It is just your personal belief, as you have nothing else to back you up on that idea. Let me ask you this: who would win between the 95 Spurs and the Shaq/Kobe Lakers? After thinking that through for a minute, tell me who went through better compe ion for his les: Olajuwon or Duncan.
what about the times where the spurs fail to repeat? his finals record goes unscathed but his playoff records will definately show that mark.... all the great centers have repeated championships or have been to the finals back to back to back etc.... look it up if you dont believe me
Other than Hakeem, Timmy was definitely the better player of any of the people that you listed.
Walton was injured so much. It's a wonder that he made the HOF.
Lambier, well that's just funny. He could shoot jump shots and he was tough. He is not even close to Timmy's class.
Jabbar is better than Timmy, imo.
Worthy, while very fast was not the player that Tim Duncan has been. He did win one finals mvp. But this one is not even close. Again, Tim Duncan was first team all defense every year, but one in the NBA.
McHale had an amazing variety of moves on the block, but he's no Tim Duncan. This just is no comparison.
Robert Parrish, the chief. Same thing. Good, solid player. Not in Tim Duncan's league, but rather below it.
Dennis Rodman. Again, not a realistic comparison. Dennis was a great defender and an awesome rebounder and a below average offensive player. Tim could do both. You couldn't really believe this.
Dominique Wilkens. Well he was more of a shooting guard/small forward than a power forward. He didn't dominate on defense. He was the human highlight film and very athletic. And a poor subs ute for Tim Duncan. He could not carry Tim's jockstrap. His Hawks fare poorly against Tim's Spurs.
Ewing was a pretty good player. But not good enough to win championships even with solid pieces surrounding him. At one time, he was very quick. A decent defender. But not Tim Duncan.
And another joke, Buck Williams, who might be slightly above average.
And Spurs Defense doesn't come from being soft, like Pau Gasol who let Paul Pierce come in the lane at will because he was a European and wouldn't hedge ! The tough Spurs Defense comes from our big man Tim Duncan and that's why we have had one of the top 3 defenses in the NBA for so many years.
So, mostly your list is a joke and you put people up there that you don't even believe belong in comparison with Tim Duncan. So, clearly, you're not being serious.
Malone averaged a board a game less than Duncan in a faster-paced league with more opportunities. If you seriously think Barkley was a better defensive player than Duncan, you either did not watch their careers or you are just being an argumentative troll. I've watched Barkley since he came in the league, have seen him play live at least 10 times, and he was a great rebounder, shooter, low-post scorer, and one of the toughest SOBs in the history of the league. He was never the elite defender Duncan has been since about his third or fourth year.
Are you talking about Magic and Kareem ?
And Worthy ?
Ah...
Even Hakeem needed Clyde, one of the 50, to repeat with Jordan out of the picture.
And .4 is pretty close. 06 we had a bad foul that we committed or we win game 7.
If someone is a top 10 of all time and they play with another player who is arguably a top 10 or top 20, then they should win championships together.
If they didn't and they had a teammate that was a top 20 caliber, then I doubt that they were really one of the top 10 players to ever play the game.
That's how I look at it.
okay... so going by this formula... If Kobe wins the championship with the current players he has now he should be at least considered among the top 10 if not then 15. Becuase Clearly Fisher, Odom, Walton and Bynum are no where near the top 100 right now
I don't think that even Barkley himself would claim to be better than Tim Duncan. And Barkley was not a good defender.
no.. not just magic and kareem.... how about walton, lambeer, ewing, russell, chamberlin, mikan, cowens.... etc... they have all repeated to the finals or at least won the championship once..... EXCEPT for Ewing i think he lost to olojuwan and then to the spurs LOL
Tim Duncan:
2007-08 All NBA Defense First Team
2006-07 All NBA Defense First Team
2005-06 All NBA Defense Second Team
2004-05 All NBA Defense First Team
2003-04 All NBA Defense Second Team
2001-02 All NBA Defense First Team
2000-01 All NBA Defense First Team
1999-00 All NBA Defense First Team
1998-99 All NBA Defense First Team
1997-98 All NBA Defense Second Team
Karl Malone:
1998-99 All NBA Defense First Team
1997-98 All NBA Defense First Team
1996-97 All NBA Defense First Team
1987-88 All NBA Defense Second Team
Who's got the better defensive resume again? The guy with four All NBA Defensive team namings in 19 years, or the one whose has been named to the first team 7 times and was on the second team the other 3?
problem with barkley is that he was a beast when he wanted to beI don't think that even Barkley himself would claim to be better than Tim Duncan. And Barkley was not a good defender.
what was Malone Compe ion vs Duncan Compe ion...
clearly Malone was going up against the greatest Bigs of all time thats why he was NBA all Defensive teams in the late 90's after those bigs retired. if it werent for those great players malone would be on the slot every single year just like Duncan
Okay, so first Kobe may yet get to my top 10 because he is building up to it.
