Is Duncan overrated?

[sportjames23]

No, Duncan is just over rated, outplayed by most of his competition head-to-head. Talking bigs like Webber, Dirk and especially KG. Shaq and Kobe have the edge in most of their legendary match ups in the playoffs. Except no one wants to talk about Tim's shortcomings, oh no.

Just Kobe, Lebron and Shaq's. Specifically in that order.


Discuss.

[catch24]

I think Duncan gets overrated when people claim he was a better (not greater) player than Shaq.

Otherwise he's a top 7-10 player all-time IMO. :confusedshrug:

[dhsilv]

Who is talking? Was he better than kobe? Zero debate yes. Shaq (there's an argument for shaq due to peak, but overall not wrong). Better than Bird? At this point I think he's made a case but you could call that overrated.

Is he a top 5-10 player? No question. If you're hearing people rank him higher than 5 then yes he's entering into the discussion. As it is I never see him over 5 so no, he's not overrated. He is for the most part still mostly underrated, and by a lot from some posters here.

[Lebronxrings]

no, hes one of the greatest role players of all time. Maybe greatest.

[bobopenguin]

1) duncan is a PF. he doesnt have to take on shaq.

2) duncan is a monster during his peak... from age 21-30... he avged like what? 20/10/2blk? like fking every year? and this is overrated?

[Mr. Jabbar]

its hard to tell with players in the pop system really. safest bet is to wait for what jameer has to say and go with the opposite

[GoSpursGo1984]

I think Duncan gets overrated when people claim he was a better (not greater) player than Shaq.

Otherwise he's a top 7-10 player all-time IMO. :confusedshrug:

Duncan did pretty much everything better then Shaq. He was a much better defender, better offensive player all Shaq did was dunk and do a hook shot and Duncan did not take games off like Shaq while having no one near as good as Kobe on his team.

[WayOfWade]

its hard to tell with players in the pop system really. safest bet is to wait for what jameer has to say and go with the opposite
:applause: well said

[Milbuck]

His peak is really underrated, but his post-prime is very overrated. Career-wise I think he's rated pretty fairly.

[sportjames23]

no, hes one of the greatest role players of all time. Maybe greatest.


:biggums:

[dhsilv]

its hard to tell with players in the pop system really. safest bet is to wait for what jameer has to say and go with the opposite

yes hard to tell in the system called "pass it to duncan" "over play your man we have duncan on the team"

It was a fancy system in his prime....

[dhsilv]

His peak is really underrated, but his post-prime is very overrated. Career-wise I think he's rated pretty fairly.

His post prime is about as good as anyone ever, maybe even goat worthy. It's him and Kareem for best post prime. Am I missing anyone?

[Mr. Jabbar]

pop doesnt have a system :lol

http://i65.tinypic.com/168a53n.png

[dhsilv]

pop doesnt have a system :lol

http://i65.tinypic.com/168a53n.png

Well what is the system? Please compare 2003 with 2014 and how the offense or defense is the same...?

[TomBrady]

Nope, that's just what butthurt Kobe/Bron stans argue to try to protect their shitty idols.

[plowking]

pop doesnt have a system :lol

http://i65.tinypic.com/168a53n.png

Your reps are too funny. :oldlol:

[Marchesk]

2) duncan is a monster during his peak... from age 21-30... he avged like what? 20/10/2blk? like fking every year? and this is overrated?

http://www.baconsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/wiltchamberlainbasketball.jpg

That's good and all, but it's not mind-blowing. Duncan is more like Bill Russell in his impact. It goes beyond the numbers, because you know, there have been guys like Wilt and Kareem who would make those numbers look paltry.

[sportjames23]

pop doesnt have a system :lol

http://i65.tinypic.com/168a53n.png


LMMFAO at that last one. :roll:

[TheBigVeto]

No.

[jstern]

He's a player gets underrated. Severely underrated by Kobe stans. And underrated by young kids and average fans who thinks he's boring and respond more to things like And1. Etc. The future doesn't look too bright for him.

[AirBonner]

He's a player gets underrated. Severely underrated by Kobe stans. And underrated by young kids and average fans who thinks he's boring and respond more to things like And1. Etc. The future doesn't look too bright for him.
This. Kobe will always be rated higher to casual fans. People who know basketball will always see Duncan as a top 10 greatest of this generation player.

[Kobe_6/8]

He's not overrated. He wanted to swim in the olympics, then he started playing basketball in 8th or 9th grade "as something to do". He's in the conversation for GOAT PF.

[feyki]

He's prime is underrated (98-03) . Probably best prime after Kareem,Jordan,Bill,Wilt . Maybe Hakeem better than him beside of those 4 in prime to prime .

[stalkerforlife]

its hard to tell with players in the pop system really. safest bet is to wait for what jameer has to say and go with the opposite

:roll:

[Dr Hawk]

His prime is worse than:

Jordan
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem
Wilt

[uber]

Well what is the system? Please compare 2003 with 2014 and how the offense or defense is the same...?

Are you serious? In Timmy's prime he was the freakin' system. If you rewatch some older spurs games you will immediately see a difference compared to today.

[midatlantic09]

1) duncan is a PF. he doesnt have to take on shaq.

2) duncan is a monster during his peak... from age 21-30... he avged like what? 20/10/2blk? like fking every year? and this is overrated?

It's overrated when one puts him in the top 6-10 all-time. Guys like Garnett, Elton Brand, and CWebb put up comparable numbers, but you never hear anyone putting them in the top 10 all-time. The only thing that really separates Duncan from those guys are rings...which really says more about the team's front office than you as an individual player. Put Duncan in Denver for the last 15 yrs with no rings and it's unlikely he'd be in anyone's top 6-10 all-time list.

[uber]

It's overrated when one puts him in the top 6-10 all-time. Guys like Garnett, Elton Brand, and CWebb put up comparable numbers, but you never hear anyone putting them in the top 10 all-time. The only thing that really separates Duncan from those guys are rings.

They maybe put up comparable numbers but not as long and as consistent as duncan. And 5 rings should put you in this all-time range when you have been pivotal for at least 4 of them.


.which really says more about the team's front office than you as an individual player. Put Duncan in Denver for the last 15 yrs with no rings and it's unlikely he'd be in anyone's top 6-10 all-time list.

If you apply this scenario to all all-time greats how many are still in the top 10 afterwards? MJ, Shaq and Wilt maybe? It shouldn't count against a player that he played for a great franchise.

[BuffaloBill]

His prime was pretty underrated. Pop's offensive system before 2004 was give the ball to duncan in the post and let him work. It wasnt until the emergence of Parker and Ginobili that Duncan stopped dominating the ball. But he kept dominating on defense.

But his peak gets underrated and overrated. He had one the best playoff performances of all time in 2003. Taking out Shaq, Kobe, Dirk, Nash, Marion, Marbury, being the only Allstar on the Spurs and averaging 25/15.5/5/3. And I've seen people say his peak wasn't top 10, and others that his peak was top 5. I think his peak was somewhere in the 7-10 range.

[feyki]

It's overrated when one puts him in the top 6-10 all-time. Guys like Garnett, Elton Brand, and CWebb put up comparable numbers, but you never hear anyone putting them in the top 10 all-time. The only thing that really separates Duncan from those guys are rings.

Show me like that ;

24 pts , 17 reb , 5 ast , 1 stl , 5 blk , 109 ortg(03 Nets had 98 Drtg) , 83 Drtg ( Nets had 104 ortg , 104 to 83 ; clearly goat level defence like Russell) and %54.5 TS .


Shaq hadn't like that level impact on 2002 finals ;

36 pts , 12 reb , 4 ast , 0.5 stl , 3 blk , 126 ortg(Nets had 99 defrat) , 102 drtg ( 104 ) and %63.5 TS .

Duncan had 19 points margin than Shaq on defence in 100 poss . 19 man , 19 .

Shaq had some good margin than Duncan on offence . But that was maximum 14-15 margin , not 20 .

[BuffaloBill]

It's overrated when one puts him in the top 6-10 all-time. Guys like Garnett, Elton Brand, and CWebb put up comparable numbers, but you never hear anyone putting them in the top 10 all-time. The only thing that really separates Duncan from those guys are rings...which really says more about the team's front office than you as an individual player. Put Duncan in Denver for the last 15 yrs with no rings and it's unlikely he'd be in anyone's top 6-10 all-time list.


Garnett, Brand, and Webber weren't nearly as consistent as Duncan. None of them are touching his interior defense either. Duncan leads all of them in points, rebounds, blocks and none them are anywhere near Duncan's number of double doubles.

[BuffaloBill]

Are you serious? In Timmy's prime he was the freakin' system. If you rewatch some older spurs games you will immediately see a difference compared to today.


It's scary how many people don't realize this or pretend to ignore it. But most people here didn't watch basketball before 2005 so you can't blame them.

[keep-itreal]

5 rings

[JohnnySic]

If Duncan wins his 6th ring you have to start thinking of putting him over Bird and Magic.

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Duncan

So top 5.

[r0drig0lac]

top 5 without no doubt, haters gonna hate

[Dr Hawk]

****ing shit, put Duncan in Minnesota from the start and he wouldn't even sniff Top 10

[r0drig0lac]

****ing shit, put Duncan in Minnesota from the start and he wouldn't even sniff Top 10


Shaq without two of the greatest sg of all time
Bill without a stacked team
Jordan without Pippen / Phil
Kaj without the two best pg of all time
Magic without a stacked team and Pat
Bird without a stacked team
Lebron without collusion


the list goes on ...

[Coach Eddie]

I think he is rated just fine. He is definitely underappreciated by the masses though. No way Kobe should be given such a farewell tour and all-star votes when Duncan is still effective at an older age.

[IGOTGAME]

If Duncan wins his 6th ring you have to start thinking of putting him over Bird and Magic.

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Duncan

So top 5.

I already have him over Bird and Magic

[Sarcastic]

Well some posters have said they would take him ahead of Kareem, so I'll say yes he is slightly overrated.

[Odinn]

The thing about Duncan, although he has been recognized as the goat PF since his 2005 ring, these top 5 talks came alive after 2013.
If you have him in your top 5, the reason should be his prime. Not his final appearances or 2014 ring. It's like sayin KAJ is a better/greater player due to his 1988-1989 rings.

Even if you value accolades more than level of play, prime of a player (which is 10-12 years, plent time span for both level of play and accolades) should be the reason where you rank.

I know, longevity is one of the major criterias but c'mon. The talks are about top 5.

[rmt]

Well some posters have said they would take him ahead of Kareem, so I'll say yes he is slightly overrated.

Which posters have said they would take him ahead of Kareem? I don't see any. I see mention of Duncan up there WITH KAJ POST-PRIME.

[Sarcastic]

Which posters have said they would take him ahead of Kareem? I don't see any. I see mention of Duncan up there WITH KAJ POST-PRIME.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=387700

[AnaheimLakers24]

Yes and he likes sucking on boys privates

[HOoopCityJones]

If Duncan wins his 6th ring you have to start thinking of putting him over Bird and Magic.

Jordan
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Duncan

So top 5.

Wtf, how? :oldlol:


This is the shit I'm talking about, if Duncan is getting moved up dropping less than 10 pts a game while playing defense on the most depleted Big era in the league's history. Not even his Teams second best player.

Why the fucc is guys like Kobe getting shit for balling out of his mind in the 3peat with Shaq?

If 2014-16 has moved up Duncan up all time , what Bryant has been able to do with and without Shaq should put on the same level if not more so. A 22 year old kid once played in the Finals on a bum ankle and came up clutch in game 4 regardless after the Teams best player fouled out.

I'll take what Kobe was showing beyond his years and vs The Spurs BEST Teams than what Duncan is doing right now.

[DMAVS41]

Wtf, how? :oldlol:


This is the shit I'm talking about, if Duncan is getting moved up dropping less than 10 pts a game while playing defense on the most depleted Big era in the league's history. Not even his Teams second best player.

Why the fucc is guys like Kobe getting shit for balling out of his mind in the 3peat with Shaq?

If 2014-16 has moved up Duncan up all time , what Bryant has been able to do with and without Shaq should put on the same level if not more so. A 22 year old kid once played in the Finals on a bum ankle and came up clutch in game 4 regardless after the Teams best player fouled out.

I'll take what Kobe was showing beyond his years and vs The Spurs BEST Teams than what Duncan is doing right now.

I agree that a title here doesn't mean much without context...

But I don't understand your post. Everything a player does in their careers matters...some things just matter more than others.

Duncan has one of the most complete careers in NBA history now. He was an elite force from day 1. He's clearly one of the best teammates and franchise players ever.

He can dominate a game without touching the ball. He's on the short list of best two way players ever.

He never had an ego bigger than the team and has proven he can play different roles and different styles and win.

He's taken less money for years to help his franchise.

He had a great peak and prime...although not on the ultra elite level of a select few.

However, imo, he makes up for that with incredible longevity and being a great teammate / leader.

What more do you want from him? He's won at an absurd rate from the jump. He's essentially never been part of a team that didn't win 50 or more and make the playoffs.

He's done everything for 2 decades.

There are maybe 4 guys you for sure...in NBA history you draft over Duncan to start a franchise. Maybe 4...

[kennethgriffin]

duncan was a role player for half his career



he was great before 2006 though

[HOoopCityJones]

I agree that a title here doesn't mean much without context...

But I don't understand your post. Everything a player does in their careers matters...some things just matter more than others.

Duncan has one of the most complete careers in NBA history now. He was an elite force from day 1. He's clearly one of the best teammates and franchise players ever.

He can dominate a game without touching the ball. He's on the short list of best two way players ever.

He never had an ego bigger than the team and has proven he can play different roles and different styles and win.

He's taken less money for years to help his franchise.

He had a great peak and prime...although not on the ultra elite level of a select few.

However, imo, he makes up for that with incredible longevity and being a great teammate / leader.

What more do you want from him? He's won at an absurd rate from the jump. He's essentially never been part of a team that didn't win 50 or more and make the playoffs.

He's done everything for 2 decades.

There are maybe 4 guys you for sure...in NBA history you draft over Duncan to start a franchise. Maybe 4...

I'm not saying he's a bum, far from it, Tim is one of my favorite players aside from Kobe, but this guy farts and ni99as start talking about how does it effect his legacy, or if he's Top 5. It's a joke.

What about his epic meltdowns in the Olympics under his watch. 05 where he shot terribad number from the field and Manu had to save the day or single handedly choking vs Shane Battier on the two easiest putbacks for the best PF of all time. None of that taint his shit the way we let 04' and 11' taint shit for Kobe and Lebron?

Then again half of this forum was ready to call Lebron top 5 all time after winning only his second championship. So why am I surprised.

All I'm saying is Bean deserves that same respect, so does KG, Dirk etc. Like if Dirk won this year, I would move him up simply because he's still The Mavs best player.

Duncan shouldn't get moved up all time just because he's a valuable role player on a contending Team. If that's the case how many spots does Ray Allen jump just from his Miami stint?

[DMAVS41]

I'm not saying he's a bum, far from it, Tim is one of my favorite players aside from Kobe, but this guy farts and ni99as start talking about how does it effect his legacy, or if he's Top 5. It's a joke.

What about his epic meltdowns in the Olympics under his watch. 05 where he shot terribad number and Manu had to save the day or single handedly choking vs Shane Battier on the two easiest putbacks for the best PF of all time. None of that taint his shit the way we let 11' and 04 taint shit for Kobe and Lebron?

Then again half of this forum was ready to call Lebron top 5 all time after winning only his second championship. So why am I surprised.

All I'm saying is Bean deserves that same respect, so does KG, Dirk etc. Like if Dirk won this year, I would move him up simply because he's still The Mavs best player.

Duncan should get moved up all time because he's a valuable role player on a contending Team. If that's the case how many spots does Ray Allen jump just from his Miami stint?

Every player was helped or carried at times...Duncan is no exception.

I think you missed my point...Duncan being this good in year 20 adds to his legacy. I agree it's not going to hugely alter it or anything, but he already has all the other stuff.

He never struggled early in his career like most do...the opposite for him...he was elite early.

He had a great peak. He had a great prime.

He's been a great teammate and franchise player.

He's had some of the best durability and longevity in NBA history.

So...yes, this won't swing him over someone you think is considerably better, but him being this good in the ending days of his career is another feather in his cap.

He's not an elite player anymore...he's not a all nba player anymore (although he's close tbh)...but that doesn't mean he's not still very good.

You don't have to be the best player on a team to get credit for how good you are.

[Nastradamus]

Duncan did pretty much everything better then Shaq. He was a much better defender, better offensive player all Shaq did was dunk and do a hook shot and Duncan did not take games off like Shaq while having no one near as good as Kobe on his team.

He in no way was a better offensive player than Shaq

[HOoopCityJones]

He in no way was a better offensive player than Shaq

Is he even a better player than Shaq? I swear I'm in the twilight zone when it comes to this ***** Tim. :oldlol:

[Showtime2001]

Kobe and Shaq both > Duncan

[sportjames23]

Yes and he likes sucking on boys privates


:biggums:

[feyki]

Kobe and Shaq together > Duncan

I agree .

[HOoopCityJones]

I agree .

Even apart though, Kobe still waxed that Spurs ass.

[Showtime2001]

I agree Kobe and Shaq both > Duncan.
:cheers:

[kennethgriffin]

kobe stomped duncans testicles with and without shaq as a teammate

[Showtime2001]

kobe stomped duncans testicles with and without shaq as a teammate
Please stop posting facts.

:lol

[feyki]

Even apart though, Kobe still waxed that Spurs ass.


After prime Duncan :D . And Gino was hurt , and Gasol .

Where was the Kobe in 05-07 ?

[HOoopCityJones]

After prime Duncan :D . And Gino was hurt , and Gasol .

Where was the Kobe in 05-07 ?

Kobe was hurt in 05. From 06-07 he was dropping monster scoring numbers the league hasn't seen since Willt, and playing with the worst roster in the league.

Where were The Spurs from 08-10?

[Showtime2001]

After prime Duncan :D . And Gino was hurt , and Gasol .
After prime Duncan? ok so you admit that 22 year old Kobe annihilated a prime Duncan in 2001.

13/9 Gasol. :bowdown:

Where was the Kobe in 05-07 ?
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/813/039/73753747_crop_650x440.jpg

[feyki]

After prime Duncan? ok so you admit that 22 year old Kobe annihilated a prime Duncan in 2001.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/813/039/73753747_crop_650x440.jpg

Is/Was Duncan perimeter player ? I guess he guarded Kobe .


I already known basketball is a team game . But some guys don't realize that . And then you would see Duncan's greatness when look at the his impact to the game .

[Showtime2001]

Is/Was Duncan perimeter player ? I guess he guarded Kobe .


I already known basketball is a team game . But some guys don't realize that . And then you would see Duncan's greatness when look at the his impact to the game .
Never denied Duncan's greatness and impact on the game when he was in his prime but he clearly is no longer in his prime and his team has been blowing out teams left and right with him riding the bench.

Clowns on here moving him up on the all time list if he wins a 6th ring and discrediting Kobe's first 3 rings while making a huge impact playing along side Shaq.

[ArbitraryWater]

I'm not saying he's a bum, far from it, Tim is one of my favorite players aside from Kobe, but this guy farts and ni99as start talking about how does it effect his legacy, or if he's Top 5. It's a joke.

I agree with you but couldn't help but cringe at your way of explaining things.

"I'm not saying he's a bum' o really? Goes on to make a fart reference

[feyki]

Never denied Duncan's greatness and impact on the game when he was in his prime but he clearly is no longer in his prime and his team has been blowing out teams left and right with him riding the bench.

Clowns on here moving him up on the all time list if he wins a 6th ring and discrediting Kobe's first 3 rings while making a huge impact playing along side Shaq.


You're right . After 2007 Duncan = Robert Parish .

[HOoopCityJones]

I agree with you but couldn't help but cringe at your way of explaining things.

"I'm not saying he's a bum' o really? Goes on to make a fart reference

What does me making a fart reference about people moving Duncan up over every little thing he does (like farting) have to do with my disclaimer that I don't think he's a bum? :biggums:

Good lord this place is getting stranger by the day.

[ArbitraryWater]

What does me making a fart reference about people moving Duncan up over every little thing he does (like farting) have to do with my disclaimer that I don't think he's a bum? :biggums:

Good lord this place is getting stranger by the day.

Nothing, just 2 seperate things I cringed at.

[HOoopCityJones]

Nothing, just 2 seperate things I cringed at.

Maybe I'm living a wee bit rent free in your head. :lol

Fucc you care what corny jokes I make anyway?

Separate*

[T_L_P]

Duncan vs Dirk in 01: 27/17/4/2

Dirk: 23/9/1/1

Duncan vs Dirk in 03 (3 games): 35/18/6/3

Dirk: 25/11/2/1

Duncan vs Dirk in 06: 32/12/4/3

Dirk: 27/13/3

Duncan vs Dirk in 09: 20/8/3/1

Dirk: 19/9/2/1

Duncan vs Dirk in 10: 18/10/3/1

Dirk: 27/8/3/1

Overall stats for them in the Playoffs is:

Duncan 24/12/3/2 55/00/66

Dirk 23/10/2/1 on 48/20/91

This is him being 'outplayed'. I could do the same for the others listed (Duncan didn't play Webber in the Playoffs). Then again, HOoopCityJones also thinks the 2003 Spurs minus Duncan were better than the 2010 Lakers minus Kobe. So obviously his perspective is wrong.

[Mirror]

Kobe is the overrated one. Quite easily.

[HOoopCityJones]

Kobe is the overrated one. Quite easily.

TLP alt. :roll:


Also like how you posted playoffs series vs Dirk and the only post season comparisons I made was his head to heads with Shaq and Kobe.

How did he fair vs KG? :pimp:

[T_L_P]

TLP alt. :roll:

:biggums: Why would I use an alt to say that? Kobe is overrated.

Though I think a lot more people acknowledge he's in the 9-11 range, so he's definitely becoming less overrated, imo.

[Legends66NBA7]

No, he's correctly ranked as one of the greatest players of all-time.

Basketball is a game of 5 on 5 and Duncan would fit any team.

[Mirror]

TLP alt. :roll:


Also like how you posted playoffs series vs Dirk and the only post season comparisons I made was his head to heads with Shaq and Kobe.

How did he fair vs KG? :pimp:
Head to head with Shaq makes sense, but why even mention Kobe? They play completely different positions.

[Mirror]

No, he's correctly ranked as one of the greatest players of all-time.

Basketball is a game of 5 on 5 and Duncan would fit any team.
Precisely.

[T_L_P]

To answer the OP: 'overrated' is always relative.

He's overrated if he moves significantly higher up on your list if he wins 6 playing poorly. However, he's pretty much constantly moving up on mine because he's playing very good basketball at such an advanced age, adding to his longevity. Look at him last season: 39 years old and by far the best player on his team in a 7-game Playoff series, All-NBA and All-Defense. How many others can say that? What if he plays like that again this postseason? Why would he not gain traction on your list, even if he doesn't win a ring?

OTOH, if he wins a ring and plays like current KG, he shouldn't really be going up on anyone's list.

I think the Kobe fans are confused because they think people use the rings argument for Duncan>Kobe. They only bring it up because that was Kobe fans' entire argument before 2014 and now they need to come up with something new, usually 'system player' or 'Kobe outplayed him h2h playing a different position'. Now that Duncan has 5 too they can't just 'Kobe 5, Duncan 4', and they obviously resent it.

[BigMacAttack]

He is the highest ranked current player that is for sure. Shaq was a better player but I would draft Duncan ahead of him to start a franchise, I'd probably only take MJ, Magic, Bird and Kareem ahead of him. His attitude would be so valuable in building a proper basketball team as Pop has done.

[k0kakw0rld]

Discuss.
You can't teach leadership.

Listen without Duncan there will be no SPURS.\

The same way the Spurs are lucky to have popovich as their head coach, the same way Popovich is lucky to have Duncan as a player.

[Mirror]

You can't teach leadership.

Listen without Duncan there will be no SPURS.\

The same way the Spurs are lucky to have popovich as their head coach, the same way Popovich is lucky to have Duncan as a player.
:applause:

[HOoopCityJones]

Head to head with Shaq makes sense, but why even mention Kobe? They play completely different positions.

Why compare Jordan's head-to-heads with Barkley or Ewing, they definitely don't play the same position, but it's widely accepted he dominated those guys. Same for Kobe, Shaq was the best player during the 3peat, but Bean played the best against our best competition in the Spurs.

[Mirror]

Why compare Jordan's head-to-heads with Barkley or Ewing, they definitely don't play the same position, but it's widely accepted he dominated those guys. Same for Kobe, Shaq was the best player during the 3peat, but Bean played the best against our best competition in the Spurs.
I don't make these comparisons. :confusedshrug:

[aau]

Duncan has one of the most complete careers in NBA history.



[B]ZERO

[Dr Hawk]

[QUOTE=aau][B]ZERO

[DMAVS41]

[QUOTE=aau][B]ZERO

[knicksman]

http://www.baconsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/wiltchamberlainbasketball.jpg

That's good and all, but it's not mind-blowing. Duncan is more like Bill Russell in his impact. It goes beyond the numbers, because you know, there have been guys like Wilt and Kareem who would make those numbers look paltry.

top 3 misses in fts all time

1. drummond
2. jordan
3. wilt

Wilt is just drummond in this era

[GoSpursGo1984]

He is the highest ranked current player that is for sure. Shaq was a better player but I would draft Duncan ahead of him to start a franchise, I'd probably only take MJ, Magic, Bird and Kareem ahead of him. His attitude would be so valuable in building a proper basketball team as Pop has done.

The only thing Shaq did better then Duncan was dunk. Duncan offensively had a bigger array of moves and defensively was much better.

[catch24]

Duncan did pretty much everything better then Shaq. He was a much better defender, better offensive player all Shaq did was dunk and do a hook shot and Duncan did not take games off like Shaq while having no one near as good as Kobe on his team.

This isn't a serious post, right?

Maybe someone can clue me in here.. I legit never seen this guy post before. :oldlol:

[Warners0]

This is such a joke. And the people making these threads could not have possibly seen him play throughout his whole career.

Duncan was as dominant an offensive player as any post playing great you can name.

I never seen any player give him problems. But he is also a very team orientated player. Probably to a fault.

He rarely if ever forces bad shots, like other superstar players he is much more interested in getting his teammates involved.

Thats just his personality and that is why the Spurs are and have been the most selfless team in basketball for the last 10-15 years.

Anyone who really thinks that Duncan could not have obtained scoring titles is a freaking moron.

[rmt]

You're right . After 2007 Duncan = Robert Parish .

2015 playoffs
17.9 pts 11.1 rebs 3.3 asst 1.3 stl 1.4 blks 58.9%FG 125 ORtg 102 DRtg 24.2 PER 1.2 WS 7.7 BPM 0.6 VORP

39 year old Duncan averaged 35.7 mins (most on the team) - the same as 23 year old Leonard.

LMA has to be integrated, Leonard has to take a more active role offensively and Duncan has to rest for the playoffs. Duncan has always given the Spurs exactly what they need - this year he doesn't need to score - just defend. Why would anyone think that after his performance just 8 months ago (when his team mates were playing like crap) that he's just some glorified role player? Do you expect him to try to "get his" or hand over the reigns to transition the team in anticipation of his retirement? Hopefully LMA and Leonard maintain a high level of play in the playoffs (and not fade as KL did in the last 3 games).

[Mr Feeny]

You're listening to a Kobe Stan :oldlol: ofcourse he's butthurt about Duncan being better than Kobe and he's trying to diminish Duncan's play and all time levels.

Duncan is going out on his own terms and is respected by everyone in the league. He's going out with dignity having lead 4 spurs title teams as lead dog (1 as a supporting cast player) and is now contributing to the spurs being a tile contender.
Kobe meanwhile is on pace to leading the Lakers to the worst season in franchise history. He's shooting 34% in the process.

And you expect Kobe fanboys to sit there and not be salty?:roll:

[Dr Hawk]

Are you saying Duncan doesn't have one of the most complete careers?

Hakeem being a great player doesn't change that for Duncan...

Having said that...Hakeem is over-rated here...his stats were way better than his true impact.

And I loved Hakeem, but it's the truth.

Why do you say that?

[dhsilv]

Why do you say that?

Really? Hakeem not until the mid 90's ever really played smart ball. He was awful as a passer (assists are NOT passing). He over dribbled. One on one the guy might be the best player ever, but in a team game his offense is drastically overrated. Youtube videos and nostalgia have greatly inflated his offense over the years. .

Mind you he was an all time great, so lets not think I'm bashing the guy, but people who rank him ahead of say Duncan either didn't really see him play or just are letting nostalgia for the highlights and big stats cloud who he was and more importantly what he wasn't.

[dhsilv]

He is the highest ranked current player that is for sure. Shaq was a better player but I would draft Duncan ahead of him to start a franchise, I'd probably only take MJ, Magic, Bird and Kareem ahead of him. His attitude would be so valuable in building a proper basketball team as Pop has done.

Why Bird and Magic? If longevity matters he's got both of them destroyed. Even if you think they had higher peaks (this seems fair), you'd then need to tell me they had MUCH higher peaks than Shaq too as Shaq played significantly longer than both as well.

[dhsilv]

Why compare Jordan's head-to-heads with Barkley or Ewing, they definitely don't play the same position, but it's widely accepted he dominated those guys. Same for Kobe, Shaq was the best player during the 3peat, but Bean played the best against our best competition in the Spurs.

The spurs were focused on STOPPING shaq in those match ups. Kobe was the guy they wanted to beat them. He certainly did it, but taking such a simplistic view without looking at how the spurs played the two guys is grossly misleading and the kind of talk that should be saved for idiot sports talking heads, not a real discussion of players.

[dhsilv]

[QUOTE=aau][B]ZERO

[dhsilv]

The only thing Shaq did better then Duncan was dunk. Duncan offensively had a bigger array of moves and defensively was much better.

shaq is stronger yet much more agile in his prime. He was much more explosive. Shaq didn't have duncan's face up game, but his post game was better in his prime. Sure a lot of it is because he's a bigger guy, but duncan isn't in the nba if he's 5'6....

[Dr Hawk]

Really? Hakeem not until the mid 90's ever really played smart ball. He was awful as a passer (assists are NOT passing). He over dribbled. One on one the guy might be the best player ever, but in a team game his offense is drastically overrated. Youtube videos and nostalgia have greatly inflated his offense over the years. .

Mind you he was an all time great, so lets not think I'm bashing the guy, but people who rank him ahead of say Duncan either didn't really see him play or just are letting nostalgia for the highlights and big stats cloud who he was and more importantly what he wasn't.

So you think Duncan and Olajuwon are so far apart as players that someone can only think Olajuwon was better because he is blind, even though Olajuwon is the best two way player of all-time. You might think Duncan is a better passer, ok, but Olajuwon was the better scorer.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

This is such a joke. And the people making these threads could not have possibly seen him play throughout his whole career.

Duncan was as dominant an offensive player as any post playing great you can name.

I never seen any player give him problems. But he is also a very team orientated player. Probably to a fault.

He rarely if ever forces bad shots, like other superstar players he is much more interested in getting his teammates involved.

Thats just his personality and that is why the Spurs are and have been the most selfless team in basketball for the last 10-15 years.

Anyone who really thinks that Duncan could not have obtained scoring titles is a freaking moron.

I've been saying this for a while now. If Duncan wanted to just get his and chuck night in and night out, he'd easily be up there with Wilt/Kareem/Shaq/etc when it comes to scoring. Duncan's a lot like Bill Russell in that he does whatever his team needs of him to win, no matter what. If his team doesn't need more scoring and needs defense, he will play defense at a GOAT level. Point. Blank. Period. And that's why, my friends, I have Duncan ahead of them other boys in the top 5. Just the way it is. Deal with it.

:pimp:

[Dr Hawk]

Nah, Duncan is not overrated, he is idealized

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Nah, Duncan is not overrated, he is idealized

You're robertshaw under an alias. Stop it.

:oldlol:

[Dr Hawk]

You're robertshaw under an alias. Stop it.

:oldlol:

I don't know who that guy is

[sportjames23]

I was looking for some vids of Dream vs Duncan (I know they met only a few times when Olajuwon was still with the Rockets, though not in his prime) and someone posted a vid of Dream with blocks on Timmy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5B12zy8zbo

[dhsilv]

So you think Duncan and Olajuwon are so far apart as players that someone can only think Olajuwon was better because he is blind, even though Olajuwon is the best two way player of all-time. You might think Duncan is a better passer, ok, but Olajuwon was the better scorer.

I think Duncan was a clearly better offensive player and I really don't think it is close.

I don't have time this morning to go over this in more detail, but as scorers the gap isn't nearly was large as people make it out to be. Per 100 both have at last 10 years of 30+ points per 100. Peak is 35 hakeem to 33 duncan.

Yeah one on one Hakeem is way better, but basketball isn't a one on one sport.

Duncan has a huge and very material edge in assists. Hakeem's peak assists per 100 was 4.7. Duncan has 10 better seasons. This imo undervalues duncan's passing edge.

Duncan was better at setting screens and just fitting into a team offense.

I think there's a very legit case that Peak dream was a better defender, I'd disagree on their careers as a whole. But offensively I really don't believe peak or career there is a strong argument for Hakeem over Duncan. Unless you have a new view or a new way to look at Hakeem's offense that I've not considered, I'm a bit at a loss as to how you can have seen him play and really strongly believe he was better offensively.

[La Frescobaldi]

I think Duncan was a clearly better offensive player and I really don't think it is close.

I don't have time this morning to go over this in more detail, but as scorers the gap isn't nearly was large as people make it out to be. Per 100 both have at last 10 years of 30+ points per 100. Peak is 35 hakeem to 33 duncan.

Yeah one on one Hakeem is way better, but basketball isn't a one on one sport.

Duncan has a huge and very material edge in assists. Hakeem's peak assists per 100 was 4.7. Duncan has 10 better seasons. This imo undervalues duncan's passing edge.

Duncan was better at setting screens and just fitting into a team offense.

I think there's a very legit case that Peak dream was a better defender, I'd disagree on their careers as a whole. But offensively I really don't believe peak or career there is a strong argument for Hakeem over Duncan. Unless you have a new view or a new way to look at Hakeem's offense that I've not considered, I'm a bit at a loss as to how you can have seen him play and really strongly believe he was better offensively.


I wish I had said this. Nice post and I agree

[Spurs5Rings2014]

I think Duncan was a clearly better offensive player and I really don't think it is close.

I don't have time this morning to go over this in more detail, but as scorers the gap isn't nearly was large as people make it out to be. Per 100 both have at last 10 years of 30+ points per 100. Peak is 35 hakeem to 33 duncan.

Yeah one on one Hakeem is way better, but basketball isn't a one on one sport.

Duncan has a huge and very material edge in assists. Hakeem's peak assists per 100 was 4.7. Duncan has 10 better seasons. This imo undervalues duncan's passing edge.

Duncan was better at setting screens and just fitting into a team offense.

I think there's a very legit case that Peak dream was a better defender, I'd disagree on their careers as a whole. But offensively I really don't believe peak or career there is a strong argument for Hakeem over Duncan. Unless you have a new view or a new way to look at Hakeem's offense that I've not considered, I'm a bit at a loss as to how you can have seen him play and really strongly believe he was better offensively.

Knowledgeable basketball fan.

:applause:

[SugarHill]

Duncan is incredibly overrated and this thread proves it

[Dr Hawk]

I think Duncan was a clearly better offensive player and I really don't think it is close.

I don't have time this morning to go over this in more detail, but as scorers the gap isn't nearly was large as people make it out to be. Per 100 both have at last 10 years of 30+ points per 100. Peak is 35 hakeem to 33 duncan.

Yeah one on one Hakeem is way better, but basketball isn't a one on one sport.

Duncan has a huge and very material edge in assists. Hakeem's peak assists per 100 was 4.7. Duncan has 10 better seasons. This imo undervalues duncan's passing edge.

Duncan was better at setting screens and just fitting into a team offense.

I think there's a very legit case that Peak dream was a better defender, I'd disagree on their careers as a whole. But offensively I really don't believe peak or career there is a strong argument for Hakeem over Duncan. Unless you have a new view or a new way to look at Hakeem's offense that I've not considered, I'm a bit at a loss as to how you can have seen him play and really strongly believe he was better offensively.

The difference in assists is minuscule. Per game, Hakeem's career APG is 2.5, Duncan's is 3. Let's not act like Duncan hasn't played in better teams with better shooters and within a much better system, which helps him a lot in this regard.

I find it highly insulting to say Hakeem is not even close to Duncan offensively when Olajuwon is one of the best offensive bigs of all-time. Wilt, Shaq and Kareem are the three most dominant offensive bigs, then comes Olajuwon, for me.

Hakeem is a PO career 26 ppg in .528 FG% scorer. High volume with great efficiency. I don't see how Duncan's superior passing and screen setting, if there is, can't create a gap between the two that makes it not even close.

[DMAVS41]

I think Duncan was a clearly better offensive player and I really don't think it is close.

I don't have time this morning to go over this in more detail, but as scorers the gap isn't nearly was large as people make it out to be. Per 100 both have at last 10 years of 30+ points per 100. Peak is 35 hakeem to 33 duncan.

Yeah one on one Hakeem is way better, but basketball isn't a one on one sport.

Duncan has a huge and very material edge in assists. Hakeem's peak assists per 100 was 4.7. Duncan has 10 better seasons. This imo undervalues duncan's passing edge.

Duncan was better at setting screens and just fitting into a team offense.

I think there's a very legit case that Peak dream was a better defender, I'd disagree on their careers as a whole. But offensively I really don't believe peak or career there is a strong argument for Hakeem over Duncan. Unless you have a new view or a new way to look at Hakeem's offense that I've not considered, I'm a bit at a loss as to how you can have seen him play and really strongly believe he was better offensively.


Duncan was a clearly better offensive player? Just no... :wtf:

[HOoopCityJones]

Duncan was a clearly better offensive player? Just no... :wtf:

This the shit I'm talking about.


Another thing, Duncan in his prime was no better than KG Defensively Imo.

Objectively Dirk, Duncan and KG are very close as players.

[feyki]

This the shit I'm talking about.


Another thing, Duncan in his prime was no better than KG Defensively Imo.

Objectively Dirk, Duncan and KG are very close as players.

04-08 Duncan same or close level as Garnett and Dirk .

But why people ignore his 98-03 ?

[Dr Hawk]

04-08 Duncan same or close level as Garnett and Dirk .

But why people ignore his 98-03 ?

From 2000 to 2010
Tim Duncan:

21.1/11.6/3.3/0.8/2.3 blocks .505 FG%

110 ORtg 95 DRtg

.552 TS% 6.1 BPM

Kevin Garnett:

21/11.7/4.5/1.3/1.5 blocks .500 FG%

112 ORtg 98 DRtg

.555 TS% 6.9 BPM

As you can see, their statistical production is similar. What puts him Duncan ahead of Garnett for me are his pre-2000 years, in which Duncan was a lot more dominant and impactful than KG

[feyki]

Again , 99-03 ..

99-03 per game stats in playoffs ;

24 pts , 14 reb , 4.5 ast , 1 stl , 3 blk , 111 Ortg , 93 Drtg , %56 TS

93 Drtg means what , think about it .

[SugarHill]

Duncan was a clearly better offensive player? Just no... :wtf:
talk to em. This Duncan shit is getting out of hand

[Anaximandro1]

Duncan is a TOP 5 player all time without any question; no one has done more with less than prime Duncan

His problem: 1) his image doesn't fit in the NBA hype machine 2) Spurs are a small market team


Title Runs: Value of Duncan/Kobe/Shaq
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mUlqUk33DFk/VmwX0VdK42I/AAAAAAAAFBU/vOOsf3fIG8Y/s1600/201.jpg


Title Runs: Teammates
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NsGb3UIjxq4/VmwX0XYHuFI/AAAAAAAAFBQ/C439ZD2CGDA/s1600/200.jpg


Play-by-Play
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Atyg-CSWXyY/VmyBYZDBUzI/AAAAAAAAFCA/TpgCtGujBoc/s1600/205.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QtqPT2lSPbQ/VmwX06W_27I/AAAAAAAAFBc/_lz6ppkgPSY/s1600/203.jpg

[Sarcastic]

Top 5?

Of Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Russell, Magic, who does he replace?

[Odinn]

Top 5?

Of Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Russell, Magic, who does he replace?
IMO, Duncan can be ranked over Magic and Wilt(due to lesser post-season success tho, Wilt was the better player). But yeah, even if Duncan's a top 5, he's the 5th.
I'd rank him at 6th or 7th place.

[DavisIsMyUniBro]

Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Duncan

You can say what you want, but alot of this is mixable.

Duncan can be number 1 if he plays at this level for 2 more years.

[DavisIsMyUniBro]

Hell, his peak alone is probably around 6-7-8

Behind Jordan, Shaq, Lebron, Wilt, Kareem

Locked with Garnett, Hakeem, and him. (probably behind hakeem too tbh)

[rmt]

Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Duncan

You can say what you want, but alot of this is mixable.

Duncan can be number 1 if he plays at this level for 2 more years.

Respectfully, it's a statement like this that drives the other side crazy - there is no way he can catch MJ.

[Sarcastic]

For peak value Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Olajuwon, Kobe, Kareem, and possibly Barkley are all ahead of Duncan.

[DavisIsMyUniBro]

Respectfully, it's a statement like this that drives the other side crazy - there is no way he can catch MJ.


each to his own.

I dont consider MJ as "untouchable" as others.

[tpols]

For peak value Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Olajuwon, Kobe, Kareem, and possibly Barkley are all ahead of Duncan.

probably, but hes got better intangibles than all of them except magic and bird.. and over those guys hes got a ton of longevity.. so cant say overrated overall since hes top 5ish all time. Only thing thats overrated is his offense itt

[Odinn]

For peak value Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Olajuwon, Kobe, Kareem, and possibly Barkley are all ahead of Duncan.
Magic and Kobe weren't better than Timmy.
LeBron and Bird are close calls. I'd say Bird > TD > Bron.

But Kobe and Magic weren't better than Tim in terms of peak.

[Dr Hawk]

As for peaks, I would go with

MJ
Wilt
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

In no order, but this would be my Top 6

[Sarcastic]

Magic and Kobe weren't better than Timmy.
LeBron and Bird are close calls. I'd say Bird > TD > Bron.

But Kobe and Magic weren't better than Tim in terms of peak.


At peak, they were. Duncan has incredible longevity, which keeps his ranking high. His stats are great, but not mind blowing. The guys with greater peaks put up mind blowing stats.

[Sarcastic]

As for peaks, I would go with

MJ
Wilt
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

In no order, but this would be my Top 6

So Bird with 3 straight MVPs doesn't have a better peak? Lebron with 4 MVPs in 5 years and all time GOAT level stats does not have a better peak?

[Dr Hawk]

So Bird with 3 straight MVPs doesn't have a better peak? Lebron with 4 MVPs in 5 years and all time GOAT level stats does not have a better peak?

Peak = 1 year

And no, I don't think Bird or Lebron have better peaks than those 6.

[SugarHill]

So Bird with 3 straight MVPs doesn't have a better peak? Lebron with 4 MVPs in 5 years and all time GOAT level stats does not have a better peak?
Peak should be a single year or just call the term something else.


Peak = 1 year

And no, I don't think Bird or Lebron have better peaks than those 6.
Bird and LeBron certainly had better statistical peaks.

[DavisIsMyUniBro]

So Bird with 3 straight MVPs doesn't have a better peak? Lebron with 4 MVPs in 5 years and all time GOAT level stats does not have a better peak?


While I have lebrons peak over Duncans

how does straight Mvps mean anything, for peaks?

I dont have time to post an arguement for Duncan right now.

Also, Box score stats are far from an end all. they provide somewhat of a baseline but serious analysis requires alot more, which we have for Duncan.

[Odinn]

At peak, they were. Duncan has incredible longevity, which keeps his ranking high. His stats are great, but not mind blowing. The guys with greater peaks put up mind blowing stats.
Not sure if serious mate... Truly...

[chocolatethunder]

The difference in assists is minuscule. Per game, Hakeem's career APG is 2.5, Duncan's is 3. Let's not act like Duncan hasn't played in better teams with better shooters and within a much better system, which helps him a lot in this regard.

I find it highly insulting to say Hakeem is not even close to Duncan offensively when Olajuwon is one of the best offensive bigs of all-time. Wilt, Shaq and Kareem are the three most dominant offensive bigs, then comes Olajuwon, for me.

Hakeem is a PO career 26 ppg in .528 FG% scorer. High volume with great efficiency. I don't see how Duncan's superior passing and screen setting, if there is, can't create a gap between the two that makes it not even close.
I agree with what you're saying and Hakeem is one of my favorite players and is definitely better than Duncan offensively but I have to take issue about Duncan playing in a "much better system". I just don't think that's true. First, San Antonio doesn't have a single "system" unless you want to call a coach constantly changing and reinventing how their team will play basketball a system. Hakeem, when he came into the league really relied on his athleticism a bunch and was crushing it but he wasn't a complete player offensively (with lots of moves etc). He kept learning and improving every year. Once Rudy T got to town, he installed a system to run everything through Hakeem which greatly increased his touches and numbers. That's no slight to Hakeem, you have to be a total stud in order to do this for sure but that certainly happened. I think that his peak was mind-blowing and certainly better than Duncan although his drop off was pretty marked. I would take Hakeem over Duncan all day every day though no doubt but Duncan is so far from overrated it's a joke. I think that he's underrated.

[sportjames23]

each to his own.

I dont consider MJ as "untouchable" as others.


Who's touching him?

[references]

Who's touching him?
not you as much as you wish that was the case

[T_L_P]

At peak, they were. Duncan has incredible longevity, which keeps his ranking high. His stats are great, but not mind blowing. The guys with greater peaks put up mind blowing stats.

Duncan has the most Win Shares ever for a Playoff run, and the second highest Box +/- for a Playoff run behind 91 Jordan.

He averaged 25/15/5/4 on one of the slowest teams ever, in one of the most defensive-minded eras we've seen.

[Dr Hawk]

I agree with what you're saying and Hakeem is one of my favorite players and is definitely better than Duncan offensively but I have to take issue about Duncan playing in a "much better system". I just don't think that's true. First, San Antonio doesn't have a single "system" unless you want to call a coach constantly changing and reinventing how their team will play basketball a system. Hakeem, when he came into the league really relied on his athleticism a bunch and was crushing it but he wasn't a complete player offensively (with lots of moves etc). He kept learning and improving every year. Once Rudy T got to town, he installed a system to run everything through Hakeem which greatly increased his touches and numbers. That's no slight to Hakeem, you have to be a total stud in order to do this for sure but that certainly happened. I think that his peak was mind-blowing and certainly better than Duncan although his drop off was pretty marked. I would take Hakeem over Duncan all day every day though no doubt but Duncan is so far from overrated it's a joke. I think that he's underrated.

I do think Duncan played in a much better system or if you prefer, with a much better coach. Pop is unique making the most out of the players he has, from 1 to 12. Everyone in the Spurs is benefited by that and I only wish Hakeem had that chance as well.

[DavisIsMyUniBro]

Who's touching him?

Alot of it is hypotheticals. also, kareem has a shout. russell might have one, wilt as well if some of the arguements against him are proven false with a time machine.

If Lebron had a jumper/played like he did in 09 for the rest of his career.

If Curry was 20/3 inches taller/athletic

If shaq was motivated

If wilt didnt have some image mentality issues

etc.

[Megabox!]

not you as much as you wish that was the case
:lol

[rmt]

I do think Duncan played in a much better system or if you prefer, with a much better coach. Pop is unique making the most out of the players he has, from 1 to 12. Everyone in the Spurs is benefited by that and I only wish Hakeem had that chance as well.

Pop has GROWN into a GOAT-level coach - but he was no way considered anywhere close to that even in 2007. He had a 41-41(?) NBA record before the 1st championship season. There was no "system" back in the day - it was throw the ball into Duncan, wait for the double and 3 or single cover and foul or get scored on. His rookie year:
21.7 pts 11.7 rebs 2.4 asst 2.5 blks
All-NBA 1st team
All-Defensive 2nd team
5th in MVP voting
ROY

Pop or his "system" didn't make that - Duncan was very good from day 1 in the NBA. IMO, it is only since Duncan has declined that Pop has really blossomed as a coach. When he couldn't depend so much offensively on Duncan and later transitioned to Parker offensively (and it wasn't enough), he experimented - combining elements of D'Antoni's Suns and took ball movement to another level. But it's his stability (total control) with the Spurs that allows him to be innovative. Pop is moving back to traditional basketball because of the personnel (LMA, Leonard, Green, Mills) who are not as good passers as Manu, Duncan, Diaw.

[Anaximandro1]

Duncan's peak was higher than Hakeem/Shaq/Malone
Statistically speaking, Duncan's peak was higher

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s2bWEB4c4ZE/VqJwX6EYKRI/AAAAAAAAFIo/EgcNv5eWkHk/s1600/1.jpg



Key: Duncan takes his game to the next level after the first round
a selfish version of Duncan would have produced amazing regular season numbers, more MVPs ... and less rings (Parker and Ginobili would have been ostracized)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JOrPcNOykqY/VqJwX4HXX0I/AAAAAAAAFIs/ZJyRIB5AXNA/s1600/2.jpg


Big men -TOP individual Playoff Runs (Title Runs since 1974)
Duncan ranks #1 #4 and #7 in Box Plus Minus ...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JhKnZCSGaIU/VNziOFMNgqI/AAAAAAAADyA/AqaFGVg2aDs/s1600/16.jpg



Duncan had the whole package: Peak, prime, longevity, individual dominance, great team player, intangibles, records, rings, MVPs, etc.


Milestone Watch ... it's going to be a long season
1000 Wins Regular Season
15000 Rebounds
3000 Blocks
17 Straight 50 Win Seasons
161 Wins Playoffs ??? (#1 in NBA history)


Duncan is a TOP 5 player all time without any question

[Dr Hawk]

Pop has GROWN into a GOAT-level coach - but he was no way considered anywhere close to that even in 2007. He had a 41-41(?) NBA record before the 1st championship season. There was no "system" back in the day - it was throw the ball into Duncan, wait for the double and 3 or single cover and foul or get scored on. His rookie year:
21.7 pts 11.7 rebs 2.4 asst 2.5 blks
All-NBA 1st team
All-Defensive 2nd team
5th in MVP voting
ROY

Pop or his "system" didn't make that - Duncan was very good from day 1 in the NBA. IMO, it is only since Duncan has declined that Pop has really blossomed as a coach. When he couldn't depend so much offensively on Duncan and later transitioned to Parker offensively (and it wasn't enough), he experimented - combining elements of D'Antoni's Suns and took ball movement to another level. But it's his stability (total control) with the Spurs that allows him to be innovative. Pop is moving back to traditional basketball because of the personnel (LMA, Leonard, Green, Mills) who are not as good passers as Manu, Duncan, Diaw.

Exactly, from 2007 onwards.

Duncan wasn't considered a Top 5 player in 2007 and he wasn't considered Top 5 all-time after 2013 either, as far as I know, when he played greatly against Miami in the Finals.

The talks started one year after. Duncan was playing to a similar level, but the difference is that the Spurs won the championship. There was a sudden explosion where people suddenly started to rank him in the Top 5 all-time.

What changed that much from 2013 to 2014? Would all these talk exist had the Spurs not win the chip and Duncan played at the exact same level?

[T_L_P]

Exactly, from 2007 onwards.

Duncan wasn't considered a Top 5 player in 2007 and he wasn't considered Top 5 all-time after 2013 either, as far as I know, when he played greatly against Miami in the Finals.

The talks started one year after. Duncan was playing to a similar level, but the difference is that the Spurs won the championship. There was a sudden explosion where people suddenly started to rank him in the Top 5 all-time.

What changed that much from 2013 to 2014? Would all these talk exist had the Spurs not win the chip and Duncan played at the exact same level?

Are you saying he wasn't top five all-time in 07, or top five in the league, because there's no question that he was a top five player that year.

[Dr Hawk]

Are you saying he wasn't top five all-time in 07, or top five in the league, because there's no question that he was a top five player that year.

Top 5 all-time.

[chocolatethunder]

I do think Duncan played in a much better system or if you prefer, with a much better coach. Pop is unique making the most out of the players he has, from 1 to 12. Everyone in the Spurs is benefited by that and I only wish Hakeem had that chance as well.
I dunno man. I dunno if you watched basketball back then or not, but as soon as
Rudy got there everything was run through him and he made the most of it. It was the right thing to do and it worked and he also benefited from it. For instance, Don Cheyney who was coach of the year the previous season, was their coach in 91-92 and got fired that season and was replaced by Rudy T. That season Hakeem averaged 21 ppg and 21ppg the season before. The next year under Rudy T he averaged 26 and kept that up for three more seasons. Pop is definitely a better coach but the Rockets won back to back titles which isn't easy to do. Hakeem had a very different career trajectory than Duncan. Hakeem was an athletic freak who relied on his athleticism to overwhelm people when he first came in the league. He wasn't doing anything like the dream shake. That wasn't remotely possible because he wasn't skilled enough yet. He got awesome numbers but he was raw compared to what he would become later in his career. So Hakeem wasn't ready or able to be used in the way that he was used later in his career and Duncan came out of college ready to go. Pop doesn't make the most out of his players, the players have to do that too. What the Spurs do is they develop players and the ones who don't develop, don't end up sticking around. But Houston was hardly some joke. They were taking guys like Cassell and Horry and developing them and having them play significant roles on a championship team. They were also able to coerce a loose cannon like Vernon Maxwell into keeping hit shit together (for their first championship at least) which is similar to what the Spurs did with S Jax. The Rockets if anything were like the Spurs in that they had guys like Bullard and Brooks and Charles Jones and Chucky Brown all playing minutes and contributing. Playing well on that team and they would never have played well somewhere else. They were the first team to get Mario Elie to actually play well and he of course later went to the Spurs. So to try and make Houston out to be anything than a stud of a team when Rudy was the coach just isn't true.

edit: BTW those Houston teams are my favorite championship teams ever and I'm 43 and got to see a lot of great teams.

[rmt]

Exactly, from 2007 onwards.

Duncan wasn't considered a Top 5 player in 2007 and he wasn't considered Top 5 all-time after 2013 either, as far as I know, when he played greatly against Miami in the Finals.

The talks started one year after. Duncan was playing to a similar level, but the difference is that the Spurs won the championship. There was a sudden explosion where people suddenly started to rank him in the Top 5 all-time.

What changed that much from 2013 to 2014? Would all these talk exist had the Spurs not win the chip and Duncan played at the exact same level?

What happened is:

2013 All-NBA 1st team
2013 All-Defensive 2nd team
2013 Finals where if they had won, TD would probably have gotten another FMVP
2014 NBA Championship
2015 All-NBA 3rd team
2015 All-Defensive 2nd team
2015 Playoffs with 17.9 pts 11.1 rebs 3.3 asst 1.3 stl 1.4 blks 58.9%FG 125 ORtg 102 DRtg 24.2 PER 1.2 WS 7.7 BPM 0.6 VORP and the best Spur on the court
2016 top 3 in defensive rating, defensive win share, defensive box plus/minus

He is contributing significantly to contending/championship teams and what he is doing at this age is unmatched by anyone except KAJ (and it seems like he can continue for another 1-2 years).

[macpierce]

From 2010-2015 his numbers were okay nothing great, dude has been unselfish and i would say lucky to have tony, manu, pop etc around him.

[La Frescobaldi]

From 2010-2015 his numbers were okay nothing great, dude has been unselfish and i would say lucky to have tony, manu, pop etc around him.


rmt had the post exactly before yours with all those facts. Let's review.

2013 All-NBA 1st team
2013 All-Defensive 2nd team
2013 Finals where if they had won, TD would probably have gotten another FMVP
2014 NBA Championship
2015 All-NBA 3rd team
2015 All-Defensive 2nd team
2015 Playoffs with 17.9 pts 11.1 rebs 3.3 asst 1.3 stl 1.4 blks 58.9%FG 125 ORtg 102 DRtg 24.2 PER 1.2 WS 7.7 BPM 0.6 VORP and the best Spur on the court
2016 top 3 in defensive rating, defensive win share, defensive box plus/minus

[Rocketswin2013]

Duncan is underrated on both ends of the floor. I have seen people criticize his playoff performances. :oldlol: Probably a top 3 all-time playoff player because of consistency and general success.

[dhsilv]

The difference in assists is minuscule. Per game, Hakeem's career APG is 2.5, Duncan's is 3. Let's not act like Duncan hasn't played in better teams with better shooters and within a much better system, which helps him a lot in this regard.

I find it highly insulting to say Hakeem is not even close to Duncan offensively when Olajuwon is one of the best offensive bigs of all-time. Wilt, Shaq and Kareem are the three most dominant offensive bigs, then comes Olajuwon, for me.

Hakeem is a PO career 26 ppg in .528 FG% scorer. High volume with great efficiency. I don't see how Duncan's superior passing and screen setting, if there is, can't create a gap between the two that makes it not even close.

As I said the assist numbers do not REMOTELY illustrate the gap between them. The ball would go into Hakeem and the offense around him would virtually stop moving. He was over dribble and over dribble and over dribble and he was very weak by elite center terms at passing out of the double team.

The issue isn't that if we were to list each skill that there is a massive gap per say. Dream has better post moves and dribble. Duncan however gets underrated there all the time. The bigger issue is how their play impacted the team as a whole and how the offense as a whole worked. Duncan plays within the team construct, even when the team game was to drop the ball down to him nearly every play, he understood that he needed to move the ball back outside as soon as the defense collapsed or he had to shoot it. Hakeem just never really fully got that. He was better on those title team rockets, they really worked hard to build the right mix of players around him and he seemed to get it, but by then he really wasn't at his athletic prime anymore. He was far more athletic late 80's and to the first few years of the 90's.

Keep in mind we're talking about two top 15 guys, but Duncan is ranked considerably higher up and the reason is ultimately that he was a better player and it was the offensive end where he truly was better.

[dhsilv]

This the shit I'm talking about.


Another thing, Duncan in his prime was no better than KG Defensively Imo.

Objectively Dirk, Duncan and KG are very close as players.

Completely agree that KG was as good or better defensively than Duncan prime vs prime. I'm not sure that's still even a debate anymore, most people have moved into that line of thinking.

The playoff production drop for KG hurts him. Dirk's average to good defense hurts him.

[dhsilv]

talk to em. This Duncan shit is getting out of hand

By 2008 nearly everyone had Duncan over Dream, you cannot act like it's a new thing to have Duncan ranked over Dream. So if that is the case, you gonna tell me Duncan was clearly the better defender? He's got to be better at something for him to have been ranked ahead of Dream that long ago.

[dhsilv]

Top 5?

Of Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Russell, Magic, who does he replace?

Given I don't have wilt in that group as brid was better imo, that would be easy. I'm also not keen on Russell, but I don't want to discount that era completely.

No way in hell Duncan passes Magic who'd be the next guy on that list, even if he wins two more titles he's not passing magic imo. Magic was a game changer in a way that he really just needs more appreciation.

[dhsilv]

For peak value Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Olajuwon, Kobe, Kareem, and possibly Barkley are all ahead of Duncan.

No case for Dream, just ZERO. No case for Kobe just ZERO. I'd say Bird and Duncan both had pretty close 3 year peaks, small edge maybe to bird but if you go to 5 years, I have Duncan.

