Top 10 of all time NBA: I include Tim Duncan, do you?

[LakeShow]

Wilt
Magic
Bird
Olajuwon
Jordan

Kareem
Malone
Robertson
Kobe
Archibald

[Thomas82]

Timmy's in my starting five.

Stockton
Jordan
Magic
Duncan
Wilt

Mine would be:

C-Wilt Chamberlain
F-Tim Duncan
F-Larry Bird
G-Michael Jordan
G-Magic Johnson

[Thomas82]

you clearly have no sense for 1960s basketball history. Wilt deserves to be number one or two on any top players of all time list. It is a stupid, but common misconseption that wilt was a 7 footer who played against 6'5" players. Wilt is still the greatest athlete to play the game of basketball. Not only was he strong and tall, wilt could play the whole game, jump higher than almost anyone that plays today or in the past, run faster than almost anyone(he was always the fastest player by far on his 60s teams) and wilt had impressive ball handling skills for a big man. Playing point guard for the harlem globetrotters does that to you.

I have said this before, but in the 1960s there are several misconceptions. For one people assume that there were few great athletes, this is extremly false. Back in the 60s the game was pure fundamentals, tim duncan is a great example of a 1960s ball player, he has athletic ability, but the fundamentals come first and foremost. If elgin baylor oscar robertson or wilt played today they would be very similar to lebron, chris paul and dwight howard, however people now a days do not see those players as the amzing athletes they were because the game was not as wide spread or as popular back in the 60s as it is now. It's hard to believe that just before the jordan era the bulls only drew around 5,000 people a game at home. Another thing is that the show is in the way of the game today. Aside from tim duncan and most of the spurs, everyone wants to see something amazing happen at the basketball game. If the cavs lose a game, all is well and fine so long as he had those highlight reel dunks. Back in the 60s dunking from the free throw line, doing a 360, etc. Was looked apon as showing off. Your team mates would not be happy with you because you wasted your energy and the fans would be upset because you were just showing off instead of getting two easy points.

It is late and i am tired so i am ending my rant on 1960s basketball right now, but i will end with saying this: If a time machine were to be found, and a 25 year old wilt chamberlain were to be put in the present day nba, so long as wilt got around 20 or 25 shots a game, he would be more dominate tan he was in the 60s. In the 60s wilt would get beat up all the time; if those fouls on wilt were to happen in today's game the player would be fined and ejected with a suspension, but in wilt's day it was just physical defense. Today's game and rules revolve around the offensive game so much that wilt would easily dominate just as much today.

+1

[kingmalaki]

You gotta be ing kidding me. The Lakers always threw everything they had at Duncan in the fourth quarters of games in 01 and 02, knowing Danny Ferry, Antonio Daniels, Samaki Walker, etc. weren't going to beat them. In '04 Duncan never saw single coverage. I don't know what kind of revisionist history you're trying to preach.

Right...Duncan never saw single coverage. What revisionist history do you have my friend. The coach that hates to double more than anyone else is Phil Jackson.

So he was doubled all game long in 01 when he shot 33% and avg 12 ppg to close out that sweep?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...105210SAS.html

He was doubled all game long in 02 when he shot 42% for the series, when they lost 4-1? Horry is my fav player, and I vividly remember PJ letting him go straight up most of the time.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...205050LAL.html

I vividly remember the Lakers letting Malone pretty much check him straight up in 04, when he shot 47% for the series.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...405020SAS.html

The Pistons pretty much let Sheed and Wallace take turns on him in 05, and he only shot 42% that series. Aside for his game 6, his offensive efficiency to close that series was pretty bad (5-15, 5-17, 11-24, 10-27 in the Final game). Thank God for Manu and Horry. This point also goes into the ring argument, as this Finals series was a clear example of how the Spurs could still win a chip even with Duncan not playing as well. I can't recall when these other centers that you compare him to were ever on teams where they could win if they didn't play great (i.e. Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing).

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...506090SAS.html

And I know you aren't gonna sit here and lie and say the Lakers didn't basically let Gasol play him straight up in the WCF last year. There is no need for me to even pull those numbers.

