Reply With Quote
no he didnt
he got some steals, but other than that, he often got face ed by his opponent.
meh, compared to timmy? average. timmy can anchor the middle much better than mchale.
no he didnt
he got some steals, but other than that, he often got face ed by his opponent.
McHale was a very good defender for the 80s where PFs were nowhere near as athletic or agile as they have become these days. Even Charles Oakley was a very good PF defender. But, neither of those two guys have the foot speed or lateral quickness required to defend a power forward in today's NBA.
I retract. McHale was excellent. He played in the 80's, which means he was a great TEAM defender, thus he could most definitely combat any great PF and keep them from scoring. It doesn't matter that he isn't physically comparable to some players, the fact that he played in the 80s (the golden era of basketball) and played great TEAM defense automatically means he is as good, if not a better defender and basketball player than Tim Duncan.
98-2000 Robinson/Duncan would RAPE Parish/Mchale....give me a break. Bynum/Gasol/Odom would give serious troubles to the 80' celtics frontline
Charles Oakley was a great defender all the way up to the 90s.
Even in today's NBA, a player like Kurt Thomas, who definitely is slow, can be a very effective defender.
For stretch, who ever said that McHale was better than Duncan on defense? He was just an excellent defender, someone who made the All-D team 6 times (3 1st, 3 2nd). He had a huge wingspan, had decent foot speed, very intelligent in his position defense, and was effective one on one. He is the guy who would guard the Malones, Ewings and Olajuwons.
he played great TEAM defense!
mchale > timmy
Two quite different things to say a player is an excellent defender and saying he can be a very effective (team) defender.
Charles Oakley was a great team defender and a tough 1-1 defender.
Same with Kurt Thomas.
They probably weren't Duncan good, but players can make up for their lack of speed with positioning and smarts, even in 1-1 situations.
McHale also played great 1-1 defense.
I repeat with slight variation, two different things to say a player is an EXCELLENT defender and saying he's a "tough" 1-1 defender.
Tim Duncan is an excellent defender, yet he isn't that athletic (since 2005 or so)
Is Larry Bird on the level of Tim Duncan? No, of course not. But he wasn't a horrible defender. You're making him sound like he was Steve Nash.
Tim Duncan is no longer an excellent defender, especially since he's lost a step and some athleticism with all of his knee and foot problems. When he was younger, he was very athletic and that's when he was an excellent defender. Now, he doesn't have the foot speed or athleticism to effectively defend the better power forwards in the league. He often has to end up defending slower, less athletic centers. Duncan is still a very good and smart defender. He's no longer an excellent defender and that's primarily because he lacks the athleticism he used to have.
Depends how you defined excellent, I guess this is much more a matter of definitions and semantics. While I agree that Duncan wasn't the defender he was primarily because he lost his athleticism, he is still better than most, if not all, big man today on the defensive end despite his limited agility and speed. If Duncan does not qualify as an excellent defender, I suppose the only big man you can put there the past season would be Dwight Howard, who I generally think is overrated defensively because he still does not have the smarts.
McHale in his prime would definitely rank similar to Duncan of 09 in terms of defensive abilities. Of course, he is a long way away from the 99 Duncan, which was the original argument.
Parker & Ginobili
Elliott, Duncan & Robinson
There was surprisingly only about 5% homerism in those choices if a 100% ginobili is considered.
In the last two seasons, Duncan has gotten lit up by opposing post players more than in his first 8 seasons in the league. He is not an "excellent" defender anymore. He's a very smart defender. He's still a very good team defender. And, Pop's defensive schemes allow him to be effective. But, by no means is Tim Duncan still an "excellent" defender anymore. Not currently. Not with those knees. Not with the decline in athleticism and mobility. And absolutely not for a power forward in today's game.
It's not a matter of semantics when the descriptions are clear. "Excellent" versus "tough" or "very good" or "effective." There is a clear enough distinction.
honestly, i can't really disagree too much, although i still would rather have Isaiah and Dumars.
but a fully healthy parker/ginobili duo is one of the best we've seen.
So you would say that there are no excellent defensive bigs in the league right now?
Dwight Howard. And, I'd probably stop right there. And even with him, I'd hesitate to call him excellent. And, now that we don't know how KG will be affected by his injuries, I wouldn't include him. But, yeah, probably no other ones right now, not currently.
But, just four years ago, there were several "excellent" big man defenders: Duncan, KG, Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace. The younger bigs who are stars need to improve their defense.
How about Kidd, Jefferson, Carter? They just didn't win.
stockton to malone???
Backcourt 2000
magic and bryon scott was pretty strong.
kidd and carter have no rings but both perennial all stars during their prime
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions