Lettuce Be Real: Duncan has been the best player on his team for all 5 rings

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Title says it all. Discuss.

[TheBigVeto]

You are correct.

[SouBeachTalents]

Parker's almost a 1B in '07 and this year, it's pretty close between him and Duncan

[navy]

True. But considering the drop off in production and the increase in role player we must give some Pop some of the credit.

[Rubio2Gasol]

It's always been so borderline, it's interesting. You can make solid arguments about the last three of them on different sides. I haven't come across many Spurs fans, I'm guessing they agree with you, but Manu, Parker, and about 5 guys in 2014 have arguments too.

All in all, doesn't matter really, he won three of them playing ridiculous, dominant ball, and two of them playing great team ball, that's really how it should be measured.

[Fox]

Agree. He should have 4 FMVPs by now.

[PickernRoller]

False. Discuss.

[NumberSix]

And Chauncey Billups was the best player on a championship team too. So what? Being the best player on a team that is overall good enough to win doesn't mean anything in itself.

Does anybody honestly think Duncan was 1 of the 3 best players this series?

[Rubio2Gasol]

And Chauncey Billups was the best player on a championship team too. So what? Being the best player on a team that is overall good enough to win doesn't mean anything in itself.

Does anybody honestly think Duncan was 1 of the 3 best players this series?

Solid argument could be made.

1. Kawhi
2. Boris
3. Duncan.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

And Chauncey Billups was the best player on a championship team too. So what? Being the best player on a team that is overall good enough to win doesn't mean anything in itself.

Does anybody honestly think Duncan was 1 of the 3 best players this series?
He was top 2 this series.

[T_L_P]

Definitely the best in 99, 03 and 07. Major arguments for 05, about as good as any other Spur in 14.

I'd say yes, although 2014 is very, very close.

[SCdac]

Duncan has definitely been the most important player for the Spurs, from 98 to 14. "Best player" on ISH is largely a debate about offense and raw numbers.

[Big#50]

Tim Duncan Is The Spurs.

[DatAsh]

Yes. The only reason most will disagree is that most can't understand how someone with less ppg can still be the best player on a team. 14/10/2 with -8 on defense is worse than 20/3/8 with +1 on defense. Just the way it is on ish. Defense doesn't matter.

[DatAsh]

And Chauncey Billups was the best player on a championship team too. So what? Being the best player on a team that is overall good enough to win doesn't mean anything in itself.

Does anybody honestly think Duncan was 1 of the 3 best players this series?

I though he was a distant 2 overall, while being 3-4th on offense.

[COnDEMnED]

Does he have a finals MVP for all 5 rings? If yes, then you are correct.

[DMAVS41]

I certainly think he was for the first 4...it still amazes me that people actually think Parker was better in 07...but whatever.

This year? Overall? I'd take Duncan.

[T_L_P]

Does he have a finals MVP for all 5 rings? If yes, then you are correct.

One series defines the best player?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Does he have a finals MVP for all 5 rings? If yes, then you are correct.
So Paul Pierce was better than Kevin Garnett in '08? Cedric Maxwell was better than Larry Bird?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I certainly think he was for the first 4...it still amazes me that people actually think Parker was better in 07...but whatever.

This year? Overall? I'd take Duncan.
Agreed. That series vs Cleveland was a joke. It doesn't even matter if Parker played marginally better (which is debatable).

[Jacks3]

How? The guy was a role-player in 2014. His team routinely won in blow-outs even when he was merely OK.

See: games 3,4 of the NBA Finals.

[Dbrog]

It's true. Only '14 is arguable. Other years are painfully clear.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

How? The guy was a role-player in 2014. His team routinely won in blow-outs even when he was merely OK.

See: games 3,4 of the NBA Finals.
He wasn't by far the best this year but he was still the best.

[T_L_P]

How? The guy was a role-player in 2014. His team routinely won in blow-outs even when he was merely OK.

See: games 3,4 of the NBA Finals.

Spurs won game 6 against OKC with Parker in the locker room. Spurs beat the Blazers with Manu shooting 25% from the field.

Duncan was the best and most consistent Spur this post4season

[Jacks3]

The Spurs don't have a "best" payer. They're clearly an ensemble team. Duncan is just another cog in the machine. People moving him up ahead of other legends for this are just ridiculous.

[T_L_P]

The Spurs don't have a "best" payer. They're clearly an ensemble team. Duncan is just another cog in the machine. People moving him up ahead of other legends for this are just ridiculous.