Tim Duncan is a great, great player. However, he is not the dude that you can tell "man, we need you to like avg 35 a game this series or we are gonna lose). In the times where the Spurs have needed him to do that, he usually couldn't (i.e. last years WCFs).

And the funny thing is you are saying getting double and triple teamed is a valid reason to shoot like garbage, when we are making a comparison between Duncan and other great centers like Shaq and Hakeem. Even assuming teams threw the kitchen sink at Duncan, are you really going to argue that Shaq wasn't doubled and tripled in every run, or that Hakeem wasn't? He didn't get doubled by Shaq and Grant in 95, or by the Ewing/Oakley/Mason trio? And I don't ever recall him shooting mid 30's to low 40% against those dudes. Shaq and Hakeem could be efficient high volume scorers when they needed to be, ala MJ. Duncan, not so much. And I can understand how that difference may not be important to you....but I think it's significant, because every team won't be able to surround Duncan with great help like the Spurs have done. Again, there is no way you could put a frontline of Gasol/Odom or Grant/Horry on either one of those dudes and get away with it.

[baseline bum]

Olajuwon shot 44% in the 90 playoffs, 39% in the 98, and 43% in 99. Get off your boy's nuts. That '01 series Duncan carried the Spurs the first two games, with 28 and 14 and 40 and 15, and they still lost because he got absolutely nothing from his teammates. He had a bad game 3, and after that the series was over. That 02 series LA trapped him every time he touched the ball in the fourth. You're on crack if you think they put Duncan in single coverage after the Spurs went up 2-0 in 04. Absolutely no one guarded the perimeter against the Spurs shooters, and the plan paid off bigtime. What do you think, the other three Lakers were standing under the basket in a circle jerk while Malone and Payton played Duncan and Parker in single coverage? In 05 Duncan was playing on two sprained ankles, and still carried the team the first three quarters of game 5 before Horry took over, and in the third and fourth of game 7.

[Thomas]

In no Specific Order;

Jordan, Duncan, Magic Johnson, Abdul Jabbar, Chamberlain, Russell, Kobe Bryant, Bird, David Robinson, Olajuwon

[dbreiden83080]

Olajuwon shot 44% in the 90 playoffs, 39% in the 98, and 43% in 99. Get off your boy's nuts. That '01 series Duncan carried the Spurs the first two games, with 28 and 14 and 40 and 15, and they still lost because he got absolutely nothing from his teammates. He had a bad game 3, and after that the series was over. That 02 series LA trapped him every time he touched the ball in the fourth. You're on crack if you think they put Duncan in single coverage after the Spurs went up 2-0 in 04. Absolutely no one guarded the perimeter against the Spurs shooters, and the plan paid off bigtime. What do you think, the other three Lakers were standing under the basket in a circle jerk while Malone and Payton played Duncan and Parker in single coverage? In 05 Duncan was playing on two sprained ankles, and still carried the team the first three quarters of game 5 before Horry took over, and in the third and fourth of game 7.

For me the 05 le is the best one of all because Tim was a complete Warrior in that whole post-season. Bad ankles that bothered him on and off the whole year. He was hurt and played bad in game 1 with Denver, bounced back had a good series. Went down in Seattle, re-tweaked one of his ankles, got up in the clinching game and hit the game winner.. Was brilliant against the Susn for 5 games. Then against the defending champs, a true great team in the Pistons, with an amazing physical D, he had his good games and his bad ones but he got it done when it mattered. Game 5 you mentioned, game 7 after a horrid first half, came out determined to go down swinging, played very well and the Spurs reclaimed the crown. Duncan solidified himself as a legend forever, with that 05 le..

