Who's the greater Spur, Parker or Robinson?

[longhornfan1234]

:confusedshrug:

[Smook A.]

David Robinson is the 2nd greatest Spur of all time behind Tim Duncan and it shouldn't even be an argument.

[sbw19]

Spurs would've repeated at least once had they had both in their prime at the same time or anything close to it.

[L.Kizzle]

Parker is behind Gervin also.

[Jlamb47]

Parker is behind Gervin also.

Parker got 4 rings and a FMVP

[ThePhantomCreep]

Parker got 4 rings and a FMVP
Parker > Barkley?

Gervin was easily the better player.

[Smoke117]

Really? First that stupid Howard vs Robinson thread...and now this? Robinson by the end of his rookie season was already a top 5 player in the entire league. He was already the 2nd best defensive player in the league after Hakeem.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

:facepalm

[SouBeachTalents]

Speedy Claxton

[KyrieTheFuture]

Trick question, it's Pop

[Mass Debator]

David Robinson >
Gervin >

but it's no shame, really.

[mattvNJ]

2018 Spanoulis

[rmt]

David Robinson is the 2nd greatest Spur of all time behind Tim Duncan and it shouldn't even be an argument.

This. Pop credits their success to first drafting DRob and following up with Duncan.

[Roundball_Rock]

This thread illustrates how there now is too heavy an emphasis on team success in assessing players. Robinson was a vastly superior player--he had a legitimate case for the best player in the league in 94' and 95' but this question is raised because of Parker's superior team success. I think team success should only be a factor in ranking players of a similar caliber.


This. Pop credits their success to first drafting DRob and following up with Duncan.

Robinson deserves a lot of credit for willingly taking a backseat to Duncan. He could have made a fuss of it--he was still a very good player in 99'--but he did not and the transition from the Robinson to Duncan eras was seamles.

[CeilingFan#1]

My opinion:

1. Duncan
2. Robinson
3. Parker
4. Gervin
5. Manu

[G-train]

I could be missing something here, but how is Tim Duncan better than David Robinson?

I forget 99% of ISH didn't see Robinson play.

At a minimum, it's arguable.

[Meticode]

1.) Duncan
2.) Robinson
3.) Gervin
4.) Parker

...I'm sorry. there's no way in hell I put Parker over Gervin. Gervin scored 40 or more points 68 times in his career. Scored over 60 once, and scored over 50 three times. His best season was probably 79-80...

33.1 PPG, 53% FG%, 85% FT%, 5.2 RPG, 2.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.0 BPG


...sorry. Even with the title and FMVP I don't put Parker above production like that.

[Meticode]

I could be missing something here, but how is Tim Duncan better than David Robinson?

I forget 99% of ISH didn't see Robinson play.

At a minimum, it's arguable.

Duncan is the greatest player at this position...ever. Robinson is not.

Robinson: 2 rings, no FMVPs, 10x all-star, 1x MVP, RotY, DPotY, 4x first team, 4x defense first team
Duncan: 5 rings, 3x FMVP, 14x all-star, 2x MVP, RotY, 10x first team, 8x defense first team

Edit: In the end I think Robinson had the higher peak as a player, but Duncan has the championships and the longevity.

[L.Kizzle]

1.) Duncan
2.) Robinson
3.) Gervin
4.) Parker

...I'm sorry. there's no way in hell I put Parker over Gervin. Gervin scored 40 or more points 68 times in his career. Scored over 60 once, and scored over 50 three times. His best season was probably 79-80...

33.1 PPG, 53% FG%, 85% FT%, 5.2 RPG, 2.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.0 BPG


...sorry. Even with the title and FMVP I don't put Parker above production like that.
Thats like saying Parker is better than Durant.

hey Jo Jo White or George Gervin?

[j3lademaster]

Duncan is the greatest player at this position...ever. Robinson is not.

Robinson: 2 rings, no FMVPs, 10x all-star, 1x MVP, RotY, DPotY, 4x first team, 4x defense first team
Duncan: 5 rings, 3x FMVP, 14x all-star, 2x MVP, RotY, 10x first team, 8x defense first team

Edit: In the end I think Robinson had the higher peak as a player, but Duncan has the championships and the longevity.If D-Robb was considered a pf he'd have a legit case for best ever. The league was built on the backs of centers: and the center position is and always will be the most competitive in terms of all-time rankings.

[played0ut]

This. Pop credits their success to first drafting DRob and following up with Duncan.

There's also that factor of luck, too. If he didn't get injured, they wouldn't have been able to get Duncan.








