Tim Duncan the 2nd greatest player of all time?

[oolalaa]

Can a legitimate argument be made that Timmy is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history? (Behind only Jordan)

If not, why the **** not? It seems to me that he's won more with less than just about every other all time great. 4 championships and 4 FMVPs (Robbed '07), his best teammates have been a past his prime/decrepid Robinson, Tony Parker (Top 150 all time? Maybe.) and Manu Ginobili (Top 200 all time?). I mean....really??

His 2003 peak is one of the very best, and most underrated, ever. He's one of the best post defenders/anchors in history. He's arguably the greatest low post facilitating big-man of all time. One of the great rebounders of his generation. A consistent scorer with phenomenal footwork and a wide array of post moves. A great leader and teammate. A consumate professional who only cares about winning. And that's what he did. Win and win and win. Between '01 and '07 (His extended prime) his Spurs only lost to the Shaq/Kobe Lakers and the '06 Mavs led by a POSESSED Dirk Nowitzki. He led a good/very good but never great small market team deep into the post season year after year after year.


I'm not saying he is the 2nd best of all time, but NO ONE EVER ranks him that high. Ever! I think that's a little strange. Surely he has a reasonably strong case?

[Odinn]

From "Is Tim Duncan greater than Shaq? Top 5 All Time?" thread;
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=252854


Duncan can be ranked over Shaq. And Shaq can be ranked over Duncan as well.

Duncan: Better career accolades/accomplishments, better intangibles
Shaq: Better peak(prime)

In my goat list right now, both of them are 6th.
But Shaq has the stronger case to be ranked as top 5 ever. Because Shaq's peak is in the goat peak debate. Duncan also was a dominant force on the floor but his peak never will be in the goat peak debate and that's why top 5 would be too high for Duncan.

[iamgine]

Can a legitimate argument be made that Timmy is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history? (Behind only Jordan)

If not, why the **** not? It seems to me that he's won more with less than just about every other all time great. 4 championships and 4 FMVPs (Robbed '07), his best teammates have been a past his prime/decrepid Robinson, Tony Parker (Top 150 all time? Maybe.) and Manu Ginobili (Top 200 all time?). I mean....really??

His 2003 peak is one of the very best, and most underrated, ever. He's one of the best post defenders/anchors in history. He's arguably the greatest low post facilitating big-man of all time. One of the great rebounders of his generation. A consistent scorer with phenomenal footwork and a wide array of post moves. A great leader and teammate. A consumate professional who only cares about winning. And that's what he did. Win and win and win. Between '01 and '07 (His extended prime) his Spurs only lost to the Shaq/Kobe Lakers and the '06 Mavs led by a POSESSED Dirk Nowitzki. He led a good/very good but never great small market team deep into the post season year after year after year.


I'm not saying he is the 2nd best of all time, but NO ONE EVER ranks him that high. Ever! I think that's a little strange. Surely he has a reasonably strong case?
Well when you diminish all his teammates without context, sure he can be.

For one, David Robinson was the 2nd-4th best center in the league in their first title run.

[Foster5k]

Tim Duncan is an all time great, no doubt about it. However, guys like Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem, Magic, Hakeem, Shaq etc have greater peaks.

[Shepseskaf]

I'm not saying he is the 2nd best of all time, but NO ONE EVER ranks him that high. Ever! I think that's a little strange. Surely he has a reasonably strong case?
Timmeh's in the top 10, but no one ranks him at #2 because he doesn't deserve it.

Would anyone say he deserves to be higher than Kareem or Magic? Not likely.

[elementally morale]

Can a legitimate argument be made that Timmy is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history? (Behind only Jordan)

No.




I'm not saying he is the 2nd best of all time

It is pretty damn clever of you



NO ONE EVER ranks him that high. Ever! I think that's a little strange.

It's not. I consider him a center and I can easily name at least two centers having been greater than him since 1980 (the year I started following the NBA). Both Hakeem and Shaq were better. From the footage I've seen I'm sure Kareem was better than both the above. Wilt, too. I'm not sold on Russell, but he sure does have a stronger case than Duncan. That makes Tim Duncan the 5th best center to have ever played the game. Which is nice, but nowhere near #2 of all time.

And if you claim he was/is a PF... I diseagree, but even if I consider him one, all the above players were still better. I have nothing against TD, but I'd say he is not a lot more than a glorified David Robinson (who was, btw a great-great player).



Surely he has a reasonably strong case?

Not really, see above.

[oolalaa]

From "Is Tim Duncan greater than Shaq? Top 5 All Time?" thread;
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=252854

Bill Russell's peak is NEVER, EVER in the GOAT peak conversation. Yet, many, many people, including myself, consider Russell to be one of the 3 greatest players in NBA history (And better than Wilt, who chucked up arguably greatest best peak ever in '67). Why? Consistent greatness over a decade (Or close to it), in general, trumps Peaks and troughs. A peak is only a coupe of seasons. They should not define a legacy

And, having said that, you, like just about everyone on the planet, sorely underrate Duncan's '02/'03 peak. I would take 2002/2003 Timmy over every player in history outside of peak Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem and Wilt.

[Lebron23]

Hell No. I rank him behind Shaquille O'Neal. Timmy is definitely a top 8 player of all time.

[oolalaa]

Well when you diminish all his teammates without context, sure he can be.

For one, David Robinson was the 2nd-4th best center in the league in their first title run.

And only a top 15 overall player. A sidekick worse than Scottie Pippen.

[Horatio33]

I love Timmy, 8th best of all time but he has no argument for 2nd.

[oolalaa]

Tim Duncan is an all time great, no doubt about it. However, guys like Bill Russell (Nope), Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem (Nope), Magic (Nope), Hakeem, Shaq etc have greater peaks.

Nope.

[oolalaa]

Timmeh's in the top 10, but no one ranks him at #2 because he doesn't deserve it.


Insightful stuff.

