Jeff McDonald: Duncan as Kareem? [Archive]

Bruno

10-23-2007, 01:03 PM

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/courtside/archives/2007/10/jeff_mcdonald_d_1.html

Weblogs
Courtside
October 23, 2007

MIAMI -- Pat Riley has coached Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Pat Riley has also coached Shaquille O'Neal. Good news for Spurs fans: Pat Riley says Tim Duncan reminds him of the former, and not the latter.

"Duncan reminds me a lot of Kareem," Riley, the Miami Heat coach, said after this morning's shootaround. "Kareem wasn't a physical center, he was a finesse center. And he played until he was 41 years old."

More than that, Jabbar remained one of the league's most dominant players well into his late 30s. In 1986, at age 38, Jabbar averaged 23.4 points per game.

Riley's point: Big men like Duncan and Jabbar, who rely more on their mind and their touch than sheer physical strength and skill, tend to have a longer shelf life in the NBA.

Meanwhile, players whose main strength is their strength -- like O'Neal -- often begin to show their age much sooner. O'Neal's body has begun to betray him the past couple seasons. At age 34, he is obviously on the downslope of his Hall-of-Fame career. This preseason, O'Neal has been plagued with a strained calf muscle. (He's expected to play in tonight's game after sitting out the previous two).

But back to Kareem ...

"I didn't start coaching Kareem until he was 32 years old," Riley said. "And he played nine more years after that. And he won four more championships after that."

Riley says he wouldn't be surprised if Duncan accomplished something similar, in terms of both success and longevity. Spurs fans can only hope he's right.

Hemotivo

10-23-2007, 01:05 PM

Kareem (Center)
Duncan (Power Forward)

Summers

10-23-2007, 01:12 PM

Kareem (Center)
Duncan (Power Forward)

Semantics.

urunobili

10-23-2007, 01:55 PM

he definitively does not utilize his full body strength and has learned from Pop how to administer the energy for the right time... i said he would retire with 8 rings... we'll c what happens...

some_user86

10-23-2007, 02:21 PM

he definitively does not utilize his full body strength and has learned from Pop how to administer the energy for the right time... i said he would retire with 8 rings... we'll c what happens...

I think that's a pipe dream. Everytime we win a championship, us Spurs fans seem to become so cocky.

barbacoataco

10-23-2007, 02:27 PM

People have been saying for years that Duncan has the potential to play well later in his career. I think the other issue is that since he is a family man, will he want to play into his late 30's? Nobody knows the answer to that question, although I'm sure people have opinions.

thispego

10-23-2007, 03:06 PM

LEN BIAS 4EVER

10-23-2007, 04:16 PM

Kareem was an asshole. I remember when I was in the 3rd grade and I asked him for an autograph his bodyguard said "no autographs kid". I got Tom Lagarde's auto that night though and latter in the season Dr. J shook my hand and talked to me for a minute while signing an auto.

So when three years latter his house caught on fire I wasn't suprised. Karma's a bitch and so was his old raggedy ass.

whottt

10-23-2007, 05:22 PM

Kareem never signed autographs for anyone...his choice in a free country. At least he was consistent about it.

I agree Duncan is from the Kareem school and that those guys tend to last longer(IMO, Malone was from the Kareem school as well, he was just the class delinquent)...

But here's the deal...Kareem went 7'2 and was arguably the best conditioned bigman in the league, one of the most co-ordinated, and as well one of the fastest...even when he got old, he was a mismatch for most 7 footers...

There was no one 7'0 that could match his speed and coordination...

So while I do think Duncan can play until he's 40, I don't think he'll remain as dominant as Kareem was late in his career....he'll decline more. He lacks Kareem's size and speed. But yeah...Duncan's skill will allow him to play late into his 30's and still be effective should he choose to do so, but he'll decline a little bit more than Kareem did as he ages.

lrrr

10-23-2007, 05:30 PM

Shaq doesn't rely on his strength alone, it was his combination of strength and agility/speed.

nfg3

10-23-2007, 07:15 PM

exstatic

10-23-2007, 07:22 PM

It would be sweet for TD to play well into his 30's and get more rings but I really don't think he will. IMHO I think he will play another 4 - 6 years and then get out. He's the cerebral type individual who after accomplishing much then heads of to do something else. Similar to Drob. Drob could have played at least 2 - 3 years or more but decided to hang it up to pursue other interests.

We need to appreciate TD while he stilll is here. Amazing how we Spurs fans seem to take him for granted at times.
:lol In 4 - 6 years, Tim will be 34-36 years old. I think that qualifies as "well into his 30's", don't you? He's under contract for 3 more seasons, and I think if those are healthy seasons, he might be open to maybe 2-3 more. Although he could play more, anything beyond that is wishful thinking.

David couldn't have played another month. He retired because he had a bad back. He had other interests, but I don't think that was the driver behind his retirement.

whottt

10-23-2007, 07:47 PM

Well...Drob played until he was 38...which is pretty old for a guy from the athleticism school....part of the reason is because he didn't start playing pro till he was about 25 years old.

whottt

10-23-2007, 07:49 PM

David couldn't have played another month. He retired because he had a bad back.

Disagree....Drob could have played a little longer, but it would have been an on and off sort of thing, healthwise...

But even an old and broken down Drob minus most of his athleticism was still one of the fastest and most athletic C's in the NBA.

He wouldn't have put up great numbers or been a realiable member of the rotation, he definitely wouldn't have been able to play back to back nights...but he still would have been better than Rasho or Nazr.

Ocotillo

10-23-2007, 07:50 PM

. I think the other issue is that since he is a family man, will he want to play into his late 30's?

Being a family man rather than out partying on the road that helps extend the old career.

ehz33satx

10-23-2007, 11:15 PM

Drob could have played at least 2 - 3 years or more but decided to hang it up to pursue other interests.

What makes you think that? David had a terrible bad back. How do you think he could play 2-3 more years? You are supposing, just like your supposing with Tim Duncan and him "ONLY" wanting to play 4 more years so he can be with his family. You don't know how either thinks.

K-State Spur

10-24-2007, 12:27 AM

duncan's skilled, but i don't think i'd call him finesse. he uses his strength much more than I think people realize.

timvp

10-24-2007, 12:31 AM

lrrr

10-24-2007, 12:32 AM

duncan's skilled, but i don't think i'd call him finesse. he uses his strength much more than I think people realize.