Likewise, if Jordan didn't break his toe in his 2nd season, they wouldn't have been able to draft Horace Grant.

Luck factors in so much in terms for top-10 GOAT careers.

[G-train]

Duncan is the greatest player at this position...ever. Robinson is not.

Robinson: 2 rings, no FMVPs, 10x all-star, 1x MVP, RotY, DPotY, 4x first team, 4x defense first team
Duncan: 5 rings, 3x FMVP, 14x all-star, 2x MVP, RotY, 10x first team, 8x defense first team

Edit: In the end I think Robinson had the higher peak as a player, but Duncan has the championships and the longevity.

Robinson has a bit more competition at the 5.

Duncan has championships in part because of Robinson, and in part because of Pop and other great players, and in part himself obviously, he was the best player most of the time.

Robinson was playing on completely different teams playing against different teams, you can't compare their team success.

Purely as a player, I take Robinson. Not as refined in the low block, but simply more dominant on both ends.

[T_L_P]

Robinson has a bit more competition at the 5.

Duncan has championships in part because of Robinson, and in part because of Pop and other great players, and in part himself obviously, he was the best player most of the time.

Robinson was playing on completely different teams playing against different teams, you can't compare their team success.

Purely as a player, I take Robinson. Not as refined in the low block, but simply more dominant on both ends.

Here is prime Robinson in the Playoffs:

90-98: 23/12/3/1/3/.549 TS% over 62 games

Duncan from 99 to 07:

24/13/4/1/3/.560 TS% over 129 games

There's no debate to be had here. Duncan has the better prime, leadership, intangibles, longevity, consistency, ability to increase his play when it mattered, etc etc.

Duncan is top 10 and Robinson is top 30 or top 25 for a reason. Because he was the better player, as Robinson gladly admits.

[Meticode]

I find it odd someone would prefer to take a top 20-30 player over a top 10 player, but okay...to each their own.

[T_L_P]

I find it odd someone would prefer to take a top 20-30 player over a top 10 player, but okay...to each their own.

Yeah, but this is just a big troll thread.

Robinson has a very thin argument for greatest Spur. But Parker doesn't come close to Duncan.

[SsKSpurs21]

Yeah, but this is just a big troll thread.

Robinson has a very thin argument for greatest Spur. But Parker doesn't come close to Duncan.

Robinson has more than just a thin argument. i say he has a legit chance of being considered the greatest Spur depending on who you ask in San Antonio. Robinson was the main reason why the Spurs remained in San Antonio and that alone makes people feel he is the greatest. without David in the early 90s the Spurs could have easily relocated to another city. I personally do not have him above Duncan but to say the argument is very thin i dont agree with.

[KungFuJoe]

Greater? Parker.

Better? Robinson by a HUUUGE margin.

[Dbrog]

My opinion:

1. Duncan
2. Robinson
3. Parker
4. Gervin
5. Manu


No way Gervin is lower than Parker. He's top50 all time for me...Parker not top 100 probably. Imagine prime Gervin on these spurs teams :eek: . People forget Gervin was a 30 pt scorer (Yes, in Playoffs too!) for many years with solid stats in other areas. He's literally one of the greatest scorers the league has ever seen. To give a more modern example, his 10th year playing pro, he was still putting up Kevin Durant numbers. How can anyone possibly say Tony has ever been better than that? Lost in all this is Artis Gilmore too (one of the GOAT defensive players). His number's retired for a reason.

[houston]

Robinson of course

[longhornfan1234]

Parker was instrumental in four championships and won 1 Finals MVP. Robinson was instrumental in one championship and role player in another. Robinson is a better individual player, but Parker is a better Spur.

[Dragonyeuw]

Duncan is the greatest player at this position...ever. Robinson is not.

Robinson: 2 rings, no FMVPs, 10x all-star, 1x MVP, RotY, DPotY, 4x first team, 4x defense first team
Duncan: 5 rings, 3x FMVP, 14x all-star, 2x MVP, RotY, 10x first team, 8x defense first team



Duncan's major advantage are his rings, but in terms of individual accolades it's not an apples to apples comparison. For one, there's only one spot for centers on the all-NBA /defensive first team whereas there are two forward spots, which literally doubles Duncan's chances at getting picked. Robinson was battling some all-time great centers in the 90's for a single position on the all-NBA team, same for the defensive first team, battling players like Mutombo, Hakeem, and Morning, all all-time great defensive centers, for that honor through the 90's. Hell, Dwight Howard has the same number of all NBA/defensive teams. Would that suggest that he's an equal player to Robinson? Only if one chooses to ignore the context that Howard has considerably less competition in his era among centers.

