Tim Duncan has the most of all times!

Tim Duncan has 18 double-doubles in NBA Finals wins, the most of all times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Leaves others in dust.

In multiple seasons, from 1985 to 2014, in the playoffs, round is Finals, team won game, requiring player recorded double-double, sorted by most games matching criteria.

1 Tim Duncan F 1999 2014 18
2 Shaquille O'Neal C 2000 2006 15
3 Magic Johnson* G 1985 1991 12
4 Scottie Pippen* F 1991 1997 9
5 Pau Gasol F 2008 2010 8
6 Hakeem Olajuwon* C 1986 1995 8
7 LeBron James F 2012 2014 7
8 Michael Jordan* G 1991 1997 7
9 Larry Bird* F 1985 1987 6
10 Chris Bosh F 2012 2013 5
11 Kobe Bryant G 2000 2010 5
12 Kevin Garnett F 2008 2010 5
13 Dirk Nowitzki F 2006 2011 5
14 Dwyane Wade G 2006 2013 5
15 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* C 1985 1987 4
16 Dennis Johnson* G 1985 1987 4
17 Kawhi Leonard F 2013 2014 4
18 Kevin McHale* F 1985 1987 4
19 David Robinson* C 1999 2003 4
20 Patrick Ewing* C 1994 1994 3

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...Y&order_by=pts

:flag: :lobt2: :flag: :lobt2: :flag:

And the award for the most random stat goes to...

I'll take Timmy over Jordan any day.

Cute stat, but there's no way in hell Duncan would still have this if Bill Russell was included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prime Time

Cute stat, but there's no way in hell Duncan would still have this if Bill Russell was included.

---

Bill Russel shouldnt count, he played against short white men, he would be average in todays NBA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prime Time

Cute stat, but there's no way in hell Duncan would still have this if Bill Russell was included.

---

At least it's marginally better than some of the other garbage stats Galileo has regaled us with in the past. Sometimes he'll go full retard and post stats like "Between the years of 1998 and 2003 of players who averaged at least 28 MPG and played at least 35 playoff games all with the same team Tim Duncan is the only person in history to have blah blah blah blah blah"

This guy doesn't fucking get the fact that there are literally millions of things Tim Duncan is "first" in. We don't have to hear about all of them. Can't we pink this moron already?

Tim Duncan has the most playoff double doubles of all time. Everyone knows that. He's been to the finals 6 times which not many players (certainly not many big men) have done. Therefore, it's not a fucking surprise that he also has the most NBA finals double doubles of all time. That's a derivative stat that doesn't add any insight to his greatness.

Why stop at NBA finals double doubles? Why not look at NBA WCF double doubles, or WCSF, or first round? With sufficient restrictions you can elevate Tim Duncan to the top at will.

Let's say I'm the Lakers fan equivalent of Galileo. I'd make up a new stat to elevate Shaq to the top. Shaq has the highest NBA finals double doubles to NBA rings ratio of all time (15/4 = 3.75 > 18/5 = 3.6)

Lebron will likely break that, considering he's going to be playing in the finals for at least the next 2-3 seasons, probably more because he plays in the East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs 4 The Win

Bill Russel shouldnt count, he played against short white men, he would be average in todays NBA

---

That is a ridiculous take when discussing statistical league records, regardless of the sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jARS mEsH sEt

Tim Duncan has the most playoff double doubles of all time. Everyone knows that. He's been to the finals 6 times which not many players (certainly not many big men) have done. Therefore, it's not a fucking surprise that he also has the most NBA finals double doubles of all time. That's a derivative stat that doesn't add any insight to his greatness.

Why stop at NBA finals double doubles? Why not look at NBA WCF double doubles, or WCSF, or first round? With sufficient restrictions you can elevate Tim Duncan to the top at will.

---

Most double-doubles in WCF:

In multiple seasons, from 1985 to 2014, in the playoffs, round is Western Conf. Finals, requiring player recorded double-double, sorted by most games matching criteria.

