Tim Duncan is greater than Shaq, and here are the numbers to PROVE it

poetis.... until Duncan wins a ring this June, he ISN'T above Shaq yet... so stop bumping this stupid thread.

Even after Duncan gets his 4th in June, it's still debatable between Shaq and Duncan, but why am I explaining to you, you feel Duncan will be "inarguably top five all time" after June...

[QUOTE=GOBB]You're clapping hands unaware Barry Bonds is a better baseball player than Hank Aaron. It totally contradicts your support about Duncan being greater than Shaq. :roll:[/QUOTE]

Umm, wewll I never thought hammerin hank was the best, but when the only thing kepping 99% sure from turining into 100% sure on the steriods issue is a test for HGH, There can be much debate.

why is 5 years of dominance more valuable then an entire career of dominance?

also, td has never had any problems like shaq has. shaqs had people traded,coaches fired, etc.

DUncan won his first champion ship in a lock out year right? Shaq was unstoppable, Duncan is stoppable.

Duncan is really good, but no where near Shaqs level.

That's like comparing Kobe to the Jordan that played for the Wizards. If Shaq were at the same point in his career as Duncan this thread wouldn't exist.

[QUOTE=Dizzle-2k7]why is 5 years of dominance more valuable then an entire career of dominance?

also, td has never had any problems like shaq has. shaqs had people traded,coaches fired, etc.[/QUOTE]

Why do the two Duncan supporters on this thread try to bend reailty? Why do they act like Shaq was only "elite" for a 3, 4 year stretch and the rest of his career wasn't great?

Shaq from 94 to 99, 2004 to 2005 was still pretty damn good. I dunno why you guys keep throwing that "why does Shaq's three good years put him ahead of Duncan's entire consistent career?"

[QUOTE=ronron15]shaq was once the most dominant player on the planet....[/QUOTE]for a couple of years at best (the first 2 Lakers titles), and I'm not even sure of that, as Duncan was certainly the better player. But Shaq had Kobe playing second fiddle

[QUOTE=EricForman]poetis.... until Duncan wins a ring this June, he ISN'T above Shaq yet... so stop bumping this stupid thread.

Even after Duncan gets his 4th in June, it's still debatable between Shaq and Duncan, but why am I explaining to you, you feel Duncan will be "inarguably top five all time" after June...[/QUOTE]

Of course, I don't know if Tim Duncan will win another title and finals MVP this June, anything can happen (injury, for instance). But if he does, with equaling Shaq in titles at 4-4, besting him in finals MVPs at 4-3, with the superior body of work he has compared to Shaq (see page 1 of this thread), if there is even a hint of objectivity in you, then it would be clear Tim Duncan has surpassed Shaq. Again, based on their respective bodies of work, its not debatable. Shaq is a great player, but for 2 big men playing in the same era, this comparison is an easy one. Also, when I spoke of Tim Duncan being inarguably top 5 upon his next title, I meant top 5 big men (already passed Hakeem, just passing Shaq), but INARGUABLY top ten all time.

[QUOTE=Timmy D for MVP]Umm, wewll I never thought hammerin hank was the best, but when the only thing kepping 99% sure from turining into 100% sure on the steriods issue is a test for HGH, There can be much debate.[/QUOTE]

Ok now in English. There is no argument for Hank over Bonds unless you're a Bonds ***** and one who has ignored MLB the last 10-12 years. And will continue to do so because you are suspicious of everyone.

[QUOTE=poeticism707]Here are Tim Duncan and Shaq's career numbers and accomplishments

Lets take it to the scorecard as it stands right NOW:

titles: Shaq 4, Duncan 3
finals mvps: Shaq 3, duncan 3
season mvps: Shaq 1, Duncan 2
1st team all nba: Shaq 7, Duncan 9
1st team all defense: Shaq 0, Duncan 7 (Shaq only has 3 2nd team all defense!)
Shaq career: 25.9ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.8apg, 2.8bpg
Duncan Career: 21.8 ppg, 11.9rpg, 3.2apg, 2.4bpg

Now lets discuss the obvious. Shaq has been in the league 5 more years than Duncan, but only has one more title, both even in finals mvps, Duncan with one more season mvp at 2-1. Here is where it gets shocking: Shaq has been in the league over 14+ years, but only 7 first team all nba elections? That a mere 50%! Also, Shaq has never, not even once been voted first team all defense- with only 3, count it 3 total 2ND TEAM all defense selections! Wow! He's a bigger defensive liability than Steve Nash! Even with all this "dominant" scoring, career wise he leads Duncan by only four points in career average! It is obvious that all you who swear by Shaq's dominance have been utterly duped!