[romain.star]

all time NBA 1st team:
PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: Bird (then James in a few years)
PF: Duncan
C: Chamberlain

All time NBA 2nd team
PG: Big O
SG: Bryant
SF: J. Erving
PF: Malone
C: O'neil

[Thomas82]

all time NBA 1st team:
PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: Bird (then James in a few years)
PF: Duncan
C: Chamberlain

All time NBA 2nd team
PG: Big O
SG: Bryant
SF: J. Erving
PF: Malone
C: O'neil

My 2nd team would be:

C-Bill Russell
F-Karl Malone
F-Julius Erving
G-Jerry West
G-Oscar Robertson

[romain.star]

My 2nd team would be:

C-Bill Russell
F-Karl Malone
F-Julius Erving
G-Jerry West
G-Oscar Robertson

My bad, Bill Russell deserves a spot in the 2nd team

[kingmalaki]

Olajuwon shot 44% in the 90 playoffs, 39% in the 98, and 43% in 99. Get off your boy's nuts. That '01 series Duncan carried the Spurs the first two games, with 28 and 14 and 40 and 15, and they still lost because he got absolutely nothing from his teammates. He had a bad game 3, and after that the series was over. That 02 series LA trapped him every time he touched the ball in the fourth. You're on crack if you think they put Duncan in single coverage after the Spurs went up 2-0 in 04. Absolutely no one guarded the perimeter against the Spurs shooters, and the plan paid off bigtime. What do you think, the other three Lakers were standing under the basket in a circle jerk while Malone and Payton played Duncan and Parker in single coverage? In 05 Duncan was playing on two sprained ankles, and still carried the team the first three quarters of game 5 before Horry took over, and in the third and fourth of game 7.

Hakeem did shoot 44% in the 90 playoffs. That was his only poor series until he was a 35 yr old man!! I just highlighted for you 3 subpar series from Duncan (really 4), two of which he was in his prime years.

I'm not on Hakeem's nuts, or Shaq's. I'm highlighting a clear difference between those players. For example, do you think Duncan could have posted 35+ on a inprime Robinson and Rodman, in any year...in an efficient manner? Do you think Duncan would have put up Shaq numbers while battling a frontline of Robinson and Oneal for example? Shaq and Hakeem could do that, even when being doubled the entire game. Can you find multiple bad playoff performances (scoring wise) from either one of those guys, like I can find multiple ones for Duncan.

Do you think he could have done this while checking Shaq on the other end, or Robinson, or Ewing? Please note he got lit by Amare in one playoff run, by Dirk in another, and lost to Shaq 3 times.

Luckily for Tim, he has always had a quality supporting cast around him so he didn't have to really dominate offensively. Again, most centers weren't on squads that could win a le while they were shooting in the low 40's for a series. If you were a Spurs fan in the Robinson era then this should not be news to you....

[Brazil]

My bad, Bill Russell deserves a spot in the 2nd team

A list of all time without Russel is not a good list

[ambchang]

Revisionist history.

Duncan, in the four championship years, shot 51.1, 52.9, 46.4, and 52.1% from the field. The only "down" year was 05, when he was playing on an ankle problem. Compared to Olajuwon, who shot 51.9 and 53.1%, Duncan wasn't too far off.

Very few players could have won 4 les in place of Duncan during those years. Hakeem was obviously one of them, but Shaq is unlikely to accomplish this, as his lack of defense would hurt the team. Shaq was unquestionably the better scorer on the team, but his defense was worse than Duncan by a mile, there really isn't any comparison.

The 99 team was severely flawed on the offensive end. It was Duncan would carried the team offensively. And it's just unreal how you can honestly say that Duncan cannot score in volume if asked to. He scored 27.6 ppg and handed out 5 apg on a team that averaged 91.1 ppg in the 02 playoffs, which means that he scored 30.3% of his team's points, and directly accounted for 41.3% of the offense. Compared to Olajuwon's highest scoring playoffs, in which he averaged 37.5ppg and 1.8 apg while his team averaged 107.3ppg; which translates to 34.9% scoring, and 38.3% offense (both assuming an assist translates to two points, and we know for a fact that 3 pters were used much more during 02 than compared to 88, so this gives a slight bias in favour of Olajuwon).

As you can see, the difference in offensive output was miniscule.
Now compared to Olajuwon's 95 numbers, when he avearged 33 ppg and 4.5 apg while his team averaged 107ppg, Hakeem accounted for his team's 30.8% of scoring, and 39.3% offense.

The pattern pretty much repeats itself with Shaq. In 98, Shaq scored 30.5ppg and handed out 2.9 apg on a team that averaged about 100 points a game in the playoffs, that's 30.5% of scoring and 36.3 of offense.