But, let's be clear, that my "formula" only established a way to disprove that somebody was a top 10 player, not a way to prove it. Those are logically two very different propositions. The converse is not the same as the contrapositive. p implies q is the same thing as not q implies not p but different from q implies p and different from the inverse not p implies not q.
Kobe, at this point, doesn't have a top 50 player with him.
However, he has a number of players who are really good and these include Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol. When you add in the total depth and talent of the Laker team, the most talented team and deepest team in the league in my opinion, then Kobe has a strong supporting cast.
Having said that, Kobe would go well on to my list if he wins this year.
He's not terribly far from making that list because again he is a terrific defender as well as scorer, facilitator, leader, etc.
So, he's not far from my list and that would go a long ways towards making my list and probably a lot of other people's lists too.
Just my opinion.
im not saying that Barkley is a better Defender than Duncan Im saying the SPurs would have prolly won more with either Barkley or Malone... Barkely prolly not but Malone most defenitaley
Ewing didn't win. Prior to the 80's, there was not much parity in the league.
And those dynasties had all the talent in the league on their team (almost).
So, with all of the talent in the league on your team, I would hope that you would repeat.
Or if you're the only 7 footer around in your era. (not quite, but there were not a lot of them and they were much less athletic than now).
Main point is that these teams that repeated had much more support than Tim has and we don't know that they would have repeated had they had as little support as Tim has had.
Yes, Charles Oakley, Horace Grant, Derek McKey, Anthony Mason, Larry Nance, Buck Williams, Rick Mahorn, Kevin McHale, AC Green, Rodney McCray, Michael Cooper, Bill Hanzlik, Danny Vranes, and Bobby Jones were monster compe ion in front of poor Karl Malone and his all-world defense.
Okay, so first Kobe may yet get to my top 10 because he is building up to it.
But, let's be clear, that my "formula" only established a way to disprove that somebody was a top 10 player, not a way to prove it. Those are logically two very different propositions. The converse is not the same as the contrapositive. p implies q is the same thing as not q implies not p but different from q implies p and different from the inverse not p implies not q.
Kobe, at this point, doesn't have a top 50 player with him.
However, he has a number of players who are really good and these include Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol. When you add in the total depth and talent of the Laker team, the most talented team and deepest team in the league in my opinion, then Kobe has a strong supporting cast.
Having said that, Kobe would go well on to my list if he wins this year.
He's not terribly far from making that list because again he is a terrific defender as well as scorer, facilitator, leader, etc.
So, he's not far from my list and that would go a long ways towards making my list and probably a lot of other people's lists too.
Just my opinion.
okay fine... i can agree to this about kobe
and the notion that Tim Duncan may well be a top ten player of all time....
Duncan vs Malone
Those that could, did. Those that couldn't, make excuses.
End of story.
Malone most definitely? You mean the Malone who choked game 7 of the 96 WCF away? The Malone who had game 6 of the 98 Finals won thanks to Stockton's clutch shooting until he didn't notice Jordan come to steal the ball? The Malone who put up 8 points in his team's elimination games in back to back seasons?
Well, then, we agree.
I remember these games.
I also remember a certain 50 point beating in the Finals that was quite unusual.
Hmm. Who played in it ?
No way. Not even close.
most defeinately not.... the only time i saw a player win it all without their number 2 star was magic johnson and thats when kareem went down with an injury Magic played all 5 positions during that finals series against the sixers
thats your opinion its cool...
It is very hard to pick from Shaq, Duncan and Olajuwon as they all have very similar credentials.
Duncan is at the point in his career where some fans are forgetting how good he was in his 2003 form. The Duncan of today is still an elite player, but no where near the same as then. Even though his stats are still good, he is not being double teamed as much as the past. That means that he is not the dominant offensive force he once was, when no one could defend him man to man.
As far as comparisons go, there are several factors. One is -- you HAVE to distinguish between "peak" and "career" value when comparing players. The first is the peak level, or the best 2-3 year period when a player was in his prime. The 2nd is the ulative, or career consistent value. For example, at his best Shaq was a more dominant player than Duncan ever was (though not by much.) However, over the course of his career Duncan has been a more consistent performer, and helped his team more.
The 2nd factor is that it is impossible to compare players of different eras. It is better to create "teams of the decade" for the 60's, 70's, 80's etc. No one really knows if the players of the past were better, worse or different than today's. The game is always changing and in different eras it takes different skill sets to succeed.
Finally, Moses Malone is a player who is often overlooked but he did it all in his career.
oh CMON that was against Jordan and Pippen....
to be all honest you guys real compe ion was us and Detroit
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
