If prime Robinson and prime Duncan switched era's

[whottt]

By the way, I thought you weren't "arguing", and I'm on the "ignore list"

Hey...just because you are too stupid to understand how the ignore works doesn't mean you have "thought" something that is correct. I suggest you stop thinking altogether...because you completely ing suck at it.

You are on ignore BTW.

(like I'd give a )? You're too pathetic, and immature for that though. Predictably, you'll carry on, desperately trying to get the last word.

So does them mean you are going to off? I'm ready for it when you are. I don't know about you but I find tediousness, tedious. Hurry up.

[whottt]

Let's see...

Bruce Bowen didn't lead the NBA in 3 shooting in 2003, though he did in 2002. I guess that means he wasn't a good 3 point shooter that year. Amazingly enough...he looked damn good to me when he dropped 27 points in threes on Kobe.


Steve Kerr didn't lead the league in 3 shooting that year...Amazingly enough, his %700 shooting PCT from 3 in that run, looks pretty ing good to me.

And I'm sorry stupid....but he was the greatest single season and career 3 shooter, that season as well.


And most certainly Bruce Bowen was All NBA D that year.


Manu was a Euroleage and ELeague finals MVP, already, he had also already kicked a team of All Star NBA players asses off the ing court with a far less experienced team, earlier that summer. Idiot.

And he was ing good. I don't give a if he'd been voted to an AS team yet or not.


Tony Parker wasn't good? Funny, he looked pretty ing good to me holding his own against AS PG's in every series we played except the one against LA...including having a 9 time All NBA D PG begging for help with him.


David Robinson couldn't get it done? Funny, I look at Shaq's totals and they were his playoff lows, exactly like it had been the two previous times Drob guarded him in the post season.


Just shut the up...you didn't refute ing . You're just an idiot.

[TD 21]

Hey...just because you are too stupid to understand how the ignore works doesn't mean you have "thought" something that is correct. I suggest you stop thinking altogether...because you completely ing suck at it.

You are on ignore BTW.




So does them mean you are going to off? I'm ready for it when you are. I don't know about you but I find tediousness, tedious. Hurry up.

Congratulations, you know all of what this message board entails more than I do, and all it took you was an extra 5, 000 posts.

One argument, and you've already shown me that you know very little about basketball. As most do in these situations, you're attempting to veer off topic, or turn this into something personal to try to mask the fact that your argument has been annihilated by me. Too bad I've seen this routine too many times.

I don't know what you're talking about, but if you mean leave the message board because I don't agree with your ignorant, biased interpretation of things, then the answer is a resounding no. If you don't like that, too bad.

[wekko368]

Maybe...but since average over 30 anyway, perhaps the Spurs would have been served by having their DPOY defend someone who could be stopped, and let Rodman see if he can get into Hakeem's head.

Had you ever watched a basketball game, you would have seen Rodman was able to be effective far beyond his size due to his willingness to be underhanded and use dirty tactics...you would have seen him doing it against Shaq when the Bulls played.

No he wasn't...because Hakeem was going off. That means it was completely stupid to waste him.

You are so ing stupid it isn't even funny...you would not last 2 second as NBA coach...and you probably wouldn't be as successful as Bob Hill was...who probably would never be that stupid again.

So let me get this straight. Olajuwon torched Robinson. And you think the Spurs would've been better served if they instead used a shorter defender with less length?

Please explain your logic. Don't allude to Shaq b/c Olajuwon and Shaq are very different players.

Patrick Ewing is not David Robinson...

You may refuse to believe it, but Ewing is in the same tier as Robinson, and that's a tier below Olajuwon.

You guys don't refute ...you brandish stupidity like it is a congressional medal of honor, I call you stupid because you are so and you lack insight and understanding of the game.

How about we both take IQ tests? I'll wager $500 that mine is higher than yours by a standard deviation.

[whottt]

Yawn. So ing tedious.

[ducks]

david>ewing by far

[Blackjack]

First off, welcome to the board, TD 21. It's nice to see another quality poster added to the mix.

You're calling others on being new fans? Did you just look at the impressive collection of names from the '03 team, and decide it was one of the greatest of all-time?

The truth of the matter is:

Robinson was on his last legs
Bowen was a sub-par offensive player still building his reputation as the best perimeter defensive player in the game
Parker, while talented, was a 20 year old 2nd year point guard who struggled mightily at times
Ginobili, again, while talented, and an established international star, was an NBA rookie still adapting to the NBA game, and being a role player
Jackson was a minimum free agent signing, and a mostly unproven player trying to establish himself in the league
Rose, as solid as he was a both ends of the court, was a mere role player
Claxton, was an injury prone runt, who was also an unestablished player at that point

In conclusion, that team lacked a certifiable 2nd All-Star, a true star-superstar caliber creator on the perimeter, and was mostly filled with past their prime vets (Robinson, Willis, Kerr, Smith, Ferry), or talented, yet erratic young players (Parker, Ginobili, Jackson).

Just look at their playoff record of 16-8. It took Duncan putting up historical numbers (24.7 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 5.3 apg, .529 fg pct, 42.5 mpg, also accounting for 5.98 win shares, the most in a single playoff since that stat has been recorded), and one of the all-time great defenses to overcome their shortcomings.

Pretty on point.

The only thing I'd disagree with is Bowen, who was only lacking the reputation, not the effectiveness.

And to his offensive inep ude, meh.

He did drop, what? 27 on Kobe?

And I'd also add that, Ginobili battled an ankle injury that prevented the Spurs form truly knowing the kind of player they had or who he'd be at the NBA level.

That team was admittedly in a transition year, as stated by Pop and others prior to the season, with an eye to the following year where they hoped to add another max-type player; some guy named Kidd being the eventual target.

I think Sean Deveney's the guy who sent Don Harris and the rest of SA into an uproar over his `Accidental Champion' piece, when people failed to realize it wasn't a slight, but an acknowledgement of the transition year Pop and others mentioned prior, and even during the season.

Having said that, whottt is completely on point with his recollection of the Houston series and the utter inep ude of Bob Hill. I'll never forgive that D-Bag for the injustice he did Dave or his sockless, wannabe Riley shtick.

If Dave had Manu during the Rockets reign, it would have been a Spurs reign. Well, they would have won at least one of 'em. Manu would've needed to be healthy and the closer for both teams, and making Manu's health a given isn't all that warranted. --i.e. '06 and '08 --

I've purposely avoided getting into the Duncan v. Robinson debate because absolutely nothing good can come from it. They're my two favorite players of all-time, playing on the only team I've ever been a fan of and there's no way in I'd prop one up by demeaning or belittling the other.

As someone with a decent a en and genuine love of the game, in my most objective of opinions, Duncan is the better player. I have no doubts about that.

I also have no doubts Robinson would've captured a ring prior to Tim's arrival, had he had a prime Manu alongside him.

[TD 21]

Let's see...

Bruce Bowen didn't lead the NBA in 3 shooting in 2003, though he did in 2002. I guess that means he wasn't a good 3 point shooter that year. Amazingly enough...he looked damn good to me when he dropped 27 points in threes on Kobe.


Steve Kerr didn't lead the league in 3 shooting that year...Amazingly enough, his %700 shooting PCT from 3 in that run, looks pretty ing good to me.

And I'm sorry stupid....but he was the greatest single season and career 3 shooter, that season as well.


And most certainly Bruce Bowen was All NBA D that year.


Manu was a Euroleage and ELeague finals MVP, already, he had also already kicked a team of All Star NBA players asses off the ing court with a far less experienced team, earlier that summer. Idiot.

And he was ing good. I don't give a if he'd been voted to an AS team yet or not.


Tony Parker wasn't good? Funny, he looked pretty ing good to me holding his own against AS PG's in every series we played except the one against LA...including having a 9 time All NBA D PG begging for help with him.


David Robinson couldn't get it done? Funny, I look at Shaq's totals and they were his playoff lows, exactly like it had been the two previous times Drob guarded him in the post season.


Just shut the up...you didn't refute ing . You're just an idiot.

I guess that one game means he's an offensive dynamo. Never mind the hundreds of otherwise that prove otherwise.

You're so stupid that you don't realize that the primary reason for those guys shooting such good percentages was the amount of open looks they received, courtesy of Duncan. It's basic basketball. Bowen has repeatedly even said that, probably for idiots like you who don't appreciate Duncan's greatness.

Ginobili was an erratic, inconsistent rookie, adjusting to the NBA game, and a lesser role. He was talented, no doubt, but nowhere near as good as he's been since 04-05-present.

I didn't say Parker, or any of these guys, weren't good. But none were legit All-Stars, 2nd scoring options, or elite creators. Not in '03. Big deal if he was quicker than Kidd, Kidd was easily the superior player back then. Parker, like Ginobili, while talented, was erratic, and inconsistent. Claxton played a huge role because of this.

Robinson was on his last legs. He essentially split time with Rose. For sure, he did an admirable job defending the post/interior in general, but he was clearly a complimentary player at that point. Too bad if you can't accept that.

I'm beginning to think you're much younger than I previously had assumed.

[TD 21]

First off, welcome to the board, TD 21. It's nice to see another quality poster added to the mix.



Pretty on point.

The only thing I'd disagree with is Bowen, who was only lacking the reputation, not the effectiveness.

And to his offensive inep ude, meh.

He did drop, what? 27 on Kobe?

And I'd also add that, Ginobili battled an ankle injury that prevented the Spurs form truly knowing the kind of player they had or who he'd be at the NBA level.

That team was admittedly in a transition year, as stated by Pop and others prior to the season, with an eye to the following year where they hoped to add another max-type player; some guy named Kidd being the eventual target.

I think Sean Deveney's the guy who sent Don Harris and the rest of SA into an uproar over his `Accidental Champion' piece, when people failed to realize it wasn't a slight, but an acknowledgement of the transition year Pop and others mentioned prior, and even during the season.

Having said that, whottt is completely on point with his recollection of the Houston series and the utter inep ude of Bob Hill. I'll never forgive that D-Bag for the injustice he did Dave or his sockless, wannabe Riley shtick.

If Dave had Manu during the Rockets reign, it would have been a Spurs reign. Well, they would have won at least one of 'em. Manu would've needed to be healthy and the closer for both teams, and making Manu's health a given isn't all that warranted. --i.e. '06 and '08 --

I've purposely avoided getting into the Duncan v. Robinson debate because absolutely nothing good can come from it. They're my two favorite players of all-time, playing on the only team I've ever been a fan of and there's no way in I'd prop one up by demeaning or belittling the other.

As someone with a decent a en and genuine love of the game, in my most objective of opinions, Duncan is the better player. I have no doubts about that.

I also have no doubts Robinson would've captured a ring prior to Tim's arrival, had he had a prime Manu alongside him.

Thank you.

I never said Bowen was lacking on effectiveness, I said he was not entirely established, still in the midst of building his reputation. That was one game. Overall, Bowen has always been a sub par offensive player. That's not a knock, that's fact.

[whottt]

So let me get this straight. Olajuwon torched Robinson. And you think the Spurs would've been better served if they instead used a shorter defender with less length?

Yes, because Olajuwon torched Robinson. Since Olajuwon torched Robinson, it was stupid to defend Olajuwon that way. It did not utilize David's defense to the benefit of the team, it also added to fatigue which carried over to the offensive end.


Furthermore, since David was also asked to carry the offensive load, there is a little thing called fouls, if you get enough of them, you will foul out of the game and at that point you will not be able to do anything to help your team.

If you have a man, who is expected to carry the offensive load, it stands to reason that picking up fouls may impede his ability to do so...it also stands to reason that guarding Hakeem is probably the A#1 big guy on that team that could have put those fouls on Robinson....

So what you do then, is fail to stop Hakeem, fatigue your bigman, risk fouling him out of the game and thereby killing your offense, and impede his defensive agressiveness lest he pick up fouls and eliminate any chance whatsoever of his team winning the game.


Do you really need that ing explained to you? Watch a ing playoff game sometime.

Intelligent my butthole.

Please explain your logic. Don't allude to Shaq b/c Olajuwon and Shaq are very different players.

Done.

You may refuse to believe it, but Ewing is in the same tier as Robinson, and that's a tier below Olajuwon.

I tell you what slick...why don't you look at their FTA, and tell me they are equal.

Then I want you to know something that you are obviously too stupid to understand...

Those FTA are direct result of these little things called, fouls, and generally a player shooting a lot of FTA means he is drawing a lot of...fouls!

As a general rule, when your team has a bigman that is carrying the team, he's the last guy on your team you want picking them up. So you probably want to do everything in your power to help him in that cause.

It stands to reason that a player that excelled at drawing them, as David Robinson did, as he was a tier above Hakeem and Ewing at drawing them, a fact that can be shoved all the way up your ass should you choose to pursue it...just might have been able to draw some of them on Hakeem, better than Hakeem could draw them on him...and since fouls can lead to a player being no longer allowed on the court, it is the a#1 way to defend him.

How about we both take IQ tests? I'll wager $500 that mine is higher than yours by a standard deviation.

Trust me...you aren't.

[Blackjack]

Thank you.

I never said Bowen was lacking on effectiveness, I said he was not entirely established, still in the midst of building his reputation. That was one game. Overall, Bowen has always been a sub par offensive player. That's not a knock, that's fact.

Yeah, he always has been a sub-par offensive player but he was pretty much as good as he ever was during that '03 run. He just hadn't established the reputation.

That's all I was saying.

[whottt]

Thank you.

I never said Bowen was lacking on effectiveness, I said he was not entirely established, still in the midst of building his reputation. That was one game. Overall, Bowen has always been a sub par offensive player. That's not a knock, that's fact.

He lead the NBA in the 3 point shooting the year before...he was ALL NBA D, that year. Idiot.

[Phenomanul]

I guess that one game means he's an offensive dynamo. Never mind the hundreds of otherwise that prove otherwise.

You're so stupid that you don't realize that the primary reason for those guys shooting such good percentages was the amount of open looks they received, courtesy of Duncan. It's basic basketball. Bowen has repeatedly even said that, probably for idiots like you who don't appreciate Duncan's greatness.

Ginobili was an erratic, inconsistent rookie, adjusting to the NBA game, and a lesser role. He was talented, no doubt, but nowhere near as good as he's been since 04-05-present.

I didn't say Parker, or any of these guys, weren't good. But none were legit All-Stars, 2nd scoring options, or elite creators. Not in '03. Big deal if he was quicker than Kidd, Kidd was easily the superior player back then. Parker, like Ginobili, while talented, was erratic, and inconsistent. Claxton played a huge role because of this.

Robinson was on his last legs. He essentially split time with Rose. For sure, he did an admirable job defending the post/interior in general, but he was clearly a complimentary player at that point. Too bad if you can't accept that.

I'm beginning to think you're much younger than I previously had assumed.

You're forgetting to add the clutchness factor... Steve Kerr, Jackson, and Ginobili pulled out an amazing game to get past the Mavs that post-season. For that matter you keep forgetting to mention the player they had in Jackson that year... you haven't mentioned him at all... Sure neither Ginobili, Parker or Jackson were All-Stars that year... but they showed up in that post-season (minus Parker's hiccups at the point; not that it mattered since Claxton played more than aptly as his backup)....

[wekko368]

Yes, because Olajuwon torched Robinson. Since Olajuwon torched Robinson, it was stupid to defend Olajuwon that way. It did not utilize David's defense to the benefit of the team, it also added to fatigue which carried over to the offensive end.

Like I said, if Olajuwon could score 40 on Robinson, imagine how many he'd score on Rodman. Maybe Robinson would've scored an extra 10 ppg, but its irrelevant if Olajuwon was scoring an extra 20 ppg.

Furthermore, since David was also asked to carry the offensive load, there is a little thing called fouls, if you get enough of them, you will foul out of the game and at that point you will not be able to do anything to help your team.

If you have a man, who is expected to carry the offensive load, it stands to reason that picking up fouls may impede his ability to do so...it also stands to reason that guarding Hakeem is probably the A#1 big guy on that team that could have put those fouls on Robinson....

It's rather presumptuous to assume that Robinson would've fouled out Olajuwon, the best defender in the league.

So what you do then, is fail to stop Hakeem, fatigue your bigman, risk fouling him out of the game and thereby killing your offense, and impede his defensive agressiveness lest he pick up fouls and eliminate any chance whatsoever of his team winning the game.

Pretty much....that's why the Rockets were a bad matchup for the Spurs.

Done.

You didn't actually explain why Rodman would have any success guarding Olajuwon...all you said was "done".