In 00, 30.7ppg and 3.1 apg while the Lakers scored 99.15. That's 31% scoring and 37.2% offense.

In 01, 30.4 ppg and 3.2 apg while the Lakers scored 103.375 ppg. That's 29.4% scoring and 35.6% offense.

These are the kinds of numbers we are talking about, where Duncan directly accounted for more of his team's offense, and scored about the same as Shaq did during their best years.

But of course, an unbiased person who actually saw how Duncan carried the team in 99, and 03 on the offensive end wouldn't have needed those numbers. Robinson was a s of his former self offensively in 99, and the team was relying on an Elliott with one kidney and Jaren Jackson for outside shooting, while having Avery Johnson shoot more than David Robinson in the playoffs.

In 03, Tony Parker wasn't anything close to the Parker you see today, he was one who was shooting 40.3% from the field for less than 15 ppg. Only 1 of the Spurs top five scorers in the playoffs shot better than 42%, and that was Tim Duncan who shot 52.9%. Stephen Jackson and Steve Kerr, along with an ancient Kevin Willis were major contributors on that team. It wasn't anything more stellar than Shaq or Hakeem had during most of their careers. It certainly was not as great as having 1st team all-nba guard Anfernee Hardway and shooters Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson, plus a rugged rebounder in Horace Grant, it definitely isn't as good as having Clyde Drexler and Kenny Smith on your side, with Sam Cassell coming off the bench, and it doesn't even compare to having Kobe Bryant, Horry, Derek Fisher and Rick Fox.

And Hakeem had more than 1 bad shooting playoffs before his prime was over. He shot 47.4% during his first PO in 85, and as mentioned before, 44.3% in the 90 playoffs.

[baseline bum]

Hakeem did shoot 44% in the 90 playoffs. That was his only poor series until he was a 35 yr old man!! I just highlighted for you 3 subpar series from Duncan (really 4), two of which he was in his prime years.

I'm not on Hakeem's nuts, or Shaq's. I'm highlighting a clear difference between those players. For example, do you think Duncan could have posted 35+ on a inprime Robinson and Rodman, in any year...in an efficient manner? Do you think Duncan would have put up Shaq numbers while battling a frontline of Robinson and Oneal for example? Shaq and Hakeem could do that, even when being doubled the entire game. Can you find multiple bad playoff performances (scoring wise) from either one of those guys, like I can find multiple ones for Duncan.

First off, throw Rodman out of the equation. I know you Rocket fans have fond memories of him for his act in games 2 and 5 and for leaving Horry all alone for the game-winner in game 1, but acting like he was a contributing member of the Spurs in 95 was lunacy. If he helped the team, why would they just dump him for Will Perdue in the summer when he had another year on his contract?

Aside from that, Olajuwon faced tons of single coverage in that series because Houston had a million three point shooters shooting from a close three-point line. You can kill that whole idea that Olajuwon could score against the pressure Shaq faced, because no big man in NBA history faced the defenses Shaq did.

Do you think he could have done this while checking Shaq on the other end, or Robinson, or Ewing? Please note he got lit by Amare in one playoff run, by Dirk in another, and lost to Shaq 3 times.

What part of playing on two sprained ankles in '05 did you not see?

Luckily for Tim, he has always had a quality supporting cast around him so he didn't have to really dominate offensively. Again, most centers weren't on squads that could win a le while they were shooting in the low 40's for a series. If you were a Spurs fan in the Robinson era then this should not be news to you....

Duncan had a quality supporting cast in '01? Danny Ferry and Terry Porter were quality starters? Antonio Daniels was a quality starting 2 guard? The 2001 team had like 3 quality players: Duncan, Robinson, and Rose.

How about Steve Smith in '02?

Duncan's supporting cast in 2000 was quality with Chucky Brown/Jerome Kersey, and Avery Johnson on their last legs starting?

[kingmalaki]

Revisionist history.

Duncan, in the four championship years, shot 51.1, 52.9, 46.4, and 52.1% from the field. The only "down" year was 05, when he was playing on an ankle problem. Compared to Olajuwon, who shot 51.9 and 53.1%, Duncan wasn't too far off.