For this and last year, anything but ridiculous.

[DatAsh]

The Spurs don't have a "best" payer. They're clearly an ensemble team. Duncan is just another cog in the machine. People moving him up ahead of other legends for this are just ridiculous.

Every team has a best player.

[COnDEMnED]

One series defines the best player?
I guess he needs to define what "all five rings" means. I took it as finals. Perhaps they need to have a playoffs MVP aside from finals MVP.

[COnDEMnED]

So Paul Pierce was better than Kevin Garnett in '08? Cedric Maxwell was better than Larry Bird?
See above reply.

[poeticism707]

Agree.

But morons who just took some pointless statistics class,

will find some useless argument in their pea brains to think otherwise.

In other words,

as long as ESPN does their thinking for them,

they sleep well at night.

[onhcetum]

These idiots don't even play basketball... ****in geeks, all they do is post on forums all day. Duncan is still a scoring option and the best defender on the spurs. last time, i checked, defense is the other 50% of the game...

#1 all time in blocks and boards... #1 in double doubles

[houston]

Tony Parker has been the Spurs best player this season. Duncan was just a role player.

[Dbrog]

Jacks you are still underrating what he did this season. They still went into him if they had nothing going for them. At 38, he is still their go-to option if all is failing. That's pretty insane to say. Is it like some of Kareems last years on the Lakers? Yes...but who holds that against Kareem? I've never heard it brought up in this sort of context. These spurs were kind of like the 04 Pistons. Billups got the fmvp but big Ben was the real mvp on that team...but that's not to say Billups wasn't instrumental to the chip. Take either player off and they fail...it's like that and it's still impressive. These past two years have added to Duncan's legacy because a few years back he looked like he was celtics Shaq...and now he's on top of the world again putting up 15/10 with elite defense. That's something special whether you want to admit it or not.

[T_L_P]

Tony Parker has been the Spurs best player this season. Duncan was just a role player.

Parker: 17/2/5/1
Duncan: 16/9/2/1

Parker: 15.7 PER, 1.1 WS, .071 WS/48, 103 ORtg (13th on the team, out of 14), 109 DRtg (dead last).

Duncan: 21.0 PER (leader), 3.2 WS (leader), .202 WS/48

Parker is the best player and Duncan is just a role player though. :facepalm

[GODbe]

Duncan stan circle jerk :sleeping . Nobody outside of ISH agrees with this crap. He's always been a role player, that's it.

[Jacks3]

His longevity and sustained excellence is special and that's why he's in the top 10. The problem is that people wanna move him into the top freaking 5 after a season where he was nothing more than a very good role-player. Do you guys not see how absurd that is? You can't vault into the top 5 of all-time with 15/10. I would argue that his 2013 season was easily more impressive and nobody was putting him top 5 then. The stans are propping him up all-time because the rest of the team got better. You see how silly that is?

Bottom-line: Role-player seasons don't move you ahead of other all-time greats.

[T_L_P]

Duncan stan circle jerk :sleeping . Nobody outside of ISH agrees with this crap. He's always been a role player, that's it.

Always. :roll:

[T_L_P]

His longevity and sustained excellence is special and that's why he's in the top 10. The problem is that people wanna move him into the top freaking 5 after a season where he was nothing more than a very good role-player. Do you guys not see how absurd that is? You can't vault into the top 5 of all-time with 15/10. I would argue that his 2013 season was easily more impressive and nobody was putting him top 5 then. The stans are propping him up all-time because the rest of the team got better. You see how silly that is?

Bottom-line: Role-player seasons don't move you ahead of other all-time greats.

Top 5 after last season. I agree that this ring doesnt move him up

[COnDEMnED]

Top 5 after last season. I agree that this ring doesnt move him up
He moved up to top 5 after losing in the finals last year but doesn't move up this year after winning the championship? You could see why this would be confusing to anyone who isn't living in Texas right? In my opinion, he moved from top 7 last year to replace Bird at top 6 this year after winning the championship. He will most likely never crack that infamous top 5.

[Dbrog]

His longevity and sustained excellence is special and that's why he's in the top 10. The problem is that people wanna move him into the top freaking 5 after a season where he was nothing more than a very good role-player. Do you guys not see how absurd that is? You can't vault into the top 5 of all-time with 15/10. I would argue that his 2013 season was easily more impressive and nobody was putting him top 5 then. The stans are propping him up all-time because the rest of the team got better. You see how silly that is?

Bottom-line: Role-player seasons don't move you ahead of other all-time greats.