1 Tim Duncan F 1999 2014 29
2 Magic Johnson* G 1985 1991 29
3 Karl Malone* F 1992 2004 24
4 Shaquille O'Neal C 1998 2004 22
5 Hakeem Olajuwon* C 1986 1997 14
6 John Stockton* G 1992 1997 12
7 Kobe Bryant G 2000 2010 11
8 Steve Nash G 2005 2010 11
9 Charles Barkley* F 1993 1997 9
10 Clyde Drexler* G 1990 1995 9
11 Kevin Johnson G 1989 1993 9
12 David Robinson* C 1995 2001 9
13 Pau Gasol F 2008 2009 8
14 Shawn Kemp F 1993 1996 7
15 Shawn Marion F 2005 2006 7
16 Dirk Nowitzki F 2003 2006 7
17 Kevin Durant F 2011 2014 6
18 Kevin Garnett F 2004 2004 6
19 A.C. Green F 1987 1989 6
20 Lamar Odom F 2008 2010 6

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...Y&order_by=pts

Most double-doubles in first round:

In multiple seasons, from 1985 to 2014, in the playoffs, round is First Round, requiring player recorded double-double, sorted by most games matching criteria.

1 Karl Malone* F 1986 2004 56
2 Tim Duncan F 1998 2014 49
3 John Stockton* G 1987 2002 46
4 Kevin Garnett F 1997 2014 44
5 Hakeem Olajuwon* C 1985 1999 40
6 Charles Barkley* F 1985 1999 39
7 Shaquille O'Neal C 1994 2008 39
8 Dirk Nowitzki F 2001 2014 32
9 David Robinson* C 1990 2001 29
10 Patrick Ewing* C 1988 2002 27
11 Carlos Boozer F 2007 2013 26
12 Dwight Howard C 2007 2014 26
13 Jason Kidd G 1997 2010 26
14 Charles Oakley F 1986 2001 22
15 Magic Johnson* G 1985 1996 20
16 Shawn Kemp F 1991 1998 20
17 Steve Nash G 2002 2010 20
18 Chris Webber F 1994 2007 19
19 Clyde Drexler* G 1985 1996 18
20 Kevin Johnson G 1989 1997 18

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...Y&order_by=pts

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BatManu20

Lebron will likely break that, considering he's going to be playing in the finals for at least the next 2-3 seasons, probably more because he plays in the East.

---

:downspin:

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

That is a ridiculous take when discussing statistical league records, regardless of the sport.

---

His reasoning may be tenuous but at least he gave one. You've merely asserted that it's "a ridiculous take" without further explanation or sound reasoning. He's currently winning this debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jARS mEsH sEt

Let's say I'm the Lakers fan equivalent of Galileo. I'd make up a new stat to elevate Shaq to the top. Shaq has the highest NBA finals double doubles to NBA rings ratio of all time (15/4 = 3.75 > 18/5 = 3.6)

---

but who has the lowest ratio?

:rollin

That's cute how Galileo is only counting wins in the Finals, so as to diminish Shaq's numbers and keep Duncan on top. Remember, even though he got swept in '95, Shaq did play in the Finals 6 times, just like Duncan (1995 w/Orlando, 2000-2004 w/Lakers, and 2006 w/Miami).

So were his double doubles in losses just stat-padding?

Wow, I just found an AMAZING stat!

Most season averaging 10 points and 5 rebounds by a player from the Virgin islands. Yes it is Tim Duncan!!!!!! Go Timmy! groundhog day baby!!! Death & taxes for ALL!!!!!!!

For single seasons; played in the NBA/BAA; in the regular season; from 1946-47 to 2013-14; born in U.S. Virgin Islands; requiring Points Per Game >= 10 and Rebounds Per Game >= 5; sorted by most seasons matching criteria.

1 Tim Duncan 1998 2014 SAS NBA 17

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...t=&order_by=ws

Get this stat to TNT prontooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!

:deadhorse

:bike:

:pop:

Wow.. Tim Duncan is pretty good.

This Duncan guy, I need to keep an eye on him. He's an up and comer.

Wow, OP! I just found the most amazing stat yet:

For single poster; Spurstalk member; In multiple posts from: tonight to tonight; posts stats requiring pointless data; pissed off >= 10 other Spurstalk members; named after Italian scientist; sorted by most posts matching criteria.