Very few players could have won 4 les in place of Duncan during those years. Hakeem was obviously one of them, but Shaq is unlikely to accomplish this, as his lack of defense would hurt the team. Shaq was unquestionably the better scorer on the team, but his defense was worse than Duncan by a mile, there really isn't any comparison.

The 99 team was severely flawed on the offensive end. It was Duncan would carried the team offensively. And it's just unreal how you can honestly say that Duncan cannot score in volume if asked to. He scored 27.6 ppg and handed out 5 apg on a team that averaged 91.1 ppg in the 02 playoffs, which means that he scored 30.3% of his team's points, and directly accounted for 41.3% of the offense. Compared to Olajuwon's highest scoring playoffs, in which he averaged 37.5ppg and 1.8 apg while his team averaged 107.3ppg; which translates to 34.9% scoring, and 38.3% offense (both assuming an assist translates to two points, and we know for a fact that 3 pters were used much more during 02 than compared to 88, so this gives a slight bias in favour of Olajuwon).

As you can see, the difference in offensive output was miniscule.
Now compared to Olajuwon's 95 numbers, when he avearged 33 ppg and 4.5 apg while his team averaged 107ppg, Hakeem accounted for his team's 30.8% of scoring, and 39.3% offense.

The pattern pretty much repeats itself with Shaq. In 98, Shaq scored 30.5ppg and handed out 2.9 apg on a team that averaged about 100 points a game in the playoffs, that's 30.5% of scoring and 36.3 of offense.

In 00, 30.7ppg and 3.1 apg while the Lakers scored 99.15. That's 31% scoring and 37.2% offense.

In 01, 30.4 ppg and 3.2 apg while the Lakers scored 103.375 ppg. That's 29.4% scoring and 35.6% offense.

These are the kinds of numbers we are talking about, where Duncan directly accounted for more of his team's offense, and scored about the same as Shaq did during their best years.

But of course, an unbiased person who actually saw how Duncan carried the team in 99, and 03 on the offensive end wouldn't have needed those numbers. Robinson was a s of his former self offensively in 99, and the team was relying on an Elliott with one kidney and Jaren Jackson for outside shooting, while having Avery Johnson shoot more than David Robinson in the playoffs.

In 03, Tony Parker wasn't anything close to the Parker you see today, he was one who was shooting 40.3% from the field for less than 15 ppg. Only 1 of the Spurs top five scorers in the playoffs shot better than 42%, and that was Tim Duncan who shot 52.9%. Stephen Jackson and Steve Kerr, along with an ancient Kevin Willis were major contributors on that team. It wasn't anything more stellar than Shaq or Hakeem had during most of their careers. It certainly was not as great as having 1st team all-nba guard Anfernee Hardway and shooters Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson, plus a rugged rebounder in Horace Grant, it definitely isn't as good as having Clyde Drexler and Kenny Smith on your side, with Sam Cassell coming off the bench, and it doesn't even compare to having Kobe Bryant, Horry, Derek Fisher and Rick Fox.

And Hakeem had more than 1 bad shooting playoffs before his prime was over. He shot 47.4% during his first PO in 85, and as mentioned before, 44.3% in the 90 playoffs.

Nice post.

Again, my question is simple. Do you honestly think Duncan could drop like 35 a night on a great frontline, in an efficient manner to lead a team to a le. There is no shame in admitting that he did not have an extra "umph" offensively like Hakeem or Shaq.

I don't think it's unreal to say Duncan couldn't drop 30 a game in an efficient manner when he has never done it. And there have been times where the Spurs have needed him to go uber with his scoring (i.e. last years WCF) and he couldn't carry the load.

Tim Duncan is a great player. What he is not in the explosive scorer that Hakeem or Shaq were. nothing you have said is refuting this. Again, if that aspect isn't as important to you then that's one thing. but I think having a dude who can score on pace with MJ is vital. Not too many dudes can drop 30 a night efficiently.....

[dallaskd]

Duncan is not over Hakeem people...

[kingmalaki]

First off, throw Rodman out of the equation. I know you Rocket fans have fond memories of him for his act in games 2 and 5 and for leaving Horry all alone for the game-winner in game 1, but acting like he was a contributing member of the Spurs in 95 was lunacy. If he helped the team, why would they just dump him for Will Perdue in the summer when he had another year on his contract?