While I agree last season was more impressive for Duncan individually, I do think it matters if you are the best or second best player on a chip squad. Basically I think what happened was people had duncan anywhere from 6-9 on their GOAT lists before last year. Then he proceeds to lead his team to the finals and loses in one of the closest finals in history against a much more stacked team. Then the following season he leads the Spurs defense (which is how they win) and is their most consistent option on offense. That's enough to AT MINIMUM make an impact on a resume...but in the way that Kobe's '01 was (or something like that). It just so happened that cluster of players were all very interchangeable and this somewhat small boost put him a bit above them. Basically people won't admit that really 5-10 are all very close to each other. It's the little things like this ring that gives you a better argument for one of those top slots. I really urge you to not discount that finals accomplishment last year. I think it says something that it's a big deal for every other player and then people don't even mention with duncan due to his pedigree of winning.

[houston]

Parker: 17/2/5/1
Duncan: 16/9/2/1

Parker: 15.7 PER, 1.1 WS, .071 WS/48, 103 ORtg (13th on the team, out of 14), 109 DRtg (dead last).

Duncan: 21.0 PER (leader), 3.2 WS (leader), .202 WS/48

Parker is the best player and Duncan is just a role player though. :facepalm


Parker all-star and all-nba 2nd team. Lead his team in scoring and assist throughout regular season and postseason. Parker is the only player on the spurs this season with any honors. Sheesh Parker the last PG since Zeke and Magic who won a title while all-star or all-nba:applause:


Duncan....................:rolleyes:

[T_L_P]

Parker all-star and all-nba 2nd team. Lead his team in scoring and assist throughout regular season and postseason. Parker is the only player on the spurs this season with any honors. Sheesh Parker the last PG since Zeke and Magic who won a title while all-star or all-nba:applause:


Duncan....................:rolleyes:

:facepalm

[SamuraiSWISH]

True, but not totally MVP caliber player, or in conversation with best players in the league. LeBron underperformed to top ten status this Finals in order to elevate his team to championships, ala MJ from '91 - '93. But he still clearly was the best player in the game. Duncan, he hasn't been that in a long time, even though gun to the head, he's their best player.

[oarabbus]

And Chauncey Billups was the best player on a championship team too. So what? Being the best player on a team that is overall good enough to win doesn't mean anything in itself.

Does anybody honestly think Duncan was 1 of the 3 best players this series?


Yes... Lebron was better. Kawhi and Bron were better, then Duncan. You could argue Duncan was better than Kawhi.

Duncan was the leader of the Spurs and arguably it's best player. He made big plays pretty consistently throughout the series and played top tier defense.

[houston]

:facepalm


nothing to say I feel that:oldlol: but for real Parker been playing at high level these past 3 years for the spurs.

[CJ Mustard]

Parker all-star and all-nba 2nd team. Lead his team in scoring and assist throughout regular season and postseason. Parker is the only player on the spurs this season with any honors. Sheesh Parker the last PG since Zeke and Magic who won a title while all-star or all-nba:applause:


Duncan....................:rolleyes:
:oldlol: @ arbitrary awards beating out statistical impact. Duncan was the best player on the Spurs by all indications: stats, eye test, etc. All Parker has is a media award selection (the same media that gave James Harden all defensive team votes).

[fpliii]

Jesus ****ing christ, I hate when people prop up Parker to diminish Duncan.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

:oldlol: @ arbitrary awards beating out statistical impact. Duncan was the best player on the Spurs by all indications: stats, eye test, etc. All Parker has is a media award selection (the same media that gave James Harden all defensive team votes).
Defensive teams are selected by coaches arent they?

[fpliii]

Defensive teams are selected by coaches arent they?
Up until this season. :facepalm

They changed the format, it's now a media vote:

http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/060214-2013-14-All-Defensive-Team-Votes.pdf

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Manu or Kawhi was the best Spurs player this season clearly
Timmy was the best on the other teams but in the 05 playoffs and finals Manu was the best

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

Top 5 after last season. I agree that this ring doesnt move him up
Duncan Top 5? good god these forums are getting more retarded than ever.

why did no one care about Duncan a couple months ago, but now that he was part of a well-oiled machine Spurs team that won a title w/ balanced play, he's suddenly some god to ISH kids? :facepalm

[houston]

:oldlol: @ arbitrary awards beating out statistical impact. Duncan was the best player on the Spurs by all indications: stats, eye test, etc. All Parker has is a media award selection (the same media that gave James Harden all defensive team votes).


:wtf: okkkkkkkkkkkkkk

[DMAVS41]

Tony Parker has been the Spurs best player this season. Duncan was just a role player.

Just no. Parker has now officially become the most over-rated player in the league.

Guy goes for 17/2/5 53% TS in the playoffs and people want to say he's clearly better than Duncan..what???

Duncan...who still gives you great defense and 16/9/2 57% TS?

I don't know who the best player on the Spurs is...but it's not clear and regardless and if Timmy is "just a role player"...than so is Parker. Scoring 1 more point per game and the team noticeably improving on both ends without you....does not entail a "best player" tag.

[booonkers]

Just no. Parker has now officially become the most over-rated player in the league.

Guy goes for 17/2/5 53% TS in the playoffs and people want to say he's clearly better than Duncan..what???

Duncan...who still gives you great defense and 16/9/2 57% TS?

I don't know who the best player on the Spurs is...but it's not clear and regardless and if Timmy is "just a role player"...than so is Parker. Scoring 1 more point per game and the team noticeably improving on both ends without you....does not entail a "best player" tag.

Duncan is their best player but not by a landslide this year. He is still the heart and soul of this team and it's no coincidence that they started sniffing another title on his resurgent season (2013). There are other factors like the emergence of Kawhi and Green but it all started with Timmy coming back refreshed and healthy.:cheers:

[pastis]

so now duncan is the best spur and best player for "his" 5 rings. its getting worse with these super trolls.

99 - there are arguments for duncan. but not so clear like his stans think. but ok ill give hm 99

03 - no question. monster duncan. best player

05- ginobili and duncan both strong. but if you consider that a so called "role player" like ginobili was at this point, being so strong and eve better than the "star" of the team ----> ginobili

07. parker without any doubts

14 - 1. kawhi, 2. parker, 3./gino/duncan/green/splitter etc

[Anaximandro1]

1999, 2003, 2005 , 2007 -> no-brainer

Duncan led four championship teams in points,rebounds,blocks,PER,etc ... Four times : he is the only player in NBA history to achieve this distinction.

His stats are incredible (Spurs only averaged 85 - 90 possessions per game)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v_xczGKXG40/U6AIC0tLR6I/AAAAAAAAC_k/BVhrMjMfu3o/s1600/1.jpg



2014 -> ???

After watching the Spurs since day 1, I still have doubts. It's between Duncan and Kawhi.

They score, defend, block shots, get rebounds, steals ... they're important at both ends of the floor .

Duncan saved the season in OKC. Timmy carried the Spurs from 2 down to 3 up with 7 straight points in OT (Game 6) , while Kawhi was the FMVP.

Duncan had a great season for a man of his age. Tim led the Spurs in almost every statistical category. Moreover, Parker and Duncan are very close in ppg.

Parker has a negative ORtg - DRtg , low PER, WS, etc. He didn't play well in the WCF/ NBA Finals.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IcMqyLqyS0s/U6AIP7b3P0I/AAAAAAAAC_4/ndaUbuJvp2E/s1600/2.jpg

[tontoz]

On the season Duncan averaged 15/10, had the highest PER on the team and was their defensive anchor, as always. IN the playoffs he averaged 16/9. I don't see an argument for anyone else.

[T_L_P]

so now duncan is the best spur and best player for "his" 5 rings. its getting worse with these super trolls.

99 - there are arguments for duncan. but not so clear like his stans think. but ok ill give hm 99

03 - no question. monster duncan. best player

05- ginobili and duncan both strong. but if you consider that a so called "role player" like ginobili was at this point, being so strong and eve better than the "star" of the team ----> ginobili

07. parker without any doubts

14 - 1. kawhi, 2. parker, 3./gino/duncan/green/splitter etc


Yesterday I ethered you and you said 07 was Duncan. Weak troll.

[NZStreetBaller]

is this just another way to try and prop up duncan in order to destroy Kobe?? Lebron fans can be so pathetic. scrapping up whatever ammunition they can against Lord Kobe.

[NZStreetBaller]

Duncan is a great player no doubt but lets be honest here the real FMVP for all the spurs ring really is pop. take away pop from this team and it probably would never even make the finals........

[GimmeThat]

And Jordan is the best player on his Bobcats team that failed to make it to the finals?