Anyone please look at these numbers and prove Shaq is better than Duncan! According to their career numbers and stats, Duncan is already ahead of Shaq, and its not even close! One more title and finals mvp will simply be icing on the cake.[/QUOTE]

Personally, I agree with you. Duncan is a little better than Shaq historically.

What Duncan fans have not mentioned is:

Duncan: Top-10 in scoring 5 times, in rebounding 9 times (twice runner-up), in FG% 6 times, in blocks 9 times, in PER rating 9 times (3 times runner-up).

Compared to:

Shaq: Top-10 in scoring 10 times (incl. [B]6[/B] times at top-2), in rebounding 7 times (3 times runner-up), in FG% [B]13 times (9 times 1st)[/B], in blocks 12 times (once 2nd), 14 times in PER rating (5 times 1st, each of which easily beats Duncan's best one).

Also, playoff-wise (till 2006):

24.1/12.7/3.6/2.69 on 50% FG for Duncan.
25.6/12.2/2.2/2.20 on 57% FG for Shaq, including post-prime years.

Shaq has overall career dominance over Duncan.
Career-wise? Give me Shaq, either if Duncan wins it this year or not.

[QUOTE=Psileas]What Duncan fans have not mentioned is:

Duncan: Top-10 in scoring 5 times, in rebounding 9 times (twice runner-up), in FG% 6 times, in blocks 9 times, in PER rating 9 times (3 times runner-up).

Compared to:

Shaq: Top-10 in scoring 10 times (incl. [B]6[/B] times at top-2), in rebounding 7 times (3 times runner-up), in FG% [B]13 times (9 times 1st)[/B], in blocks 12 times (once 2nd), 14 times in PER rating (5 times 1st, each of which easily beats Duncan's best one).

Also, playoff-wise (till 2006):

24.1/12.7/3.6/2.69 on 50% FG for Duncan.
25.6/12.2/2.2/2.20 on 57% FG for Shaq, including post-prime years.

Shaq has overall career dominance over Duncan.
Career-wise? Give me Shaq, either if Duncan wins it this year or not.[/QUOTE]

Now these are excellent points! However, Shaq's lack of defense (as evidenced in 0 first team all defense, only 3 2nd team all defense) has ever made him a liability, which is only one reason Duncan has the edge.

[QUOTE]Now these are excellent points![/QUOTE]
Why, because he used awards and statistics to prove a point, because that's all you're willing to listen to, and comprehand?

All-NBA and All-Defense only matter if you HAVEN'T watched the player or players being analyzed. They help to show off the strengths and weaknesses of players, and allow insight as to what people at the time thought of the player or players.

However, considering Shaq and Duncan are quite recent, and pretty much everyone who've replied in this thread (or are even on this board) have watched most of their careers play out, the awards aren't necissary. They aren't necissary because if you've seen both of these players play, the superior is really never in doubt.

[QUOTE]What Duncan fans have not mentioned is:

Duncan: Top-10 in scoring 5 times, in rebounding 9 times (twice runner-up), in FG% 6 times, in blocks 9 times, in PER rating 9 times (3 times runner-up).

Compared to:

Shaq: Top-10 in scoring 10 times (incl. [B]6[/B] times at top-2), in rebounding 7 times (3 times runner-up), in FG% [B]13 times (9 times 1st)[/B], in blocks 12 times (once 2nd), 14 times in PER rating (5 times 1st, each of which easily beats Duncan's best one).[/QUOTE]

This is somewhat misleading because Shaq is clearly in the twilight of his career. There won't be any more seasons where Shaq can crack top 10 in any of those categories. Duncan, however is in the prime of his career. He is going to rack up at least a few more top-10 in Rebounding, Blocks, and PER. Do you agree?

[QUOTE]Also, playoff-wise (till 2006):

[B]24.1/12.7/3.6/2.69 on 50% FG for Duncan.
25.6/12.2/2.2/2.20 on 57% FG for Shaq, including post-prime years.[/B]

Shaq has overall career dominance over Duncan.
Career-wise? Give me Shaq, either if Duncan wins it this year or not.[/QUOTE]

Not that I am diasagreeing with you, but the 2nd statline looks better to me. Anyone else notice the same thing? In reading your post, I was expecting to see some crazy dominance numbers of Shaq over Duncan, but your stats definitely does not prove your case.