He didn't help the team have the best record in basketball that season? Are you now saying Rodman was a bad defender for the Spurs?

Aside from that, Olajuwon faced tons of single coverage in that series because Houston had a million three point shooters shooting from a close three-point line. You can kill that whole idea that Olajuwon could score against the pressure Shaq faced, because no big man in NBA history faced the defenses Shaq did.

A lot of single coverage...that's funny. Do you think Duncan could drop 35 a night on a prime Robinson, while checking him on the other end?

What part of playing on two sprained ankles in '05 did you not see?

Both of his ankles were sprained in 01, 02, 04 and last year against Gasol? Are you also going to now say the Lakers didn't let Gasol go straight up with him for the most part?

Duncan had a quality supporting cast in '01? Danny Ferry and Terry Porter were quality starters? Antonio Daniels was a quality starting 2 guard? The 2001 team had like 3 quality players: Duncan, Robinson, and Rose.

How about Steve Smith in '02?

Duncan's supporting cast in 2000 was quality with Chucky Brown/Jerome Kersey, and Avery Johnson on their last legs starting?

Duncan had a quality supporting cast when he won les. Do you deny this? Again, he won a le in 05 while shooting like garbage. No other center played on a team where that was possible (the ones that I am comparing him to here). The argument of him carrying a team without a second star in 03 is valid, but it's not like Hakeem didn't do the exact same thing in 95.

[dbreiden83080]

Duncan is not over Hakeem people...

In most peoples minds, i believe he is..

[sananspursfan21]

bill russell's too low, chamberlain's too low, and tim duncan is 1 spot too low

[kingmalaki]

In most peoples minds, i believe he is..

You mean most Spurs fans, or those that reside in San Antonio.

[HarlemHeat37]

I have Hakeem ahead of Duncan on my list that I posted earlier, I don't think it's really debatable..Tim was a better passer, but I think that's where it ends..

Duncan and Hakeem are very similar players..2 of the greatest defensive players of all-time, good passers, both had good Js, solid post moves, class acts with great leadership ability, led teams to les with weak help compared to other le teams('93, 2003)..

Hakeem just did most things SLIGHTLY better than Tim..

[Thomas82]

Duncan is not over Hakeem people...

Says who?

[Thomas82]

revisionist history.

Duncan, in the four championship years, shot 51.1, 52.9, 46.4, and 52.1% from the field. The only "down" year was 05, when he was playing on an ankle problem. Compared to olajuwon, who shot 51.9 and 53.1%, duncan wasn't too far off.

Very few players could have won 4 les in place of duncan during those years. Hakeem was obviously one of them, but shaq is unlikely to accomplish this, as his lack of defense would hurt the team. Shaq was unquestionably the better scorer on the team, but his defense was worse than duncan by a mile, there really isn't any comparison.

The 99 team was severely flawed on the offensive end. It was duncan would carried the team offensively. And it's just unreal how you can honestly say that duncan cannot score in volume if asked to. He scored 27.6 ppg and handed out 5 apg on a team that averaged 91.1 ppg in the 02 playoffs, which means that he scored 30.3% of his team's points, and directly accounted for 41.3% of the offense. Compared to olajuwon's highest scoring playoffs, in which he averaged 37.5ppg and 1.8 apg while his team averaged 107.3ppg; which translates to 34.9% scoring, and 38.3% offense (both assuming an assist translates to two points, and we know for a fact that 3 pters were used much more during 02 than compared to 88, so this gives a slight bias in favour of olajuwon).

As you can see, the difference in offensive output was miniscule.
Now compared to olajuwon's 95 numbers, when he avearged 33 ppg and 4.5 apg while his team averaged 107ppg, hakeem accounted for his team's 30.8% of scoring, and 39.3% offense.

The pattern pretty much repeats itself with shaq. In 98, shaq scored 30.5ppg and handed out 2.9 apg on a team that averaged about 100 points a game in the playoffs, that's 30.5% of scoring and 36.3 of offense.

In 00, 30.7ppg and 3.1 apg while the lakers scored 99.15. That's 31% scoring and 37.2% offense.