Wilt just never did it in the playoffs so you're clearly talking just regular season, right? If we're talking playoffs and if you want to go one year. MJ, Lebron, and Shaq are the only two with a better playoff run than 03 Duncan. All due respect to hakeem's epic run, which has to be mentioned.

[dhsilv]

As for peaks, I would go with

MJ
Wilt
Kareem
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan

In no order, but this would be my Top 6

Moses has to be in this list and should be ahead of a few guys here. And given Russell was universally seen as the better player than wilt by those who actually saw them live, Russell should be here if you want wilt.

[ScalsFan21]

Duncan is not overrated, and if he is, it's by a negligible amount.

He was gifted a ridiculously stacked situation that most consensus #1 draft choices don't fall ass backwards into, on account of the freak Admiral injury the previous year. Handed excellent help for his entire career as well as a coach that took his game to a whole new level, especially defensively.

But the fact is, the player that Tim has been throughout his career IS in fact, top 10 all-time. If you want to argue that had a Garnett-type had the same luck from the jump of his career that he'd have Duncan's consensus top-8 spot all-time instead of him, I won't argue it, but Duncan was all-time great on both sides of the ball, with the accolades to back it up.

Verdict: accurately rated, but let's put it this way. I never want to hear he's "underrated". If anything you gotta err on the side of overrated, but I personally wouldn't go there.

[DMAVS41]

By 2008 nearly everyone had Duncan over Dream, you cannot act like it's a new thing to have Duncan ranked over Dream. So if that is the case, you gonna tell me Duncan was clearly the better defender? He's got to be better at something for him to have been ranked ahead of Dream that long ago.

Not sure what your point is. I think people that watched Hakeem know his stats really are a bit inflated vs his actual impact.

But, that has nothing to do with your claim that Duncan was a clear cut better offensive player.

And that is just false...Duncan's offense is actually getting over-rated quite hugely on here now. Not that he wasn't a great offensive player at times...but he was not all time elite...and certainly not on a different tier offensively than Hakeem.

Your post above seems to lack the nuance it takes to rank such great players.

For starters, I actually think Duncan's defense over the course of his career has been better than Hakeem's...I think peak vs peak might every so slightly favor Hakeem on potentiality, but it's close. But Duncan has been that consistent anchor from the jump and that matters to me.

If we just put Duncan vs Hakeem in a vacuum....Hakeem might come out as the better player....at least on ability.

However, a big reason why I, can't speak for others, have Duncan so high all time is his leadership, intangibles, team first, franchise first attitude. Not that Hakeem was a bad teammate, but he wasn't Duncan level on too many fronts to list like coachability, adaptability...etc.

This can't be overlooked imo. I feel the same way about Magic.

But...I want to stay on the Duncan offense thing. Like...Dirk and Kobe, for example, were better offensive players than Duncan. So if Duncan was clearly better than Hakeem....where do you put guys like Dirk and Kobe on offense? How do you describe them vs Hakeem?

Do you just say they destroy Hakeem offensively? If so, I don't think we watched the same player.

[La Frescobaldi]

Moses has to be in this list and should be ahead of a few guys here. And given Russell was universally seen as the better player than wilt by those who actually saw them live, Russell should be here if you want wilt.

Not to derail a thread about Timi Dunkin. But

That's far from correct. Here's just a few of the hundreds I've seen and heard over the years.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=334329


WOW was watching the playoffs it's the hot time of the year!!
anyhow...........
Bob McAdoo says otherwise:
http://thestartingfive.net/2010/05/04/the-starting-five-bob-mcadoo-interview-do-not-forget-about-the-doo/

MT: Need to get a discussion going just for the sake of history. Speaking with Sonny Hill and John Chaney, they both say Wilt is the GOAT.

BM: You can’t argue with them. His stats don’t tell you otherwise. The guy averaged 50 points a game, 30 rebounds, 10 block shots…averaged triple doubles. Had 100 points in a game.
I don’t care what these young players say that the talent wasn’t just as good. I don’t agree with them. When you have to play against Bill Russell 8 to 10 times a year, what are you talking about?

Wilt had to play an All Star center almost every game. I had the opportunity to see him play when I was young and was able to play against him my rookie year. He was everything that people say… Like you say, only the old timers know about Wilt.
**************************************
Wali Jones says otherwise.......
S.C: You played with some of the greatest players in NBA history and have been around the game for a long time. Is Wilt the best player of all time?

WJ: In history. In the history of basketball, how could you question that? As an individual, he’s the greatest basketball player ever to put on sneaks.

I’m honored because I’ve played with some great centers: Walt Bellamy, Bob Lanier, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Moses Malone, Darryl Dawkins, and Darrall Imhoff. Then you talk about Archie Clark, Hal Greer and Oscar Robertson. I’ve played with some of the greatest guards in the history of basketball.
*********************************************

Rick Barry, as you saw from Cavs....... says otherwise. Jerry West says otherwise.
Larry Bird:
When the topic of all-time greatest player was once raised, a fellow named Larry Bird didn't hesitate. "Let me tell you something," Bird said. "For a while, they were saying that I was the greatest. And before me, it was Magic who was the greatest. And then it's Michael's turn. But open up the record book and it will be obvious who the greatest is."

http://static.espn.go.com/nba/columns/lawrence_mitch/110858.html
Walt Frazier gets asked the question all the time. "Who's the greatest NBA player of all time? "I always ask, what's the criteria?" said Frazier, the former Knicks star. "If you're talking about winning, it's Bill Russell. If you're talking about versatility, it's the Big O. If you're talking about Superman, it's Wilt Chamberlain. What he did was almost comical."

Connie Hawkins: http://www.nba.com/suns/news/wilt_memories.html
"It's really ironic. I think about it and I don't think people realize just how great he really was. You hear guys talking about Michael Jordan and all these folks, but they really refuse to accept the fact that when you look at the record books, he has some records that will never be broken. He played like 13 or 14 years and never fouled out of a basketball game. He scored 100 points in one game. One year, he played, I think it was 54 minutes a game. He didn't sit down the whole time. He played the whole year. One year, he had like 55 rebounds in a game. Each year, he did something that was phenomenal, and I don't think anybody can ever top that.

Bill Russell stood on the court at the Top 50 ceremony in 1996 and told the reporters there, that Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest basketball player of all time. You can say Bill was being kind to a friend, or he was using some bragging rights, or something else. But if you do, you clearly never watched Bill Russell because at least in public, that man is absolutely not like that. He was as coldly, bluntly realistic as any player I ever saw.

Spenser Haywood:
LeBron made headlines when he came out with his Mount Rushmore list. And now everybody is asking everybody else for their opinion. Who’s on your Mount Rushmore?
SH: I would go with Kareem. And you got to have Wilt there. And then I would go with two of the younger guys. I would go with LeBron and Michael.
***********************************
But, you know, you can find other players who will say the sky is green, or go look up a quote from Matty Guokas who says Wilt was selfish because he wouldn't pass to Mattie (Guokas was a freaking scrub).

Believe em if you want to, Mr. DB. I watched hoops in those days. Chamberlain was the real deal, one of the 3 greatest players I've ever seen, with Jabbar & Jordan.
Nobody else is in that little circle to me.

[dhsilv]

Not sure what your point is. I think people that watched Hakeem know his stats really are a bit inflated vs his actual impact.

But, that has nothing to do with your claim that Duncan was a clear cut better offensive player.

And that is just false...Duncan's offense is actually getting over-rated quite hugely on here now. Not that he wasn't a great offensive player at times...but he was not all time elite...and certainly not on a different tier offensively than Hakeem.

Your post above seems to lack the nuance it takes to rank such great players.

For starters, I actually think Duncan's defense over the course of his career has been better than Hakeem's...I think peak vs peak might every so slightly favor Hakeem on potentiality, but it's close. But Duncan has been that consistent anchor from the jump and that matters to me.

If we just put Duncan vs Hakeem in a vacuum....Hakeem might come out as the better player....at least on ability.

However, a big reason why I, can't speak for others, have Duncan so high all time is his leadership, intangibles, team first, franchise first attitude. Not that Hakeem was a bad teammate, but he wasn't Duncan level on too many fronts to list like coachability, adaptability...etc.

This can't be overlooked imo. I feel the same way about Magic.

But...I want to stay on the Duncan offense thing. Like...Dirk and Kobe, for example, were better offensive players than Duncan. So if Duncan was clearly better than Hakeem....where do you put guys like Dirk and Kobe on offense? How do you describe them vs Hakeem?

Do you just say they destroy Hakeem offensively? If so, I don't think we watched the same player.

I think dream is the most overrated offensive player in nba history. That is not to say he was a bad offensive player or anything close, but yes Dirk and Kobe are significantly better than Dream.

You can call it leadership, but being able to keep teammates involved in a play is just CRITICAL to basketball, and Hakeem was the anti teammate involvement guy. Look on talent and skill Dream is off the charts, but that's not how basketball is played. I understand that there is some argument that a lot of his failings were due to talent around him, but I can remember just way too often watching him dribble endlessly without doing anything.

I believe I posted that I think dream might be better peak defensively but I had Duncan for their careers, so not sure if you missed that or what, but we're almost to the same wording in agreement there.

You often like to describe roles where things can get more complex and that is why we post is it not? If I'm passing into the post, I do feel more strongly about dream scoring. But I feel much better with the spurs scoring out of a Duncan post up.

If you want to just talk stats and say use a concept of points created by the two, they're very close with a slight edge to Duncan. Points scored + points off assists for example. If that is what you consider offense then I'd agree the same tier.

To me leadership has both an offense, defense, and "intangible" value add which is why I give this to Duncan. I'm not sure it's leadership that made Duncan know that he needed to keep teammates involved while Hakeem did not, but it made the spurs offense significantly better. Just like on defense a HUGE and under discussed skill is communication with teammates. Hell for both consistency and adherence to running a play are critical elements that perhaps don't show up in a stats line. Now sure there is the lockerroom stuff, leading by example, etc. All kinds Duncan also had in spades though I'm not sure Hakeem was a bad guy in any of that.

If you don't see the same value or put things like keeping teammates involved as offense, but show it elsewhere, then by your standards I have Duncan better offensively by a hair. If you follow my method, I think Duncan is a significantly better offensive player (as the laws of diminishing marginal returns for each tier require us to use when talking top 15 all time players).

[dhsilv]

Not to derail a thread about Timi Dunkin. But

That's far from correct. Here's just a few of the hundreds I've seen and heard over the years.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=334329

I was talking about the media, I don't value player opinions nearly as much. That is however a separate thread topic. And I suppose universally was a hair strong, but the overwhelming consensus was Russel>Wilt.

[juju151111]

No case for Dream, just ZERO. No case for Kobe just ZERO. I'd say Bird and Duncan both had pretty close 3 year peaks, small edge maybe to bird but if you go to 5 years, I have Duncan.

Wilt just never did it in the playoffs so you're clearly talking just regular season, right? If we're talking playoffs and if you want to go one year. MJ, Lebron, and Shaq are the only two with a better playoff run than 03 Duncan. All due respect to hakeem's epic run, which has to be mentioned.
Wait when you say no case for Dream. What do you mean. You think Duncan was better then Hakeem :roll:

[TheImmortal]

Damn.. 4PTS/ 3REB/ 3AST/ 1-5 FGA GOAT longevity! :facepalm

[juju151111]

I think dream is the most overrated offensive player in nba history. That is not to say he was a bad offensive player or anything close, but yes Dirk and Kobe are significantly better than Dream.

You can call it leadership, but being able to keep teammates involved in a play is just CRITICAL to basketball, and Hakeem was the anti teammate involvement guy. Look on talent and skill Dream is off the charts, but that's not how basketball is played. I understand that there is some argument that a lot of his failings were due to talent around him, but I can remember just way too often watching him dribble endlessly without doing anything.

I believe I posted that I think dream might be better peak defensively but I had Duncan for their careers, so not sure if you missed that or what, but we're almost to the same wording in agreement there.

You often like to describe roles where things can get more complex and that is why we post is it not? If I'm passing into the post, I do feel more strongly about dream scoring. But I feel much better with the spurs scoring out of a Duncan post up.

If you want to just talk stats and say use a concept of points created by the two, they're very close with a slight edge to Duncan. Points scored + points off assists for example. If that is what you consider offense then I'd agree the same tier.

To me leadership has both an offense, defense, and "intangible" value add which is why I give this to Duncan. I'm not sure it's leadership that made Duncan know that he needed to keep teammates involved while Hakeem did not, but it made the spurs offense significantly better. Just like on defense a HUGE and under discussed skill is communication with teammates. Hell for both consistency and adherence to running a play are critical elements that perhaps don't show up in a stats line. Now sure there is the lockerroom stuff, leading by example, etc. All kinds Duncan also had in spades though I'm not sure Hakeem was a bad guy in any of that.

If you don't see the same value or put things like keeping teammates involved as offense, but show it elsewhere, then by your standards I have Duncan better offensively by a hair. If you follow my method, I think Duncan is a significantly better offensive player (as the laws of diminishing marginal returns for each tier require us to use when talking top 15 all time players).
The only intangible Duncan got over Dream is going to a great organization and top 5 Goat coach.

[dhsilv]

Wait when you say no case for Dream. What do you mean. You think Duncan was better then Hakeem :roll:

Yes, I can name other players if you like as well. I think hakeem is greatly overrated by the youtube flurry of highlights and espn clips of him doing his dream shake. Add in the stories of Kobe going to train with him like he's the master from karate kid.

[dhsilv]

The only intangible Duncan got over Dream is going to a great organization and top 5 Goat coach.

As I've posted before and I'll post again. Pop was NOT a truly great coach when Duncan entered the league. Pop's first full season as a head coach in the nba came in duncan's rookie year. Even after winning a title in 99, Pop was nearly fired for Doc Rivers. Pop owes Duncan in many ways for him staying in the league. It wasn't until after 03, Duncan's peak, that we really saw the mastery of coaching that Pop became. The two guys owe each other a LOT!

The fact you think Hakeem has the intangibles of Duncan is just silly, but as this continues it is going to seem like I have some issue or thought Hakeem was bad, when I'm simply disagreeing with how with each passing year Hakeem seems to move up more and more people's lists as a result of having seen less and less of him or having seen more and more youtube videos since they last saw him actually play.

[juju151111]

Yes, I can name other players if you like as well. I think hakeem is greatly overrated by the youtube flurry of highlights and espn clips of him doing his dream shake. Add in the stories of Kobe going to train with him like he's the master from karate kid.
Pls name them and Kobe wasn't the only one who trained with him. LJ did after 2011,Deight did in 2010 etc.... Their is noting overrated about Hakeem bro.

[dhsilv]

Pls name them and Kobe wasn't the only one who trained with him. LJ did after 2011,Deight did in 2010 etc.... Their is noting overrated about Hakeem bro.

Are we doing offense or just better player?

