Bucks: Tim Duncan is the third best player of all time..

[djohn2oo8]

It is funny though s are saying Robinson never had shooters when that 94-95 team shot 37% from 3 on the season with 434 3PM, and ranking 7th in the league in percentage.

[ambchang]

His playoff numbers are even less impressive when you factor in who the few big offensive series(statistically) came against.

1 was the 1990 Nuggets who defined the run and gun style.

27.7 ppg, 59.3 FG%, 63 TS% (pace in the series was 108.8)

The next series vs Portland he was down to 22.9 ppg on 50.4 FG%/55.8 TS%

Not bad, but not great and among the better series from his prime.

His playoff numbers also benefited from the run and gun early 90's West when he faced the Run TMC Warriors. When you see his numbers, you'll think he dominated.

25.8 ppg, 68.6 FG%, 76 TS%

But watch the series and not only will you see that he wasn't taking over those games, but you'll hear the commentators mention that his numbers seemed quiet. And then keep in mind that the Warriors were the 5th worst defensive team in the entire league and that Robinson's 55 win Spurs lost to the 44 win Warriors.

In fact, it was very normal for stars to put up huge numbers against the Warriors of this era. And this is one of the cases where the numbers look a lot better than the impact, as evidenced by him losing in 4 games to a team that won 11 fewer games.

The 3rd big playoff series offensively came against the '96 Suns when he averaged 30 ppg on 55.6 FG%/62 TS%, but similar to Golden State in '91, Phoenix was the 7th worst defensive team in the entire league(in a league with several expansion teams), and the worst in the entire playoffs. You'll see the drop vs Utah in that same playoffs.

And then there are these other series from Robinson's '90-'96 prime.

1993 1st round vs Portland- 19.3 ppg, 42.6 FG%, 48.7 TS%
1994 1st round vs Utah- 20 ppg, 41.1 FG%, 47.1 TS%
1995 1st round vs Denver- 19 ppg, 42.9 FG%, 49.3 TS%
1996 semifinals vs Utah- 19.3 ppg, 47.5 FG%, 52.6 TS%

Shows you that he was never as good of a scorer as his regular season numbers suggest. Choker.

He never was as good a scorer and Choker are two different things. I agree he never was a great scorer as his regular season suggest. He lives by the FT line, and he faces up most of the time, which makes his game comparatively easy to stop when the defense focuses on him, especially when his teammates can't nail open shots.

Magic Johnson shot 42% against the same Warriors team, so I am not entirely sure your comment on how common it is for superstars to put up great numbers.

As for run and gun West, Hakeem played in the runningest era of basketball in the late 80s, and he still managed to be bottled up by the Lakers and the Sonics. Did he choke in those series?

Not reading any of that due to the simple fact amb doesn't know that 3 point shooters don't open up the floor for the center, the center opens up the floor for the 3 point shooters to get open shots

Olajuwon: In our system, we knew that our strength was inside and that teams would try to guard me one-on-one. So it was our responsibility to force them to double-team. When they double-teamed, we had to spread the court with our shooters. So my job was to establish that inside game so that the outside guys could do their jobs: extend the court, make the 3-pointers.
But the problem was that if I didn't do my job and don't force them to double-team me, then my teammates all were affected. So the point was to make them pay by establishing that. So you have to have a single player with that ability to make the other teams pay. And there are some teams and coaches who will say, "Let him go one-on-one." We would change our game plan then to go inside, just to force them to double-team.

Amb. Guess David couldn't open up the floor in the playoffs

Apparently, Rudy T disagreed with you:

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/13/sp...it-on-top.html

It's a daily thing that we live by, there is not a guy on this team that won't get into a situation where they are shooting some 3-pointers in practice. That is just the way we live. That's a part of the Rockets' system.