Agreed. And even though Kareem did possess a lot of finesse, so much of what a center does relies on them having the strength to be in position to begin with. Shaq on the other hand has very little finesse. Kareem and Duncan could shoot from further than 3 feet on a consistent basis.

Strength does not leave an athlete as quickly as agility. That's why Kareem could play as long as he did. And hopefully that will be the case for Tim too.

STBN_CBN

10-24-2007, 01:15 AM

Kareem was very athletic through his career, even in his later days. Duncan is more fundamentally sound and skilled than he is athletic. Not the greatest of comparisons.

whottt

10-24-2007, 01:19 AM

Eh, style of play has little to do with how long a bigman can play basketball. I see very little historical connection to the athleticism (or lack thereof) of a bigman and their career length.

For example, Brad Daugherty had a similar style to Duncan, played less games per year, shied away from contact ... and he was still done at 28. David Robinson relied heavily on athleticism and he was still a championship caliber player at 38. Shaquille O'Neal has put more wear and tear on his body over the years than about five average centers combined ... and he's still going relatively strong going into his 16th season. In fact, when Shaq was young, everyone said Shaq would have to retire young due to his size and style of play.

Career length is basically luck. If you can avoid major injuries and you have the right genes, you can play into your 40's. I see no rhyme or reason to it. I'd like to hope Duncan could play for a long time but that's impossible to tell. We could be witnessing the last couple years of Duncan's career ... or we could just be in the middle of his run. It's impossible to tell.

That said, what is pretty exciting is that sometimes bigmen peak later in their careers. for example, Hakeem peaked at around 33 years of age. He became a vastly improved player from the age of 30 to age 33. If Duncan can take a similar leap, that'd be nice.

:smokin

Gotta disagree here...

Drob and Shaq are two of the most athletic freaks to ever play the game...they had a lot of athleticism to lose.

Drob still only played 14 years or so....Shaq is about done.

Wilt was done after 13 years.

No, it's just common sense to me...athleticism leaves before skill leaves.

Anyone reliant primarily on their athleticism is going to have a tougher time lasting...

Athleticism = body
Skill = mind

There are some freaks that remain athletic way past the time of the typical player...but they are the extreme exception to the rule.

Most of the times the guys that last the longest are the guys the rely on their mental attributes more.

You don't see many players lasting till 40...and those that do, aren't doing it because they can jump out of the gym.

Eventually...the physical decline wins out...no matter how skilled.

Whether it's losing the ability to move...or just the body breaking down...the physical decline always has the ultimate say.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 02:13 AM

Eh, style of play has little to do with how long a bigman can play basketball. I see very little historical connection to the athleticism (or lack thereof) of a bigman and their career length.

For example, Brad Daugherty had a similar style to Duncan, played less games per year, shied away from contact ... and he was still done at 28. David Robinson relied heavily on athleticism and he was still a championship caliber player at 38. Shaquille O'Neal has put more wear and tear on his body over the years than about five average centers combined ... and he's still going relatively strong going into his 16th season. In fact, when Shaq was young, everyone said Shaq would have to retire young due to his size and style of play.

Career length is basically luck. If you can avoid major injuries and you have the right genes, you can play into your 40's. I see no rhyme or reason to it. I'd like to hope Duncan could play for a long time but that's impossible to tell. We could be witnessing the last couple years of Duncan's career ... or we could just be in the middle of his run. It's impossible to tell.

That said, what is pretty exciting is that sometimes bigmen peak later in their careers. for example, Hakeem peaked at around 33 years of age. He became a vastly improved player from the age of 30 to age 33. If Duncan can take a similar leap, that'd be nice.

:smokinI would dispute that Shaq is "going strong".

He's played 981 out of 1198 possible regular season games over 15 years. Even pro-rating for 1999, that only averages out to 67/82 games per year.

I haven't gone through the list of the top centers, but I'm positive that if that's not THE worst durability record among them, it's way up there.

Sure, anyone can have an injury. But in Shaq's case it's been multiple different injuries over multiple years (he's had FIVE out of 14 seasons of 60 games or less, not counting 1999, and 8/14 seasons of less than 70 games, which is a record that could only be beaten by Bill Walton), and the overwelming majority of those has probably been related to him being out of shape.

That's the blemish that keeps Shaq a tier below Kareem, Russell, and Wilt(*). Those other guys all showed up ready to play on day 1 and brought it night in and out, every game, every season.

(*)Well, that, and being The Big Most Swept Ever, which may actually be a related issue.

timvp

10-24-2007, 02:44 AM

Gotta disagree here...Actually, I didn't see much disagreement in your post. The points you disagreed on were points I didn't make.

My point was that simply not relying on athleticism isn't enough to predict that a player will play until they are 40. Plenty of players who even in their prime relied on smarts still were out of the game in their early-30's. And then there are other players who adjusted from being an athletic freak to being a cerebral player (Robert Horry, Cliff Robinson ... to name a couple recent examples).

Being a cerebral player doesn't mean you can play until you are 40. Just like being an athletic-based player doesn't mean you'll be out of the league at 32. It's much more random than that.

timvp

10-24-2007, 02:47 AM

Regular season stats.

Seriously though, how does Shaq compare to others as far as missing games that count? Duncan and Robinson both missed a playoff run with injuries. Shaq, while he is lazy in the regular season, has been pretty darn healthy during the playoffs over the years.

I'd be interested in a breakdown of the best bigman of all-time and the percentage of playoff games they missed.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 03:25 AM

Playoff games missed, career:

Russell 0
Abdul-Jabbar 1 (the Magic Johnson game vs. the Sixers)
Chamberlain 0
Shaquille O'Neal 2

David Robinson 10 (3 games missed due to season-ending injury)
Tim Duncan 5 (4 games missed due to season-ending injury, 1 game missed due to father's death)

So now we've established that despite loafing through the regular season, Shaq still has missed more playoff games than Russell, Chamberlain, and Kareem COMBINED. And probably got swept more than those three COMBINED.

As for Duncan and Robinson, yeah, they've missed some. Season-ending injuries you can't do anything about. Robinson had chronic back problems that he played through. They still didn't loaf.

And we still haven't addressed that Shaq is mostly out due to weight issues that are self-inflicted.

He a top-five center all-time no question. But this image of him as Most Dominant Ever is just a joke.

timvp

10-24-2007, 03:38 AM

Nice research :tu

Only two missed games for Shaq is pretty impressive, seeing as how he has played something like two-thirds of his regular season games. He has never played 82 games in a season but played something ~164 consecutive playoff games. That's interesting and points to laziness more than it does being injury prone.

timvp

10-24-2007, 03:40 AM

So now we've established that despite loafing through the regular season, Shaq still has missed more playoff games than Russell, Chamberlain, and Kareem COMBINED.You've also established that Duncan has missed more playoff games than Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar and O'Neal COMBINED.

Basically, it appears that dominant centers have shown the ability to play through pain when necessary.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 03:43 AM

On one hand, you could argue that if Shaq hadn't been so lazy, kept in shape, and played 75-80 games a year, he would have been retired by now.

But on the other, you could also argue that if he had a Karl Malone-like ethic, he would still be averaging 20 and 10 and the Heat would be winning 60 games in the East. Or he'd still be with the Lakers.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 03:50 AM

You've also established that Duncan has missed more playoff games than Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar and O'Neal COMBINED.

Basically, it appears that dominant centers have shown the ability to play through pain when necessary.Some of that is luck and timing. All of those guys had at least one year where they were out for an extended time with an injury. (Hell, Chamberlain only played 12 regular season games in 69-70, and then 18 playoff games.) Duncan was apparently the only one whose most serious injury came at the very end of the year.

But then, if Duncan had been playing in the 60s or 70s, they would have thrown his ass back out on the court for a meniscal tear.

timvp

10-24-2007, 03:54 AM

But on the other, you could also argue that if he had a Karl Malone-like ethic, he would still be averaging 20 and 10 and the Heat would be winning 60 games in the East. Or he'd still be with the Lakers.Or if Karl Malone would have had O'Neal's ability to up his game in the playoffs, Malone would have found a way to win a championship with a top three point guard of all-time and a top ten coach of all-time.

:stirpot:

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 03:57 AM

Oh, I'm not going to defend Malone's playoff performance. But I just can't praise a guy for sandbagging during the regular season.

And Jerry Sloan, top ten coach? I'll have to think about that one.

Axl Van Dam

10-24-2007, 05:43 AM

mathbzh

10-24-2007, 08:09 AM

That said, what is pretty exciting is that sometimes bigmen peak later in their careers. for example, Hakeem peaked at around 33 years of age. He became a vastly improved player from the age of 30 to age 33.

Hakeem didn't peaked that late. His 88/89 or 89/90 seasons (26 to 29) are arguably his best seasons and at 34 he had already started declining.

Reggie Miller

10-24-2007, 08:48 AM

I'm not sure if there is a optimum height for health reasons, but the "really big" bigs decline fast. It is probably a result of their weight more than anything else. Duncan is not that heavy, which will help.

I have seen references to bigs who developed abnormally (grew too far too fast) and have had health problems. I wonder if this is true of Oden. I assume this may have been true for Bowie. Duncan does not seem to be affected by anything like that based on his career so far.

Not to pick on Oden, who seems like a good kid, but I really do wonder about him. At this time last year, I remember commenting that it looked like he might have some sort of thyroid or pituitary gland problem.

Reggie Miller

10-24-2007, 09:06 AM

But here's the deal...Kareem went 7'2 and was arguably the best conditioned bigman in the league, one of the most co-ordinated, and as well one of the fastest...even when he got old, he was a mismatch for most 7 footers...

I forgot to mention Kareem. There is no question that Kareem was about 10 years ahead of the curve on conditioning. Also, people forget the "Nation of Islam Factor." Assuming Kareem adhered to NOI tenets consistently, this meant no smoking, no drinking, and eating mostly healthy foods during his NOI years. If you're not out partying into the small hours and eating junk food, that has to help.

whottt

10-24-2007, 11:07 AM

I forgot to mention Kareem. There is no question that Kareem was about 10 years ahead of the curve on conditioning. Also, people forget the "Nation of Islam Factor." Assuming Kareem adhered to NOI tenets consistently, this meant no smoking, no drinking, and eating mostly healthy foods during his NOI years. If you're not out partying into the small hours and eating junk food, that has to help.

I can assure you that Kareem...did not, and still doesn't...adhere to strict NOI tenets...

Kareem, he like the ganj...

Now there's something...

You think of two guys that stayed effective into their 40's...

Kareem, Robert Parish...

Think about what they had in common :smokin

Reggie Miller

10-24-2007, 01:16 PM

I can assure you that Kareem...did not, and still doesn't...adhere to strict NOI tenets...

Kareem, he like the ganj...

Now there's something...

You think of two guys that stayed effective into their 40's...

Kareem, Robert Parish...

Think about what they had in common :smokin

Well, I'll file that under "Learn Something New Every Day." It doesn't surprise me, but I sure didn't know that about him.

whottt

10-24-2007, 02:12 PM

Well, I'll file that under "Learn Something New Every Day." It doesn't surprise me, but I sure didn't know that about him.

Kareem's been busted multiple times for possession of marijuana...

Reggie Miller

10-24-2007, 02:50 PM

Kareem's been busted multiple times for possession of marijuana...

During his playing days or afterwards? Just curious.

whottt

10-24-2007, 04:40 PM

During his playing days or afterwards? Just curious.

Late 90's...

He might have had some stuff prior to that...but he def got popped a couple of times in the 90's...and the 00's.

I see where you are going with this...

People generally don't take up smoking herb for the first time in their mid 50's...

T Park

10-24-2007, 04:44 PM

Im sure he got busted in the 80s, but he was so godlike, and still is, in LA that it was easily swept under the rug.

The internet not being prevelent in the 80s also aided.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 06:06 PM

Actually, if you read Giant Steps, Kareem was pretty open about it.

Russ

10-24-2007, 07:07 PM

whottt

10-24-2007, 09:32 PM

Actually, if you read Giant Steps, Kareem was pretty open about it.

http://www.hkcinemagic.com/en/images/people/thumb/le_jeu_de_la_mort_kareem_abdul_jabbar2_51bab49534a b666ae1c37f9e4a3ff81a.jpg

I bet he's done more than just some herb...

Being in LA in the mid late sixties...probably a whole lot more than herb.

ShoogarBear

10-24-2007, 09:34 PM

http://www.hkcinemagic.com/en/images/people/thumb/le_jeu_de_la_mort_kareem_abdul_jabbar2_51bab49534a b666ae1c37f9e4a3ff81a.jpg

I bet he's done more than just some herb...

Being in LA in the mid late sixties...probably a whole lot more than herb.http://www.abstractdigitalartgallery.com/fractal-digital-art-print-psychedelic-self-print-WEBartgallery.jpg

whottt

10-24-2007, 09:37 PM

I think the comparison is bang on and I have believed it for some time.

But it's not just athleticism vs. fundamentals. It's body type mostly. Also efficiency of motion, smoothness -- they even play with that same impassive look (although Tim's aloofness is much more benign than Kareem's was).

There are significant differences as well -- Kareem played true center and never rebounded or played D like Tim. He wasn't a leader or a popular locker-room guy like Tim, either. But the similarities that go to longevity are striiking.

Lame...Kareem was a pretty good leader, he just wasn't an emotional one...but he knew to play the game, and he knew how to make his teamates better...and his credo was alway the team is more important than the invidual...and he backed that up on more than one occasion.

Kareem's a smart smart dude, about basketball, and other things...and if he was an NBA coach, he'd probably be considered one of the best...

And for a guy that couldn't rebound...he sure could rebound.

Ditto D...he's like second or third on the all time blocks list and they didn't even count the stat for the first 5 years of his career...he could also pass.

Pretty much nothing Kareem couldn't do and didn't understand about the game of basketball...he gets it better than most coaches.

He had a lot of help to win all his titles...but when he got that help he did just what you are supposed to do with it...and then some.

And as someone else mentioned, he was way ahead of his time on things like conditioning...and a lot of other things as well.

Russ

10-25-2007, 08:21 AM

Lame...Kareem was a pretty good leader, he just wasn't an emotional one...

Actually, until Magic arrived, the Lakers had no leader and won nothing with Kareem. Ditto, Milwaukee without Oscar. Or as Kareem, himself, put it before Magic arrived, "I just show up and shoot a few hook shots."

Kareem's a smart smart dude, about basketball, and other things...and if he was an NBA coach, he'd probably be considered one of the best...

No one in a position to hire NBA coaches has ever concurred.

And for a guy that couldn't rebound...he sure could rebound.

He could rebound, no doubt, he just chose not to. Given his longeveity and height, his career rebound stats were bound to be good -- just nowhere close to what they could have been. Russell and Chamberlain averaged twice as many rebounds/game as Kareem.

Ditto D...he's like second or third on the all time blocks list and they didn't even count the stat for the first 5 years of his career...

Blocks = D?

Reggie Miller

10-25-2007, 08:26 AM

Late 90's...

He might have had some stuff prior to that...but he def got popped a couple of times in the 90's...and the 00's.

I see where you are going with this...

People generally don't take up smoking herb for the first time in their mid 50's...

When you assume, you make an ass of...

I was just curious why I hadn't heard about it. I would agree that it was more likely he started as a teenager or at UCLA.

EDIT: He was also a student of Bruce Lee, who smoked reefer or hashish (not sure which). Supposedly, an allergic reaction to hashish played a role in Lee's edema. Obviously, there are a lot of conspiracy theories and disinformation surrounding Lee's death, so who knows?

degenerate_gambler

10-25-2007, 08:30 AM

Kareem was a bad, bad dude.

Ask Bruce Lee...

http://refernet.typepad.com/jdragon/2007/06/bruce_lee_vs_ka.html

Reggie Miller

10-25-2007, 08:31 AM

Kareem was a bad, bad dude.

Ask Bruce Lee...

http://refernet.typepad.com/jdragon/2007/06/bruce_lee_vs_ka.html

Either great minds think alike or coincindences abound...

whottt

10-25-2007, 08:35 AM

Actually, until Magic arrived, the Lakers had no leader and won nothing with Kareem. Ditto, Milwaukee without Oscar. Or as Kareem, himself, put it before Magic arrived, "I just show up and shoot a few hook shots."

And how many titles did they win without him?

No one in a position to hire NBA coaches has ever concurred.

And since all of them are so successful....

He could rebound, no doubt, he just chose not to. Given his longeveity and height, his career rebound stats were bound to be good -- just nowhere close to what they could have been. Russell and Chamberlain averaged twice as many rebounds/game as Kareem.

He lead the league in rebounding....

How many times has Duncan lead the league in rebounding?

Or blocks?

Blocks = D?

Yes...blocks = d...effort put out on the defensive end of the court...

You got a better stat?

whottt

10-25-2007, 08:43 AM

When you assume, you make an ass of...

My bad...

I ASSUmed there was a point and reason for asking that question...

I won't make that mistake with you again.

I was just curious why I hadn't heard about it. I would agree that it was more likely he started as a teenager or at UCLA.

Because you either weren't watching basketball then, or weren't paying attention?

EDIT: He was also a student of Bruce Lee, who smoked reefer or hashish (not sure which). Supposedly, an allergic reaction to hashish played a role in Lee's edema. Obviously, there are a lot of conspiracy theories and disinformation surrounding Lee's death, so who knows?

If Lee was killed by Hash he's the first and only person in history to be so...allergic reaction, or otherwise...

Russ

10-25-2007, 09:02 AM

Yes...blocks = d...effort put out on the defensive end of the court...

You got a better stat?
Not really. Maybe points/game allowed by your team? That's the problem, individual defensive play doesn't translate to stats. (No one would suggest steals as a barometer, right?)

It's a matter of opinion.

Same with leadership, etc.

You think Kareem was a great leader. I disagree.

You think Kareem was an intellectual. I disagree -- he was just in a position as a top player on a popular team to intimidate those (like reporters) who questioned his stony demeanor. Thus, they presented it as thoughtfulness.

You think Kareem would make a great coach. I disagree. We'll never know.

You think Kareem played better D and rebounded better than Duncan. I disagree.

But the comparison between Kareem and Duncan re longevity, I think, is quite corrrect.

polandprzem

10-25-2007, 09:06 AM

Kareem was a bad, bad dude.

Ask Bruce Lee...

http://refernet.typepad.com/jdragon/2007/06/bruce_lee_vs_ka.html

That's why there should be a seprate MMA forum :drunk

polandprzem

10-25-2007, 09:11 AM

http://www.steinersports.com/ssm/p/01/225/01225_jabbphs016014.jpg

Reggie Miller

10-25-2007, 09:44 AM

What ever happended to that Lew Alcindor fellow? I hear he was a pretty good big man...

mystargtr34

10-25-2007, 11:18 AM

Kareem was a very solid rebounder until he hit his mid 30's. His rebound rate, adjusted for minutes played and pace factor (important to consider when comparing different eras). He hovered around 18 for most of his career, topped at 19.6 one year (Duncan's career high is 19.4). But Tim has been right on about 19 nearly every season except his first couple. Kareem had a few seasons around the 15 mark during his prime which isnt particularly great for a C.