1. Galileo (OP), Internet, Post Count 5,146

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prime Time

Cute stat, but there's no way in hell Duncan would still have this if Bill Russell was included.

---

And there is no way in hell Bill Russell would have 11 rings if there was more than 8 teams in his era

Not a bad stat to lead in at all. To be first in the company of Hall of Famers in any categorical listing is no small task.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heyheymymy

Wow, OP! I just found the most amazing stat yet:

For single poster; Spurstalk member; In multiple posts from: tonight to tonight; posts stats requiring pointless data; pissed off >= 10 other Spurstalk members; named after Italian scientist; sorted by most posts matching criteria.

1. Galileo (OP), Internet, Post Count 5,146

---

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs 4 The Win

Bill Russel shouldnt count, he played against short white men, he would be average in todays NBA

---

wilt chaimberlain and walt bellamy were short white men? On what planet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james evans

wilt chaimberlain and walt bellamy were short white men? On what planet?

---

lol, he played against 90% white guys who were straight trash compared to todays players, congrats you picked a couple of exceptions

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/medi...amps_56_57.jpg

Tim has most rings among Spurs too.:)

I saw the Spurs championship DVD and when Russell stood right next to Duncan they appeared to be the same height, despite Russell's advanced age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jARS mEsH sEt

His reasoning may be tenuous but at least he gave one. You've merely asserted that it's "a ridiculous take" without further explanation or sound reasoning.

---

You're right, jARS mEsH sEt, and I should have taken a few extra minutes to explain.

The reason I think it's ridiculous to say that Bill Russell's stats, or Wilt's stats, shouldn't count is because records are simply just that. Historical records and statistics. NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, etc. statistics are posted and stand as history. To say that Tim Duncan's records shouldn't count 25 or 50 years from now because of changes in average stature of men, or some other comparative measurement would also be unfair to Tim's historical, statistics. Wayne Gretzky has more career assists than any other player has total points, but would that be the case if facing today's larger (by average) goalkeepers wearing couch cushions for pads? His stats still count.

http://chasing23.com/wp-content/uplo...ll-239x300.jpg

Bill Russell (#6 defending Wilt Chamberlain above) would have a much tougher time in today's NBA than he would have had in the 1950's and 60's, however, the talent back then was still quite good. Russell, at 6-91/2 lacked bulk for a big man during his career. Although Bill was tall, he was not perceived as a giant of a center back then. I was fortunate enough to watch him live at the Garden in the 60's, not to mention all of the weekend games on TV. He went up against Wilt Chamberlain and Nate Thurmond on a regular basis. The average NBA player's height and weight in 1965 was 6'6", 213 lbs, according to both the Basketball Reference and the Association for Professional Basketball Research.
Here are the yearly NBA average heights and weights during Russell's 13-year pro career:
AVERAGE PLAYER HEIGHT AND WEIGHT (Assoc. for Prof. Basketball Research)
Season Height Weight

1956-57 - 6'5" 207 lbs.
1957-58 - 6'5" 205 lbs.
1958-59 - 6'5" 208 lbs.
1959-60 - 6'5.5" 206 lbs.
1960-61 - 6'5.5" 207 lbs.
1961-62 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1962-63 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1963-64 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1964-65 - 6'6" 213 lbs.
1965-66 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1966-67 - 6'6" 210 lbs.
1967-68 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1968-69 - 6'6" 214 lbs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...NBA_stats.html

http://www.apbr.org/apbr-faq.html



The NBA average player height peaked in 1986–87 at 6' 7.62" and the average weight was 215.46 lbs. In 2013-14, it was 6'7", 217 lbs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_lea...ing_experience

Indeed players improve their speed or other physical tools over time in all sports but statistics are just that...statistics, based on the rules and dimensions at a given time in history. You just can't say that they "shouldn't count".

http://i833.photobucket.com/albums/z...teThurmond.jpg
Nate Thurmond

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

You're right, jARS mEsH sEt, and I should have taken a few extra minutes to explain.