[ashlar]

If he was a more selfish player he might have had a shot but he has always had a well balanced team that didn't really allow that.

[oolalaa]

It's not. I consider him a center and I can easily name at least two centers having been greater than him since 1980 (the year I started following the NBA). Both Hakeem and Shaq were better. From the footage I've seen I'm sure Kareem was better than both the above. Wilt, too. I'm not sold on Russell, but he sure does have a stronger case than Duncan. That makes Tim Duncan the 5th best center to have ever played the game. Which is nice, but nowhere near #2 of all time.

And if you claim he was/is a PF... I diseagree, but even if I consider him one, all the above players were still better. I have nothing against TD, but I'd say he is not a lot more than a glorified David Robinson (who was, btw a great-great player).


Hakeem and Shaq had better peaks. So what? Give me Timmy's entire career over both of them. Wilt, too, had a better peak. He also had several troughs ('63, half of '65, '68 (I don't care what the numbers say), '69). And Russ's peak was not better than Duncan's imo, although I would still take Russell over Duncan overall.

[elementally morale]

Insightful stuff.

Stop pretending you want real answers to your so-called 'question'. You asked the question to push an agenda. It doesn't matter what kind of an answer you'll get, because what you really want to hear is something like this: "TD was great, a top5 player all time for sure. It is reasonable to argue he is even better than that".

I'm sorry to burst you bubble, but you won't find many people who will say thing like this.

Next time, instead of imitating a question just tell us what you think. Like this: "I think TD was a lot better tan given credit for. I personally can build a case for him being #2 of all time."

At any rate, if you ask others' opinions at least try pretending you want to hear what they have to say. It's a lot more mature thing to do.

[Whoah10115]

There is 0000000000 argument for Tim Duncan being robbed of the FMVP in 2007. I watched the series. Just because he's their most important and best player doesn't mean he was the best player in the series. Under that logic, the best player should win all the time, regardless of how he plays.


And to be honest, Ginobili was better than him in the 2005 Finals. But there was no chance that Ginboili would have won it over Duncan. For Parker to win in 2007, it had to be in a sweep, with Parker being noticeably better, following the 2005 Finals.



Now, if Tim Duncan is lost before the series, do I think that has a bigger impact than Parker or Ginobili going down? Absolutely. But those are intangible things that don't take away from how they played in the actual series.



If you wanna talk about a great player being robbed of the FMVP, talk about Magic in 88. James Worthy had no business beating him out. And for all the talk of Magic stealing Kareem's award in 1980 (which isn't' fair, as Kareem flat out missed a game, so it's at least arguable), Kareem had no real argument to beat out Magic in 85. It came down to surprise at how well Kareem played. Those are arguments.

[elementally morale]

However, reading and writing forums is a lot more fun with opinions involved, crazy as they can be. Are the majority of those opinions nothing more than attempts at rationalizing someone's rather irrational gut feelings about something? Sure. Is that a problem? Well... as long as it is entertaining, I don't mind. I'm not coming to forums like this one to read 'the objective truth'. So I'm not disappointed if I can't find it.

[oolalaa]

Stop pretending you want real answers to your so-called 'question'. You asked the question to push an agenda. It doesn't matter what kind of an answer you'll get, because what you really want to hear is something like this: "TD was great, a top5 player all time for sure. It is reasonable to argue he is even better than that".

I'm sorry to burst you bubble, but you won't find many people who will say thing like this.

Next time, instead of imitating a question just tell us what you think. Like this: "I think TD was a lot better tan given credit for. I personally can build a case for him being #2 of all time."

At any rate, if you ask others' opinions at least try pretending you want to hear what they have to say. It's a lot more mature thing to do.

:oldlol:

I have no agenda, you clown. I do in fact want "real" answers to my questions: "Can a legitimate argument be made that Timmy is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history?" and "If not, why not?" Simple. The fact that I genuinely believe a CASE can be made that he's the 2nd greatest player in history does not make me want to read a congruent response, or make me agenda driven. I am objective and open minded, you know. In fact, I WELCOME people to DISAGREE with me, as long as they back it up. "No" and "because he doesn't deserve it" are pretty pathetic responses.

And btw, I rank Timmy as the 6th greatest player of all time (Behind Jordan, Russell, Magic, Kareem and Bird). This alone makes your entire 1st paragraph pretty worthless :oldlol:

[pauk]

http://i.lolzer.com/t/6/274/no-no-no-HELL-NO.gif

[BuffaloBill]

I have him at #5

[millwad]

Tim Duncan has no case what so ever for being called 2nd greatest of all-time and OP did obviously not see the 2007 finals..

I'd take Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Jordan, Bird, Olajuwon, Wilt and Russell anytime and anyday over Duncan.

[oolalaa]

There is 0000000000 argument for Tim Duncan being robbed of the FMVP in 2007. I watched the series. Just because he's their most important and best player doesn't mean he was the best player in the series. Under that logic, the best player should win all the time, regardless of how he plays.


The Cavaliers entire defensive strategy was centered around stopping Tim Duncan. That was all they cared about. He was doubled A LOT. Tony Parker was not. Tony Parker was allowed to run amok against Snow and Boobie.

Duncan was their defensive anchor, too. He was the reason Lebron settled for waaaay too many perimiter jumpshots. He SHUT DOWN the paint. And let's not forget about passing/facilitating. Duncan was spreading the floor. He averaged more assists than Parker, who is a ****ing point guard!! In fact, Duncan averaged more assists than anyone not named Lebron.

And, lastly, Duncan was the undeniable, unquestioned leader of that team. His entire team loved and respected him. They followed his lead. He motivated those around him. His 'intangibles' are impossible to quantify, but they CERTAINLY weren't negligible.

Does none of that matter?




And to be honest, Ginobili was better than him in the 2005 Finals. But there was no chance that Ginboili would have won it over Duncan. For Parker to win in 2007, it had to be in a sweep, with Parker being noticeably better, following the 2005 Finals.


