Reply With Quote
Basketball is a team game.
And how does that have any signficance?
Basketball is a team game.
Reasons as to why a team doesn't advance in the playoffs counts for more than just player 1 and 2. According to this logic, Pierce>Duncan because he made it further without KG, even though they played a sad Chicago team.
Yes it is, which is why RIngs and MVPS shouldnt be a factor in determining the GOAT..........
Why are you all taking the bait? Just stop posting in here and let the thread die.
Then what the are you attempting to say, man? What is your argument? If you think Tim has good fundamentals and you don't think his stats are bad, then what are you trying to accomplish? And what players are you really trying to compare him to? Were you initially just intending give your opinion that Tim is overrated? That's alot of posting back to other spurs-talkers in order to get your specific opinion across. Way too much energy wasted for that, IMO.
the 94 bulls would get swept by the 2009 mavs, and the 2009 duncan-less could beat the 1994 cavs
Leadership and ability to make the overall team better, which makes the GOAT, leads to rings and MVPs.
because i want to raise my post count.
because i want to raise my post count.
No matter where Tim Duncan is ranked, he's still greater than Garnett.
In '91, Magic did have a fellow top 50 player next to him (Worthy). Vlade Divac was a nice, young piece people overlook. Perkins was a nice pick-up.
'94 Bulls? That's an example of how great a coach Phil Jackson is.
Im just saying TD has too much of a stacked roster and that stacked roster is making him this great. If TD Was really THAT GREAT he would have done more with less like other players...
This year's roster wasn't stacked for . Outside the 3, they barely had anything.
And what makes you think Dallas would sweep the 94 Bulls.
Those big 3 are enough.... Just like how Pippen was enough for Jordan and like Kobe was enough for Shaq....
It was two for the playoffs, and one of them coming off tendenosis. Is that enough?
Duncan should have won more than 1 game........... I mean he is a top 5 of all time according to most of you posters...
Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs in 2005. Is he near the bottom of your list? happens.
Ha Ha Put Duncan in place of Kobe in 05 and see what happens.....
To deny the superiority of the (Lakers/Bulls) championship squads bench whithin those years vs. the Spurs bench this year is laughable and offensive to those champ teams. So you're saying with our shallow secondary (and no Ginobili) and two major players from the teams of those eras would have advanced? Did you watch our bench this year (sans Manu)? Or any of our starters outside of Tim and Tony? Tim is our rock, Tim is the reason San Antonio has championships. A whole lot of dominant players at his position in this league never get to experience winning on the level he has perpetuated every year that he has been in. Bud, come off it. Tim Duncan is the best power forward in the modern era and IMO to ever play the game.
Hypothetical, try again.
Put Kobe in place of Duncan in 2009 and the Spurs get destroyed either way.
Duncan gets the credit he deserves and in no way is he extremely overrated. Duncan>>>>>KG. If KG had anything on Duncan, he would have done more than just reach the WCF before he had to get traded to a team with Pierce, Rondo, and Allen in order to do something.
This year he cleaned K.G.'s clock on stats, averaged more points, rebounds, assists and blocks.
It shouldn't be the only factor, but of course winning must be part of the equation. You think it's more legitimate to hand out huge legacy points for losing? Then you should be arguing Jerry West or Elgin Baylor for top honors, as nobody lost more finals than they did. And yes, both had nice statistics to go along with their losing.
Basketball is a team game, but it's obvious certain individuals (a few per era) have tremendous effects and influence on the bigger picture.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