In 01, 30.4 ppg and 3.2 apg while the lakers scored 103.375 ppg. That's 29.4% scoring and 35.6% offense.

These are the kinds of numbers we are talking about, where duncan directly accounted for more of his team's offense, and scored about the same as shaq did during their best years.

But of course, an unbiased person who actually saw how duncan carried the team in 99, and 03 on the offensive end wouldn't have needed those numbers. Robinson was a s of his former self offensively in 99, and the team was relying on an elliott with one kidney and jaren jackson for outside shooting, while having avery johnson shoot more than david robinson in the playoffs.

In 03, tony parker wasn't anything close to the parker you see today, he was one who was shooting 40.3% from the field for less than 15 ppg. Only 1 of the spurs top five scorers in the playoffs shot better than 42%, and that was tim duncan who shot 52.9%. Stephen jackson and steve kerr, along with an ancient kevin willis were major contributors on that team. It wasn't anything more stellar than shaq or hakeem had during most of their careers. It certainly was not as great as having 1st team all-nba guard anfernee hardway and shooters dennis scott and nick anderson, plus a rugged rebounder in horace grant, it definitely isn't as good as having clyde drexler and kenny smith on your side, with sam cassell coming off the bench, and it doesn't even compare to having kobe bryant, horry, derek fisher and rick fox.

And hakeem had more than 1 bad shooting playoffs before his prime was over. He shot 47.4% during his first po in 85, and as mentioned before, 44.3% in the 90 playoffs.

+1

[baseline bum]

I don't think it's unreal to say Duncan couldn't drop 30 a game in an efficient manner when he has never done it. And there have been times where the Spurs have needed him to go uber with his scoring (i.e. last years WCF) and he couldn't carry the load.

You're a ing re . In '03 Duncan put up 28 in game 1, 28 in game 3, 36 in game 4, 27 in game 5, and 37 in the clinching game 6 against Shaq and Horry. Game 2 he only had 12, but that was over halfway into the second quarter. you for your bull lies about Duncan. ing Rocket fans who only want to talk about 1995 are sickening. He also completely annihilated them in the 99 playoffs, dropping 37 on them when Shaq ran his mouth and told the world he was gonna personally check Duncan in game 3. That 06 series vs Dallas you about Duncan had 32 a night and 41 in game 7. Take your ass back to Montrose and eat a fat .

[TDfan2007]

Nice post.

Again, my question is simple. Do you honestly think Duncan could drop like 35 a night on a great frontline, in an efficient manner to lead a team to a le. There is no shame in admitting that he did not have an extra "umph" offensively like Hakeem or Shaq.

I don't think it's unreal to say Duncan couldn't drop 30 a game in an efficient manner when he has never done it. And there have been times where the Spurs have needed him to go uber with his scoring (i.e. last years WCF) and he couldn't carry the load.

Tim Duncan is a great player. What he is not in the explosive scorer that Hakeem or Shaq were. nothing you have said is refuting this. Again, if that aspect isn't as important to you then that's one thing. but I think having a dude who can score on pace with MJ is vital. Not too many dudes can drop 30 a night efficiently.....

Oh boy here we go...

In the 06 WCSF against Dallas Tim averaged over 32ppg on 57%shooting and dropped 41 in game 7.

In the 03 WCSF against Shaq's Lakers Tim averaged 28 and 12 on about 53% shooting. That same postseason against the Mavs Tim averaged 28ppg and 16.7rpg while shooting about 57%.

In the 2001 WCSF against the Mavs he averaged 27ppg and 17.4 rpg while shooting 51%. So...

In the 2005 WCF against the Suns Tim averaged 27.4ppg and 13.8rpg while shooting about 53%

In the 2007 WCF against the Suns Tim averaged 26.8ppg and 13.7rpg while shooting 57%

Keep in mind that Tim's teams averaged less ppg than Hakeem and Shaq's which makes Tim's production even more impressive.

Oh and btw, Tim did not shoot like garbage for the entirety of the 2005 playoffs, only against the Pistons. And I wonder how the Spurs managed to win that series with Tim shooting that poorly...oh! Maybe it had something to do with Tim's defense.