[QUOTE]This is somewhat misleading because Shaq is clearly in the twilight of his career. There won't be any more seasons where Shaq can crack top 10 in any of those categories. Duncan, however is in the prime of his career. He is going to rack up at least a few more top-10 in Rebounding, Blocks, and PER. Do you agree?[/QUOTE]

He probably will, but he won't compile Shaq's "pole positions". I mean, for an elite player, it's much easier to just crack the top-10 than being No1 in a category. Shaq led the league in scoring twice and in FG% 9 times, equaling Wilt's record. And has around 10 more runner-up positions in various categories. It's like comparing Jordan's and English' scoring: Both were consistantly at top-10, but Jordan, with his 10 scoring titles, displayed a bigger dominance in this field. So goes it for Shaq's and Duncan's statistical dominance.

[QUOTE]Not that I am diasagreeing with you, but the 2nd statline looks better to me.[/QUOTE]

So we agree here. Shaq had the better statline.

[QUOTE]In reading your post, I was expecting to see some crazy dominance numbers of Shaq over Duncan, but your stats definitely does not prove your case.[/QUOTE]

Well, I remind you that I included Shaq's post-prime years. Duncan had produced the aforementioned up to the age of 30. If we compare them to Shaq's numbers up to 30, they become:

Duncan: 24.1/12.7/3.6/2.69 on 50% FG
Shaq: 28.2/12.7/3.2/2.25 on 56% FG

[QUOTE=Psileas]He probably will, but he won't compile Shaq's "pole positions". I mean, for an elite player, it's much easier to just crack the top-10 than being No1 in a category. Shaq led the league in scoring twice and in FG% 9 times, equaling Wilt's record. And has around 10 more runner-up positions in various categories. It's like comparing Jordan's and English' scoring: Both were consistantly at top-10, but Jordan, with his 10 scoring titles, displayed a bigger dominance in this field. So goes it for Shaq's and Duncan's statistical dominance.



So we agree here. Shaq had the better statline.



Well, I remind you that I included Shaq's post-prime years. Duncan had produced the aforementioned up to the age of 30. If we compare them to Shaq's numbers up to 30, they become:

[B]Duncan: 24.1/12.7/3.6/2.69 on 50% FG
Shaq: 28.2/12.7/3.2/2.25 on 56% FG[/B][/QUOTE]

Wow, that statline is still not very convincing. Do you see what I'm saying here? Duncan averages 4 less points, which is obvious since we all know that Shaq is clearly the superior scorer, but Duncan has been the better passer and defender. Looks to me like they are about dead even.

PS: You also have take in consideration that Shaq also has "more" years of declining ahead of him which will further drop his playoff numbers.

[QUOTE]Looks to me like they are about dead even.[/QUOTE]
How so? The 0.4 assist advantage and the 0.4 block advantage only help to even out that scoring edge. It's not like those are big differences between the two. And even if you were to think that those two stats completely evened out the scoring edge, you still have to take into consideration that Shaq is one of the msot efficient scorers on the block that this league has ever seen. 57% for his career. Duncan's 50% is no small feat, but it pails in comparison to Shaq. You could bring FT% into the mix, but it's not like either player is particularly efficient in that category.
[QUOTE]PS: You also have take in consideration that Shaq also has "more" years of declining ahead of him which will further drop his playoff numbers.[/QUOTE]
And Duncan doesn't?

[QUOTE=RidonKs]How so? The 0.4 assist advantage and the 0.4 block advantage only help to even out that scoring edge. It's not like those are big differences between the two. And even if you were to think that those two stats completely evened out the scoring edge, you still have to take into consideration that Shaq is one of the msot efficient scorers on the block that this league has ever seen. 57% for his career. Duncan's 50% is no small feat, but it pails in comparison to Shaq. You could bring FT% into the mix, but it's not like either player is particularly efficient in that category.

And Duncan doesn't?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, if you add in the difference in efficiency, Shaq has like a 7-9 ppg advantage on Duncan, which is [b]large[/b] -- certainly more than enough to offset the small difference in bpg.

[QUOTE=GOBB]Hank Aaron? :roll: Barry Bonds is better than Hank Aaron...not even a debate. Barry Bonds is this generations best baseball player and has an argument for GOAT. Horrible example...try using another sport because you dont know where Hank Aaron is ranked in terms of greatness. Damn sure aint on Bonds level.[/QUOTE]

Much as I despise every single thing about Bonds, there really is no debate about this. Bonds>Aaron. The End.