Duncan has the superior game down low, otherwise as an overall player I don't believe he holds any significant advantages over Robinson as a player. The Admiral was a more prolific scorer and shotblocker, and comparable rebounder.

[ThePhantomCreep]

No way is Robinson the greatest Spur. He shit the bed too many times in the playoffs and lacked longevity--7 elite seasons and one great one (1998). His peak production was arguably higher than Duncan's though.

1992: 26/13/3/3/5(blocks!!)
1995: 28/11/3/1/3

Parker is several tiers below Robinson. The 1995 WCFs pretty much erased what a beast this guy was in his prime.

[rmt]

I fail to see why some people see only the physical - ignoring the whole player - the intangibles, the mental, emotional, drive, competitiveness, etc. Yes, DRob was bigger, faster, stronger but basketball was not the be-all that it is for Duncan. DRob had a lot of interests, and God was most important to him. Duncan is much more single-minded (on basketball) and competitive. It amazes me that at this age, TD has re-dedicated himself to eating right, keeping the weight off the knee, still performing at a high level, etc. when he could have hung it up a long time ago.

As far as Parker vs DRob, it's DRob hands down.

[Aussie Dunker]

Robinson was a better player, and better Spur, than Parker and Gervin.

Gervin was a better player than Parker,

But Parker is a better Spur, than Gervin...

I know that logic is somewhat flawed - but it feels kind of right...

[ThePhantomCreep]

Robinson was a better player, and better Spur, than Parker and Gervin.

Gervin was a better player than Parker,

But Parker is a better Spur, than Gervin...

I know that logic is somewhat flawed - but it feels kind of right...


"Parker > Gervin" is like arguing "Worthy > Baylor"

Just no.

[Legends66NBA7]

"Parker > Gervin" is like arguing "Worthy > Baylor"

Just no.

Agreed.

Chip counting alone can't overcome Robinson and Gervin were much more productive players on the floor than Parker. Same with Baylor. Just because the Lakers lost all those times in the Finals doesn't mean Baylor wasn't going down without a fight. He was actually amazing in a lot of them, just didn't win.

[T_L_P]

I agree if we're talking about how much one player meant to the franchise as a whole, Robinson has a legitimate argument. But I'm still picking Duncan; if he doesn't get drafted the Spurs are just another team that never won a ring or never made a Finals, because: no Duncan = no Pop (would have been fired) = no RC (Pop made him a GM). And without Duncan, Pop and RC, the Spurs are not winning anything.

But as players and careers? It's clearly Duncan. Robinson was broken down after about 10 years, and even in his prime he wasn't a better player than Duncan (Duncan scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, and dished out more assists on better efficiency).

Robinson was a bit like KG. He thrived as the second guy (I'd argue that he was the best role player ever in 01). But, as I'm sure he'd admit at sometime, basketball wasn't everything to him. He had his religion, his family, his charity organisations. All that meant basketball was his profession, not his obsession.

My personal rankings go:

1. Duncan
2. Robinson
3. Gervin
4. Parker
5. Manu

EDIT: HM to a personal favourite Sean Elliott.

[miles berg]

Duncan
Robinson
Iceman
Parker
Manu

[D-FENS]

1. Duncan
2. Robinson
3. Gervin
4. Parker
5. Manu

[FPJ]

OP, many people with actual bball knowledge (who also know how to use advance stats) have Robinson in the top 10 OAT.

[L.Kizzle]

Robinson was a better player, and better Spur, than Parker and Gervin.

Gervin was a better player than Parker,

But Parker is a better Spur, than Gervin...

I know that logic is somewhat flawed - but it feels kind of right...
Is Sam Jones a better player than Larry Bird?

10 rings > 3 rings right?

[KOBE143]

1. Robinson
2. Gervin
3. Parker
4. Ginobili
5. Duncan

[T_L_P]

1. Robinson
2. Gervin
3. Parker
4. Ginobili
5. Duncan

Terrible troll.

[TheWINdyCity]

Terrible troll.

always has been

[bukowski81]

Parker was instrumental in four championships and won 1 Finals MVP. Robinson was instrumental in one championship and role player in another. Robinson is a better individual player, but Parker is a better Spur.

Robinson was the Spurs for a lot of time, he was the only reason the Spurs were on the map for most of the 90s, you cant say the same about Parker.

Robinson is a better player and a greater spur by quite a good margin.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

im not even sure id put Parker over Manu..