Wilt was at a consistent 20, which shows how inflated the rebounding numbers were in the 60's, his rate was about the same as a Kevin Garnett or Dwight Howard.

Man In Black

10-25-2007, 11:45 AM

EDIT: He was also a student of Bruce Lee, who smoked reefer or hashish (not sure which). Supposedly, an allergic reaction to hashish played a role in Lee's edema. Obviously, there are a lot of conspiracy theories and disinformation surrounding Lee's death, so who knows?

Sorry. True Bruce Lee fans know that Bruce died of from swelling of the brain which was caused by an allergic reaction to a medication called Eqaugesic.

And Whott talks about Kareem's ability with this statement:

But here's the deal...Kareem went 7'2 and was arguably the best conditioned bigman in the league, one of the most co-ordinated, and as well one of the fastest...even when he got old, he was a mismatch for most 7 footers...

I'd like to point out that when one truly relies on his fundamental brilliance, it doesn't matter as much about his athleticism. Also, if we're talking conditioning, they why is it you don't talk about Tim's past life as a US-ranked swimmer? It's something that Tim has mentioned on Inside The NBA. 10,000 meters everyday in the off-season. It helps keep up his endurance and since it's non weight-bearing, it helps keep his body in tip-top shape. I don't want to discredit Kareem but at the same time, I don't want someone's opinion to misrepresent the work that TD does to continue his assault on the ALL-NBA and ALL-NBA D teams.

whottt

10-25-2007, 09:53 PM

Sorry. True Bruce Lee fans know that Bruce died of from swelling of the brain which was caused by an allergic reaction to a medication called Eqaugesic.

And Whott talks about Kareem's ability with this statement:

I'd like to point out that when one truly relies on his fundamental brilliance, it doesn't matter as much about his athleticism.

Athleticism + Skill > Skill

Speed + skill > Skill

Kareem was IMO, the best running bigman in the NBA, until his very last day on the court.

Also, if we're talking conditioning, they why is it you don't talk about Tim's past life as a US-ranked swimmer? It's something that Tim has mentioned on Inside The NBA. 10,000 meters everyday in the off-season. It helps keep up his endurance and since it's non weight-bearing, it helps keep his body in tip-top shape. I don't want to discredit Kareem but at the same time, I don't want someone's opinion to misrepresent the work that TD does to continue his assault on the ALL-NBA and ALL-NBA D teams.

I'm not misrepresenting anything about Duncan...nor am I attacking...

What occurred here was, someone said Kareem couldn't rebound...when in fact, he lead the league in rebounding...

If that's misrepresenting Duncan...you're being a subjective homer. I merely stated a fact.

A
Fact.

Stating that Kareem was ahead of his time in conditioning and was a superb athletic in addition to a well conditioned, and a skilled one...isn't misrepresenting either...nor is it an attack on Duncan.

It's merely the truth...

Misreprsenting would be oh like...when someone says they think the pursuit of Kidd is going to make Tony Parker mad...being questioned by someone else...and then a year later when it coems out that it did in fact Parker mad...the questioner fails to admit that guy saying it would make Parker mad, was in fact, right....fails to admit it...as much as years later.

whottt

10-25-2007, 10:08 PM

Not really. Maybe points/game allowed by your team? That's the problem, individual defensive play doesn't translate to stats. (No one would suggest steals as a barometer, right?)

No...ppg allowed is not always indicative of good defense...

Some teams shoot the ball faster than others on offense...that doesn't mean they can't play defense.

More possessions = more ppg

How about Kareem's 11 ALL NBA Defense Teams?

You think that means maybe the man could play a little D? Just a tad?

You think Kareem was a great leader. I disagree.

And I'd say he won every where he went...sometimes he needed help...and so has every other player in history.

You think Kareem was an intellectual. I disagree -- he was just in a position as a top player on a popular team to intimidate those (like reporters) who questioned his stony demeanor. Thus, they presented it as thoughtfulness.

I think he's obviously a very intelligent man....you can tell that just by listening to him talk. I can anyway...

You think Kareem would make a great coach. I disagree. We'll never know.

Actually...we do know...he's coached one season as a pro coach, and won a championship that season.

Again...like the 11 ALL NBA D teams...that would seem to indicate he has some potential there...

Pop's barely had a winning record anywhere on teams without 2 or more HOF'ers them..

You think Kareem played better D and rebounded better than Duncan. I disagree.

#1. I didn't say he could play D better than Duncan.

But the man did make 11 ALL NBA D teams...

He's also blocked over 3000 shots...chopping off 5 years of his pro career...

He also actually was one of the best bigmen at stealing the ball as well.

You think that because he played on up tempo teams he couldn't play D at an extremely high level...

Guess what? He could...

And unlike Duncan? He often took the toughest defensive assignment...something Duncan has seldom done.

As for rebounding...

The man lead the NBA in rebounding...

Has Duncan?

How do Duncan's best rebounding years compare to Russell and Wilt's?

Who has the higher career average...Kareem? or Duncan?

Who has the best single season average...Kareem? or Duncan?

And if you tell me players got more rebounds then...I am going to say..guess what, Kareem still lead the league in rebounding, he was still the best...something Duncan has yet to do.

The man lead the league rebounding...

He also lead the league in block shots...

Has Duncan ever done those things?

No, he hasn't...he's never been the best in the league at those things, therefore...

As with the ALL NBA D Teams...as with your assessment of his defensive abilities, as with his ability as a leader, and a coach...

You do not have shred of factual evidence to back up your stance...

While I have at least some factual basis for every opinion I have, including some plain old cold hard facts...

But the comparison between Kareem and Duncan re longevity, I think, is quite corrrect.

Thanks :tu

Russ

10-25-2007, 10:21 PM

No...ppg allowed is not always indicative of good defense...

Some teams shoot the ball faster than others on offense...that doesn't mean they can't play defense.

More possessions = more ppg

How about Kareem's 11 ALL NBA Defense Teams?

You think that means maybe the man could play a little D? Just a tad?

And I'd say he won every where he went...sometimes he needed help...and so has every other player in history.

I think he's obviously a very intelligent man....you can tell that just by listening to him talk. I can anyway...