I confess, I never actually watched the '05 Finals, for various reasons (And I can't find it anywhere on the internet). However, going by the numbers and from what I've read, I find it exceedingly hard to believe that Manu deserved it. Was he really better than Timmy? Really?? Why?




If you wanna talk about a great player being robbed of the FMVP, talk about Magic in 88. James Worthy had no business beating him out.


Completely agree. Magic put on a playmaking clinic. Amazing to watch.



And for all the talk of Magic stealing Kareem's award in 1980 (which isn't' fair, as Kareem flat out missed a game, so it's at least arguable)


I don't think Magic has any case whatsoever. Kareem was better than Magic in every game 1 thru 5. It wasn't remotely close. Magic, obviously, outplayed Kareem in game 6, but one game should not define a series



Kareem had no real argument to beat out Magic in 85. It came down to surprise at how well Kareem played. Those are arguments.

I'm not sure if you mean that Magic was robbed in '85? I disagree if that's the case. Kareem was awesome. His last hurrah as it turned out.

[elementally morale]

oolalaa

You sound a bit immature. A good bit. Good luck with your agenda. I'm not going to argue this any further.

[Carbine]

There is 0000000000 argument for Tim Duncan being robbed of the FMVP in 2007. I watched the series. Just because he's their most important and best player doesn't mean he was the best player in the series. Under that logic, the best player should win all the time, regardless of how he plays.


And to be honest, Ginobili was better than him in the 2005 Finals. But there was no chance that Ginboili would have won it over Duncan. For Parker to win in 2007, it had to be in a sweep, with Parker being noticeably better, following the 2005 Finals.



Now, if Tim Duncan is lost before the series, do I think that has a bigger impact than Parker or Ginobili going down? Absolutely. But those are intangible things that don't take away from how they played in the actual series.


If you wanna talk about a great player being robbed of the FMVP, talk about Magic in 88. James Worthy had no business beating him out. And for all the talk of Magic stealing Kareem's award in 1980 (which isn't' fair, as Kareem flat out missed a game, so it's at least arguable), Kareem had no real argument to beat out Magic in 85. It came down to surprise at how well Kareem played. Those are arguments.

Tony averaged 23 points and 4 assists per game in the finals.

Tim Duncan averaged 18/11.5 board.....and averaged the same amount of assists. 2+ blocks a game....


Literally the only thing Tony was better at was scoring 5 points more per game on better field goal percentages. Tim was as good, or in most cases better in everything else.

He deserved the finals MVP that year. You could easily make the argument that his rebounding/defense/things that go unnoticed by a box score but are very apparent to knowledgeable ball people more than made up the 5 ppg difference and better FG% from Tony.

[millwad]

The Cavaliers entire defensive strategy was centered around stopping Tim Duncan. That was all they cared about. He was doubled A LOT. Tony Parker was not. Tony Parker was allowed to run amok against Snow and Boobie.

Duncan was their defensive anchor, too. He was the reason Lebron settled for waaaay too many perimiter jumpshots. He SHUT DOWN the paint. And let's not forget about passing/facilitating. Duncan was spreading the floor. He averaged more assists than Parker, who is a ****ing point guard!! In fact, Duncan averaged more assists than anyone not named Lebron.

And, lastly, Duncan was the undeniable, unquestioned leader of that team. His entire team loved and respected him. They followed his lead. He motivated those around him. His 'intangibles' are impossible to quantify, but they CERTAINLY weren't negligible.



Stupid arguments.

So what that the Cavaliers focused on Duncan, just because they focused on him more doesn't mean that it works as an excuse for his lack of scoring and bad FG%.

Tony Parker the point guard averaged 24.5 points on 56% shooting.

Tim Duncan the center averaged 18.3 points on 44% shooting.....

And leadership doesn't give you a FMVP trophy..

And yeah, lets forget about Bruce Bowen and give Tim all the credit for James FG%..

[RRR3]

And only a top 15 overall player. A sidekick worse than Scottie Pippen.
:biggums:

[Carbine]

Stupid arguments.

So what that the Cavaliers focused on Duncan, just because they focused on him more doesn't mean that it works as an excuse for his lack of scoring and bad FG%.

Tony Parker the point guard averaged 24.5 points on 56% shooting.

Tim Duncan the center averaged 18.3 points on 44% shooting.....

And leadership doesn't give you a FMVP trophy..

And yeah, lets forget about Bruce Bowen and give Tim all the credit for James FG%..

You're right, I fudged my numbers.

Anyway, Tim averaged more assists, way more rebounds, way more blocks....and I think we both can agree the things Tim provides that do not go on the stat sheet, like proper rotations and help defense along with challenging/contesting shots, among other things, Duncan has the edge over Parker in.

Tony scored more, but not at a blistering rate...24.5 ain't that much.... on great fg percentages.....Tim was better in everything else.

[oolalaa]

You sound a bit immature. A good bit. Good luck with your agenda. I'm not going to argue this any further.

That's your repost?

Like I said, you're a clown. Ask any knowledgable poster on this board whether or not I have an "agenda". It will burst YOUR bubble.

[BlackVVaves]

First of all, the fact that you began your argument by allocating an imaginary FMVP to Duncan showed how deeply flawed your reasoning would prove to be. Does KG have an FMVP too? Does Kareem have 3? Being a revisionist of history is a path to ignorance. Yes, Duncan was the most important player on that team that year. But, he was not awarded a FMVP. You can't alter that for your own agenda.

Second, and this is quite simple really. If you think Duncan is a better player or had a greater impact - not only on his team, but the game of basketball PERIOD - than Magic, Kareem, Wilt, and Bird, then maybe you should lock yourself in a room for a few weeks and re-familiarize yourself with their playing careers. It's laughable that you think Duncan is a better player than Kareem particularly. The man with 6 MVPs, 6 championships, 2 FMVPs, Top Three All-Time in Rebounds, Top 3 All-Time in Blocks, and the All-Time leader in scoring?????