I tell you what slick...why don't you look at their FTA, and tell me they are equal.

Then I want you to know something that you are obviously too stupid to understand...

Those FTA are direct result of these little things called, fouls, and generally a player shooting a lot of FTA means he is drawing a lot of...fouls!

I compared Robinson's 1995 postseason and Ewing's 1993 postseason b/c they both played 15 games. And you're right, Robinson shot almost twice as many free throws. But Ewing scored more points with a much better FG%.

As a general rule, when your team has a bigman that is carrying the team, he's the last guy on your team you want picking them up. So you probably want to do everything in your power to help him in that cause.

Understandable, but you need to go with the matchups that give your team the best chance of winning. That's why Olajuwon guarded Ewing in the 1994 finals instead of Thorpe.

It stands to reason that a player that excelled at drawing them, as David Robinson did, as he was a tier above Hakeem and Ewing at drawing them, a fact that can be shoved all the way up your ass should you choose to pursue it...just might have been able to draw some of them on Hakeem, better than Hakeem could draw them on him...and since fouls can lead to a player being no longer allowed on the court, it is the a#1 way to defend him.

It's true that Robinson drew many more fouls than Olajuwon did, but Olajuwon had a refined post game and didn't need to draw fouls to score points. His FG% in the playoffs during the mid 90's was great.

And like I said, Olajuwon was the best defender in the league. It's hard to imagine he would make enough defensive mistakes to get into foul trouble. And even if he were close to getting into foul trouble, he would've played off Robinson and given him the 15 ft jumper (assuming he was still assigned to guard Robinson). Considering that Robinson's fg% was 44.6%, this wouldn't have been a bad option.

[whottt]

I guess that one game means he's an offensive dynamo. Never mind the hundreds of otherwise that prove otherwise.

You're so stupid that you don't realize that the primary reason for those guys shooting such good percentages was the amount of open looks they received, courtesy of Duncan. It's basic basketball. Bowen has repeatedly even said that, probably for idiots like you who don't appreciate Duncan's greatness.

On the contrary idiot...I'm the one that knows Duncan does that every year(until last year) and what detemines whether not we win more often than not, is whether or not the guy hits them. And because of that I know he had many more guys that did that, than David Robinson...and he had more guys that did it, that year, in that situation, than any other team he has ever played on.

What you are too ing stupid to understand, is that David Robinson drew more of those than Duncan did. Because he drew more fouls than Duncan did. @2000 more of them as it stands right now.

What you are also likely TOO ING STUPID to understand, although I can't be certain, is that Avery Johnson made 1 3 pointer in 90 ING PLAYOFF GAMES, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 8 ING LESS THAN BRUCE BOWEN MADE IN THAT ONE ING GAME and that is far less of a detriment to removing the player from the bigman's nuts.

OR TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, 2 LESS THAN NAZR MOHAMMED AND RASHO NESTEROIVCH HAVE MADE.


On the contrary, I realize a great deal, and you are an incomparable, ok well actually you are very comparable now that I think about it, idiot who realizes nothing.

And Bruce Bowen had already lead the NBA in the 3 point shooting.






Who are you trying to convince with your stupid ing "reputation" statement?

Why don't you just write I am stupid and clueless as whottt says I am on your forehead in neon ink...because you are proving my point 100% with those statements.

You didn't know when Bruce Bowen lead the NBA in 3 shooting, or if you did those synapses weren't firing, and still barely are...it's obvious.



What has that reputation BS got to do with anything other than the fact that you are only capable of discerning who is good, based on what other people say rather than your own eyes.

Which is patently obvious by your absolute cluelessness about how good that team was, then, and now.

Bruce Bowen was younger, he was a better defender then, he was a better shooter then, he kicked Kobe's ass then. And it wasn't just one ing game either.

How hard is to ing see what Kobe did to us when Bowen wasn't there? All you had to do was be watching...it was the worst blowout in WCF history.


That's why Bruce Bowen was there...

Ginobili was an erratic, inconsistent rookie, adjusting to the NBA game, and a lesser role. He was talented, no doubt, but nowhere near as good as he's been since 04-05-present.

I don't give a what you think, he bounced a dream team off the court earlier that summer, in Indiana. And he was already a Euroleague MVP...just because you didn't realize how good he was then, doesn't mean the rest of us didn't.


I know I know...he didn't have a "reputation".




There are archives here idiot...dating back to then, why don't you look them up and see who was saying what then.


About that team, about Manu, about Bruce. No "reputation" needed.

I didn't say Parker, or any of these guys, weren't good. But none were legit All-Stars, 2nd scoring options, or elite creators. Not in '03. Big deal if he was quicker than Kidd, Kidd was easily the superior player back then. Parker, like Ginobili, while talented, was erratic, and inconsistent. Claxton played a huge role because of this.

Did you call Jason Kidd not being able to defend him? I sure as did.


I get the feeling you'd be doing good to call 2+2 on a Big Chief Notebook.


Maybe if 4 gets a "reputation" you might...but I doubt it.

Robinson was on his last legs. He essentially split time with Rose. For sure, he did an admirable job defending the post/interior in general, but he was clearly a complimentary player at that point. Too bad if you can't accept that.

I'm beginning to think you're much younger than I previously had assumed.

Think what you want, in fact I take that as a compliment. Unfortunately it pretty much hammers home how worhtless and poor your observations are and therefore your opinion and analysis by association...because you are very very wrong.


Also, I am convinced you're an idiot and therefore the idea of us agreeing on anything is one I find extremely repellent....

So thank you.



