Reply With Quote
You know you're an All-Star when Chuck Hayes sets his career high in combined points/rebounds when he's being primarily guarded by you..impressive..
Real though, good luck to Bynum on his All-Star bid..break a leg B..
The Champs are the Champs until proven otherwise.
Wake me up when the Spurs can get out the 1st round again. Trust me, the Lakeshow will be waiting.
You know you're an All-Star when Chuck Hayes sets his career high in combined points/rebounds when he's being primarily guarded by you..impressive..
Real though, good luck to Bynum on his All-Star bid..break a leg B..
Does it matter? The All Star voting is a popularity contest that's normally completely disconnected with who's been playing the best up until that point...
But to shut up 21 Dumb s... Duncan, 11 years older and all, actually has better numbers than Bynum in almost every statistical category this season, doing it in a fraction of playing time:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...y.cgi?id=hbZsZ
And this is with Andrew being one of the centerpieces on offense. Now that Pau is back, I fully expect his numbers to go back down...
No he doesn't.
TD has the better stats in fewer minutes.
Dang, I always thought Bynum would be good but I never thought I'd see the day Bynum and Duncan were that statistically close.
I'm kind of surprised that Duncan insists on getting listed in the PF position for these ballots.
Word...
Even though people have already made my point for me, I'll just add, once again: No, there isn't a single credible argument for Bynum starting over Duncan. Even the extra 4-5 mpg (per game that may be meaningless, but that amounts to 322-404 extra minutes over the course of 82 games if it were to hold. Not that I expect it to with Gasol back) haven't made Bynum statistically superior to Duncan in any category, save for fg% and big deal. With Bynum's overwhelming size, fairly good athleticism, the fact that he's very young (meaning there's still plenty of spring in his legs, so he get's more lift around the basket) and I wouldn't say an afterthought on offense, but clearly not one of the two main focuses, means he should probably be shooting an even higher percentage from the field than he does.Bynum has a solid argument for starting over Timmy. Overall Timmy has a huge experience advantage but Bynum has been beasting and the Lakers have the second best record in the league.
It's moot because Timmy is listed at PF because that's what he wants.
Parker hasn't been playing like the 2nd best PG in the league, like Bynum has at C. Try again.
Hate to break it to you but Duncan has played more minutes at center than PF this decade.
He'll be remembered as a PF because that's how Timmy wants it. I don't blame him, I would too.
Looks like you're just another idiot who lacks reading comprehension. I didn't say Parker should start (just look back in this thread at my West All-Star team as of now), I said me being a homer, like you claim, would be if I were to say that. Saying Duncan should start, even though there's more than enough evidence to suggest this, is not being a homer.
No, he'll be remembered as a PF because that's the position he primarily played from 97-06.
I'm amazed by how few people know how to properly interpret stats.
I'm kind of surprised that Garnett and Nowitzki insist on being listed as PF's (not on the All-Star ballot, since the listing doesn't distinguish between PF/SF or SG/PG, it's just F or G), when in actuality they play like SF's. Yet no one ever calls them on that.
so because the lakers have a good record means bynum=allstar? duncan is way better than bynum he's workin for all his points in the paint while bynum sits down low getting spoon fed like a baby back. At the end of the day bynum is just a role player.
I am not sure what you're saying.
Those stats are pretty straight forward; how else would you interpret them?
And I don't understand the correlation to Dirk or KG. I've never heard of Dirk or KG insisting on PF versus SF.
Although I have heard that Duncan prefers to be listed as a PF or Center.
I don't think anybody's calling Duncan out for it (I was not); just an oddity. Most Spurfan here know I really do like Duncan.
To be quite honest, I actually meant more in general. In direct relation to what you said, the minutes are the big thing. 4.4 mpg is significant, whether people realize it or not. And, like SamoanTD said, Duncan has to work harder for his points, not only because he's not overly big or mobile, but because he, along with Parker, is the focus of the defense.
The point is people make like to reason that "Duncan plays like a center, only he insists on playing power forward so he can feast on smaller opponents", but I could make the same argument for Garnett and Nowitzki. They play like small forwards, only they don't play that position because they'd get burned on the perimeter defensively and offensively their quickness advantage would vanish. You could say they'd have a height advantage, but the truth is neither (particularly Nowitzki) likes to post up or play in the post.
Duncan's reasoning is that he feels he can do more than a center. He seemingly feels like the term center equates to immobile, unskilled and just getting by on size.