Better players

Jordan
Kareem
Bird
Wilt
Duncan
West
Oscar
Kobe
Shaq
Russell
Lebron
*added in edit* Moses

If we're talking offense it gets a bit bigger

Add

Barkley
Dirk
Baylor
Erving
Pettit
Malone
Wade
Durant
Reed

Odds are there are more I'm missing and a few of these I admit I'd be ok with you going another direction with, but I think this is a fair start. I mean I'm not sure how to compare say nash to hakeem or stockton for that matter. Hmm Ewing is another interesting choice but I'll take the shake over Ewing jumpers. And I'm just not going to give Wilkins props but his defense was so bad I'm taking away points on offense for it.

[juju151111]

As I've posted before and I'll post again. Pop was NOT a truly great coach when Duncan entered the league. Pop's first full season as a head coach in the nba came in duncan's rookie year. Even after winning a title in 99, Pop was nearly fired for Doc Rivers. Pop owes Duncan in many ways for him staying in the league. It wasn't until after 03, Duncan's peak, that we really saw the mastery of coaching that Pop became. The two guys owe each other a LOT!

The fact you think Hakeem has the intangibles of Duncan is just silly, but as this continues it is going to seem like I have some issue or thought Hakeem was bad, when I'm simply disagreeing with how with each passing year Hakeem seems to move up more and more people's lists as a result of having seen less and less of him or having seen more and more youtube videos since they last saw him actually play.
Oh pls The Spurs were a great organization from the get go and so was pop. 50+ games since like 2000. Hakeem got a decent coach in 93 for god sakes. Half his team was on crack or being suspended in the playoffs for weed. Severely underpaying him in his prime. All types of bs it.

Even with all that Hakeem still had the better peak. Duncan gets to preserve himself with low mins and great coaching so he has the longevity.

[juju151111]

Are we doing offense or just better player?

Better players

Jordan
Kareem
Bird
Wilt
Duncan
West
Oscar
Kobe
Shaq
Russell
Lebron
*added in edit* Moses

If we're talking offense it gets a bit bigger

Add

Barkley
Dirk
Baylor
Erving
Pettit
Malone
Wade
Durant
Reed

Odds are there are more I'm missing and a few of these I admit I'd be ok with you going another direction with, but I think this is a fair start. I mean I'm not sure how to compare say nash to hakeem or stockton for that matter. Hmm Ewing is another interesting choice but I'll take the shake over Ewing jumpers. And I'm just not going to give Wilkins props but his defense was so bad I'm taking away points on offense for it.
Your a clown. I will respond tomorrow gotta sleep.

[dhsilv]

Oh pls The Spurs were a great organization from the get go and so was pop. 50+ games since like 2000. Hakeem got a decent coach in 93 for god sakes. Half his team was on crack or being suspended in the playoffs for weed. Severely underpaying him in his prime. All types of bs it.

Even with all that Hakeem still had the better peak. Duncan gets to preserve himself with low mins and great coaching so he has the longevity.

When was Hakeem's peak? His physical peak, he was dominate defensively, but he declined a bit there and became a great offensive player when they finally did start to win.

I don't disagree that he had weak teammates or a lesser organization, but a part of his weak teammates was due to his terrible understanding of nba offense. Maybe a better coach gets him out of that stuff, i think we all agree he has more talent and skill than Duncan, but that wasn't what happened. I can't judge a guy on potential after a near 20 year career.

As for the spurs, sure they're a great organization. Pop was just not a great coach from the start. And the 50 win stuff...how many sub 50 win seasons does lebron have after 21? Great players win, they make everyone around them look better than they are or at least most do.

[LAZERUSS]

Moses has to be in this list and should be ahead of a few guys here. And given Russell was universally seen as the better player than wilt by those who actually saw them live, Russell should be here if you want wilt.

Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First Team All-NBA selections in their 10 years in the league. And while neither were listed in '69, it was a complete joke that Unseld, Reed, and Russell finished ahead of Chamberlain in the MVP balloting. Aside from Unseld ekeing out a 57-25 to 55-27 team winning edge, Wilt led his team to better overall records than Russell and Reed, and he held margins of 4-2 and 5-1 in team H2H's. He and Unseld were tied 3-3 in team H2H's, but in terms of individual domination in all of those H2H's, Chamberlain just annihilated all three.

And in terms of MVP balloting, both Wilt and Russell won four MVPs while in the league together. However, Russell stole an MVP from Chamberlain in '62. Sorry to say, even the players demonstrated their hatred for Wilt's unfathomable domination that year.

Interesting too, that Wilt won an MVP over Russell in his rookie season. So, in his first year, he was already considered a more dominant player. Then, from the mid-60's on, Wilt won three straight cakewalk MVPs. Very few would have considered Russell the better player from '65 on.

And, as you should be well aware, Wilt just dominated Russell in their vast majority of their 143 career H2H meetings. This simply can't be denied. He overwhelming outscored him, badly outrebounded him, and outshot him from the field by a staggering margin. And a "balanced" Wilt not only solidly outscored, outrebounded, and outshot Russell, he then blew him away in assists. Hell, in their known H2H's, Chamberlain had a massive edge in blocked shots, as well.

And I always found it fascinating that when Chamberlain FINALLY had an equal roster, that was healthy, and well-coached, he and his team just destroyed the eight-time defending (and 60-21) Celtics...and as always, with Wilt just crushing Russell in every facet of the game.

And I have never received a decent response to this...

In the '66 EDF's, Chamberlain's Sixers were down to Boston, 3-1, and going into a potential close-out game. Chamberlain had played the same exact way against Boston, just as he had during the regular season, when his team went 6-3 against the Celtics. But now with his teammates just puking all over the floor (they would collectively shoot .352 in this series), Chamberlain took it upon himself to being the team back. He hung a massive 46-34 game on Russell and the Dynasty, but it was not enough in a 120-112 loss.

Ok, let's jump to the very next post-season. Now it was Russell and his Celtics down 3-1, and facing elimination. Did Russell rise up an overwhelm Wilt with a 46-34 game, when it was obvious that his teammates, who were finally being neutalized, desperately needed him to? Hell no...he quietly led his sheep to to slaughter with a feeble FOUR point game, on 2-5 shooting. Oh, and all Wilt did in that series clinching game was to hang 29 point on Russell, 22 of which came in the first half when the game was still close. All while outshooting Russell from the floor, 10-16 to 2-5; outassisting Russell, 13-7; and outrebounding Russell, 36-21...in a blowout win.

If Russell were the better player, where are those "Wilt-type" games? I can find some FORTY games, out of their 143 career H2H's, where Wilt massively outplayed Russell. And in all but about ONE other game, in which Wilt was playing with a badly injured wrist, did Russell significantly outplay Wilt. In the remainder of those 143 H2H's, Wilt outplayed Russell in all but a few.

None other than John Wooden said it best...had those two swapped rosters, (and coaches), and it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

[PickernRoller]

Dude could never repeat rings in his life.

Vultured a lot when the Lakers were down in their off years.

He's overrated by anyone that has him above Kobe and Shaq. Anyone that believes that is overrating him. Anyone that doesn't does not have him overrated. It's that simple.

[feyki]

Dude could never repeat rings in his life.

Vultured a lot when the Lakers were down in their off years.

He's overrated by anyone that has him above Kobe and Shaq. Anyone that believes that is overrating him. Anyone that doesn't does not have him overrated. It's that simple.


Damn , that is so important . That changes everything , Duncan isn't even close to top 50 now .

[dhsilv]

Chamberlain held a 7-2 margin in First Team All-NBA selections in their 10 years in the league. And while neither were listed in '69, it was a complete joke that Unseld, Reed, and Russell finished ahead of Chamberlain in the MVP balloting. Aside from Unseld ekeing out a 57-25 to 55-27 team winning edge, Wilt led his team to better overall records than Russell and Reed, and he held margins of 4-2 and 5-1 in team H2H's. He and Unseld were tied 3-3 in team H2H's, but in terms of individual domination in all of those H2H's, Chamberlain just annihilated all three.

And in terms of MVP balloting, both Wilt and Russell won four MVPs while in the league together. However, Russell stole an MVP from Chamberlain in '62. Sorry to say, even the players demonstrated their hatred for Wilt's unfathomable domination that year.

Interesting too, that Wilt won an MVP over Russell in his rookie season. So, in his first year, he was already considered a more dominant player. Then, from the mid-60's on, Wilt won three straight cakewalk MVPs. Very few would have considered Russell the better player from '65 on.

And, as you should be well aware, Wilt just dominated Russell in their vast majority of their 143 career H2H meetings. This simply can't be denied. He overwhelming outscored him, badly outrebounded him, and outshot him from the field by a staggering margin. And a "balanced" Wilt not only solidly outscored, outrebounded, and outshot Russell, he then blew him away in assists. Hell, in their known H2H's, Chamberlain had a massive edge in blocked shots, as well.

And I always found it fascinating that when Chamberlain FINALLY had an equal roster, that was healthy, and well-coached, he and his team just destroyed the eight-time defending (and 60-21) Celtics...and as always, with Wilt just crushing Russell in every facet of the game.

And I have never received a decent response to this...

In the '66 EDF's, Chamberlain's Sixers were down to Boston, 3-1, and going into a potential close-out game. Chamberlain had played the same exact way against Boston, just as he had during the regular season, when his team went 6-3 against the Celtics. But now with his teammates just puking all over the floor (they would collectively shoot .352 in this series), Chamberlain took it upon himself to being the team back. He hung a massive 46-34 game on Russell and the Dynasty, but it was not enough in a 120-112 loss.

Ok, let's jump to the very next post-season. Now it was Russell and his Celtics down 3-1, and facing elimination. Did Russell rise up an overwhelm Wilt with a 46-34 game, when it was obvious that his teammates, who were finally being neutalized, desperately needed him to? Hell no...he quietly led his sheep to to slaughter with a feeble FOUR point game, on 2-5 shooting. Oh, and all Wilt did in that series clinching game was to hang 29 point on Russell, 22 of which came in the first half when the game was still close. All while outshooting Russell from the floor, 10-16 to 2-5; outassisting Russell, 13-7; and outrebounding Russell, 36-21...in a blowout win.

If Russell were the better player, where are those "Wilt-type" games? I can find some FORTY games, out of their 143 career H2H's, where Wilt massively outplayed Russell. And in all but about ONE other game, in which Wilt was playing with a badly injured wrist, did Russell significantly outplay Wilt. In the remainder of those 143 H2H's, Wilt outplayed Russell in all but a few.

None other than John Wooden said it best...had those two swapped rosters, (and coaches), and it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

I can't watch the games. I have stats and litterally nothing else. It's not like I can go watch them play and then put stats into context for future games. The few in existence are virtually unwatchable. The general feeling from everything I have read was that Russel was better. This isn't like even the 70's when the footage was ok and there are a lot of games. There are very few games to watch and they are REALLY hard to watch.

[dhsilv]

Dude could never repeat rings in his life.

Vultured a lot when the Lakers were down in their off years.

He's overrated by anyone that has him above Kobe and Shaq. Anyone that believes that is overrating him. Anyone that doesn't does not have him overrated. It's that simple.

You're making the claim that Duncan was a "vulture" when he got his titles because he didn't beat a team with what you're claiming had TWO better players than him on it. Gee....with that logic.

[juju151111]

When was Hakeem's peak? His physical peak, he was dominate defensively, but he declined a bit there and became a great offensive player when they finally did start to win.

I don't disagree that he had weak teammates or a lesser organization, but a part of his weak teammates was due to his terrible understanding of nba offense. Maybe a better coach gets him out of that stuff, i think we all agree he has more talent and skill than Duncan, but that wasn't what happened. I can't judge a guy on potential after a near 20 year career.

As for the spurs, sure they're a great organization. Pop was just not a great coach from the start. And the 50 win stuff...how many sub 50 win seasons does lebron have after 21? Great players win, they make everyone around them look better than they are or at least most do.
Hakeem peak was around 93 or 94. No him having weak teammates has noting to do with him not understanding offense. It had to do with crack,weed, and injuries :facepalm

[juju151111]

Are we doing offense or just better player?

Better players

Jordan
Kareem
Bird
Wilt
Duncan
West
Oscar
Kobe
Shaq
Russell
Lebron
*added in edit* Moses

If we're talking offense it gets a bit bigger

Add

Barkley
Dirk
Baylor
Erving
Pettit
Malone
Wade
Durant
Reed

Odds are there are more I'm missing and a few of these I admit I'd be ok with you going another direction with, but I think this is a fair start. I mean I'm not sure how to compare say nash to hakeem or stockton for that matter. Hmm Ewing is another interesting choice but I'll take the shake over Ewing jumpers. And I'm just not going to give Wilkins props but his defense was so bad I'm taking away points on offense for it.
I don't think we going agree on the better players because we probably judge players differently. I jidge players on performance,playoffs, amd other things. Also why didn't you post up Magic, but you said Bird.

[LAZERUSS]

I can't watch the games. I have stats and litterally nothing else. It's not like I can go watch them play and then put stats into context for future games. The few in existence are virtually unwatchable. The general feeling from everything I have read was that Russel was better. This isn't like even the 70's when the footage was ok and there are a lot of games. There are very few games to watch and they are REALLY hard to watch.

I agree about the footage. There are something like 4-5 games that were recorded, and most of them only show halves. On top of that, none of them even included ONE of Chamberlain's 30+ point games.

Having said that, though, where do you rank Kareem? He played four years in the league with Wilt, and never approached his domination, nor came close to Wilt's dominance over the SAME centers that a prime Wilt was destroying (and most all of them were nearing the ends of their careers when a peak KAJ was battling them.)

Oh, and before he shredded his knee in game nine of the '69-70 season (Kareem's rookie season), a 33 year old Wilt was leading the scoring at 32.2 ppg, on a .579 FG%. Kareem averaged 28.8 ppg on a .518 that season, and a couple of years later he had his greatest season of his career, at 34.8 ppg on a .574.

And we know that a 34-36 year old Wilt, playing on a surgically repaired knee, was still dominating the best centers of the 70's, some of whom would even be great into the 80's. In his last season, he brutalized the 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier in their six H2H's, and this was a peak Lanier who was still great into the end of the decade.

Rick Barry won a title in '75 with a 30.6 ppg seasonal average, in a season in which Kareem didn't even make the playoffs.. He played against Wilt in the '67 Finals in a season in which he averaged 35.6 ppg.

John Havlicek was far greater in the 70's, than he was in the 60's, and he played eight years in each decade. And Havlicek was on a team that beat KAJ's last great team of the 70's in the Finals.

I go on. Guys like Hayes, Unseld, McAdoo, even Gilmore (whom Chamberlain outplayed in their '72 NBA-ABA ASG.)

And back to Kareem. He was just obliterating Hakeem in their career H2H's. A 38-39 year old KAJ averaged 32 ppg on a .630 FG% in their 10 H2H's in those two seasons, which included games of 40, 43, and 46 points. And a 40 year old Kareem badly ouitplayed a 25 year old Hakeem in their four H2H's. Oh, and in the same week that Kareem was crushing Hakeem with his 46 point game (on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes BTW), he steamrolled Patrick Ewing by a 40-9 margin (outshooting him, 15-22 to 3-17 BTW.)