To add to it, Hakeem doesn't agree with you either:

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/19941995.html

Yes, I agree, but I think it was because of this team, the style of play. We're playing team basketball, aggressive defense, hitting more outside shots which opened the floor and gave me more room to operate inside. And also, we played with more experience after what we had done last year.

djohn2oo8 didn't know how the Rockets championship teams work.
obvious that the strengths was hakeem, duh. Just that teams can't collapse on him when the guys are raining threes all day.

[ambchang]

It is funny though s are saying Robinson never had shooters when that 94-95 team shot 37% from 3 on the season with 434 3PM, and ranking 7th in the league in percentage.

It's even funnier that the team was only number 15 in 3PM, which means they are selective and feasted on teams that give them open shots.

What is even even funnier was that the Rockets made 646 3PM in the same year, about 50% more than the Spurs.

What's funniest is that the Spurs were shooting .335 in the playoffs, finishing 12th out of 16 playoff teams, and made 60 in 15 games. No teams playing more than 5 games that post season made less three pointers than the Spurs.

[djohn2oo8]

It's even funnier that the team was only number 15 in 3PM, which means they are selective and feasted on teams that give them open shots.

What is even even funnier was that the Rockets made 646 3PM in the same year, about 50% more than the Spurs.

What's funniest is that the Spurs were shooting .335 in the playoffs, finishing 12th out of 16 playoff teams, and made 60 in 15 games. No teams playing more than 5 games that post season made less three pointers than the Spurs.

What's funny is Hakeem won the year before with his team making just as many 3's in the regular season as David's the year after....So he won his first ring with them making about 200 less 3's than the year after.

(Drops Mic)

[I. Hustle]

What's funny is Hakeem won the year before with his team making just as many 3's in the regular season as David's the year after....So he won his first ring with them making about 200 less 3's than the year after.

(Drops Mic)

(picks up mic)

Then the Rockets died

(drops mic again)

[djohn2oo8]

(picks up mic)

Then the Rockets died

(drops mic again)

(picks up mic)

Like the Spurs' chances of a repeat.

(drops mic again)

[I. Hustle]

(picks up mic)

Like the Spurs' chances of a repeat.

(drops mic again)

(picks up mic)
(dusts it off)
(asks for another cover because this one has spit and hair all over it)

Like the Rockets' chances of ever doing anything ever again

(drops mic)
(steps on mic)

[Thread]

(picks up mic)
(dusts it off)
(asks for another cover because this one has spit and hair all over it)

Like the Rockets' chances of ever doing anything ever again

(drops mic)
(steps on mic)

(Drives out to the Carefree Highway)
(Orders cheeseburger, medium)
(Eats it)
(Comes back home)
(Takes nap)

Chow!

[djohn2oo8]

(picks up mic)
(dusts it off)
(asks for another cover because this one has spit and hair all over it)

Like the Rockets' chances of ever doing anything ever again

(drops mic)
(steps on mic)

(Picks up mic, stares at it, long pause)

Like the chances of the Spurs getting rid of Parker

(drops mic)
( s on it)

[K...]

(Picks up mic, stares at it, long pause)

Like the chances of the Spurs getting rid of Parker

(drops mic)
( s on it)

First off what's wrong with keeping the best point guard of the franchise,, two why would you on the Mic? That's just dumb.

[djohn2oo8]

First off what's wrong with keeping the best point guard of the franchise,, two why would you on the Mic? That's just dumb.

Parker is a cancer who is openly jealous of his teammates. Plus his skills have declined by ALOT.

[K...]

Parker is a cancer who is openly jealous of his teammates. Plus his skills have declined by ALOT.

You read this forum too much.

If he really were a cancer he wouldn't be paid the thank you contract,, he wouldn't have friends among other players, and more than one former team mate would call him out. The people who hate him hate all shoot first pg.


If you are not a Manu fan then it's suffice to say Parker just sucks. But most teams have crappy players. That does not make then cancerous.

[ambchang]

What's funny is Hakeem won the year before with his team making just as many 3's in the regular season as David's the year after....So he won his first ring with them making about 200 less 3's than the year after.