The reason I think it's ridiculous to say that Bill Russell's stats, or Wilt's stats, shouldn't count is because records are simply just that. Historical records and statistics. NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, etc. statistics are posted and stand as history. To say that Tim Duncan's records shouldn't count 25 or 50 years from now because of changes in average stature of men, or some other comparative measurement would also be unfair to Tim's historical, statistics. Wayne Gretzky has more career assists than any other player has total points, but would that be the case if facing today's larger (by average) goalkeepers wearing couch cushions for pads? His stats still count.

http://chasing23.com/wp-content/uplo...ll-239x300.jpg

Bill Russell (#6 defending Wilt Chamberlain above) would have a much tougher time in today's NBA than he would have had in the 1950's and 60's, however, the talent back then was still quite good. Russell, at 6-91/2 lacked bulk for a big man during his career. Although Bill was tall, he was not perceived as a giant of a center back then. I was fortunate enough to watch him live at the Garden in the 60's, not to mention all of the weekend games on TV. He went up against Wilt Chamberlain and Nate Thurmond on a regular basis. The average NBA player's height and weight in 1965 was 6'6", 213 lbs, according to both the Basketball Reference and the Association for Professional Basketball Research.
Here are the yearly NBA average heights and weights during Russell's 13-year pro career:
AVERAGE PLAYER HEIGHT AND WEIGHT (Assoc. for Prof. Basketball Research)
Season Height Weight

1956-57 - 6'5" 207 lbs.
1957-58 - 6'5" 205 lbs.
1958-59 - 6'5" 208 lbs.
1959-60 - 6'5.5" 206 lbs.
1960-61 - 6'5.5" 207 lbs.
1961-62 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1962-63 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1963-64 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1964-65 - 6'6" 213 lbs.
1965-66 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1966-67 - 6'6" 210 lbs.
1967-68 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1968-69 - 6'6" 214 lbs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...NBA_stats.html

http://www.apbr.org/apbr-faq.html



The NBA average player height peaked in 1986–87 at 6' 7.62" and the average weight was 215.46 lbs. In 2013-14, it was 6'7", 217 lbs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_lea...ing_experience

Indeed players improve their speed or other physical tools over time in all sports but statistics are just that...statistics, based on the rules and dimensions at a given time in history. You just can't say that they "shouldn't count".

http://i833.photobucket.com/albums/z...teThurmond.jpg
Nate Thurmond

---

Good post. Yeah I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

You're right, jARS mEsH sEt, and I should have taken a few extra minutes to explain.

The reason I think it's ridiculous to say that Bill Russell's stats, or Wilt's stats, shouldn't count is because records are simply just that. Historical records and statistics. NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, etc. statistics are posted and stand as history. To say that Tim Duncan's records shouldn't count 25 or 50 years from now because of changes in average stature of men, or some other comparative measurement would also be unfair to Tim's historical, statistics. Wayne Gretzky has more career assists than any other player has total points, but would that be the case if facing today's larger (by average) goalkeepers wearing couch cushions for pads? His stats still count.

http://chasing23.com/wp-content/uplo...ll-239x300.jpg

Bill Russell (#6 defending Wilt Chamberlain above) would have a much tougher time in today's NBA than he would have had in the 1950's and 60's, however, the talent back then was still quite good. Russell, at 6-91/2 lacked bulk for a big man during his career. Although Bill was tall, he was not perceived as a giant of a center back then. I was fortunate enough to watch him live at the Garden in the 60's, not to mention all of the weekend games on TV. He went up against Wilt Chamberlain and Nate Thurmond on a regular basis. The average NBA player's height and weight in 1965 was 6'6", 213 lbs, according to both the Basketball Reference and the Association for Professional Basketball Research.
Here are the yearly NBA average heights and weights during Russell's 13-year pro career:
AVERAGE PLAYER HEIGHT AND WEIGHT (Assoc. for Prof. Basketball Research)
Season Height Weight