Then think about this...a prime Shaq, in the '99 playoffs, had his highest scoring game against a fading Hakeem, of 37 points.

As for Russell-Wilt...we have enough research to know that Wilt's stats were not meaningless in the vast majority of those games. Most all of their 143 career H2H games were close, and while there was this perception that Russell's teams alway beat Wilt's, the reality was, they won 60% of their regular season H2H's, and 59% of their post-season H2H's, which included four game seven's that were decided by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.

And we also know that when Wilt finally had an equal roster, that was healthy and well-coached, his Sixers annihilated the Dynasty, and in a series in which Wilt trashed Russell in every facet of the game.

[HOoopCityJones]

Dude could never repeat rings in his life.

Vultured a lot when the Lakers were down in their off years.

He's overrated by anyone that has him above Kobe and Shaq. Anyone that believes that is overrating him. Anyone that doesn't does not have him overrated. It's that simple.

Forgot about this little doozy. Never defended his championship.

Funny thing about Duncan stans is they'll say scoring and rings aren't the end all be all because fucc Kobe, but will turn around and use Duncan's superior scoring and winning to prop him up over guys like KG, Hakeem but when he's pit against Shaq, Kobe and Malone, all of a sudden defense is the end all be all for why he's better . :oldlol:

[Dr Hawk]

Are we doing offense or just better player?

Better players

Jordan
Kareem
Bird
Wilt
Duncan
West
Oscar
Kobe
Shaq
Russell
Lebron
*added in edit* Moses

If we're talking offense it gets a bit bigger

Add

Barkley
Dirk
Baylor
Erving
Pettit
Malone
Wade
Durant
Reed

Odds are there are more I'm missing and a few of these I admit I'd be ok with you going another direction with, but I think this is a fair start. I mean I'm not sure how to compare say nash to hakeem or stockton for that matter. Hmm Ewing is another interesting choice but I'll take the shake over Ewing jumpers. And I'm just not going to give Wilkins props but his defense was so bad I'm taking away points on offense for it.

I don't understand how someone can think of Russell as a better player than Olajuwon. Russell was average offensively and GOAT level defensively.

Olajuwon was a LOT better offensively and GOAT level defensively.

If you mean to say "greater player", then ok, but "better player", never

[feyki]

Forgot about this little doozy. Never defended his championship.

Funny thing about Duncan stans is they'll say scoring and rings aren't the end all be all because fucc Kobe, but will turn around and use Duncan's superior scoring and winning to prop him up over guys like KG, Hakeem but when he's pit against Shaq, Kobe and Malone, all of a sudden defense is the end all be all for why he's better . :oldlol:

Repeat=defend the ring

Kobe fans are einstein :facepalm

[HOoopCityJones]

Repeat=defend the ring

Kobe fans are einstein :facepalm

He's never repeated tho :biggums:

[feyki]

He's never repeated tho :biggums:

.d.d.d

[dhsilv]

I don't understand how someone can think of Russell as a better player than Olajuwon. Russell was average offensively and GOAT level defensively.

Olajuwon was a LOT better offensively and GOAT level defensively.

If you mean to say "greater player", then ok, but "better player", never

Meh, you can drop him if you'd like. I don't really care where people rank russel or wilt for that matter. I don't know if it's fair to them or players after to do such comparisons.

[dhsilv]

I agree about the footage. There are something like 4-5 games that were recorded, and most of them only show halves. On top of that, none of them even included ONE of Chamberlain's 30+ point games.

Having said that, though, where do you rank Kareem? He played four years in the league with Wilt, and never approached his domination, nor came close to Wilt's dominance over the SAME centers that a prime Wilt was destroying (and most all of them were nearing the ends of their careers when a peak KAJ was battling them.)

Oh, and before he shredded his knee in game nine of the '69-70 season (Kareem's rookie season), a 33 year old Wilt was leading the scoring at 32.2 ppg, on a .579 FG%. Kareem averaged 28.8 ppg on a .518 that season, and a couple of years later he had his greatest season of his career, at 34.8 ppg on a .574.

And we know that a 34-36 year old Wilt, playing on a surgically repaired knee, was still dominating the best centers of the 70's, some of whom would even be great into the 80's. In his last season, he brutalized the 6-11 HOFer Bob Lanier in their six H2H's, and this was a peak Lanier who was still great into the end of the decade.

Rick Barry won a title in '75 with a 30.6 ppg seasonal average, in a season in which Kareem didn't even make the playoffs.. He played against Wilt in the '67 Finals in a season in which he averaged 35.6 ppg.

John Havlicek was far greater in the 70's, than he was in the 60's, and he played eight years in each decade. And Havlicek was on a team that beat KAJ's last great team of the 70's in the Finals.

I go on. Guys like Hayes, Unseld, McAdoo, even Gilmore (whom Chamberlain outplayed in their '72 NBA-ABA ASG.)

And back to Kareem. He was just obliterating Hakeem in their career H2H's. A 38-39 year old KAJ averaged 32 ppg on a .630 FG% in their 10 H2H's in those two seasons, which included games of 40, 43, and 46 points. And a 40 year old Kareem badly ouitplayed a 25 year old Hakeem in their four H2H's. Oh, and in the same week that Kareem was crushing Hakeem with his 46 point game (on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes BTW), he steamrolled Patrick Ewing by a 40-9 margin (outshooting him, 15-22 to 3-17 BTW.)

Then think about this...a prime Shaq, in the '99 playoffs, had his highest scoring game against a fading Hakeem, of 37 points.

As for Russell-Wilt...we have enough research to know that Wilt's stats were not meaningless in the vast majority of those games. Most all of their 143 career H2H games were close, and while there was this perception that Russell's teams alway beat Wilt's, the reality was, they won 60% of their regular season H2H's, and 59% of their post-season H2H's, which included four game seven's that were decided by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.

And we also know that when Wilt finally had an equal roster, that was healthy and well-coached, his Sixers annihilated the Dynasty, and in a series in which Wilt trashed Russell in every facet of the game.

Experience matters...

[DMAVS41]

I think dream is the most overrated offensive player in nba history. That is not to say he was a bad offensive player or anything close, but yes Dirk and Kobe are significantly better than Dream.

You can call it leadership, but being able to keep teammates involved in a play is just CRITICAL to basketball, and Hakeem was the anti teammate involvement guy. Look on talent and skill Dream is off the charts, but that's not how basketball is played. I understand that there is some argument that a lot of his failings were due to talent around him, but I can remember just way too often watching him dribble endlessly without doing anything.

I believe I posted that I think dream might be better peak defensively but I had Duncan for their careers, so not sure if you missed that or what, but we're almost to the same wording in agreement there.

You often like to describe roles where things can get more complex and that is why we post is it not? If I'm passing into the post, I do feel more strongly about dream scoring. But I feel much better with the spurs scoring out of a Duncan post up.

If you want to just talk stats and say use a concept of points created by the two, they're very close with a slight edge to Duncan. Points scored + points off assists for example. If that is what you consider offense then I'd agree the same tier.

To me leadership has both an offense, defense, and "intangible" value add which is why I give this to Duncan. I'm not sure it's leadership that made Duncan know that he needed to keep teammates involved while Hakeem did not, but it made the spurs offense significantly better. Just like on defense a HUGE and under discussed skill is communication with teammates. Hell for both consistency and adherence to running a play are critical elements that perhaps don't show up in a stats line. Now sure there is the lockerroom stuff, leading by example, etc. All kinds Duncan also had in spades though I'm not sure Hakeem was a bad guy in any of that.

If you don't see the same value or put things like keeping teammates involved as offense, but show it elsewhere, then by your standards I have Duncan better offensively by a hair. If you follow my method, I think Duncan is a significantly better offensive player (as the laws of diminishing marginal returns for each tier require us to use when talking top 15 all time players).


I have Duncan over Hakeem and have had so for a long time.

However, you are over-rating Duncan's offense.

You are always touting advanced metrics...especially RAPM...but I don't follow your logic here then....as Duncan's offensive RAPM for virtually every year of his career is nothing special.

I certainly don't think that stat is the end all be all, but Duncan isn't producing a lot of hidden value on offense either. Yea, he's a good screen setter and roll man that does create value without stats...but it's nowhere near elite offensive player value on and off the ball for the majority of his career.

Considering Hakeem was one of the best scorers in NBA history...and a far more skilled offensive force than Duncan...I'm not sure you can defend your claim.

Now, again, I do agree that Hakeem is over-rated.

However, Duncan is being vastly over-rated offensively. In order for Duncan to be clearly better than Hakeem on offense...he'd have to be an all time elite offensive player. And Duncan wasn't that...not even close to be honest.

[dhsilv]

I have Duncan over Hakeem and have had so for a long time.

However, you are over-rating Duncan's offense.

You are always touting advanced metrics...especially RAPM...but I don't follow your logic here then....as Duncan's offensive RAPM for virtually every year of his career is nothing special.

I certainly don't think that stat is the end all be all, but Duncan isn't producing a lot of hidden value on offense either. Yea, he's a good screen setter and roll man that does create value without stats...but it's nowhere near elite offensive player value on and off the ball for the majority of his career.

Considering Hakeem was one of the best scorers in NBA history...and a far more skilled offensive force than Duncan...I'm not sure you can defend your claim.

Now, again, I do agree that Hakeem is over-rated.

However, Duncan is being vastly over-rated offensively. In order for Duncan to be clearly better than Hakeem on offense...he'd have to be an all time elite offensive player. And Duncan wasn't that...not even close to be honest.

I am not overrating Duncan. This is purely me massively downgrading Hakeem.

[dhsilv]

I am not overrating Duncan. This is purely me massively downgrading Hakeem.

here just to add color, and i do mean color.

http://i.imgur.com/OonBdje.jpg

By all time standards neither of these two are all time great offensive players. Like...just not! I had to check my look up 10 times because I couldn't believe how crappy both their OBPM's were.

But I think Duncan offensively was better or as good as his stats. I think Hakeem is much worse than his stats. But again that said these aren't all time great offensive players by the stats in the context of top 20 guys I think anyway you look at it, you're debating letting them in.

For some absurd reason people think hakeem was an all time great offensive player equal to his defensive ability. It isn't true.

[greatest-ever]

What the ****? A guy who has 5 rings, 3 Fmvps, 2 mvps and been on a 50+ win team for basically almost 2 decades is overrated? Wow.

[Taller than CP3]

He's incredibly slow and moves like a dinosaur and got blocked by Amare in the playoffs and missed that layup against the Heat, of course he's overrated.

[T_L_P]

He's incredibly slow and moves like a dinosaur and got blocked by Amare in the playoffs and missed that layup against the Heat, of course he's overrated.

He played Amare 4 times and won every matchup. And how does being slow make you overrated in any way? :oldlol:

[DMAVS41]

here just to add color, and i do mean color.

http://i.imgur.com/OonBdje.jpg

By all time standards neither of these two are all time great offensive players. Like...just not! I had to check my look up 10 times because I couldn't believe how crappy both their OBPM's were.

But I think Duncan offensively was better or as good as his stats. I think Hakeem is much worse than his stats. But again that said these aren't all time great offensive players by the stats in the context of top 20 guys I think anyway you look at it, you're debating letting them in.

For some absurd reason people think hakeem was an all time great offensive player equal to his defensive ability. It isn't true.

Again, I agree Hakeem was over-rated...

But your argument is that Duncan was clearly a better offensive player...and I just don't see that at all.

It's probably a stretch to say he was as good...let alone clearly better.

[dhsilv]

Again, I agree Hakeem was over-rated...

But your argument is that Duncan was clearly a better offensive player...and I just don't see that at all.

It's probably a stretch to say he was as good...let alone clearly better.

The offensive stats we have basically rank them on par with a slight favoring of Hakeems two year peak and then it's a land slide for Duncan after that. If you consider Duncan's stats to under value or fairly value him and hakeems to over value him, that alone is enough to end the argument.

[DMAVS41]

The offensive stats we have basically rank them on par with a slight favoring of Hakeems two year peak and then it's a land slide for Duncan after that. If you consider Duncan's stats to under value or fairly value him and hakeems to over value him, that alone is enough to end the argument.

Not sure what you are referencing, but OBPM literally means nothing to me.

When I say stats are a bit inflated...I'm talking about the Hakeem playoff stats where he was basically putting up 30/12/3 over a decade iirc.

[dhsilv]

Not sure what you are referencing, but OBPM literally means nothing to me.

When I say stats are a bit inflated...I'm talking about the Hakeem playoff stats where he was basically putting up 30/12/3 over a decade iirc.

Our best way to come back to RAPM with sadly BPM for Hakeem. The stats for both duncan and Hakeem are not impressive. Their per 100 scoring is very similar. Offensive winshare is similar as well.

You can't find a stat of any kind that really strongly says Hakeem was better offensively.

Now some of these stats might not be very good, but the point of posted the table with their stats (which for some reason isn't showing up when I look at it...not sure if you saw it or not) was to illustrate that if we're just looking at stats, Hakeem doesn't have an advantage.

I then have been adding the color that Hakeems stats greatly over value him. To me that is more than enough to make a clear distinction between the two players. Now I want to add, I don't think Hakeem is a little bit worse than his stats. He flat out through most of his career made everyone around him worse and unless he just couldn't miss he was not helping their offense at all.

[DMAVS41]

Our best way to come back to RAPM with sadly BPM for Hakeem. The stats for both duncan and Hakeem are not impressive. Their per 100 scoring is very similar. Offensive winshare is similar as well.

You can't find a stat of any kind that really strongly says Hakeem was better offensively.

Now some of these stats might not be very good, but the point of posted the table with their stats (which for some reason isn't showing up when I look at it...not sure if you saw it or not) was to illustrate that if we're just looking at stats, Hakeem doesn't have an advantage.

I then have been adding the color that Hakeems stats greatly over value him. To me that is more than enough to make a clear distinction between the two players. Now I want to add, I don't think Hakeem is a little bit worse than his stats. He flat out through most of his career made everyone around him worse and unless he just couldn't miss he was not helping their offense at all.

I disagree with some of this, but even if I agreed...literally nothing above gets you to the point where Duncan was "clearly better offensively" than Hakeem.

[dhsilv]

I disagree with some of this, but even if I agreed...literally nothing above gets you to the point where Duncan was "clearly better offensively" than Hakeem.

Guy 1 makes his teams offense better.

Guy 2 does not.

Guy 1 is clearly better.

What do you consider clearly? You spend a lot of time on these boards debating the use of a single word but you nearly never post what you think that word means. If we disagree on what clearly means in all time top 20 basketball player terms, we're just wasting time posting.

To me if two players are roughly even in stats, but their net impact to the team is more than say 5 or so points a game different due to other factors and the gap widens in key playoff games, then it's pretty clear. I think the gap here is more than 5 or so points a game.

Outside of 2-3 years (you can debate if 96 was still one of those years) he was just awful as a teammates on offense and after 96 he was well into his decline. I would likely take 10 of Duncan's years without even having to think over the rest of hakeem's career offensively.