Actually...we do know...he's coached one season as a pro coach, and won a championship that season.

Again...like the 11 ALL NBA D teams...that would seem to indicate he has some potential there...

Pop's barely had a winning record anywhere on teams without 2 or more HOF'ers them..

#1. I didn't say he could play D better than Duncan.

But the man did make 11 ALL NBA D teams...

He's also blocked over 3000 shots...chopping off 5 years of his pro career...

He also actually was one of the best bigmen at stealing the ball as well.

You think that because he played on up tempo teams he couldn't play D at an extremely high level...

Guess what? He could...

And unlike Duncan? He often took the toughest defensive assignment...something Duncan has seldom done.

As for rebounding...

The man lead the NBA in rebounding...

Has Duncan?

How do Duncan's best rebounding years compare to Russell and Wilt's?

Who has the higher career average...Kareem? or Duncan?

Who has the best single season average...Kareem? or Duncan?

And if you tell me players got more rebounds then...I am going to say..guess what, Kareem still lead the league in rebounding, he was still the best...something Duncan has yet to do.

The man lead the league rebounding...

He also lead the league in block shots...

Has Duncan ever done those things?

No, he hasn't...he's never been the best in the league at those things, therefore...

As with the ALL NBA D Teams...as with your assessment of his defensive abilities, as with his ability as a leader, and a coach...

You do not have shred of factual evidence to back up your stance...

While I have at least some factual basis for every opinion I have, including some plain old cold hard facts...

Thanks :tu

I think the comparison is bang on and I have believed it for some time.

But it's not just athleticism vs. fundamentals. It's body type mostly. Also efficiency of motion, smoothness -- they even play with that same impassive look (although Tim's aloofness is much more benign than Kareem's was).

There are significant differences as well -- Kareem played true center and never rebounded or played D like Tim. He wasn't a leader or a popular locker-room guy like Tim, either. But the similarities that go to longevity are striiking.

That's why I sometimes wonder just how many rings Tim may get if he wants them (and I think he does). And just how long (decades?) that we'll have to listen to the "experts'" desperate, wishful thinking that the Spurs are simply too old, that they're on their last legs and not athletic enough. They've been saying it now, about an ever-changing supporting cast, for about seven years.

Take a tranquilizer -- this is all I said. :)

whottt

10-25-2007, 10:28 PM

And I said...

11 ALL NBA D Teams.
Lead league in rebounding....and blocks. Not to mention lead at least one postseason in those same categories...joining one David M Robinson as the only player to do so(who also was the only guy other than Kareem to the league the league in scoring blocks and boards, and incidentally, was the man guarding Shaq when the Spurs went through the Lakers for their titles).
Won multiple championships at every level, high school, college and pro.
Won a championship in his only year as a head coach.

No tranq necessary...

mystargtr34

10-26-2007, 02:22 AM

No...ppg allowed is not always indicative of good defense...

Some teams shoot the ball faster than others on offense...that doesn't mean they can't play defense.

More possessions = more ppg

How about Kareem's 11 ALL NBA Defense Teams?

You think that means maybe the man could play a little D? Just a tad?

And I'd say he won every where he went...sometimes he needed help...and so has every other player in history.

I think he's obviously a very intelligent man....you can tell that just by listening to him talk. I can anyway...

Actually...we do know...he's coached one season as a pro coach, and won a championship that season.

Again...like the 11 ALL NBA D teams...that would seem to indicate he has some potential there...

Pop's barely had a winning record anywhere on teams without 2 or more HOF'ers them..

#1. I didn't say he could play D better than Duncan.

But the man did make 11 ALL NBA D teams...

He's also blocked over 3000 shots...chopping off 5 years of his pro career...

He also actually was one of the best bigmen at stealing the ball as well.

You think that because he played on up tempo teams he couldn't play D at an extremely high level...

Guess what? He could...

And unlike Duncan? He often took the toughest defensive assignment...something Duncan has seldom done.

As for rebounding...

The man lead the NBA in rebounding...

Has Duncan?

How do Duncan's best rebounding years compare to Russell and Wilt's?

Who has the higher career average...Kareem? or Duncan?

Who has the best single season average...Kareem? or Duncan?

And if you tell me players got more rebounds then...I am going to say..guess what, Kareem still lead the league in rebounding, he was still the best...something Duncan has yet to do.

The man lead the league rebounding...

He also lead the league in block shots...

Has Duncan ever done those things?

No, he hasn't...he's never been the best in the league at those things, therefore...

As with the ALL NBA D Teams...as with your assessment of his defensive abilities, as with his ability as a leader, and a coach...

You do not have shred of factual evidence to back up your stance...

While I have at least some factual basis for every opinion I have, including some plain old cold hard facts...

Thanks :tu
You talk about opponent ppg not being a good defensive measurement because of factors such as team putting up shots quicker than others, or pace factor (which i totally agree with).

Yet, when you compare Kareem's rebounding with Duncan you hint that Kareem was better because he averaged more rebounds, or he led the league in rebounding while Duncan didnt.

You completely disregard your previous reasoning about opponent ppg. The pace of a game effects rebounds also. Wilt averaged 27 rebounds per game one season, Dennis Rodman peaked at 18.7 rpg. Who was the better rebounder? Wilt? Not quite, and it wasnt really that close.

Back to Duncan and Kareem. Kareem's peak rebounding value was 16.9 rebounds, in 75/76. In 04/05 Duncan averaged 11.1 rebounds per game, you would think Kareem dominated Duncan in rebounding in comparison.

Kareem's rebound rate = 19.6
Duncan's rebound rate = 19.4

This isnt the best example as Duncan only played 33.4 minutes while Kareem played 42 minutes. But pace factor is big when comparing different eras.

Duncan has had 3 seasons with a rebound rate higher than 19.
Kareem as 1 such season.

At 32, Kareem dipped down to 15, which isnt exactly great for a C.

Its a close comparison, but i would say Duncan was a better rebounder.

mystargtr34

10-26-2007, 03:41 AM

So Cal.... Wilt or Kareem?

Indazone

10-26-2007, 03:50 AM

Yao baby!

Yao > Duncan

LOL ;)

mathbzh

10-26-2007, 05:48 AM

Yao baby!

Yao > Duncan

LOL ;)

No
Scola > Wilt :elephant

whottt

10-26-2007, 08:13 AM

You talk about opponent ppg not being a good defensive measurement because of factors such as team putting up shots quicker than others, or pace factor (which i totally agree with).