PS: While you were sitting their like a dumb ing ass marveling at how Tim Duncan was doing it by himself...some of us were here, in game threads, in chats, keeping track of exactly how many points Shaq was scoring and against whom he was scoring them.


Long before that sort of stat keeping had any sort of well known "rep".


I doubt you've done it now or even thought about doing it, much less 6 years ago.


And for an old broken down man, there was a game where David was fouled out in 14 minutes of play, I want you to look at the boxscore of that game and tell me why is it unlike any of the others...asdide from the obvious FG%.

Hint: It was a loss.


Now then idiot...the following facts have no doubt sent neurons passing through, probably for the first time ever, that much bountiful rarely used virgin massive mass of that you call brains.

What have you learned about yourself?

You did not know how good Bruce Bowen was, because he had no reputation.
You did not know how good Manu was because he had no repuation.
You did not know how good Tony Parker was because he had no reputation.
You did not know how important David Robinson was because of his then reputation.
You did not know how effective Steve Kerr was because of his then reputation.

You did not know how good that team was, because it had/has..........no reputation.


This is not my stupidity, it is yours. It is you that judges things on reputations and what people say...not I. It is you that is incapable of analytical thought, not I.


I already knew this about you. I knew it from the second I started arguing with you. You are just now finding this out and likely thinking on a higher level, including selfawareness, than you have been on before.


It can be permanent or it can be temporary...the choice is all yours.





You are welcome.





I suggest you thank me for it, stop acting like you know more about this than me, that you have thought about it more than me, or that you have researched it more than me...

Because you and I both know that you most certainly have not.

That is why you are getting handed to you every time you put your stupid finger to your stupid keyboard and type your stupid sentences. You are in over your head.


Fact.

There is no crime in being stupid, unless you don't realize it and ignore the obvious signs that you are...I sense you struggle with this already, but it's not too late to reverse the course you find yourself on and be able to engage in civil and non-abusive debates with me should you choose...but you must first admit you are stupid, and then make a sincere effort to stop being so.

The first thing you can do...is pull your stupid ing head out of your stupid ing ass, and realize there's a lot more to everything, than "reputation".


And you are still on ignore.

[whottt]

Like I said, if Olajuwon could score 40 on Robinson, imagine how many he'd score on Rodman. Maybe Robinson would've scored an extra 10 ppg, but its irrelevant if Olajuwon was scoring an extra 20 ppg.



It's rather presumptuous to assume that Robinson would've fouled out Olajuwon, the best defender in the league.



Pretty much....that's why the Rockets were a bad matchup for the Spurs.



You didn't actually explain why Rodman would have any success guarding Olajuwon...all you said was "done".



I compared Robinson's 1995 postseason and Ewing's 1993 postseason b/c they both played 15 games. And you're right, Robinson shot almost twice as many free throws. But Ewing scored more points with a much better FG%.



Understandable, but you need to go with the matchups that give your team the best chance of winning. That's why Olajuwon guarded Ewing in the 1994 finals instead of Thorpe.



It's true that Robinson drew many more fouls than Olajuwon did, but Olajuwon had a refined post game and didn't need to draw fouls to score points. His FG% in the playoffs during the mid 90's was great.

And like I said, Olajuwon was the best defender in the league. It's hard to imagine he would make enough defensive mistakes to get into foul trouble. And even if he were close to getting into foul trouble, he would've played off Robinson and given him the 15 ft jumper (assuming he was still assigned to guard Robinson). Considering that Robinson's fg% was 44.6%, this wouldn't have been a bad option.

You must have never seen David Robinson in his prime...

Play off of him indeed.

He wasn't fast enough to guard the Admiral, no one was, and that's why the Admiral drew so many fouls.

Hakeem was pretty good draw at drawing fouls, Robinson was pretty much the best in history at it besides Wilt.


Consider he shot 600 more than Hakeem, in 4 fewer years, then realize his touches and shots were cut in half for the last half of his career and no one fouled him to put him on the line...he's a career 70% FT shooter.


I've already refuted all this stuff...go back and read the first part of the thread.


Rudy T was smart enough to not do that to his bigman....don't tell me you know Hakeem wouldn't have drawn fouls, it's not his call, it's the referees, and if he hadn't...Robinson would have put up some bigger numbers on him.


Teams did not guard David Robinson with one bigman, because no bigman in the league had the speed and quickness to keep up with him.

You could not play off him...what you could do was double team him an foul him and take advantage of the lack of a perimeter game surrounding him...and they can only call one foul at a time, get enough bodies in there and they won't call any....and what's exactly teams could do with AJ and Rodman in there.

Rodman was like Bruce Bowen, with no perimeter game. AJ was like Jacque Vaughn, with no perimeter game.


Drob shot a of a lot of FT in that series, way more than Hakeem did. Be glad Hakeem wasn't guarding David...because that Dream Shake can''t do when he's on the bench with 3 fouls.

There is no better defense than putting a player on the bench in foul trouble or fouling them out of the game.

[TDMVPDPOY]

prime duncan would exposed the travelling hakeem in his sleep...

we all know duncan elevate his game in the playoffs, compared to drobs production decrease in the playoffs...

duncans defense man 2 man is better than his help defense which where drob excels in both, but man 2 man defense is more important when your playing against centers who love to shuffle there footwork and pumpfakes...if you follow duncan, he rarelys jump off the ground whether blocking shots or pumpfakes...

his back to the basket offense game is polish then drob...

hence i think duncan would put up a better matchup to hakeem...

[wekko368]

You must have never seen David Robinson in his prime...

Play off of him indeed.

He wasn't fast enough to guard the Admiral, no one was, and that's why the Admiral drew so many fouls.