Now you can disagree about my view on hakeem being a black hole for the ball. You can disagree about how many points I think it cost the rockets in his teammates not putting in effort. You can disagree on the greater than 5 point impact I think he cost his teams due to his style of player. You can agree with all the above and not consider that a clear distinction. At this point I'm not sure where you stand on any of that.

[DMAVS41]

Guy 1 makes his teams offense better.

Guy 2 does not.

Guy 1 is clearly better.

What do you consider clearly? You spend a lot of time on these boards debating the use of a single word but you nearly never post what you think that word means. If we disagree on what clearly means in all time top 20 basketball player terms, we're just wasting time posting.

To me if two players are roughly even in stats, but their net impact to the team is more than say 5 or so points a game different due to other factors and the gap widens in key playoff games, then it's pretty clear. I think the gap here is more than 5 or so points a game.

Outside of 2-3 years (you can debate if 96 was still one of those years) he was just awful as a teammates on offense and after 96 he was well into his decline. I would likely take 10 of Duncan's years without even having to think over the rest of hakeem's career offensively.

Now you can disagree about my view on hakeem being a black hole for the ball. You can disagree about how many points I think it cost the rockets in his teammates not putting in effort. You can disagree on the greater than 5 point impact I think he cost his teams due to his style of player. You can agree with all the above and not consider that a clear distinction. At this point I'm not sure where you stand on any of that.

Clearly means exactly what the damn word does....that debating it is pointless as it's not close enough to warrant a discussion.

I think it's fairly obvious what the word means.

And the problem is that Duncan wasn't clearly better than a shit ton of good offensive players.

[dhsilv]

Clearly means exactly what the damn word does....that debating it is pointless as it's not close enough to warrant a discussion.

I think it's fairly obvious what the word means.

And the problem is that Duncan wasn't clearly better than a shit ton of good offensive players.

Dude, people debate everything on earth here. Much of it is completely one sided as hell and people just keep debating. If I posted the Jordan was a better offensive player than Robert Horry there'd be one guy who disagreed.

I'm sorry but "clearly" is not clearly defined in this context. Thus I added my version of what it is.

And yeah there are a lot of better offensive players than Duncan. Dirk is a heck of a lot better. But we're talking Hakeem...

[DMAVS41]

Dude, people debate everything on earth here. Much of it is completely one sided as hell and people just keep debating. If I posted the Jordan was a better offensive player than Robert Horry there'd be one guy who disagreed.

I'm sorry but "clearly" is not clearly defined in this context. Thus I added my version of what it is.

And yeah there are a lot of better offensive players than Duncan. Dirk is a heck of a lot better. But we're talking Hakeem...

People can debate whatever they want.

I don't see how one can think something is debatable or could go either way...while at the same time holding to the opinion that one side is clearly correct.

In large part I agree with you...I just think you under-rate Hakeem offensively and hold him unfairly accountable for some roster and coaching issues...while ignoring the context of Duncan's support throughout his career in comparison.

Regardless, I agree Duncan was better...but if I had a 10 year stretch where I needed just offense...I'm going with Hakeem every time...

[PickernRoller]

You're making the claim that Duncan was a "vulture" when he got his titles because he didn't beat a team with what you're claiming had TWO better players than him on it. Gee....with that logic.

The logic is pretty clear. You're just too retarded to see it.

Vultured in Lakers off-years. Couldn't do jack shit when Lakers were dominant. Mainly because he wasn't better than the aforementioned players when push came to shove.

It's and always will be pretty simple when it comes to the Lakers, Spurs ring distribution.

[juju151111]

Clearly means exactly what the damn word does....that debating it is pointless as it's not close enough to warrant a discussion.

I think it's fairly obvious what the word means.

And the problem is that Duncan wasn't clearly better than a shit ton of good offensive players.
Exactly why i decided arguing with him pointless. He just going to keep repeating nonsense about Duncan being far better. If Duncan wemt against Hakeem. He would get destroyed. Every ATG cemter/PF that he faced in the playoffs he destroyed. Duncan isn't messing with Playoff Hakeem its that simple. Also people don't judge players frpm playoffs has much has you amd i. I normally agree with your list, but why do you have Duncan over Hakeem? Is it his achievements or do you think he actually a better player.

[rmt]

The logic is pretty clear. You're just too retarded to see it.

Vultured in Lakers off-years. Couldn't do jack shit when Lakers were dominant. Mainly because he wasn't better than the aforementioned players when push came to shove.

It's and always will be pretty simple when it comes to the Lakers, Spurs ring distribution.

If you are implying that Duncan wasn't better than either Shaq OR Kobe, why in the world would you expect him to beat BOTH of them together?

[PickernRoller]

If you are implying that Duncan wasn't better than either Shaq OR Kobe, why in the world would you expect him to beat BOTH of them together?

I see your memory fails you in a cheap attempt at mockery. Kobe was alone from 08-2010. Stay frosty.

[T_L_P]

I see your memory fails you in a cheap attempt at mockery. Kobe was alone from 08-2010. Stay frosty.

And he didnt beat the Spurs once en route to winning a ring. Yet youre here talking about vulturing. :oldlol:

[dhsilv]

People can debate whatever they want.

I don't see how one can think something is debatable or could go either way...while at the same time holding to the opinion that one side is clearly correct.

In large part I agree with you...I just think you under-rate Hakeem offensively and hold him unfairly accountable for some roster and coaching issues...while ignoring the context of Duncan's support throughout his career in comparison.

Regardless, I agree Duncan was better...but if I had a 10 year stretch where I needed just offense...I'm going with Hakeem every time...

Again this doesn't have anything to do with Duncan.

I'm purely stating I don't think Hakeem could play in a team concept and he just didn't get it. So for me I'm never taking hakeem over Duncan offensively. You could be right that it was teammates and coaching, but I can't change those things and see if it would be different.

[dhsilv]

The logic is pretty clear. You're just too retarded to see it.

Vultured in Lakers off-years. Couldn't do jack shit when Lakers were dominant. Mainly because he wasn't better than the aforementioned players when push came to shove.

It's and always will be pretty simple when it comes to the Lakers, Spurs ring distribution.

So if he was better than both he'd be so good he could beat BOTH of them? Both?

[dhsilv]

Exactly why i decided arguing with him pointless. He just going to keep repeating nonsense about Duncan being far better. If Duncan wemt against Hakeem. He would get destroyed. Every ATG cemter/PF that he faced in the playoffs he destroyed. Duncan isn't messing with Playoff Hakeem its that simple. Also people don't judge players frpm playoffs has much has you amd i. I normally agree with your list, but why do you have Duncan over Hakeem? Is it his achievements or do you think he actually a better player.

Hakeem would score on Duncan without a problem...his team would score less than Duncan's. Pick any year for them...

[PickernRoller]

And he didnt beat the Spurs once en route to winning a ring. Yet youre here talking about vulturing. :oldlol:

No fault of his own Duncan was shatting the bed when the going got rough...

Top seeds, early exits. Rinse and repeat.

[dhsilv]

I see your memory fails you in a cheap attempt at mockery. Kobe was alone from 08-2010. Stay frosty.

03 didn't happen?

[T_L_P]

No fault of his own Duncan was shatting the bed when the going got rough...

Top seeds, early exits. Rinse and repeat.

3th seed in 09, 7th seed in 10 (avg seed of 5).

The Lakers were the 4th seed in 99 and the 5th seed in 03 (avg seed of 4.5).

But again, Duncan was vulturing when the Lakers weren't any good and Kobe wasn't. :oldlol: :oldlol:

[Anaximandro1]

It's going to be a long season ...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-s2VC-d92Was/VqRTKfdrwqI/AAAAAAAAFJY/XaI38VrRXzo/s1600/3.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sLF7ClLNblU/VqRTKnJ0sBI/AAAAAAAAFJk/0lVzJUSCuUo/s1600/4.jpg

[dhsilv]

It's going to be a long season ...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-s2VC-d92Was/VqRTKfdrwqI/AAAAAAAAFJY/XaI38VrRXzo/s1600/3.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sLF7ClLNblU/VqRTKnJ0sBI/AAAAAAAAFJk/0lVzJUSCuUo/s1600/4.jpg

Where are you getting this data out of curiosity?

[juju151111]

Hakeem would score on Duncan without a problem...his team would score less than Duncan's. Pick any year for them...
No he wouldn't. Give them equal teams and Hakeem wins.

[DMAVS41]

Again this doesn't have anything to do with Duncan.

I'm purely stating I don't think Hakeem could play in a team concept and he just didn't get it. So for me I'm never taking hakeem over Duncan offensively. You could be right that it was teammates and coaching, but I can't change those things and see if it would be different.

You honestly think Hakeem was incapable of playing within a team concept?

Like, you are telling me, that if Hakeem played under Pop and played on the Spurs instead of Duncan that he would not have been capable of listening to Pop and playing within a team concept?

I mean...if you really believe that....then I'm interested to know where you rank Hakeem all time. Because no way can you have him top 15 if you think he was that big of a selfish "me first" type player.

[dhsilv]

You honestly think Hakeem was incapable of playing within a team concept?

Like, you are telling me, that if Hakeem played under Pop and played on the Spurs instead of Duncan that he would not have been capable of listening to Pop and playing within a team concept?

I mean...if you really believe that....then I'm interested to know where you rank Hakeem all time. Because no way can you have him top 15 if you think he was that big of a selfish "me first" type player.

See that becomes a tough question, because again I didn't see him in a different scenario.

With better coaching perhaps he learns to be a better passer? Duncan sucked as a passer when he first came into the league but he quickly got better. Even in the title run I think by all time great player standards Hakeem is the worst passer among the top 25.

Where I'm going is that we need a reason why he was a weak passer. If it was poor court awareness than, a better coach can't do much for him. If it was ego and selfishness a good coach can't do much for him. If he just didn't understand how to play within a team offense, a good coach could make him the best player ever potentially.

As for the ranking, this thread has given me some time to look at Hakeem more closely. I've always just slotted him somewhere around Moses in that 11-15 range, but you've made some good points. He might need to move back a hair. Though it's hard to drop a guy who was at Hakeem's level defensively too far and even with his poor passing and general awareness, he's still a top 50 scorer and in a weak era he could be a one man show offensively. To me he can't drop lower than Karl Malone so I guess that gives a reasonable range for him.

[dhsilv]

No he wouldn't. Give them equal teams and Hakeem wins.

I was explaining my view on the two players and using a team scenario. What the hell was the purpose of that post?

[DMAVS41]

See that becomes a tough question, because again I didn't see him in a different scenario.

With better coaching perhaps he learns to be a better passer? Duncan sucked as a passer when he first came into the league but he quickly got better. Even in the title run I think by all time great player standards Hakeem is the worst passer among the top 25.

Where I'm going is that we need a reason why he was a weak passer. If it was poor court awareness than, a better coach can't do much for him. If it was ego and selfishness a good coach can't do much for him. If he just didn't understand how to play within a team offense, a good coach could make him the best player ever potentially.

As for the ranking, this thread has given me some time to look at Hakeem more closely. I've always just slotted him somewhere around Moses in that 11-15 range, but you've made some good points. He might need to move back a hair. Though it's hard to drop a guy who was at Hakeem's level defensively too far and even with his poor passing and general awareness, he's still a top 50 scorer and in a weak era he could be a one man show offensively. To me he can't drop lower than Karl Malone so I guess that gives a reasonable range for him.

Again, I agree Hakeem had his flaws...like a lot of players do.

I just never viewed Hakeem as inherently selfish and narrow minded as you do.

We'll never know, but the player I saw obviously had the raw ability and talent...and I just don't see why he'd resist listening to a coach like Pop, or Phil, or Riley, or Brown, or Rick...etc.

A lot of what you say is accurate from an objective standpoint with Hakeem's game, but at the same time, a lot of that is easily fixable with better coaching and teams around him.

[dhsilv]

Again, I agree Hakeem had his flaws...like a lot of players do.

I just never viewed Hakeem as inherently selfish and narrow minded as you do.

We'll never know, but the player I saw obviously had the raw ability and talent...and I just don't see why he'd resist listening to a coach like Pop, or Phil, or Riley, or Brown, or Rick...etc.

A lot of what you say is accurate from an objective standpoint with Hakeem's game, but at the same time, a lot of that is easily fixable with better coaching and teams around him.

Well this is why I'm not saying he was like this because he was selfish. He very well might just not have had great court awareness, for all I know he lacked great peripheral vision? But even if we fixed him in that he passed sooner, he just wasn't good as a passer. That is seriously from a technical skills list his only weakness but it's a big deal.

We fully agree he had the tools to be vastly better, but I could say the same about Rasheed Wallace. Sheed could have been a top 20 all time guy with his skill set. It didn't happen. Could Pop or Jackson have fixed that? Who knows.

[DMAVS41]

Well this is why I'm not saying he was like this because he was selfish. He very well might just not have had great court awareness, for all I know he lacked great peripheral vision? But even if we fixed him in that he passed sooner, he just wasn't good as a passer. That is seriously from a technical skills list his only weakness but it's a big deal.

We fully agree he had the tools to be vastly better, but I could say the same about Rasheed Wallace. Sheed could have been a top 20 all time guy with his skill set. It didn't happen. Could Pop or Jackson have fixed that? Who knows.

Given what Hakeem showed he was capable of at certain points of his career...I don't think the above is quite fair.

This isn't a case of someone needing to be vastly better...this is a case of trying to figure out if a player was capable of improving certain aspects of their game given better coaching and teammates throughout their careers.

We obviously can't answer this, but there was very little I saw in Hakeem that would prevent him from improving in certain areas you are talking about.

Again though...even with some flaws...in no way was Duncan a "clearly better" offensive player.

[BuffaloBill]

[QUOTE]The Spurs won because of Tim Duncan, a guy I could never break. I could talk trash to Patrick Ewing, get in David Robinson

[Spurs5Rings2014]

It's going to be a long season ...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-s2VC-d92Was/VqRTKfdrwqI/AAAAAAAAFJY/XaI38VrRXzo/s1600/3.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sLF7ClLNblU/VqRTKnJ0sBI/AAAAAAAAFJk/0lVzJUSCuUo/s1600/4.jpg

7th most impactful player in the entire league at age 40+.

:bowdown:

I may have to move him up in my top 5.

[dhsilv]

Given what Hakeem showed he was capable of at certain points of his career...I don't think the above is quite fair.

This isn't a case of someone needing to be vastly better...this is a case of trying to figure out if a player was capable of improving certain aspects of their game given better coaching and teammates throughout their careers.

We obviously can't answer this, but there was very little I saw in Hakeem that would prevent him from improving in certain areas you are talking about.

Again though...even with some flaws...in no way was Duncan a "clearly better" offensive player.

I long ago decided that if a guy never completely gets it, it's on him. I'm not sure if it was an IQ thing, culture, lack of early development, teammates, coaches, or personality, but he just never "got IT". I've found betting against a guy who doesn't seem to "get it" is the right bet nearly always.

But I guess we have to agree to disagree. I just can't see a scenario where Hakeem is a better 5 on 5 offensive player...in the NBA. Hakeem might look better in china or something.