The hell is wrong with you man?

Duncan is top 8 All-Time, and the greatest Power Forward the NBA has ever seen. But please, stay off the molly. It's debatable whether Duncan was a better player that Shaq All-Time, let alone the likes of Kareem, Magic, or Wilt.

[oolalaa]

Stupid arguments.

So what that the Cavaliers focused on Duncan, just because they focused on him more doesn't mean that it works as an excuse for his lack of scoring and bad FG%.

Tony Parker the point guard averaged 24.5 points on 56% shooting.

Tim Duncan the center averaged 18.3 points on 44% shooting.....

And leadership doesn't give you a FMVP trophy..

And yeah, lets forget about Bruce Bowen and give Tim all the credit for James FG%..

Does 6ppg on better efficiency make up for the discrepancy in rebounding, defense, shot blocking, facilitating and leadership? Imo, nope.

And since when could Bruce Bowen (Or anyone....ever) stop 6"8, 260 Lebron James (i.e the greatest perimiter athlete in NBA history) from getting to the line whenever he wanted, especially with no hand checking? He didn't want to drive in large part because Timmy was back there.

[SCdac]

Not better than Jordan. Not better than Kareem. Kind of kills the argument right there for me... Definitely a top-10 player though. I have him over Kobe but not Shaq.

[tmacattack33]

Can a legitimate argument be made that Timmy is the 2nd greatest player in NBA history? (Behind only Jordan)

If not, why the **** not? It seems to me that he's won more with less than just about every other all time great. 4 championships and 4 FMVPs (Robbed '07), his best teammates have been a past his prime/decrepid Robinson, Tony Parker (Top 150 all time? Maybe.) and Manu Ginobili (Top 200 all time?). I mean....really??

His 2003 peak is one of the very best, and most underrated, ever. He's one of the best post defenders/anchors in history. He's arguably the greatest low post facilitating big-man of all time. One of the great rebounders of his generation. A consistent scorer with phenomenal footwork and a wide array of post moves. A great leader and teammate. A consumate professional who only cares about winning. And that's what he did. Win and win and win. Between '01 and '07 (His extended prime) his Spurs only lost to the Shaq/Kobe Lakers and the '06 Mavs led by a POSESSED Dirk Nowitzki. He led a good/very good but never great small market team deep into the post season year after year after year.


I'm not saying he is the 2nd best of all time, but NO ONE EVER ranks him that high. Ever! I think that's a little strange. Surely he has a reasonably strong case?

No, he's not. And it's not even arguable.

[oolalaa]

First of all, the fact that you began your argument by allocating an imaginary FMVP to Duncan showed how deeply flawed your reasoning would prove to be. Does KG have an FMVP too? Does Kareem have 3?


1. Yes, KG DOES have a FMVP! The '08 Finals were a near carbon copy of the '07 Finals, in that a perimiter player who scored a bunch of points beat out the anchor, leader and better all around player.

2. No, Kareem doesn't have 3 FMVPS....he has 4!! '71, '74 (Understandibly a controversial opinion, only because they lost), '80 and '85.



Being a revisionist of history is a path to ignorance. Yes, Duncan was the most important player on that team that year. But, he was not awarded a FMVP. You can't alter that for your own agenda.


Precisely the opposite. The path to ignorance is not questioning things, accepting things on faith. Did James Worthy DESERVE the 1988 FMVP? Please don't chuck at me "He was given the award at the time so that means he deserves it". If you answer no (Which I'm sure you wont do in order to keep your hollow argument going, even though it's the biggest FMVP robbery of all time to anyone remotely knowledgable) then why the **** can't I answer "No" to the question "Did Parker desever the '07 FMVP"? FMVPs are subjective awards voted by fallible, sometimes ignorant and/or biased "media" members.




Second, and this is quite simple really. If you think Duncan is a better player or had a greater impact - not only on his team, but the game of basketball PERIOD - than Magic, Kareem, Wilt, and Bird, then maybe you should lock yourself in a room for a few weeks and re-familiarize yourself with their playing careers. It's laughable that you think Duncan is a better player than Kareem particularly. The man with 6 MVPs, 6 championships, 2 FMVPs, Top Three All-Time in Rebounds, Top 3 All-Time in Blocks, and the All-Time leader in scoring?????


Holy moly. Imo, PEAK ('03) Duncan is better than PEAK Bird ('86), PEAK Magic ('87) and PEAK Kareem ('77). I think his peak was marginally better than Bird and Magic because of his vastly superior defensive impact, and I would take him over Kareem because I would take '77 Walton over '77 kareem. I think '03 Timmy and '77 Walton are a vitual tie, but I am more than willing to be swayed by an argument for Walton.

Having said that, I have Magic, Bird and Kareem AHEAD of Duncan on my all time list, so STFU.

[Carbine]

No, he's not. And it's not even arguable.

I think it's arguable. He never said scorer, which Duncan would not have an argument against the other great centers like Shaq/Kareem/Hakeem/etc.

Duncan is fantastic as a facilitator down there. When he figured out how to pass from doubles and congested space he waas a force down there.

The main thing I look for in a facilitator is when you dump it down to him, what's the chances of a quality shot being taken as a team. In Duncan's case and the Spurs it was almost automatic.

The same could be said for the other great facilitators as well, but Duncan has an argument.

[oolalaa]

No, he's not. And it's not even arguable.

It's not even arguable that it's arguable. It's quite clearly arguable. But, go on, who would you have ahead of him in that department?

[kennethgriffin]

tim is 9th or 10th all time


#1 jordan
#2 Kareem
#3 Magic
#4 Russell
#5 Wilt
#6 Kobe
#7 Bird
#8 Shaq
#9 Duncan
#10 Hakeem

[BoutPractice]

It'll be arguable once he retires due to the combination of team success (particularly the winning percentage stat) individual success, all-around impact and longevity, but it'll also be a clear longshot.