[DMV2]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2014.html

---REGULAR SEASON---
15 points behind Parker for team points leader.
#1 in rebounding and blocks.
12 FGM behind Parker for FGM leader.
#2 in PPG.
#2 in win share, 0.3 behind Leonard.
#1 in defensive win share.
#1 in PER
---PLAYOFFS---
#2 in PPG and total points, 26 points behind Parker.
#2 in FG% of player who took 100+ shots, #1 for more than 101+ shots.
#1 in rebounding and blocks.
#1 in win share at 3.2, #1 in offensive win share, #2 in DWS.
#1 in PER

TD was definitely more than a role player. #1 option at best or #1B option at worst.

[SexSymbol]

Talking just finals -
99 and 03 are easily his
05 Manu has a VERY good case, saves at least two games in that series
07 Parker definitely has a case, he was owning Cavs in the paint all those games, and those were close games, Parker was clutch as ****.
14 Leonard was the best player on the Spurs, Parker and Manu have cases too

[Dresta]

The Spurs don't have a "best" payer. They're clearly an ensemble team. Duncan is just another cog in the machine. People moving him up ahead of other legends for this are just ridiculous.
Playing as a part of a great team like SA is part of being a great player. Basketball is a team sport and team success is important when it comes to measuring career impact. Duncan has been on the Spurs for 5 titles and over a decade of consistent greatness; when his play has dipped he's deferred to others and played a more team-orientated game. So what? This only shows the selflessness of Duncan and the culture Pop has instilled on the Spurs, and it is to his credit, and certainly makes him a superior player to your hero Kobe Bryant, who has been a selfish egomaniac his whole career, and repeatedly threw his team under the bus/ lost championships because of it.

But yeah, apparently in your deranged mind Duncan didn't play enough hero ball to deserve any credit for this title. You guys are such a joke man :roll:

[pastis]

1999, 2003, 2005 , 2007 -> no-brainer

Duncan led four championship teams in points,rebounds,blocks,PER,etc ... Four times : he is the only player in NBA history to achieve this distinction.

His stats are incredible (Spurs only averaged 85 - 90 possessions per game)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v_xczGKXG40/U6AIC0tLR6I/AAAAAAAAC_k/BVhrMjMfu3o/s1600/1.jpg



2014 -> ???

After watching the Spurs since day 1, I still have doubts. It's between Duncan and Kawhi.

They score, defend, block shots, get rebounds, steals ... they're important at both ends of the floor .

Duncan saved the season in OKC. Timmy carried the Spurs from 2 down to 3 up with 7 straight points in OT (Game 6) , while Kawhi was the FMVP.

Duncan had a great season for a man of his age. Tim led the Spurs in almost every statistical category. Moreover, Parker and Duncan are very close in ppg.

Parker has a negative ORtg - DRtg , low PER, WS, etc. He didn't play well in the WCF/ NBA Finals.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IcMqyLqyS0s/U6AIP7b3P0I/AAAAAAAAC_4/ndaUbuJvp2E/s1600/2.jpg

your one of the biggest trolls on ish. do you even post anything else than your copy and paste troll posting about duncan? always the same post with copy and paste, your life must be boring

facepalm.jpg

[Dr.J4ever]

Title says it all. Discuss.
Nah, Tony Parker has been the Spurs best player for a couple years now. Although, TP has not necessarily been the best Spur player in these playoffs.

If Lazerus were here, he would say Kawhi carried TD to a title.:lol

[kwajo]

I think half of these responses are based purely on the idea of the best offensive player, not the best player. Go watch the Playoffs again and tell me Duncan's team defence and guarding of the rim wasn't critical to every game.

He's clearly accepted a smaller role than past championships, but he's definitely the guy who sets the tone for the whole team and has for 17 years. To me that makes him the most important player on their roster.

[AirFederer]

Duncan is all about winning and ain't bout those individual stats :pimp:

W and Championships are the only stats that count to him - :bowdown:

[Jasper]

Title says it all. Discuss.
FAIL ----


he was only a coach on the floor , he was a shadow of himself from 4 titles.


JUST remember the Spurs in all of their years never back to backed.

In fact it was seldom they back to backed appearing in the finals.

[Carbine]

It's funny how people rewrite history to fit their agenda.

Their wasn't even a discussion amongst non-biased individuals who the best player was for the Spurs in '05.

Duncan was the first option on offense and he was very clearly one of the best defensive players in the league. Even if Manu PLAYED better on offense for stetches/games, the huge disparity between the two on defense and the boards makes it a non-conversation.

[Dresta]

It's funny how people rewrite history to fit their agenda.

Their wasn't even a discussion amongst non-biased individuals who the best player was for the Spurs in '05.