1956-57 - 6'5" 207 lbs.
1957-58 - 6'5" 205 lbs.
1958-59 - 6'5" 208 lbs.
1959-60 - 6'5.5" 206 lbs.
1960-61 - 6'5.5" 207 lbs.
1961-62 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1962-63 - 6'5.5" 208 lbs.
1963-64 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1964-65 - 6'6" 213 lbs.
1965-66 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1966-67 - 6'6" 210 lbs.
1967-68 - 6'6" 211 lbs.
1968-69 - 6'6" 214 lbs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...NBA_stats.html

http://www.apbr.org/apbr-faq.html



The NBA average player height peaked in 1986–87 at 6' 7.62" and the average weight was 215.46 lbs. In 2013-14, it was 6'7", 217 lbs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_lea...ing_experience

Indeed players improve their speed or other physical tools over time in all sports but statistics are just that...statistics, based on the rules and dimensions at a given time in history. You just can't say that they "shouldn't count".

http://i833.photobucket.com/albums/z...teThurmond.jpg
Nate Thurmond

---

Gr8 pic of Nate :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs 4 The Win

lol, he played against 90% white guys who were straight trash compared to todays players, congrats you picked a couple of exceptions

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/medi...amps_56_57.jpg

---

there were only 10 teams. russel, chaimberlain, petit, and bellamy were 4 greats that played in that era off the top of my head. that's still 33% of good comp in the paint even if the other teams had abloutely nothing. today there are 30 teams. For a good big man today to equal that, they'd have to play at least 9 teams with great(or future great) big men. Can you name 9 nba teams today with dominant low post big men? Once again, my opinion means absolutely nothing. It's just that, it's my opinion. These are mathematical facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james evans

there were only 10 teams. russel, chaimberlain, petit, and bellamy were 4 greats that played in that era off the top of my head. that's still 33% of good comp in the paint even if the other teams had abloutely nothing. today there are 30 teams. For a good big man today to equal that, they'd have to play at least 9 teams with great(or future great) big men. Can you name 9 nba teams today with dominant low post big men? Once again, my opinion means absolutely nothing. It's just that, it's my opinion. These are mathematical facts.

---

Did you ever stop to consider that these "greats" were only greats because they played against ordinary white guys who would be NCAA players at best in today's era... Of course every tall black dude that had any skill was "dominant and elite", they were the only players with an NBA skillset!!!! Russell is not bad, but he isnt better than Duncan lol. Imagine Duncan, Kobe, and Shaq in that era. Their numbers would be off the fucking charts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs 4 The Win

Did you ever stop to consider that these "greats" were only greats because they played against ordinary white guys who would be NCAA players at best in today's era... Of course every tall black dude that had any skill was "dominant and elite", they were the only players with an NBA skillset!!!! Russell is not bad, but he isnt better than Duncan lol. Imagine Duncan, Kobe, and Shaq in that era. Their numbers would be off the fucking charts.

---

If you want to be technical about it, how many primed big men did shaq play against in HIS prime. hakeeem, ewing, robinson had been in the league for years before he got there and he did his thing against them but they had their way with him as well. when shaq hit his peak in the late 90s and thru the 2000s, those guys weren't in their primes. He had duncan, but guys like yao and olawakondi just weren't it. ben wallace? mutombo?(who i feel should be a hall of famer based on defense). Mourning got sick when he hit his peak. But i'd say shaq is an all time great and I can't say that if shaq played in the 80s against top big men nightly he'd be average cuz that wouldn't be true. I don't believe he'd win 3 in a row, but he would still be shaq. If you think Walt bellamy wouldnt be good enough for the nba today, but dwight howard and brooke lopez are, then we'll just agree to disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

You're right, jARS mEsH sEt, and I should have taken a few extra minutes to explain.

---

And that is how you thoroughly dismantle someone on the internet.

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/up...bert-bravo.gif

Just poking around Tim Duncan's numbers right now his career has simply been incredible. In the playoffs he is first all time in block shots, third all time in rebounds, and fifth all time in scoring. That's unbelievable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heyheymymy

Wow, OP! I just found the most amazing stat yet:

For single poster; Spurstalk member; In multiple posts from: tonight to tonight; posts stats requiring pointless data; pissed off >= 10 other Spurstalk members; named after Italian scientist; sorted by most posts matching criteria.

1. Galileo (OP), Internet, Post Count 5,146

---

You are just jealous that I discovered and I alone found a more interesting stat than you did. get a job. You must need something to keep you busy in the offseason.

:lmao