The problem not really being Duncan himself, who by all accounts has had the dream career for a big man, but the quality of the competition. Though Duncan could've made a much better case for himself had his Spurs won in 2004, 2006 and 2012, years in which some would say they should have won. (Well, no one would've said they were the favourites in 2004, but once they got in an advantageous position in the series they should've been able to seal the deal)

[oolalaa]

It'll be arguable once he retires due to the combination of team success (particularly the winning percentage stat) individual success, all-around impact and longevity, but it'll also be a clear longshot.

The problem not really being Duncan himself, who by all accounts has had the dream career for a big man, but the quality of the competition. Though Duncan could've made a much better case for himself had his Spurs won in 2004, 2006 and 2012, years in which some would say they should have won. (Well, no one would've said they were the favourites in 2004, but once they got in an advantageous position in the series they should've been able to seal the deal)

That 2004 series against L.A is the biggest black mark on his career, imo. It was a mediocre series by his standards. However, Fishers ridiculously, absurdly improbable 0.4 shot in game 5 shouldn't be completely dismissed. San Antonion would have been up 3-2.

[BlackVVaves]

1. Yes, KG DOES have a FMVP! The '08 Finals were a near carbon copy of the '07 Finals, in that a perimiter player who scored a bunch of points beat out the anchor, leader and better all around player.

2. No, Kareem doesn't have 3 FMVPS....he has 4!! '71, '74 (Understandibly a controversial opinion, only because they lost), '80 and '85.



Precisely the opposite. The path to ignorance is not questioning things, accepting things on faith. Did James Worthy DESERVE the 1988 FMVP? Please don't chuck at me "He was given the award at the time so that means he deserves it". If you answer no (Which I'm sure you wont do in order to keep your hollow argument going, even though it's the biggest FMVP robbery of all time to anyone remotely knowledgable) then why the **** can't I answer "No" to the question "Did Parker desever the '07 FMVP"? FMVPs are subjective awards voted by fallible, sometimes ignorant and/or biased "media" members.




Holy moly. Imo, PEAK ('03) Duncan is better than PEAK Bird ('86), PEAK Magic ('87) and PEAK Kareem ('77). I think his peak was marginally better than Bird and Magic because of his vastly superior defensive impact, and I would take him over Kareem because I would take '77 Walton over '77 kareem. I think '03 Timmy and '77 Walton are a vitual tie, but I am more than willing to be swayed by an argument for Walton.

Having said that, I have Magic, Bird and Kareem AHEAD of Duncan on my all time list, so STFU.
[/QUOTE]

Ok, so you're either trolling, purposefully instigating, or just plain disoriented right now. I understand why some posters have chose to refrain with further discussion with you...as will I. My rebuttal will be brief.

There's a difference between deserving and actually receiving. I never said Kareem didn't deserve the 1980 FMVP, nor did I say KG didn't deserve the 2008 FMVP. But, they did not receive the award and prancing around saying Duncan or anyone else has more or less awards is completely asinine. It's one thing to add context, which I always advocate. It's another to make claims to change history. Duncan was the leader and most important piece of the 2007 Spurs' team. That's context. Tony Parker was the most notable dynamic in the 2007 Finals, and was awarded the FMVP, even though he wasn't the team's best player overall. That's fact.

You're correct in that not questioning things also leads to ignorance. But, being offered facts and then rejecting them to perpetuate your own sense of actuality that revolves around repainting the walls of history is equal ignorant. Like I said, context is indeed important. But if you don't see the idiocy in listing Duncan's achievements, and stating he has 4 FMVPs, then you truly are just trolling. Or stupid. No offense.

Lastly, you're assessment on utilizing peaks to display the correct order of an All-Time list is both heavily flawed and hypocritical. Since when are All-Time lists configured using a one year sample? And if so, then Shaq and Wilt are the 2nd and 3rd greatest players of all time, followed by Bird. So, how the **** does this theory depict Duncan as the second greatest player of All-Time? Like I said, hypocritical. You cannot sit behind your computer screen with a straight face and say Duncan had a better peak than Shaq or Wilt. I know you don't believe that, and if so, shame on you.

If you're going to refute my points with actual intellect-based sentiments, I'd gladly continue this discussion. Otherwise, I'm pretty much done. I think you're just trying to get a rile out of people, and if so, that doesn't require my attention to a post. So I won't waste my time.

Cheers.

[BuGzBuNNy]

This is the best way to decide who is the better player.

A player can be individually dominant, and another player can be not quite as individually dominant but still make a team better than the first guy. Usually when people talk about peaks, they're mostly talking about individual dominance it seems.

Does this team...
PG- Average player
SG- Average player
SF- Average player
PF- Average player
C- Shaquille O'neal

Beat this team?...
PG- Average player
SG- Average player
SF- Average player
PF- Tim Duncan
C- Average player

I think the team with Duncan wins more often than not, making his peak better than Shaq's. Shaq was more individually dominant and maybe the most ever, but I think more times than not a team with Duncan is more likely to beat a team with Shaq.

:applause:

[ThaRegul8r]

No, he is not.

Duncan is my favorite player who's currently active in the league, but unlike many people, that doesn't prevent me from being objective and recognizing the truth. Only a fanboy would argue the point. I don't see why being one of the top ten players ever to play the game isn't good enough.

[DatAsh]

Holy moly. Imo, PEAK ('03) Duncan is better than PEAK Bird ('86), PEAK Magic ('87) and PEAK Kareem ('77). I think his peak was marginally better than Bird and Magic because of his vastly superior defensive impact, and I would take him over Kareem because I would take '77 Walton over '77 kareem. I think '03 Timmy and '77 Walton are a vitual tie, but I am more than willing to be swayed by an argument for Walton.



I'm not as high on Duncan's peak as you are.