Yet, when you compare Kareem's rebounding with Duncan you hint that Kareem was better because he averaged more rebounds, or he led the league in rebounding while Duncan didnt.

That's becasuse the guy I was arguing with asked me to look at Kareem's rebounds comprared to Wilt and Russell's...first.

If I am going to do that for Kareem, you know...compare him to arguably the two greatest rebounders in league history, and then say he can't rebound because he never averaged as many as they did, I'm going to do it for Duncan.

They weren't averaging 25 rebounds per game by the time Kareem got into the league...

As for my other point...

Kareem lead the league in rebounding...that means he was the best in the league at it...

That is a point that cannot be challenged.

Kareem was the best in the league at it...at least once.

You completely disregard your previous reasoning about opponent ppg. The pace of a game effects rebounds also. Wilt averaged 27 rebounds per game one season, Dennis Rodman peaked at 18.7 rpg. Who was the better rebounder? Wilt? Not quite, and it wasnt really that close.

Back to Duncan and Kareem. Kareem's peak rebounding value was 16.9 rebounds, in 75/76. In 04/05 Duncan averaged 11.1 rebounds per game, you would think Kareem dominated Duncan in rebounding in comparison.

Kareem's rebound rate = 19.6
Duncan's rebound rate = 19.4

This isnt the best example as Duncan only played 33.4 minutes while Kareem played 42 minutes. But pace factor is big when comparing different eras.

So Kareem gets penalized for playing 42 mins per game? I think he should be rewarded for that...I consider it a plus, not a negative :wtf

It also could be indicative of the fact that Kareem played on some teams that had point guards capable of averaging close to 10 board per game...not to mention the other guys...while Duncan had Rasho.

Duncan has had 3 seasons with a rebound rate higher than 19.

And how many of those came before David Robinson was broken? Or retired? My guess is none.

Kareem as 1 such season.

At 32, Kareem dipped down to 15, which isnt exactly great for a C.

Well...tell you what, let me know when Duncan hits 32, and then we'll see if we can talk shit about what Kareem did at 32...deal?

Its a close comparison, but i would say Duncan was a better rebounder.

And I'd say...yet he was never the best in the league at it, better than the other guys at just plain old pulling down boards...not even when he was the only true rebounding force on his team...

And since Duncan did play on some teams that's sole focus was defense, and causing their opponents to miss a lot of shots...

There's really no case that he's a superior rebounder to Kareem.

What we have here is a case of...a HOF player having an obvious weakest area of his game, and someone exaggerating that into the statement, that he sucked in that area...and then getting their ass handed to them for their exaggeration.

Russ

10-26-2007, 08:58 AM

What we have here is a case of...a HOF player having an obvious weakest area of his game, and someone exaggerating that into the statement, that he sucked in that area...and then getting their ass handed to them for their exaggeration.

At the risk of beating a dead horse . . .

Had you admitted early on (as you do now) that rebounding was "a weakness area" of AJ's games, I would have agreed. In fact that's more than I was saying about Kareem (whom by the way I consider to be one of the few that may be argued as the greatest player ever). To translate for you, I never said that he "sucked in that area."

What I actually said was . . .

I think the comparison is bang on and I have believed it for some time.

But it's not just athleticism vs. fundamentals. It's body type mostly. Also efficiency of motion, smoothness -- they even play with that same impassive look (although Tim's aloofness is much more benign than Kareem's was).

There are significant differences as well -- Kareem played true center and never rebounded or played D like Tim. He wasn't a leader or a popular locker-room guy like Tim, either. But the similarities that go to longevity are striiking.

That's why I sometimes wonder just how many rings Tim may get if he wants them (and I think he does). And just how long (decades?) that we'll have to listen to the "experts'" desperate, wishful thinking that the Spurs are simply too old, that they're on their last legs and not athletic enough. They've been saying it now, about an ever-changing supporting cast, for about seven years. :)

Everyone (including Kareem) admits that he could have been a better rebounder than he was (especially later in his career). The point is that Tim is a very good rebounder who comes closer to reaching his potential as a rebounder than AJ did. That's all -- they're both among the best statistically.

Same with defense. Kareem would have had to literally work at, or try, not to be a great defensive player given his physical stature and skills. As good as he was, however, he didn't each his potential in that area as well as Russell or even Wilt did. He just wasn't as interested and, as a matter of conscious strategy, his team concurred -- he was more valuable to the Lakers by saving his energy for the offensive end.

In fact, toward the latter stages, Kareem often did not even run back to the defensive end after the Lakers missed baskets in order to conserve energy. That fact could never be gleened through statistics but only by watching Kareem play. And that is the problem with relying soley upon statistics to attempt to compare players or make points.

mystargtr34

10-26-2007, 09:09 AM

That's becasuse the guy I was arguing with asked me to look at Kareem's rebounds comprared to Wilt and Russell's...first.

If I am going to do that for Kareem, you know...compare him to arguably the two greatest rebounders in league history, and then say he can't rebound because he never averaged as many as they did, I'm going to do it for Duncan.

They weren't averaging 25 rebounds per game by the time Kareem got into the league...

Obviously, the league was slowing down during the 70's. Wilt's rebound rate actually improved throughout his career up until he was 36 while hes rebound per game were going DOWN. That shows how dramatically the pace of the game changed. As you said, its obviously an unfair comparison to say Wilt was a better rebounder than Kareem ONLY because Wilt averaged 25 boards and Kareem averaged 16 (completely different era's). Wilt was the better rebounder though but thats not my point.

As for my other point...

Kareem lead the league in rebounding...that means he was the best in the league at it...

That is a point that cannot be challenged.

Kareem was the best in the league at it...at least once.

Are you going to stick to that point. Duncan was top 2 in rebounding twice in his career so far, same as Kareem. Is that much of a difference?

So Kareem gets penalized for playing 42 mins per game? I think he should be rewarded for that...I consider it a plus, not a negative :wtf

It is a plus, its one of the things that made him one of a kind. Minutes dont effect rebound rate because its adjusted to 40 minutes. My point was that it would be better to compare rebound rate when they played similar minutes (removes any potential outside factors) even though it is adjusted for minutes, you get my drift? Its more accurate to compare scorers who played say 35 and 40 minutes, than it is to compare a scorer who played 20 minutes to a scorer who played 40 minutes (exaggerating). Anyway, its a moot point because Duncan's minutes are limited because of Pop, hes played 40 minutes before and had no problems doing so.

