because the two couldn't get along, something that is partly Kobe's fault (just as much Shaq's fault IMO).

Someone mentioned that Duncan never won back-to-back Championships and what I said above I believe is the reason why. With both of Kobe's separate Championship runs the Lakers kept the majority of the team together after winning, basically the Top 8 players stayed every year and if anything, they added people. With the Spurs, they changed alot of pieces every year, win or lose and never made alot of big name additions. The first two, completely different teams. The second two, Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Bowen, Horry, the rest changed pretty frequently both in terms of staying on the roster and players roles on the team. Popovich is a doghouse Coach, you can fall out of favor with him quickly. Admittedly, the core of Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Bowen and Horry stayed together for quite a while but Duncan won Championships with 3 completely different teams overall (99/03/05). Again, not a knock on Kobe, he's won with 2 completely different teams as well.

Overall, I just feel like it's easier to build a team around Duncan. He's the ultimate franchise player. He was absolutely dominant on both ends of the floor, great Leader, unselfish, can mesh with any type of player/team, willing to take less money to help add pieces to the team, completely loyal to the franchise, never a distraction on or off the court and is one of the Top 10 Players of All-Time, THE best Power Forward ever.

If you add in marketability, then I'd probably lean towards Kobe because it's not like you can't win with Kobe as your franchise player, he's one of the 10 Greatest Players ever too. Personally as an owner though, marketability wouldn't be one of my priorities. If I own an NBA team I'm already filthy rich anyway, I want to win at all costs.

Good post. Have read a stat where TD has taken more different team mates to a ring than any other great.

True about the winning - especially in LA (where rich/famous people like to be seen at what becomes social events). If a team wins, the fans flock. It's when they lose that you need star power to keep the fans in the seats.

[ThaRegul8r]

Personally as an owner though, marketability wouldn't be one of my priorities. If I own an NBA team I'm already filthy rich anyway, I want to win at all costs.

:applause:

If I own an NBA team, my objective is to win. If you win, you'll always have bandwagoners.

[AK47DR91]

:applause:

If I own an NBA team, my objective is to win. If you win, you'll always have bandwagoners.
Winning is the key to marketing for small media market teams.

[swag2011]

U sound mad bro, lol. Just stating the obvious.

not mad at all, just like you, i'm stating the obvious. As soon as the they saw the thread had "kobe" in it, you already know they were gunna come in here and pick against him or discredit him anyway. So it's pointless to state that laker fans are gunna go for kobe, when kobe haters are just gunna do the opposite.

[WillC]

not mad at all, just like you, i'm stating the obvious. As soon as the they saw the thread had "kobe" in it, you already know they were gunna come in here and pick against him or discredit him anyway. So it's pointless to state that laker fans are gunna go for kobe, when kobe haters are just gunna do the opposite.

The Kobe fans and the Kobe haters negate each other.

That just leaves the intelligent, unbiased fans to make the deciding votes.

And Tim Duncan won in a landslide victory.

[Punpun]

Kobe. It's pretty obvious anyone would want to choose Kobe over Duncan for your franchise. And I'm not even going to go on the stats and leadership discussion to prove my point.

Kobe brings in WAY MORE money than Duncan ever could. This simple fact is enough to skew the balance heavily in Kobe's favor.

[WillC]

Kobe. It's pretty obviosu anyone would want to choose Kobe.

Did you see the result? Tim Duncan got far more votes than Kobe. So maybe it's not so 'obvious' after all.


Kobe brings in WAY MORE money than Duncan ever could. This simple fact is enough to skew the balance heavily in Kobe's favor.

Who cares? The objective here was to win championships, not sell jerseys.

[Punpun]

Who cares? The objective here was to win championships, not sell jerseys.

Dude, no. You said "to start a franchise", so YOU CARES.

Kobe is 7 Finals by the way. That's more than Duncan. But hey, I said I didn't need to go on the stats and legacy thingie in order to prove my point. I did.

ANother kicked ass for Punpun. :applause:

[I LUV KOBE]

If you want popularity, better player, more rings and longevity.. Kobe will be your answer unless you're a hater..

[NumberSix]

Who cares? The objective here was to win championships, not sell jerseys.
Not that that would matter anyway.

[AK47DR91]

Dude, no. You said "to start a franchise", so YOU CARES.

Kobe is 7 Finals by the way. That's more than Duncan. But hey, I said I didn't need to go on the stats and legacy thingie in order to prove my point. I did.

ANother kicked ass for Punpun. :applause:
You do realized that 4 of those 7 Finals appearances was built around Shaq and not Kobe, right? :lol

[Punpun]

You do realized that 4 of those 7 Finals appearance was built around Shaq and not Kobe, right? :lol
You realize the last trip to the finals for Duncan was built around Parker right ? :lol

All of those shitty attacks are nothing but excuses, can we stick to facts please ?

2 kicked ass in 2 answers. :bowdown:

[WillC]

Dude, no. You said "to start a franchise", so YOU CARES.

Kobe is 7 Finals by the way. That's more than Duncan. But hey, I said I didn't need to go on the stats and legacy thingie in order to prove my point. I did.