[QUOTE=RidonKs]How so? The 0.4 assist advantage and the 0.4 block advantage only help to even out that scoring edge. It's not like those are big differences between the two. And even if you were to think that those two stats completely evened out the scoring edge, you still have to take into consideration that Shaq is one of the msot efficient scorers on the block that this league has ever seen. 57% for his career. [B]Duncan's 50% is no small feat, but it pails in comparison to Shaq. You could bring FT% into the mix, but it's not like either player is particularly efficient in that category.[/B]

And Duncan doesn't?[/QUOTE]

I don't think thats fair. Duncan shoots a playoff career 70% from the FT line, which is nothing to brag about but its far more spectacular than Shaq's career 50% FT. You can't say that neither guy is efficient so lets throw away those stats. Thats the same difference as comparing an 85% FT shooter to a 65% FT shooter.

I'm a huge Duncan fan but even I think that Shaq has the edge right now as far as career goes, but I have no doubt Duncan will go down as the greater player once his career ends.

I just don't think those numbers represent a jawdropping difference to convince me that Shaq was clearly a greater player based on those numbers. A good arguement for Shaq is he was more dominant in his Peek Prime than Duncan ever was.

Shaq is the most dominate force the league has ever seen. Tim Duncan may be the greatest power foward ever but hes not greater than shaq, why would somebody even bring up this conversation shaq is better and will always be end of discussion.

[QUOTE=WeJustNeedaRing]Shaq is the most dominate force the league has ever seen. Tim Duncan may be the greatest power foward ever but hes not greater than shaq, why would somebody even bring up this conversation shaq is better and will always be end of discussion.[/QUOTE]
:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Wuxia]I don't think thats fair. Duncan shoots a playoff career 70% from the FT line, which is nothing to brag about but its far more spectacular than Shaq's career 50% FT. You can't say that neither guy is efficient so lets throw away those stats. Thats the same difference as comparing an 85% FT shooter to a 65% FT shooter.

I'm a huge Duncan fan but even I think that Shaq has the edge right now as far as career goes, but I have no doubt Duncan will go down as the greater player once his career ends.

I just don't think those numbers represent a jawdropping difference to convince me that Shaq was clearly a greater player based on those numbers. A good arguement for Shaq is he was more dominant in his Peek Prime than Duncan ever was.[/QUOTE]
:applause:

:pimp:

:violin:

:pimp:

:confusedshrug:

I think if you eliminated the times when poeticism has posted :pimp: faces, this thread would be 7 pages instead of 13. :)

[QUOTE=Loki]I think if you eliminated the times when poeticism has posted :pimp: faces, this thread would be 7 pages instead of 13. :)[/QUOTE]

I whole-heartedly disagree, Loki!

I haven't once posted this emoticon::) .

But now, it is somehow appropriate:

:)

[QUOTE=WeJustNeedaRing]Shaq is the most dominate force the league has ever seen. Tim Duncan may be the greatest power foward ever but hes not greater than shaq, why would somebody even bring up this conversation shaq is better and will always be end of discussion.[/QUOTE]

I'm sick of hearing this "Shaq was the most dominate force ever." Wilt Chamberlien was the most dominate to ever play teh game, period.

[QUOTE=Timmy D for MVP]I'm sick of hearing this "Shaq was the most dominate force ever." Wilt Chamberlien was the most dominate to ever play teh game, period.[/QUOTE]

Most dominant force that kept losing and by the time he won, he had to tone down his game and basically... STOP SCORING.

Again, I've said this countless times, stats from those days are too skewed, it means nothing.

Wilt is up there in terms of dominance, but hands down, the single most dominant ever? Not necessarily.

Shaq's 40-20s in the NBA FINALS against modern competition is more impressive than whtaever Wilt's playoff outputs were (which, by the way, were usualy lower than their regular season stats)

[QUOTE=EricForman]Most dominant force that kept losing and by the time he won, he had to tone down his game and basically... STOP SCORING.

Again, I've said this countless times, stats from those days are too skewed, it means nothing.

Wilt is up there in terms of dominance, but hands down, the single most dominant ever? Not necessarily.

Shaq's 40-20s in the NBA FINALS against modern competition is more impressive than whtaever Wilt's playoff outputs were (which, by the way, were usualy lower than their regular season stats)[/QUOTE]

Oh you're right, we must cripple a player due to his stats. Russells 11 rings, pshhh whatever, it was back then right?

Dominant: Providing superior influence, or control. Proving the most prominant/accending.

That describes Wilt better than anyone.