I don't think I could rank his peak above any of the following

Wilt
Shaq
Jordan
Russell
Walton
Kareem
Bird
Magic

Hakeem and Lebron are right with him in terms of peak as well, at least in my eyes.

[ThaRegul8r]

Bill Russell's peak is NEVER, EVER in the GOAT peak conversation.

For one thing, most people don't even know when Russell's peak was. Most people couldn't tell you a single thing about his career other than the fact that he won 11 rings.

[tmacattack33]

It's not even arguable that it's arguable. It's quite clearly arguable. But, go on, who would you have ahead of him in that department?

Brad Miller, Pau Gasol, Garnett, and Noah all have better vision. And this is just speaking of current players.

[tmacattack33]

Spencer Hawes would be right up there as well...probably right behind those guys. Maybe even ahead of one of them though, it's not like i can say I've watched games where i was specifically looking at Spencer Hawes' passing vision.

[kennethgriffin]

I'm not as high on Duncan's peak as you are.

I don't think I could rank his peak above any of the following

Wilt
Shaq
Jordan
Russell
Walton
Kareem
Bird
Magic

Hakeem and Lebron are right with him in terms of peak as well, at least in my eyes.


duncans peak is like 22 and 10.... theres a ton of better peak players

and i love how kobe bryant gets absolutely no respect around here. even though he won every single player of the decade award

:facepalm

[RRR3]

This is the best way to decide who is the better player.

A player can be individually dominant, and another player can be not quite as individually dominant but still make a team better than the first guy. Usually when people talk about peaks, they're mostly talking about individual dominance it seems.

Does this team...
PG- Average player
SG- Average player
SF- Average player
PF- Average player
C- Shaquille O'neal

Beat this team?...
PG- Average player
SG- Average player
SF- Average player
PF- Tim Duncan
C- Average player

I think the team with Duncan wins more often than not, making his peak better than Shaq's. Shaq was more individually dominant and maybe the most ever, but I think more times than not a team with Duncan is more likely to beat a team with Shaq.

:applause:
Shaq could carry average players much better than Duncan IMO.

[oolalaa]

Ok, so you're either trolling, purposefully instigating, or just plain disoriented right now.


Funny, it's you who seems disoriented in your response.




There's a difference between deserving and actually receiving....But, they did not receive the award


What is the point to this comment?



and prancing around saying Duncan or anyone else has more or less awards is completely asinine. It's one thing to add context, which I always advocate. It's another to make claims to change history.


WOW. The fact that I said that Duncan was "robbed" of the '07 FMVP is quite obviously an OPINION!!!! Just like, in my OPINION, Magic was robbed in 1988. Am I not allowed to voice MY OPINION?? FMVPs have no inherint, absolute truth to them. There is no 100% right answer. You're equating me saying that Duncan was the '07 FMVP with me saying that Richie Geurin won the scoring crown in 1962. It's an undeniable, indesputable FACT that Wilt scored more poinst than everyone else in the league in '62. Its not a FACT that Parker was "contextually better" than Duncan in the '07 Finals, which is what the award is supposed to reward.



Duncan was the leader and most important piece of the 2007 Spurs' team. That's context. Tony Parker was the most notable dynamic in the 2007 Finals, and was awarded the FMVP, even though he wasn't the team's best player overall. That's fact.


Notable dynamic? Wtf does that even mean. It sounds like you're reaching a little.



You're correct in that not questioning things also leads to ignorance. But, being offered facts and then rejecting them to perpetuate your own sense of actuality that revolves around repainting the walls of history is equal ignorant.


Remember, it's a fact that Parker was AWARDED the FMVP but it's not a fact that he DESERVED the FMVP.



Lastly, you're assessment on utilizing peaks to display the correct order of an All-Time list is both heavily flawed and hypocritical. Since when are All-Time lists configured using a one year sample? And if so, then Shaq and Wilt are the 2nd and 3rd greatest players of all time, followed by Bird. So, how the **** does this theory depict Duncan as the second greatest player of All-Time? Like I said, hypocritical. You cannot sit behind your computer screen with a straight face and say Duncan had a better peak than Shaq or Wilt. I know you don't believe that, and if so, shame on you.


This is where you've gone a bit loopy. What's going on with your mind dude? Are you tired or something? Go drink some redbull. Where did I state, or even insuate, that my all time list is judged solely on peaks?? Are you too lazy to read my other responses in this thread? Can you not decipher sentences properly?

My all time list....

1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. Magic
4. Kareem
5. Bird
6. Duncan
7. Wilt (I can certainly entertain Wilt being two or three spots higher)
8. West
9. Kobe
10. Shaq

In terms of peaks, Jordan, Wilt, Shaq and Hakeem are all clearly superior to '03 Duncan. No one else has a clear case over him.

[DatAsh]

duncans peak is like 22 and 10.... theres a ton of better peak players

and i love how kobe bryant gets absolutely no respect around here. even though he won every single player of the decade award

:facepalm

23/13/4 with top 6-8 all time defense.

I don't have Kobe's peak all that much further down, if that's why your upset. I was just listing the players whose peaks I consider to be better than Duncan's.

[tmacattack33]

And then all time, you have Arvydas Sabonis and Vlade Divac unarguably as having better vision and passing skills than Tim Duncan.

Chris Webber is right behind those two.

And this is just from around the mid-to-late 90's and up (when i started watching bball heavily) and up, with a focus on 2000 and up (since this is when i was old enough to really evaluate things).

[oolalaa]

For one thing, most people don't even know when Russell's peak was. Most people couldn't tell you a single thing about his career other than the fact that he won 11 rings.

Because it's not clear or defined like the vast majority of players peaks are. I, for one, like 1965, but '62 and '64 could be argued (Hell, even '61 & '63, too). Do you have an opinion?

[KungFuJoe]

Duncan is a great player, no doubt. But he wouldn't even crack my top 25, much less #2.