That's actually terrible logic. Just because Robinson drew many fouls during his career doesn't necessarily mean he did the same to Olajuwon.

In fact during the entire 94-95 season and postseason, Olajuwon fouled out a grand total of 3 times. Whether you like it or not, the guy was an efficient defender and not as foul prone as you think.

Hakeem was pretty good draw at drawing fouls, Robinson was pretty much the best in history at it besides Wilt.

Entirely irrelevant since we're talking about the specific matchup between Olajuwon and Robinson. There's no use in bringing up Robinson's success against other players and other teams.

Consider he shot 600 more than Hakeem, in 4 fewer years, then realize his touches and shots were cut in half for the last half of his career and no one fouled him to put him on the line...he's a career 70% FT shooter.

Again, this is irrelevant when you're talking about individual matchups between Robinson and Olajuwon. In fact, during regular season play during Robinson's career, Olajuwon faced the Spurs 46 times and fouled out twice. In addition, he didn't foul out in any of the games against the Spurs in the 95 postseason.

I've already refuted all this stuff...go back and read the first part of the thread.

Sorry, you haven't refuted anything.

Rudy T was smart enough to not do that to his bigman....don't tell me you know Hakeem wouldn't have drawn fouls, it's not his call, it's the referees, and if he hadn't...Robinson would have put up some bigger numbers on him.

Hakeem was an efficient defender. History indicates that he wouldn't have come close to being in the foul trouble that you're suggesting.

Teams did not guard David Robinson with one bigman, because no bigman in the league had the speed and quickness to keep up with him.

Except Hakeem Olajuwon...maybe you need to watch that youtube video of the Rockets/Spurs 95 postseason. It shows Olajuwon easily had the speed and quickness to keep up with Robinson.

You could not play off him...what you could do was double team him an foul him and take advantage of the lack of a perimeter game surrounding him...and they can only call one foul at a time, get enough bodies in there and they won't call any....and what's exactly teams could do with AJ and Rodman in there.

So you're blaming the refs for the Spurs loss to the Rockets in 95?

Drob shot a of a lot of FT in that series, way more than Hakeem did. Be glad Hakeem wasn't guarding David...because that Dream Shake can''t do when he's on the bench with 3 fouls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYFV06e2blE

Watch this and tell me it wasn't Olajuwon guarding Robinson. Out of curiosity, who do you think was?

[TD 21]

You're forgetting to add the clutchness factor... Steve Kerr, Jackson, and Ginobili pulled out an amazing game to get past the Mavs that post-season. For that matter you keep forgetting to mention the player they had in Jackson that year... you haven't mentioned him at all... Sure neither Ginobili, Parker or Jackson were All-Stars that year... but they showed up in that post-season (minus Parker's hiccups at the point; not that it mattered since Claxton played more than aptly as his backup)....

I'm not forgetting to add the "clutchness factor", because it goes without saying that that will be there on any championship team. You're right though, I did forget to do a write up on Jackson, but did mention him briefly. Jackson definitely showed up in a big way, but the fact remains that he was a minimum role player who had yet to establish himself entering that season.

On the contrary idiot...I'm the one that knows Duncan does that every year(until last year) and what detemines whether not we win more often than not, is whether or not the guy hits them. And because of that I know he had many more guys that did that, than David Robinson...and he had more guys that did it, that year, in that situation, than any other team he has ever played on.

What you are too ing stupid to understand, is that David Robinson drew more of those than Duncan did. Because he drew more fouls than Duncan did. @2000 more of them as it stands right now.

What you are also likely TOO ING STUPID to understand, although I can't be certain, is that Avery Johnson made 1 3 pointer in 90 ING PLAYOFF GAMES, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 8 ING LESS THAN BRUCE BOWEN MADE IN THAT ONE ING GAME and that is far less of a detriment to removing the player from the bigman's nuts.

OR TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, 2 LESS THAN NAZR MOHAMMED AND RASHO NESTEROIVCH HAVE MADE.


On the contrary, I realize a great deal, and you are an incomparable, ok well actually you are very comparable now that I think about it, idiot who realizes nothing.

And Bruce Bowen had already lead the NBA in the 3 point shooting.






Who are you trying to convince with your stupid ing "reputation" statement?

Why don't you just write I am stupid and clueless as whottt says I am on your forehead in neon ink...because you are proving my point 100% with those statements.

You didn't know when Bruce Bowen lead the NBA in 3 shooting, or if you did those synapses weren't firing, and still barely are...it's obvious.



What has that reputation BS got to do with anything other than the fact that you are only capable of discerning who is good, based on what other people say rather than your own eyes.

Which is patently obvious by your absolute cluelessness about how good that team was, then, and now.

Bruce Bowen was younger, he was a better defender then, he was a better shooter then, he kicked Kobe's ass then. And it wasn't just one ing game either.

How hard is to ing see what Kobe did to us when Bowen wasn't there? All you had to do was be watching...it was the worst blowout in WCF history.


That's why Bruce Bowen was there...



I don't give a what you think, he bounced a dream team off the court earlier that summer, in Indiana. And he was already a Euroleague MVP...just because you didn't realize how good he was then, doesn't mean the rest of us didn't.


I know I know...he didn't have a "reputation".




There are archives here idiot...dating back to then, why don't you look them up and see who was saying what then.


About that team, about Manu, about Bruce. No "reputation" needed.




Did you call Jason Kidd not being able to defend him? I sure as did.


I get the feeling you'd be doing good to call 2+2 on a Big Chief Notebook.


Maybe if 4 gets a "reputation" you might...but I doubt it.