Duncan was the first option on offense and he was very clearly one of the best defensive players in the league. Even if Manu PLAYED better on offense for stetches/games, the huge disparity between the two on defense and the boards makes it a non-conversation.
Not to underplay Duncan's role (he has clearly had a superior career than Kobe) but Manu was the closer on that team, and his importance shouldn't be understated. He was incredible during that title run.

[LeBird]

His longevity and sustained excellence is special and that's why he's in the top 10. The problem is that people wanna move him into the top freaking 5 after a season where he was nothing more than a very good role-player. Do you guys not see how absurd that is? You can't vault into the top 5 of all-time with 15/10. I would argue that his 2013 season was easily more impressive and nobody was putting him top 5 then. The stans are propping him up all-time because the rest of the team got better. You see how silly that is?

Bottom-line: Role-player seasons don't move you ahead of other all-time greats.

This, his ranking really shouldn't change much based on this season. He really didn't do anything he didn't do before or anything that was especially great.

Spurs won because of their system, because of Pop. The very fact that they were so deep and it was a team effort underlines this. Put Duncan on a similar team talent wise without the system and Pop as coach and they don't do near as well.

[Bigsmoke]

4 our of 5 of them.

Parker is the best players in the 2014 team

[DMAVS41]

Not to underplay Duncan's role (he has clearly had a superior career than Kobe) but Manu was the closer on that team, and his importance shouldn't be understated. He was incredible during that title run.

Yes, but Duncan was the clear cut best player.

Very similar to Kobe/Gasol from 10. Gasol was amazing in the playoffs at 20/11/4 60% TS.

Kobe was clearly the best player though.

Just like Duncan was still clearly the best player even though Manu had a great playoffs at 21/6/4 65% TS.

[LeBird]

I think half of these responses are based purely on the idea of the best offensive player, not the best player. Go watch the Playoffs again and tell me Duncan's team defence and guarding of the rim wasn't critical to every game.

He's clearly accepted a smaller role than past championships, but he's definitely the guy who sets the tone for the whole team and has for 17 years. To me that makes him the most important player on their roster.

It's critical but probably more so the passing is critical for how the Spurs played. They played at an offensive level you basically can't match. That wasn't because of Duncan, that was mostly because of Parker and to a lesser extent Manu. They might not get enough assists to show it, but how they playmake and move the ball is critical.

[DMAVS41]

This, his ranking really shouldn't change much based on this season. He really didn't do anything he didn't do before or anything that was especially great.

Spurs won because of their system, because of Pop. The very fact that they were so deep and it was a team effort underlines this. Put Duncan on a similar team talent wise without the system and Pop as coach and they don't do near as well.

The problem with thinking like this...and I understand it, is that there are very few 38 year olds in NBA history that could play at the level Duncan did this year.

He deserves a legacy boost for doing what he's done the last 2 years now. If his team doesn't choke horribly in game 6...he's sitting on back to back titles and a finals mvp.

His play, at this stage of his career, has been historic...

[DMAVS41]

It's critical but probably more so the passing is critical for how the Spurs played. They played at an offensive level you basically can't match. That wasn't because of Duncan, that was mostly because of Parker and to a lesser extent Manu. They might not get enough assists to show it, but how they playmake and move the ball is critical.

Because of Parker?

Dude...the offense got better without him in both the playoffs and regular season.

In fact, I'd say that Parker's over dribbling was the only weakness the Spurs had all year.

[I<3NBA]

the Spurs don't win any ring without him. that says it all.

that's why Pop says that when Duncan retires, he'll also retire from coaching.

[LeBird]

The problem with thinking like this...and I understand it, is that there are very few 38 year olds in NBA history that could play at the level Duncan did this year.

He deserves a legacy boost for doing what he's done the last 2 years now. If his team doesn't choke horribly in game 6...he's sitting on back to back titles and a finals mvp.

His play, at this stage of his career, has been historic...

It's not so much Duncan's level of play as there is a dearth of big men these days and even his stat-line looks pretty good at this moment in the light of that. This level of play in the 70s/80s/90s, where the league had far better big men, doesn't really impress. Even as a 37 yr old KAJ was putting up 22/8/3 - now that's worthy of the praise and not just because he's older.

Otherwise, he's just one of the important cogs in his team. And it's not so much due to his individual prowess that they defied the odds as the fact that his team was clearly the best organised one we've seen in ages. The same team in someone else's hands other than Pop's struggles to make the playoffs. That's how all the other teams are built, insofar as they rely on their stars. So Duncan's own individual level of play was not that high; but because he had a team where even the bench were performing very well, it didn't have to be.