Duncan player of the week, Duncan is the one beasting. Bynum has no chance
It's because Duncan wants to the the "best pf of all time" even though he's not. If he didn't come into a situation where management did a good job building around him and allowing him to win rings, then he wouldn't even be in the discussion
Duncan and Bynum are on separate ballots basically.
Duncan at Forward vying against guys like Melo, Dirk, Pau
Bynum's at Center with Amare as his prime compe ion.
Bynum's got a very high chance of making the All Star team...not sure if it will be as a starter or backup.
Says the guy who's a fan of a team that annually ranks in the top 3 in the league in payroll, yet they've never won a championship, meanwhile, the Spurs have rarely ever been over the luxury tax and up until this year the times they did go over it was barely, yet they've won four championships. They've surrounded Duncan with low draft picks and savvy, under-the-radar acquisitions via trade or free agency. This notion that Duncan has been surrounded by overwhelming talent and that's the reason he's considered to be as great as he is is false. You're just a bitter Mavs fan with with a career loser/choke-artist as your lead player.
No offense, it's just that Tim Duncan isn't as good as an individual basketball player as Barkely, Malone, or even Dirk.
Barkely, Malone, Dirk >Duncan
Duncan + spurs management > those other guys + their management
I love how you round up to exaggerate your BS. 55.2 mpg minus 31.8 = 3.4. 3.4 * 82 = 278. Not the 322 to 404 minutes you claim.
Regardless of your paltry math skills, I am surprised also to see that Timmy and Drew are pretty much even in most stats. Does this now mean Timmy is overatted too?
Not really, Duncan is >>>>>>>>>>>> Bynum on Defense, even at his advanced age.
The difference isnt in the minutes played, its often in the pace of the game. Ever since the Duncer era began, the Spurs have been one of the slowest paced teams in the league, meaning less possessions in the game, meaning less opportunities for points, rebounds, assists, blocks etc... Ever since hes been in the league, has been short changed in terms of his raw stats, even though they have still been amongst the best in the league. So anytime you look at stats, you should look at the pace a team plays.
Its no coincidence guys like Marion, Stoudemire and Nash upped their stats by 25% in a system with increased possessions, and its also no coincidence guys like Duncan increase their numbers by a similar amount when they play those teams who push the ball, and have more possessions in a game.
About the topic though... id have no problem putting Bynum in as the starting C in the West as of right now... the only other guys who you would really consider are Kaman and Marc Gasol... they have impressive numbers - but coaches reward wins, and fans reward being a Laker.
Not really. I think what makes Duncan the better player is that he's the more complete player. He's been anchoring our defense for years at an incredibly high level. Barkley is a self-admitted defensive liability, and while Dirk has always been an average rebounder and improved his defense ever so slightly, he's far from being an anchor, or even be anywhere near Duncan defensively.
Malone is probably the better comparison.
IMHO, you are the position you defend, not the position you play on offense. See: Manute Bol
Duncan has supplanted Malone and Barkely on his body of work and completeness and clutch-ness.
The story isn't over on Dirk, but he does NOT play anywhere near the defense and therefore isn't on the same tier.
There isn't really an argument for greatest PF..
Malone is one of the biggest chokers for a superstar in NBA history, Barkley was a horrible defender..Dirk didn't become an above average defender until this season or last season, and he's far from an anchor or anything special..he's also had his fair share of choking..
Garnett>>Dirk from a career perspective..
It was a mistake genius, I didn't intentionally "round up", nor am I lacking in "math skills". I was actually a year ahead of my grade in math.I love how you round up to exaggerate your BS. 55.2 mpg minus 31.8 = 3.4. 3.4 * 82 = 278. Not the 322 to 404 minutes you claim.
Regardless of your paltry math skills, I am surprised also to see that Timmy and Drew are pretty much even in most stats. Does this now mean Timmy is overatted too?
As for all this Nowitzki talk, he doesn't merit a mention. He's a sub par rebounder, passer, probably the worst screen setter I've ever seen, is reluctant and mostly ineffective when playing with his back to the basket in the low post, is no longer a deadly 3-point shooter (used to be one of his major attributes), can't defend straight up, is a mediocre team defender, rarely blocks shots (despite his inflated total early this year), is a bonafide choke artist and could never carry a team, not even one that's featured as bloated a payroll or as many weapons as the Mavs have over the years.
And for all the talk about "what a great scorer he is", that's also overstated. If it weren't for his exceptional free throw shooting, he'd be a mostly inefficient scorer. He's a 7'footer shooting in the mid 40's from the field. Give Duncan 20 shots per game and play him 38 minutes per game and he could easily average in the mid 20's in points per game.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