[QUOTE=Timmy D for MVP]Oh you're right, we must cripple a player due to his stats. Russells 11 rings, pshhh whatever, it was back then right?

Dominant: Providing superior influence, or control. Proving the most prominant/accending.

That describes Wilt better than anyone.[/QUOTE]

:violin:

Here are Tim Duncan and Shaq's career numbers and accomplishments

Lets take it to the scorecard as it stands right NOW:

titles: Shaq 4, Duncan 3
finals mvps: Shaq 3, duncan 3
season mvps: Shaq 1, Duncan 2
1st team all nba: Shaq 7, Duncan 9
1st team all defense: Shaq 0, Duncan 7 (Shaq only has 3 2nd team all defense!)
Shaq career: 25.9ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.8apg, 2.8bpg
Duncan Career: 21.8 ppg, 11.9rpg, 3.2apg, 2.4bpg

Now lets discuss the obvious. Shaq has been in the league 5 more years than Duncan, but only has one more title, both even in finals mvps, Duncan with one more season mvp at 2-1. Here is where it gets shocking: Shaq has been in the league over 14+ years, but only 7 first team all nba elections? That a mere 50%! Also, Shaq has never, not even once been voted first team all defense- with only 3, count it 3 total 2ND TEAM all defense selections! Wow! He's a bigger defensive liability than Steve Nash! Even with all this "dominant" scoring, career wise he leads Duncan by only four points in career average! It is obvious that all you who swear by Shaq's dominance have been utterly duped!

Anyone please look at these numbers and prove Shaq is better than Duncan! According to their career numbers and stats, Duncan is already ahead of Shaq, and its not even close! One more title and finals mvp will simply be icing on the cake.

[quote=poeticism707][B][COLOR=SlateGray]Shaq has been in the league 5 more years than Duncan,[/COLOR][/B][/quote]
[COLOR=Teal][B]during which he faced much better competition, not to mention he didn't have an ideal environment to thrive in like Duncan, i.e. an established superstar and an organization with great personnel (scouts, coaches etc..) that made the Spurs such a winning franchise of late.[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=sbw19][COLOR=Teal][B]during which he faced much better competition, not to mention he didn't have an ideal environment to thrive in like Duncan, i.e. an established superstar and an organaization with great personnel (scouts, coaches etc..) that made the Spurs such a winning franchise of late.[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Congradulations! You've just invalidated Magic Johnson and Bill Russel's ENITER CAREER! What has he won, Bob? His own stupidity.

[quote=poeticism707][COLOR=Gray][B]Congradulations! You've just invalidated Magic Johnson and Bill Russel's ENITER CAREER![/B][/COLOR][/quote]

[COLOR=Teal][B] No. I've pointed out two facts which helped Duncan become a winner that Shaq didn't have, and I believe them to be pertinent to this thread.[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=sbw19][COLOR=Teal][B] No. I've pointed out two facts which helped Duncan become a winner that Shaq didn't have, and I believe them to be pertinent to this thread.[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Shaq also played with Kobe and Wade, both obviously better than any of Duncan's teammates.

Phil Jackson= 9 titles

Greg Poppovich= 3 titles

Any other baseless arguments? :confusedshrug:

[quote=poeticism707][B][COLOR=Gray]Shaq also played with Kobe and Wade, both obviously better than any of Duncan's teammates.

Phil Jackson= 9 titles

Greg Poppovich= 3 titles

Any other baseless arguments?[/COLOR][/B] [/quote] [COLOR=Teal][B]
I meant during that five-year period.

But I'd have to say, the Spurs organization has been one of the best, if not THE BEST organization in the NBA during the last 10 years. And it certainly has been the most consistent.
[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Timmy D for MVP]Oh you're right, we must cripple a player due to his stats. Russells 11 rings, pshhh whatever, it was back then right?

Dominant: Providing superior influence, or control. Proving the most prominant/accending.

That describes Wilt better than anyone.[/QUOTE]

Shaq or Wilt both can be argued as the most dominant ever. Not that hard...you dont have to slight Shaq because he is being compared to Tim Duncan.

shaq had penny in his first 5 years along with a pretty damn good orlando cast.

to call drob a "superstar" while he was with duncan is really reaching. he was in the twilight of his career when duncan arrived. yes, he was effective, but hardly a superstar.

shaq has played with penny, kobe, and wade. i still dont understand why someone would take shaqs 3-5 years of dominance over tim duncan's CAREER of dominance. not to mention all of shaqs antics and drama that get in the way.

tim duncan is a professional and a winner at that. end of story.