So, in conclusion, one of the biggest team efforts in winning a ring shouldn't score so many points for an individual based consideration like the best players of all time.

Doing so on the basis of him winning another ring is simply ring counting.

[LeBird]

Because of Parker?

Dude...the offense got better without him in both the playoffs and regular season.

In fact, I'd say that Parker's over dribbling was the only weakness the Spurs had all year.

I'm talking about in general. Yes, he did have moments where he dribbled the ball too much but both Parker and Manu were there primary ball handlers and passers in a team that scorched the opposition due to their passing.

Also, what is the sample you're using to make that claim?

[DMAVS41]

I'm talking about in general. Yes, he did have moments where he dribbled the ball too much but both Parker and Manu were there primary ball handlers and passers in a team that scorched the opposition due to their passing.

Also, what is the sample you're using to make that claim?

I'm using the entire regular season and entire playoffs.

Regular season;

Offensive rating with Parker 109.8
Offensive rating without Parker 111.5

Playoffs;

Offensive rating with Parker 113.9
Offensive rating without Parker 114.8


I'm not saying Parker hurts them or anything like that, but Parker does not drive the offense. It's the system and unselfishness and shooting.

[DMAVS41]

It's not so much Duncan's level of play as there is a dearth of big men these days and even his stat-line looks pretty good at this moment in the light of that. This level of play in the 70s/80s/90s, where the league had far better big men, doesn't really impress. Even as a 37 yr old KAJ was putting up 22/8/3 - now that's worthy of the praise and not just because he's older.

Otherwise, he's just one of the important cogs in his team. And it's not so much due to his individual prowess that they defied the odds as the fact that his team was clearly the best organised one we've seen in ages. The same team in someone else's hands other than Pop's struggles to make the playoffs. That's how all the other teams are built, insofar as they rely on their stars. So Duncan's own individual level of play was not that high; but because he had a team where even the bench were performing very well, it didn't have to be.

So, in conclusion, one of the biggest team efforts in winning a ring shouldn't score so many points for an individual based consideration like the best players of all time.

Doing so on the basis of him winning another ring is simply ring counting.


I think his level the last 2 years has been special at his age. Not many players ever have done this.

I also think his interior defense still gets vastly under-rated. It's a big impact.

[Young X]

Parker basically had 0 impact in 3 straight closeout games in 3 different series and his team still won.

He's inefficient offensively, doesn't rebound and his defensive impact is non existent.

The Spurs actually played better with him on the bench. Duncan's defensive impact alone makes him more impactful than Parker, Manu and Leonard also made more of an impact.

[DMAVS41]

Parker basically had 0 impact in 3 straight closeout games in 3 different series and his team still won.

He's inefficient offensively, doesn't rebound and his defensive impact is non existent.

The Spurs actually played better with him on the bench. Duncan's defensive impact alone makes him more impactful than Parker, Manu and Leonard also made more of an impact.

Parker is, no doubt, insanely over-rated.

If I had to pick one of Duncan, Parker, Manu, Leonard to lose for an entire series as a Spurs fan...it would for sure be Parker. He's easily the most expendable player of that group. In part because of Mills/Belli/Joseph backing up, but also because of his inefficient play, lack of defense/rebounding, and over dribbling that at times can really hurt the offense.

He's a really good player for sure, but people claiming he's the clear cut best player on this Spurs teams are nuts.

[LeBird]

I'm using the entire regular season and entire playoffs.

Regular season;

Offensive rating with Parker 109.8
Offensive rating without Parker 111.5

Playoffs;

Offensive rating with Parker 113.9
Offensive rating without Parker 114.8


I'm not saying Parker hurts them or anything like that, but Parker does not drive the offense. It's the system and unselfishness and shooting.

You misunderstood the query. Sample: how many games with and how many without. The idea that Spurs are better without their primary ball-handler and offensive facilitator (and also one of the best PGs in the league) sounds more like an anomaly.


I think his level the last 2 years has been special at his age. Not many players ever have done this.

I also think his interior defense still gets vastly under-rated. It's a big impact.

How many HOF ATGs play until they're 37? It's so specific it's almost irrelevant unless you're a die-hard for any semblance of longevity.