[RRR3]

Duncan is a great player, no doubt. But he wouldn't even crack my top 25, much less #2.
Lolwut. Who's your top 25 then.

[oolalaa]

I'm not as high on Duncan's peak as you are.

I don't think I could rank his peak above any of the following

Wilt
Shaq
Jordan
Russell
Walton
Kareem
Bird
Magic

Hakeem and Lebron are right with him in terms of peak as well, at least in my eyes.

That's understandible.

I personally give a hell of a lot more importance/weight to post seasons than regular seasons (That's not to say that he wasn't great in the regular season, too). In effect, when I say peak Duncan, I'm primarily talking about what he did over 24 games in the '03 playoffs. A playoffs in which he averaged a 25/15/5 & 3blks, and was outstanding defensively. A playoffs in which he carried old man Robinson, rookie Manu Ginobili and 2nd year Tony Parker past the defending champs in 6 games in the WCSFs (Culminating in a 37/16/4 clinic in the closeout game 6), and to the Finals, once again culminating in a great close-out game 6 (21/20/10/8).

His passing, particuarly, was beautiful to watch. A 25.5 AST% is staggeringly good for a big-man. Wilt in '67 (Usually considered, and rightly so, the standard for low/mid post facilitating for a big guy) didn't reach that mark in either the regular season or playoffs. His minutes and the pace obviously ballooned his apg totals. And Bird in '86, the greatest passing forward in history at the height of his playmaking powers on the greatest team of all time? 28.1%. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but Timmy was picking teams apart like few have ever done from low post.

[kennethgriffin]

23/13/4 with top 6-8 all time defense.

I don't have Kobe's peak all that much further down, if that's why your upset. I was just listing the players whose peaks I consider to be better than Duncan's.


1 season

:facepalm

23ppg for kobe is one of his worst seasons in his career



duncan only has the success... he doesnt have the dominant stats with the success like kobe or shaq

[KungFuJoe]

Lolwut. Who's your top 25 then.

My list is based on skills and ability, since championships is generally a team achievement. I've just never been that hot on Duncan. Don't get me wrong...he's definitely one of the best ever, but he always had a good/great team, great coaching and the benefit of playing with pretty much the same team for his entire career so chemistry was always there.

In no particular order, I would say these players are BETTER than Duncan:

Wilt
Shaq
Kareem
Robinson (this is arguable but Robinson's peak was absolutely ridiculous)
Hakeem
Russell
Barkley
K Malone
Dirk
Garnett
Bird
Lebron James
Jordan
Kobe
Magic
O Robinson
Dr. J

ok you got me...I can't think of 25 off the top of my head (though I'll probably think of a few more as I'm typing this)...but I think he falls just below most of the guys I mentioned and doesn't come close to the Jordans, Birds and Magics.

[oolalaa]

23/13/4 with top 6-8 all time defense.

I don't have Kobe's peak all that much further down, if that's why your upset. I was just listing the players whose peaks I consider to be better than Duncan's.

DatAsh, how do definitively you know his defense is top 6-8 all time?

[DatAsh]

DatAsh, how do definitively you know his defense is top 6-8 all time?

I gave a range because I didn't want to think about it too hard. Six was the floor because I have the following 5 guys -

Russell
Thurmond
Hakeem
Wilt
Robinson

- as better defenders. I see Robinson and Duncan as close though.

[DatAsh]

1 season



Single season peak was all I was referring to.

[3LiftHeatCurse]

Maybe not 2nd greatest.

But he's top 6 for sure.

Jordan
Wilt
Kareem
Magic
Russell
Duncan
Bird

[oolalaa]

I gave a range because I didn't want to think about it too hard. Six was the floor because I have the following 5 guys -

Russell
Thurmond
Hakeem
Wilt
Robinson

- as better defenders. I see Robinson and Duncan as close though.

I guess I'm asking you how you came to your conclusion. Are you using certain advanced team stats? Or is it based on what you've seen and read? I have a feeling it's mostly the former. Am I right?

[NumberSix]

No

[BuffaloBill]

My list is based on skills and ability, since championships is generally a team achievement. I've just never been that hot on Duncan. Don't get me wrong...he's definitely one of the best ever, but he always had a good/great team, great coaching and the benefit of playing with pretty much the same team for his entire career so chemistry was always there.

In no particular order, I would say these players are BETTER than Duncan:

Wilt
Shaq
Kareem
Robinson (this is arguable but Robinson's peak was absolutely ridiculous)
Hakeem
Russell
Barkley
K Malone
Dirk
Garnett
Bird
Lebron James
Jordan
Kobe
Magic
O Robinson
Dr. J

ok you got me...I can't think of 25 off the top of my head (though I'll probably think of a few more as I'm typing this)...but I think he falls just below most of the guys I mentioned and doesn't come close to the Jordans, Birds and Magics.


...

[TheBigVeto]

He is top 5, on Larry Bird's level. The only knock against him is that he plays with the 2nd GOAT SG. If Manu doesn't exist, he'll be top 3 easy.

[DatAsh]

I guess I'm asking you how you came to your conclusion. Are you using certain advanced team stats? Or is it based on what you've seen and read? I have a feeling it's mostly the former. Am I right?

Depends on the player.

I've seen less than 10 of Russell's games in total, so almost all of what I know about him comes from reading and looking at stats, and it's the same with Thurmond.

With Wilt, it's harder to get a grasp on how good he was defensively by looking at the stats because he was so damn inconsistent; therefore, most of my opinion of Wilt's defense comes from what I've read.

The other guys I've read less about, but I've seen more of.

I'm not big on trying to compare their defensive team stats against each other because their situations were too different, and there's just too many unknowns.

[Odinn]

Some of the all-time greats' playoff averages at their top (in 3 consecutive seasons);
http://b1211.hizliresim.com/13/d/fv5h4.jpg

25/15/5/3 pretty good, huh?