It also could be indicative of the fact that Kareem played on some teams that had point guards capable of averaging close to 10 board per game...not to mention the other guys...while Duncan had Rasho.

Duncan also had D-Rob, a doube digit rebounde for basically Duncan's first 3 seasons, and a solid rebounder for Duncan's first 6 seasons. Rasho actually had 2 seasons with the Spurs with a rebound rate basically the same as that of a 32 year old Kareem. Nazr was a double digit rebounder in New York and always grabbed a good rate of rebounds.

And how many of those came before David Robinson was broken? Or retired? My guess is none.

Duncan's career rebound rate is 18.3. His rookie year with a healthy D-Rob, his rate was 17.6, a ROOKIE remember, players are expected to get better.

Well...tell you what, let me know when Duncan hits 32, and then we'll see if we can talk shit about what Kareem did at 32...deal?

Umm ok, its not like hes 25 anymore, hel be 32 in about 5 months, last season he put up a rate of 18.7, higher than all but two of Kareem's seasons.

And I'd say...yet he was never the best in the league at it, better than the other guys at just plain old pulling down boards...not even when he was the only true rebounding force on his team...

And since Duncan did play on some teams that's sole focus was defense, and causing their opponents to miss a lot of shots...
You have no argument there, the early Duncan spurs probably had the slowest pace in league HISTORY, thus less shots put up, so your probably favouring Duncan with that argument.

There's really no case that he's a superior rebounder to Kareem.

Ive listed the cases above.

What we have here is a case of...a HOF player having an obvious weakest area of his game, and someone exaggerating that into the statement, that he sucked in that area...and then getting their ass handed to them for their exaggeration.

Yes he sucked at it more than Duncan, but thats not to say he wasnt a good rebounder.

whottt

10-26-2007, 09:55 AM

Obviously, the league was slowing down during the 70's. Wilt's rebound rate actually improved throughout his career up until he was 36 while hes rebound per game were going DOWN. That shows how dramatically the pace of the game changed. As you said, its obviously an unfair comparison to say Wilt was a better rebounder than Kareem ONLY because Wilt averaged 25 boards and Kareem averaged 16 (completely different era's). Wilt was the better rebounder though but thats not my point.

And I'd say the fact that Wilt's rebounding rate improved once he could barely walk, should probably indicate to you that there's something rotten in Denmark with rebounding rate....

I assure you, he wasn't a better rebounder at 36...

Are you going to stick to that point. Duncan was top 2 in rebounding twice in his career so far, same as Kareem. Is that much of a difference?

Yes...it's that much of a difference, because you are saying a guy that was clearly the best in the league at it one time, is not as good as guy who has yet to be.

Best in the league...

It is a plus, its one of the things that made him one of a kind. Minutes dont effect rebound rate because its adjusted to 40 minutes. My point was that it would be better to compare rebound rate when they played similar minutes (removes any potential outside factors) even though it is adjusted for minutes, you get my drift? Its more accurate to compare scorers who played say 35 and 40 minutes, than it is to compare a scorer who played 20 minutes to a scorer who played 40 minutes (exaggerating). Anyway, its a moot point because Duncan's minutes are limited because of Pop, hes played 40 minutes before and had no problems doing so.

And I think you have to use stats like rebound rate with some common sense...

Tell you what...I have yet to look at a single rebound rate stat for any of the players mentioned...

But I can say with all certainty...when Dennis Rodman was paired with David Robinson in Drob's prime...his rebound rate likely suffered for it...tremendously.

Duncan also had D-Rob, a doube digit rebounde for basically Duncan's first 3 seasons, and a solid rebounder for Duncan's first 6 seasons. Rasho actually had 2 seasons with the Spurs with a rebound rate basically the same as that of a 32 year old Kareem. Nazr was a double digit rebounder in New York and always grabbed a good rate of rebounds.

And Kareem played with two greatest rebounding PG's in league history...not to mention of couple of other HOF's bigmen who were superior rebounders as well...

If it is your goal to trash the rebound rate stat and prove emphatically why it should never a primary judge, and only be used as a secondary one with a great deal of reservation...

You've succeeded.

Duncan's career rebound rate is 18.3. His rookie year with a healthy D-Rob, his rate was 17.6, a ROOKIE remember, players are expected to get better.

Umm ok, its not like hes 25 anymore, hel be 32 in about 5 months, last season he put up a rate of 18.7, higher than all but two of Kareem's seasons.]/quote]

And his front line was Bruce Bowen and Fabricio Oberto...

[quote]You have no argument there, the early Duncan spurs probably had the slowest pace in league HISTORY, thus less shots put up, so your probably favouring Duncan with that argument.

They actually did have the lowest opp FGA allowed in NBA history, several times, which means they also had an unusually high amount of missed shots to go along with that low pace...

Yes he sucked at it more than Duncan, but thats not to say he wasnt a good rebounder.

And I've yet to see a convincing argument that Duncan is the better rebounder...

Only secondary stats being used to make a primary judgement...

And what did happen to DRob's rebound rate anyway when he was paired with Rodman?

And how do you rank Bruce Bowen as a rebounder at the SF position?

I think Mugsey Bogues could give him a run for his money...

In short...rebound rate is highly influenced by supporting cast....and should not be a primary judge of anything...nor should it even be given a great deal of credence in the secondary stat category when it comes to judgements like this...

Whereas, a guy actually leading his league in rebounding...cannnpt be argued with...he was the best that season. Period.

Kinda lik when Dennis Rodman left...Drob decided to prove a point and lead the league in rebounding...which he then did.

whottt

10-26-2007, 10:01 AM

And furthermore...Kareem's saying he could have been a better rebounder doesn't prove anything either...

Duncan undoubtedly thinks he could improve in every facet of his game...most of the great ones do...that's one of the reasons they were great.

Russ...Duncan plays for a coach that lives and breathes defense...Kareem played for a coach(well really a PG) that lived and breathed transition offense...

Kareem executed the desires of his teams...same as Duncan...it proves nothing emphatically about either one being a superior offensive or defensive player to the other....only exemplifies why they were great...because they provided what they were asked to provide to such a great degree...

I assure you, if Riley had wanted Kareem getting his but back down the court and he wasn't doing it...he wouldn't have been on the court as much.

And if Duncan wasn't often the only player on the Spurs crashing the offensive glass, per Pops wishes...he wouldn't be on the court as much either.