Think what you want, in fact I take that as a compliment. Unfortunately it pretty much hammers home how worhtless and poor your observations are and therefore your opinion and analysis by association...because you are very very wrong.


Also, I am convinced you're an idiot and therefore the idea of us agreeing on anything is one I find extremely repellent....

So thank you.



PS: While you were sitting their like a dumb ing ass marveling at how Tim Duncan was doing it by himself...some of us were here, in game threads, in chats, keeping track of exactly how many points Shaq was scoring and against whom he was scoring them.


Long before that sort of stat keeping had any sort of well known "rep".


I doubt you've done it now or even thought about doing it, much less 6 years ago.


And for an old broken down man, there was a game where David was fouled out in 14 minutes of play, I want you to look at the boxscore of that game and tell me why is it unlike any of the others...asdide from the obvious FG%.

Hint: It was a loss.


Now then idiot...the following facts have no doubt sent neurons passing through, probably for the first time ever, that much bountiful rarely used virgin massive mass of that you call brains.

What have you learned about yourself?

You did not know how good Bruce Bowen was, because he had no reputation.
You did not know how good Manu was because he had no repuation.
You did not know how good Tony Parker was because he had no reputation.
You did not know how important David Robinson was because of his then reputation.
You did not know how effective Steve Kerr was because of his then reputation.

You did not know how good that team was, because it had/has..........no reputation.


This is not my stupidity, it is yours. It is you that judges things on reputations and what people say...not I. It is you that is incapable of analytical thought, not I.


I already knew this about you. I knew it from the second I started arguing with you. You are just now finding this out and likely thinking on a higher level, including selfawareness, than you have been on before.


It can be permanent or it can be temporary...the choice is all yours.





You are welcome.





I suggest you thank me for it, stop acting like you know more about this than me, that you have thought about it more than me, or that you have researched it more than me...

Because you and I both know that you most certainly have not.

That is why you are getting handed to you every time you put your stupid finger to your stupid keyboard and type your stupid sentences. You are in over your head.


Fact.

There is no crime in being stupid, unless you don't realize it and ignore the obvious signs that you are...I sense you struggle with this already, but it's not too late to reverse the course you find yourself on and be able to engage in civil and non-abusive debates with me should you choose...but you must first admit you are stupid, and then make a sincere effort to stop being so.

The first thing you can do...is pull your stupid ing head out of your stupid ing ass, and realize there's a lot more to everything, than "reputation".


And you are still on ignore.

Again, making things up. Where did I say that Duncan doesn't do that every year?

In his prime, Robinson drew more fouls, due to superior length, quickness, and athleticism, but certainly not because he was a more skilled, intelligent, or aggressive player than Duncan. We're talking about '03 here, re , stay on topic.

You can build up that one game from Bowen all you want, the fact is he was a sub-par offensive player, who's only skill on that end was to make wide open corner three's, mostly off of the doubles Duncan drew. I know full well Bowen led the league in 3 point shooting that year, but that doesn't change the fact that he was a severely limited offensive player.

That team was flawed, no matter how you choose to remember them. They won because Duncan played out of his mind, they made timely open looks, and played tremendous defense, but they rarely won, at least in the playoffs, from thoroughly dismantling the opposition. The '99 and '07 teams were far more dominant throughout their runs. Pop was always on the verge of losing it back then because damn near every game was a roller-coaster.

Bowen didn't exactly hold Bryant down in '03, either. He did about as well as could be expected, but Bryant has always been a thorn in the Spurs side, much like Nowitzki, or Stoudemire.

Ginobili didn't play a ton of minutes, and was mostly an up and down bench player. For sure, he was solid, but he was also erratic, and inconsistent. You need to go back, and review the box scores (or, if you have it, footage). I don't give a what he did as a lead man in the World Championships, he was a mere role player on the '03 Spurs.

Kidd was the best point guard in that series, and the entire league back then, end of story. I don't give a if Parker out-quickened him, he was benched a few times in crunch time in favor of journeyman Claxton.

Because I don't agree with some biased, un-knowledgeable, disillusioned fan, I don't have a credible opinion? Or because I'm not in the 5, 000 post club? Those are great reasons.

ONCE AGAIN RE BOY, I NEVER SAID DUNCAN DID IT BY HIMSELF. LEARN TO READ. I SAID HE CAME ABOUT AS CLOSE AS ONE CAN COME TO DOING SO, PARTICULARLY CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT HE'S A BIG MAN.

O'Neal was an unstoppable force back then. Not even the almighty Robinson could shut him down. No one could. The man outweighed Duncan by a listed 77 pounds back then, plus had a 2 inch height advantage. What did you want Duncan to do defensively on him? Only guys like Robinson, Divac, and Sabonis, had the slightest bit of success against him, and that was because they either had the girth, length, or a combination of both, to combat him.

I don't give a what type of stats you kept, or if I'm on "ignore"; you want a medal for that?

[clubalien]

Things david has done that Duncan will never!
1: win a scoring le
2:winning an olympic medal.. david did it in college and was the first dream team... this is the best world wide not just in the NBA that david competed with

Things Tim hasn't done yet. Be a top 50 player. Some of you forget david was honored as a top 50 player in ALL OF NBA history.. Tim probably didn't even make the top 75.

To this day i still don't think tim can even beat david playing one on one.
Tim ofcourse hasn't gotten the honor of being a HoF player. I think i will spot him this one because one day he might.

50>21

[wekko368]

Things Tim hasn't done yet. Be a top 50 player. Some of you forget david was honored as a top 50 player in ALL OF NBA history.. Tim probably didn't even make the top 75.

Absolutely wrong. Duncan is easily in the top 20 and I'm being very conservative.

[booonkers]

it is already widely considered that tim duncan is already in the top ten all time list.
what people tend to forget is that tim duncan helped immensely in the growth of manu and tony as basketball players. he is probably the most unselfish player ever who understood the need to allow other teammates to grow for the greater good of the team. this characteristic is very rare for superstar players. if he could he would carry the team (00-02 years).

[kingmalaki]

Superstars like David can take teams with crappy supporting casts and get them to the playoffs, but those teams are never able to win a le. That is precisely the difference between the DRob era in the 1990s and the Duncan era in the 2000s. David put up some ridiculous numbers (easily more ridiculous than Duncan's), but because his supporting casts were far inferior it didn't matter. Tim has had some memorable playoff performances, which were made possible by having a great supporting cast that other teams had to worry about.

Since you seem to be having trouble understanding this concept, you can use the 1995 Western Conference Finals as an example. Hakeem Olajuwon played great, but his performance would not have been enough had the Rockets not had Clyde Drexler, Robert Horry, Sam Cassell, Kenny Smith, etc. Those guys opened up so much for Hakeem. They even gave Hakeem the luxury of never having to guard David one-on-one that series. As you know, David did not have that luxury when trying to guard Hakeem.

I understand the concept just fine. You have yet to see me argue that Robinson should have won a le with any of those teams (except for the one in 95). But what you and whott don't seem to get is that during the regular season, the Spurs were winning with those crap supporting casts because his level of play was dominant. At times in the postseason, that wasn't the case because his level of play decreased (someone else already listed the numbers). In the regular season, he was able to win with that cast on most nights because he was the best big man on the court. In the playoffs on 4 occassions, he wasn't able to do that because he got outplayed by other great HOF bigs. You can blame his teammates all you want, but place some blame on David too....that's all I'm saying. In each series against Malone, Barkley and Hakeem.....he got outplayed.

And for the last time, please stop with the 1-1 excuse because I have the tapes and I see Hakeem getting doubled numerous times (how do you think others got their wide open looks), and I see Hakeem on Robinsosn 1-1 often. But even if you get no help guarding your man, if you are an elite defender you shouldn't let him drop 40 a night on you. The main difference in that series was Hakeem's dominance. If Robinson played better defense then the Spurs advance....period.

Edit: And I just wanted to note that I'm not trying to bash David. He was a great player and one of the greatest centers that I ever saw. I recognize that like Hakeem and Ewing, he played with garbage for the majority of his career. I just think his level of play took a dip in the postseason and that his lack of a post game hurt him. When it comes to losing in the postseason, when you recognize that his teammates sucked you also need to recognize that he was getting outplayed by other bigs when it mattered most. Don't absolve him of his share of the blame. That makes a big difference when you compare him to dudes like Duncan or Hakeem, who basically crapped on 3 HOF bigs to get his two les.

[Phenomanul]

This dude whotttt carries his post count into arguments like it's some kind of championship banner. Funny thing is, he's getting absolutely destroyed by 2 people with a combined post count of under 100.



Still lol @ Jason Kidd being on the Duncan olympic team.

Lame take....


Olojuwon's Rockets teams beat their rivals by playing Olojuwon as the workhorse... Ultimately however, is was some pretty legendary shooting by the likes of Cassell, Horry, Smith, Elie and later Drexler which put them over the top...

David never had that game-changing shooter, no one else that could step up to win a critical playoff game. How hard is that to understand people?

In fact, thanks to Duncan's arrival the Spurs have managed to win 4 championships... but let's not forget that each of those championships hinged on plays that had little to do with Duncan's greatness...

In '99 Jaren Jackson went ballistic against the Lakers, and ahem... the run required Elliott's Memorial Day Miracle... you may have heard of it. Oddly enough, this was Elliott's first playoff game-winning shot...

In '03 despite Duncan's grandeur, the Spurs don't get past the Mavs without the game that Steve Kerr pulled out of the hat in game 6. It still doesn't take away the fact that Duncan nearly dropped a Quad-double on the Nets to win a le... If Kerr doesn't have his moment however; the Spurs would have never made it to that round...

In '05 Ginobili simply dominated the post-run compe ion... David never had a teammate which could play at the level that Ginobili demonstrated during that particular playoff run. EVER! Even guys like Brent Barry outperformed (perhaps not statistically - considering pace of game - but clutchwise) any backcourt teammate of David's during his pre-injury years....

In '07 Parker enjoyed his coming out party... Duncan, as great as always still required his backcourt to open up the floor for him...

Conversely one could make the case that Duncan was at his statistical peak during '01-'02... yet as gargantuan as his numbers were the Spurs still ended up empty handed.

[wekko368]

Olojuwon's Rockets teams beat their rivals by playing Olojuwon as the workhorse... Ultimately however, is was some pretty legendary shooting by the likes of Cassell, Horry, Smith, Elie and later Drexler which put them over the top...

Ultimately however, is the fact that Olajuwon became a better player during the playoffs.

How do you think those players got their open looks?

David never had that game-changing shooter, no one else that could step up to win a critical playoff game. How hard is that to understand people?

"No one else"? Robinson himself was an inferior player during the postseason (when compared to his regular season).

Look at 1995. His fg% dropped from 53% in the regular season to 44.6% in the playoffs. That's actually a very significant decline. Not to mention he averaged 19.3 shots per game in the playoffs and 18.4 in the regular season. In addition, he averaged 10.5 ft/game in the regular season and 9.9 in the playoffs. Also, his turnovers increased from 2.9/game (regular season) to 3.7/game (playoffs).