(Drops Mic)

You act like the nba didn't shorten the three point line that year.

Seriously, do you even know anything about how the rockets won those two championships and the impact it had to the rest of the league? You should be embarrassed to call yourself a rockets fan.

[djohn2oo8]

You act like the nba didn't shorten the three point line that year.

Seriously, do you even know anything about how the rockets won those two championships and the impact it had to the rest of the league? You should be embarrassed to call yourself a rockets fan.

Is that your retort? Because in your argument you said the only reason Hakeem won was because of great 3 point shooting, that means wherever the goddamn 3 point line is, they make it from. No, you are not changing the goalposts on this one. You lost. Get over it. His first ring was with shooters who didn't hit at a great clip that season.

chng

[ambchang]

Is that your retort? Because in your argument you said the only reason Hakeem won was because of great 3 point shooting, that means wherever the goddamn 3 point line is, they make it from. No, you are not changing the goalposts on this one. You lost. Get over it. His first ring was with shooters who didn't hit at a great clip that season.

chng

The previous season the rockets still led the league in 3pm by a pretty big margin, so your assertion of my assertion is still correct.

Unfortunately for you, that is not what I am arguing about. What I am saying is that great big men need outside shooting to open up the lane so that they can do their thing inside. It was true for wilt, Kareem, Moses, Hakeem, shaq, and Duncan.

Also, not exactly sure what I "lost" in. The rockets was the best three point shooting team by a significant margin the two years they ring. In 93 and 96, when Hakeem was just as good, the rockets finished second and didn't ring.

[djohn2oo8]

The previous season the rockets still led the league in 3pm by a pretty big margin, so your assertion of my assertion is still correct.

Unfortunately for you, that is not what I am arguing about. What I am saying is that great big men need outside shooting to open up the lane so that they can do their thing inside. It was true for wilt, Kareem, Moses, Hakeem, shaq, and Duncan.

Also, not exactly sure what I "lost" in. The rockets was the best three point shooting team by a significant margin the two years they ring. In 93 and 96, when Hakeem was just as good, the rockets finished second and didn't ring.

That 94 team shot 33% on 3PA in the regular season. They were not a great 3pt shooting team. Now you are combining the years when it shows in 94 they didn't shoot great that season, they made the most because they took the most attempts and shot horribly at it (33%). They got better in the playoffs because teams were forced to double Hakeem. And then, it was only Horry, Cassell, and Smith. That team was not full of three point shooters and that is why you keep attempting to move then goalposts. The Spurs in 95 were more efficient on their 3 point shots than that 94 Rockets team. So, again, Robinson has no excuse. Hakeem rang first without a great 3 point shooting team. You lose. Again. And no, Hakeem was not as good in 96 as he was in 94 and 95....His PEAK seasons.

[da_suns_fan]

What difference does it make? Theres literally no way Spurs fan will ever admit that maybe theyre grossly overrating their respective players.

But do you think youre fooling anyone? You think anyone really believes David Robinson was better than Hakeem Olajuwon?

Do you think anyone even knows who Tim Duncan IS?

[K...]

What difference does it make? Theres literally no way Spurs fan will ever admit that maybe theyre grossly overrating their respective players.

But do you think youre fooling anyone? You think anyone really believes David Robinson was better than Hakeem Olajuwon?

Not many. But it's true that David Robison is underrated, hakeem is about right or overrated. Shaq is controversial and always will be because of the " if he had...." factor.

Do you think anyone even knows who Tim Duncan IS?

Only the people who matter.

Post moves are a declining art. Duncan was the last great post player.

[K...]

Just a reminder, this thread was created by professional troll. If you posted more than three times in this you were trolled.

[ambchang]

That 94 team shot 33% on 3PA in the regular season. They were not a great 3pt shooting team. Now you are combining the years when it shows in 94 they didn't shoot great that season, they made the most because they took the most attempts and shot horribly at it (33%). They got better in the playoffs because teams were forced to double Hakeem. And then, it was only Horry, Cassell, and Smith. That team was not full of three point shooters and that is why you keep attempting to move then goalposts. The Spurs in 95 were more efficient on their 3 point shots than that 94 Rockets team. So, again, Robinson has no excuse. Hakeem rang first without a great 3 point shooting team. You lose. Again. And no, Hakeem was not as good in 96 as he was in 94 and 95....His PEAK seasons.

The more you talk, the more it shows you have little understand of the impact and legacy of "your" Rockets championship teams.

33% 3P shooting is not horrible by 1994 standards, in fact, they were right around average (15 out of 27 teams) at .334. it would have been horrible if it was 2016, but the use of the 3 pter evolved tremendously since then, and precisely BECAUSE of the Rockets. The most accurate shooting team that year was the Pacers, and they shot .368, but only made 184 3 pters on 500 attempts. For comparison, the Rockets MADE 429 3pters that year. Only 6 teams shot over 35% that year and 10 above 34%, so I wouldn't call 33.4% "horribly" by any stretch of imagination. In an era where top teams were shooting around 1000 3 pters throughout the entire season, the different between a .368 and .334 3 pt shooting team is about 1 to 1.5 points a game. However, if you compare the #1 3PM team in 94 and the #15 3PM team that same season (Clippers with 252 makes), the difference is 6.5 points per game.

To say that Horry, Cassell and Smith were the "only" 3 point shooters on the Rockets is bogus. Vernon Maxwell makes 1.6 3pters a game (at a low %, which made the Rocket's overall 3p% "horrible") and was a major threat. Scott Brooks and Mario Elie was shooting a high percent (but low volume). The numbers were even more impressive in the playoffs.

There is not question Hakeem was a beast those two playoffs, and hats off to him, and he certainly enabled that inside out offense. He even made the careers of players like Elie, Horry, Cassell, Smith and Maxwell, because without Hakeem, those guys will be just journey man drifting around and being challenged on every 3 pter they make. But without those players (or similar replacements) and Rudy T's system, Hakeem would be another Charles Barkley or Karl Malone, a brilliant individual player with no rings to show for it. And yes, you get the name of any superstar, and if they toiled their entire careers on teams that were not built to amplify their strengths and cover their weaknesses, they would all be ringless.

What goal posts have I moved? I have remained consistent in saying that the Rockets were great 3 pt shooting teams and forever changed how the NBA offense worked. The Spurs were more efficient that year? What does that mean when you combine with their comparatively low number of 3PM? It means that they were opportunistic and it wasn't a part of their offense. The delta in %s are so small that the top and the middle team in 94 translated to a difference of about a point a game, where as the attempts translates to 6.5 points a game. If that doesn't tell you how a barrage of 3 pters forces teams to cover the three point line and opens up the lane, I don't know what will.

You seemed to be obsessed about declaring victories on points that you are wrong on (or at best at dispute). I am not sure why you are in such a hurry to do so? Does it make you feel better? You don't even seem to know what allowed your favourite team to win two championships, and you go around and start to say you are winning? Winning at what? Being exposed?

Hakeem AND Rudy T both talked about how important the 3 pter was to the offense of those teams, but no, you won because you start looking at things that make a 1 pt difference in a game.

Hakeem was just as good in 96, his teammates weren't though. Both his advanced and traditional stats saw a marginal dip, but that somehow transformed the Rockets from a championship team to being swept in the 2nd round. He was still really good in the first round, but then, according to you, just decided to choke against the Sonics to get swept in the next.

[ambchang]

What difference does it make? Theres literally no way Spurs fan will ever admit that maybe theyre grossly overrating their respective players.

But do you think youre fooling anyone? You think anyone really believes David Robinson was better than Hakeem Olajuwon?

Do you think anyone even knows who Tim Duncan IS?

ESPN:
Duncan: 8
Shaq: Lower than 8
Hakeem: Lower than 8.