ANother kicked ass for Punpun. :applause:

The opening post clearly says that the franchise's goal is "to win multiple championships".

Reading comprehension fail.

[Punpun]

The opening post clearly says that the franchise's goal is "to win multiple championships".

Reading comprehension fail.
Championships teams are built with money. Kobe brings in more Money than Duncan ever could. 2 facts. Do you want another fact ? You will win multiple championships with both Duncan and Kobe. Another one ? Having ****loads of money + Rings is better than just rings. Another fact ? Kobe is the one who is going to bring that in.

Dude, do I need to continue or are you going to stop having your ass kicked ?

:yaohappy:

[AK47DR91]

You realize the last trip to the finals for Duncan was built around Parker right ? :lol

All of those shitty attacks are nothing but excuses, can we stick to facts please ?

2 kicked ass in 2 answers. :bowdown:
You know that Duncan's 3 Finals MVP, 3-0 Finals series record is still better than Kobe's 2-1 record and 2 Finals MVP, right? :lol

[Punpun]

You know that Duncan's 3 Finals MVP, 3-0 Finals series record is still better than Kobe's 2-1 record and 2 Finals MVP, right? :lol

Dude, why do you want to keep playing this sterile little game that won't advance the discussion in the least and will do nothing more than to devolve the conversation into a succession of kneejerks reaction ?

Are you here to troll or to have a legit conversation ?

:yaohappy:

[AK47DR91]

Dude, why do you want to keep playing this sterile little game that won't advance the discussion in the least and will do nothing more than to devolve the conversation into a succession of kneejerks reaction ?

Are you here to troll or to have a legit conversation ?

:yaohappy:
I thought both of us were at trolling mode to be honest.

ADDED: My real opinion(not trolling or baiting) post was on Page 4 by the way. It's a fair statement.

[Punpun]

Sure is. Starting building with a big is always a good thing. But on the other hand I don't know if, as an owner, I would not prefer to have my superstar be someone like Kobe who brings in an enormous amount of cash, huge tv deals etc.

[WillC]

Sure is. Starting building with a big is always a good thing. But on the other hand I don't know if, as an owner, I would not prefer to have my superstar be someone like Kobe who brings in an enormous amount of cash, huge tv deals etc.

:facepalm

Maybe Tim Duncan would be a bigger superstar if he'd had the luxury of spending his entire career in Los Angeles playing next to the likes of Shaq?

[Punpun]

Maybe Tim Duncan would be a bigger superstar if he'd had the luxury of spending his entire career in Los Angeles playing next to the likes of Shaq?
DO you actually believe that ? Do you even know who Tim Duncan is ? It has nothing to do with the place he is playing in and everything to do with who he is as a person. Are you for real or what ?

:yaohappy:

[WillC]

DO you actually believe that ? Do you even know who Tim Duncan is ? It has nothing to do with the place he is playing in and everything to do with who he is as a person. Are you for real or what ?

:yaohappy:

To be honest, I couldn't really care less.

This thread was intended to establish which player would be best to build around if your goal was to win championships. Tim Duncan (rightly) won the vote in a landslide.

Have a good cry about it.

[Punpun]

You couldn't care less, yet you made this thread and went all butthurt when I called you out on your bullshit.

:yaohappy:

[WillC]

I care about who the better player is.

Not who sells the most jerseys and rapes the most women.

[amfirst]

Obviously Kobe, pair him with a good big man and u got a championship. Duncan paired with a good pg does not guarantee it. Basically, u need more pieces around Duncan than Kobe.

[Rysio]

:facepalm

Maybe Tim Duncan would be a bigger superstar if he'd had the luxury of spending his entire career in Los Angeles playing next to the likes of Shaq?
no.

[AlonzoGOAT]

Is PunPun one of those people that ride the lakers/kobe because their franchise sucks dick like Heavencint?

[Punpun]

Is PunPun one of those people that ride the lakers/kobe because their franchise sucks dick like Heavencint?
Oh yes, show me where I've dickrided anyone in this thread. Please. ****ing trolls I swear.

@WillC, Yeah son. You are mad as ****. Pretty evident. You just keep spouting bs, keep being called out on it and keep crying about it. You are pretty funny all thing considered.

[AlonzoGOAT]

Oh yes, show me where I've dickrided anyone in this thread. Please. ****ing trolls I swear.

@WillC, Yeah son. You are mad as ****. Pretty evident. You just keep spouting bs, keep being called out on it and keep crying about it. You are pretty funny all thing considered.


So you just became a kings fan and I'm not just talking about this thread :roll: And why would it be hard to understand people would want to start a franchise with duncan over kobe? I haven't even voted. Duncan is the better player, He's a big, 3FMVPs :bowdown:. I don't see how he wouldn't bring money just like kobe if he played in L.A

[Carbine]

Tim Duncan would bring in a lot of money if he played in LA.

People love winners.

[RaininTwos]

Aside from illogical Kobe-stans, it's like 30 to none.:oldlol:
:coleman:

[Punpun]

So you just became a kings fan and I'm not just talking about this thread :roll: And why would it be hard to understand people would want to start a franchise with duncan over kobe? I haven't even voted. Duncan is the better player, He's a big, 3FMVPs :bowdown:

No dude, don't try to escape the conversation like that. You accuse dme of dickriding Kobe&the laker sin this thread. Where did I dickrided them ? Where ?

Oh that's right, I didn't.

I just ethered you little troll.

[AlonzoGOAT]

:coleman:

You're on the clock :cheers:

[WillC]

Oh yes, show me where I've dickrided anyone in this thread. Please. ****ing trolls I swear.

@WillC, Yeah son. You are mad as ****. Pretty evident. You just keep spouting bs, keep being called out on it and keep crying about it. You are pretty funny all thing considered.

Cool story bro.

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/1%20San%20Antonio%20Spurs/Tim%20Duncan/tdnikecommercials-1.gif

[Punpun]

Cool story bro.

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/1%20San%20Antonio%20Spurs/Tim%20Duncan/tdnikecommercials-1.gif
So cute. :yaohappy:

[AlonzoGOAT]

No dude, don't try to escape the conversation like that. You accuse dme of dickriding Kobe&the laker sin this thread. Where did I dickrided them ? Where ?

Oh that's right, I didn't.

I just ethered you little troll.


I've seen your obsessions so answer the question why are you suddenlya kings fan? Because of T-robb :roll: No need to get upset, they are a shit

[Punpun]

I've seen your obsessions so answer the question why are you suddenlya kings fan? Because of T-robb :roll: No need to get upset

You still aren't answering. And for a good reasona ctually. You tried to attack me on a pretended "Ur a bandwagoner dickriding kkobe&the lakers lol". When called out on your bullshit, you immediatly backpedalled. You're cute too.

Do you have enough dignity to admit you were wrong ? Or do you want to keep the petulant child act like WillC ?

Ps: I've never said I was a SAC fan. T-rob or not T-rob. More bullshit you keep inventing.

[AlonzoGOAT]

:mad: :mad: :cry: :cry:

So your just D riding T-robb ? Can't blame me for you already have dick riding history :lol

[NumberSix]

Lol @ this niqqa Punpun trying to act like he ain't a notorious Kobe-tard.

[Punpun]

So your just D riding T-robb ? Can't blame me for you already have dick riding history :lol

I'm trying my best to be a T-Rob dickrider yeah. Yeah, I can blame you. You falsely accused me of sth just because. Then when called on it you refuse to admit you were wrong.

Congrats, you reached WillC's level of low.

:yaohappy:

[AlonzoGOAT]

I'm trying my best to be a T-Rob dickrider yeah. Yeah, I can blame you. You falsely accused me of sth just because. Then when called on it you refuse to admit you were wrong.

Congrats, you reached WillC's level of low.

:yaohappy:

So you really can't blame me? You ride a player not your ??(LA) franchise and get offensive in this thread because Kobe lost to Duncan in this poll. Why would you care so much over something so meaningless. I would take Yao Ming over both of these cuz he wite

[Punpun]

Lol @ this niqqa Punpun trying to act like he ain't a notorious Kobe-tard.

Bush, I like ya and all but don't act like you understand what's going on. :kobe:

[RaininTwos]

You're on the clock :cheers:
wait what?

[Punpun]

So you really can't blame me? You ride a player not your ??(LA) franchise and get offensive in this thread because Kobe lost to Duncan in this poll. Why would you care so much over something so meaningless.

>Got offensive

Keep making up stuff dude. I'm loving it. Froma SAC fan to LA fan in 2 com.

:yaohappy:

[AlonzoGOAT]

>Got offensive

Keep making up stuff dude. I'm loving it. Froma SAC fan to LA fan in 2 com.

:yaohappy:

:lol Exposed just running in circles now:lol Once a D rider always one.


I rest my case :applause: !!!!!!!!!


So mad

[Punpun]

So cute. :yaohappy:


Ps: Congrats in effectively shitting up the thread. :bowdown:

[AlonzoGOAT]

So cute. :yaohappy:


Ps: Congrats in effectively shitting up the thread. :bowdown:


Pretty sure that was you being butthurt on pg 7 :roll: :applause: (On a poll already decided)

[Punpun]

So freaking cute of you. :yaohappy:

[AlonzoGOAT]

:bowdown:

:cheers:

[BrickingStar]

Duncan and it's not close don't know why ppl are bitching close this thread

[Punpun]

:cheers:

:applause:

[Sakkreth]

Duncan more impact overall, and you don't need another top big man to win it all.

[KingBeasley08]

Wow Duncan dominated. I would have voted for him as well :bowdown:

[I<3NBA]

TD any day and twice on Sundays. Kobe won't have the patience to wait for you to build around him. he'd whine to be traded on his 2nd year. we're talking about starting from an empty roster right?

[oamjad13]

Kobe. And the reason is that Kobe is a marketing dream. The guy is someone who can create those remarkable plays that leave you startled so he'll be an exciting leader. Also, Kobe showed in 09 and 10 that he can win championships with a decent, but by no means good, roster.

Timmy D is more capable of leading a start-up franchise to titles but being a marketer, I need that marketability factor that Kobe provides.