Reply With Quote
Dallas just happens matchup well against San Antonio, healthy Ginobili or not. Had the Spurs drawn the Hornets, Jazz, the inexperienced Blazers team, or maybe the Nuggets, they probably advance.
Dallas just happens matchup well against San Antonio, healthy Ginobili or not. Had the Spurs drawn the Hornets, Jazz, the inexperienced Blazers team, or maybe the Nuggets, they probably advance.
Way to out the only person on your side, dumbass.
He should be expected to make it at least to the 2nd round if he is clearly a top 5 player of all time
Pippen did it in 94 without MJ
Magic Johnson did it in 91 without Kareem and actually made it to the Finals....
loooool You expect me to side with someone who called me a re . You are the only one who might but not me asshat.
Pippen's team was still stacked, and they didn't face matchup problems like the Spurs did versus Dallas.
And Magic is the absolute .
Dear Mr. Joey Whelan, you seem forget what type of game Tim plays when making comparisons to other current all-stars. Fundamental ball (passing/ setting screens/ understanding the open man/ understanding that breaking your arm off in the rim is still only worth two points/ ect..) doesn't allow you to pad your stats (and in a flash notable way) as much as (in particular Wolves era) K.G.'s me first (low B-ball I.Q.) mentality. Tim makes those (admittedly very talented roll-players) around him into the dominant forces they are. And he has won more than most in the modern era as a result. How is the better player even a question for you? The results are in, Duncan= legend to the game best PF ever. How can you possibly claim media bias for that general understanding? It's just a common understanding. Even other legends begrudgingly admit it. Now repeat after me..."I'm sorry spurs talk for wasting your time with this absolute garbage". Thank you.
Shouldn't you be plagiarizing an article and taking down your embarassing youtube videos?
Statistics back up the Fundamental ball. If a player blows in terms of statistics most likely his Funademental Ball will be bad as well.
What do you mean stacked? Are you pulling all this info from your ass? the first 3peat team was no where near the 94 team.
Putting my loyalties aside, it would've been fun to see Duncan and Garnett face-off in the 2008 Finals. With Ginobili at full strength, of course.
I will humor this, explain to me how Tim "blows" statistic wise. Be specific and show your work.
Sam Cassell was a pretty good player, underrated at the time. You can't say Garnett had nobody. Some of his Wolves teams weren't much worse than the recent Cavs teams Lebron had.
He was still suffering from Tendonosis, its something that you would have known if you watched the games...
tendonosis is degeneration of the Achilles tendon, something that wont go away with an ice pack, it was going to take about the whole summer to heal even before the playoffs.
They still had a good roster, and didn't have matchup problems like the Spurs had with Dallas. Can you not ing compute this?
I didnt say he blows statistical wise. Reread the post. Im just saying you cant use Fundamental ball as an excuse to back up greatness.
Is that the excuse for all the Spurs losses? Matchup problems? TD's Roster in 09 without Ginobili > Bulls Roster in 94
They were up against a good Dallas team with Dirk ing Nowitzki without Manu Ginobili. What other ing excuse do you need?
But you guys had Tim ing Duncan.
td's role players in 2009 <<<<< bulls role players in the 90s
One player = team?
Im not talking about the the 90's Bulls with MJ im talking about that specific 94 Team which Pippen led to a game 7 Second Round loss to the eventual finalists Knicks....
No but this goes back to my argument why Tim Duncan is overrated. If he was as good as he is rated he would at least get them to the second round..... Even without their 2nd best player. Like I said Pippen did it in 94 without #1 greatest player and Magic Johnson did it in 91
ok then
2009 mavs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1994 cavs
You're ting me, right? Robinson was a great player, no doubt. But 2003 was the final year of his career. Most (if not all) his numbers that year were career lows. As far as Parker is concerned, that was his rookie NBA season, no? He was nowhere near as good then as he is now.
Get the weak out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