[La Frescobaldi]

Some of the all-time greats' playoff averages at their top (in 3 consecutive seasons);
http://b1211.hizliresim.com/13/d/fv5h4.jpg

25/15/5/3 pretty good, huh?

Comparable peak of Chamberlain as a Sixer (I never saw Wilt as a Warrior which is when his numbers were astronomical but his teams the weakest)
Playoff Span '66-68
PPG 24.5
RPG 28
AST 6.1

Wilt's games against Boston & the Warriors in '67 and '68 are still the greatest playoff performances I've ever seen and it's not close. Next is Jabbar's championship performances in '71, then Chamberlain's '72 playoff. Then Jordan's first three-peat.
Havlicek isn't mentioned anywhere in this thread which is disgusting. I doubt I could rank Timmy above Hondo. Maybe. Maybe.
But Havlicek's sheer numbers aren't at this level, running just about 25 8 and 6 in his prime (of course numbers don't show defense, etc.).
Or Bob McAdoo, with numbers at 32 13 & 2 are easily in this level (also no argument for top 2 but we're looking at some peak playoff numbers here)

Duncan isn't in the talks for top 2, no. Jordan & Chamberlain far excel the rest of history, and Kareem is alone behind them in third.

To me, as his career winds down, Timmy Dunkin' has a formidable case in an argument for top 10.
But really it's not fair to him, nor to the other greats, to talk about him while he's still playing.

[iamgine]

And only a top 15 overall player. A sidekick worse than Scottie Pippen.
Impact wise Robinson was top 5 that season.

[Odinn]

Comparable peak of Chamberlain as a Sixer (I never saw Wilt as a Warrior which is when his numbers were astronomical but his teams the weakest)
Playoff Span '66-68
PPG 24.5
RPG 28
AST 6.1

Wilt's games against Boston & the Warriors in '67 and '68 are still the greatest playoff performances I've ever seen and it's not close. Next is Jabbar's championship performances in '71, then Chamberlain's '72 playoff. Then Jordan's first three-peat.
Havlicek isn't mentioned anywhere in this thread which is disgusting. I doubt I could rank Timmy above Hondo. Maybe. Maybe.
But Havlicek's sheer numbers aren't at this level, running just about 25 8 and 6 in his prime (of course numbers don't show defense, etc.).
Or Bob McAdoo, with numbers at 32 13 & 2 are easily in this level (also no argument for top 2 but we're looking at some peak playoff numbers here)

Duncan isn't in the talks for top 2, no. Jordan & Chamberlain far excel the rest of history, and Kareem is alone behind them in third.

To me, as his career winds down, Timmy Dunkin' has a formidable case in an argument for top 10.
But really it's not fair to him, nor to the other greats, to talk about him while he's still playing.
I'm sick of you. I'm sick of the ones obsessed with Wilt. He isn't the goat. He isn't in the same class with Michael Jordan. Get over it.

[oolalaa]

Impact wise Robinson was top 5 that season.

Top 15 was a little harsh. I would still take Shaq, Mourning, Hakeem, Kidd, Grant Hill, Payton and Malone over him. A.I, KG and Webber have cases, too.

[BlackVVaves]

Some of the all-time greats' playoff averages at their top (in 3 consecutive seasons);
http://b1211.hizliresim.com/13/d/fv5h4.jpg

25/15/5/3 pretty good, huh?

No wonder they mostly comprise the Top 10 players of All-Time :bowdown:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No wonder they mostly comprise the Top 10 players of All-Time :bowdown:

I feel like I've been giving Kobe a lot of praise lately (too much for my liking :oldlol:), but those are some impressive f'ing numbers. That goes for everyone on that list.

#legends :applause:

[oolalaa]

Some of the all-time greats' playoff averages at their top (in 3 consecutive seasons);
http://b1211.hizliresim.com/13/d/fv5h4.jpg

25/15/5/3 pretty good, huh?

TIMMMMMMMMYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!

[La Frescobaldi]

I'm sick of you. I'm sick of the ones obsessed with Wilt. He isn't the goat. He isn't in the same class with Michael Jordan. Get over it.

lol i hadn't posted on here in like 8 or 9 months until yesterday and you're already sick of me!! Easy enough to block my posts if you don't like em.
Just know that I sat the bleachers for many a playoff and I call it like I see it.

[oolalaa]

Depends on the player.

I've seen less than 10 of Russell's games in total, so almost all of what I know about him comes from reading and looking at stats, and it's the same with Thurmond.

With Wilt, it's harder to get a grasp on how good he was defensively by looking at the stats because he was so damn inconsistent; therefore, most of my opinion of Wilt's defense comes from what I've read.

The other guys I've read less about, but I've seen more of.

I'm not big on trying to compare their defensive team stats against each other because their situations were too different, and there's just too many unknowns.

Alright, cool :cheers:

[Darius]

More like Gregg Popovich is the 2nd greatest coach of all time.

[BlackVVaves]

I feel like I've been giving Kobe a lot of praise lately (too much for my liking :oldlol:), but those are some impressive f'ing numbers. That goes for everyone on that list.

#legends :applause:

30, 6, and 5 on 48% is impressive indeed. Bird's numbers are ****ing amazing, 27, 10, and 7 on 50%? Cotdamn.

Sometimes we spend so much time bickering with fanboys/extremists, and we disallow ourselves from grasping player's truly amazing greatness. To be considered one of the top 10 or 15 players of all time, in a league that has seen thousands of players over it's history, is a remarkable depiction of the talent, work ethic, and success that these very few players exhibited :applause:

[KOBE143]

No.. I dont mind where people put him but the 2nd spot is already locked for Kobe..

[Timmy D for MVP]

7th. With flex room for 6th.

I prefer to do tiers. And he's in the third tier with Bird, and Shaq. Now you could debate the order of that tier but none of those three will lever break beyond it. So 2nd in impossible.