KAJ (36 yr old): 22/7/3 on 58/NA/72
KAJ (37 yr old): 22/8/3 on 60/NA/73

K Malone (36 yr old): 26/10/4 on 51/25/80
K Malone (37 yr old): 23/8/5 on 50/40/79

Jordan (38 yr old): 23/6/5 on 42/20/79

Ewing (36 yr old): 17/10/1 on 44/NA/71
Ewing (37 yr old): 15/10/1 on 47/NA/73

Barkley (36 yr old) 15/11/3 on 48/23/65

You can name more and look. I am sure Dirk will put up impressive numbers in his 36th year as well.

At the end of the day, longevity only matters so much. Imagine a 36-37 yr old Malone in this league. Maybe had they a system like Pop's they'd have stayed longer (where you have reduced minutes but can still be a key player).

So yea, Duncan has been good, but nothing that superlative to justify putting him into GOAT territory IMO. There is a diminishing returns argument and not all rings are equal.

[DMAVS41]

You misunderstood the query. Sample: how many games with and how many without. The idea that Spurs are better without their primary ball-handler and offensive facilitator (and also one of the best PGs in the league) sounds more like an anomaly.



How many HOF ATGs play until they're 37? It's so specific it's almost irrelevant unless you're a die-hard for any semblance of longevity.

KAJ (36 yr old): 22/7/3 on 58/NA/72
KAJ (37 yr old): 22/8/3 on 60/NA/73

K Malone (36 yr old): 26/10/4 on 51/25/80
K Malone (37 yr old): 23/8/5 on 50/40/79

Jordan (38 yr old): 23/6/5 on 42/20/79

Ewing (36 yr old): 17/10/1 on 44/NA/71
Ewing (37 yr old): 15/10/1 on 47/NA/73

Barkley (36 yr old) 15/11/3 on 48/23/65

You can name more and look. I am sure Dirk will put up impressive numbers in his 36th year as well.

At the end of the day, longevity only matters so much. Imagine a 36-37 yr old Malone in this league. Maybe had they a system like Pop's they'd have stayed longer (where you have reduced minutes but can still be a key player).

So yea, Duncan has been good, but nothing that superlative to justify putting him into GOAT territory IMO.


It's not games with and without...it's the entire season with him on the court and off the court.

Parker played roughly 2,000 minutes this year of the 3,900 spurs minutes.

In the 1,996 minutes he was on the court. The Spurs had an offensive rating of 109.8.

In the 1,952 minutes he was on the bench or not playing...the Spurs had an offensive rating of 111.5

Same thing for the playoffs...it's minutes played...not games man.

I also don't get the above...Kareem and Malone and some of those other guys played amazingly well at their ages. Duncan has reached that level now with his play the last two years.

Yes, a lot of guys don't play this long...uhhhh...that would be the point. It matters. Duncan had a brilliant prime/peak...and how he's aged about as well as anyone in history not named Kareem or Malone. It's extremely impressive...

[LeBird]

It's not games with and without...it's the entire season with him on the court and off the court.

Oh I wasn't referring to that, and I find stats like those a bit contextual depending on the team. Especially in terms of the Spurs who rotate differently to other NBA teams. It's interesting though. What are the stats the last 5 years?



I also don't get the above...Kareem and Malone and some of those other guys played amazingly well at their ages. Duncan has reached that level now with his play the last two years.

Yes, a lot of guys don't play this long...uhhhh...that would be the point. It matters. Duncan had a brilliant prime/peak...and how he's aged about as well as anyone in history not named Kareem or Malone. It's extremely impressive...


But he hasn't really, he played below those levels and won because he played on a better team. How many good big men are there left in the league and look at his output. It's good, but in that context it's not that impressive frankly. If Ray Allen wins a couple more rings by being a decent role player for his age it's not changing my impression of his legacy. It's just not that important to me that he stuck it out because the team he's in has managed to keep him relevant.

It's really only impressive if you regard longevity and contextualise output with that. But I'm not a basketball GM, I'm not concerned with judging a player's usefulness in terms of his playing life. In reality, Tim Duncan was better 6 years ago, after his 4th ring and has only been getting worse basically each season onwards. Now you're basically boosting his rating because he won a ring? Duncan wasn't even in All-NBA 3rd team this season. Yet I'm going to reward him by elevating him into the GOAT discussion? Not likely. Moreover, those players generally dominated significant parts of their era/career as the outright best player. Tim Duncan hasn't even been in the top 5 MVP voting for the last 8 seasons now (or two 4th place finishes in the last 10 seasons) that's basically half of his career. Kareem was still getting votes until 86 (he retired 89) and he came 5th that year.

Longevity only makes up so much.