Reply With Quote
Trying to tell Duncan lovers that Dream > Duncan is like trying to tell Kobe nut huggers that Jordan > Kobe. Though the gap is smaller in the former than the latter
In fairness, IIRC, Dream made the Finals once in the 80's too. Perhaps with a more stacked team than he had in the championship years of 94-95 (Ralph Sampson), but that parallels quite nicely with Duncan's relationship with Robinson.
Trying to tell Duncan lovers that Dream > Duncan is like trying to tell Kobe nut huggers that Jordan > Kobe. Though the gap is smaller in the former than the latter
You're kidding me, right? '95 Rocket fan comes and s on everything Duncan has done his entire career like the most virulent Kobe fans on this board.
Could Duncan chase down a guard on a fast break layup and block his shot at the rim?
Absolutely wrong. Players are indeed more athletic, stronger, and faster, but that comes at the expense of their skills. For example, let's look at Dwight Howard, the best center in the current league, and compare him to the centers from 1995. He would clearly be athletically superior to all centers except for Robinson, Olajuwon, and Shaq, but he would be considered unskilled.
In fact, I'd say that Olajuwon, Robinson, Ewing, Shaq, Mourning, and maybe Divac were more skilled than Dwight Howard (with Mutombo being on par with Howard).
Seriously, the most skilled center in the league, Yao Ming, is the definition of a slow/stiff center, but when he's healthy, he's the best center in the league.
Some of the players who began their primes in the late 80's/early 90's finished their careers in the early 2000's. That's a testament to their skill. That meant that after their athleticism declined, their skill level was high enough to still allow them to be contributors.
If Duncan's era was so skilled and athletic, how could a 40 year old Michael Jordan average 20 ppg?
Jordan is just the best player ever. Following your logic, a better question would be how could Hakeem average only 7pts at 39?
PLEASE POINT TO WHERE HAKEEM WAS ONLY A BEAST FOR A FEW YEARS!
how about you even show where Duncan was dominant for longer. You do realize "The Dream" was still having prime seasons at the age that Duncan is now.
You obviously don't know what "skill" means. Players are more athletic, but guess what.....Stromile Swift was one of the most athletic players in the league. What he lacked was any skill what so ever.
Hakeem's era was LOADED with skilled players....players that had something like I don't know....footwork and post moves, as well as players that had mid range game/ jumpers, and they had much greater basketball IQs overall as well.
Today's league and Duncan's era was one of the worst low basketball IQ eras of alltime. (There's a reason why he got the nickname "The big fundelmental", he was one of the few players that had throw back skills) When a guy like Luis Scola can come into the league and display footwork that's better than the vast majority of the players in the league today and a of alot better than players that are considered "elite big men", then something is obviously wrong with the NBA's "skill level".
Dude seriously, the more I read your posts, the more I'm convinced that you either didn't watch the NBA back in the day or were too young to remember it. The "skill level" in today's league is severely lacking or just watered down due to expansion....either way it sucks. There's a reason why Stern wanted to force kids to go to college and it wasn't just because he was worried about kids missing out on the "college experience"...his product was being hurt. They should just go ahead and make a 3 year post graduation minimum and get it over with.
Last edited by Tmac&Luther; 05-26-2010 at 07:11 PM.
I'm impressed that a player at the age of 39 was good enough to play 20 mpg on an nba team (even if it was the lowly Raptors).Jordan is just the best player ever. Following your logic, a better question would be how could Hakeem average only 7pts at 39?
Umm, you do realize that 1993-1995 Olajuwon was pretty much the same exact age as the 08-10 Duncan. Olajuwon blew Duncan away in the athleticism department...at the age of 33 he makes a 33 year old Duncan look like the current Shaq you see today (but Olajuwon was only great for a couple of seasons
Sorry, but Duncan's athleticism doesn't compare to Olajuwon's..
Last edited by Tmac&Luther; 05-26-2010 at 07:12 PM.
I'm laughing very loud at someone saying players today are more skilled. Do even 1/3 of the players in the league today have a mid-range game? Since we are comparing two elite big men, the best big man in the league today has 0 post game and can't even abuse 1-1 coverage because he has few skills. Yet players today are more skilled? Child please.
He must have missed those Lakers quotes from after the 1986 WCF from earlier in this thread, but who reads stuff before posting? I now I know I don't. I just act belligerent and call everybody rook and noob. Really, its the best strategy out there. Also, when you have a losing argument as we Spurs fans have here just turn it into an endurance test and keep on posting, posting, and posting.
PLEASE POINT TO WHERE HAKEEM WAS ONLY A BEAST FOR A FEW YEARS!
how about you even show where Duncan was dominant for longer. You do realize "The Dream" was still having prime seasons at the age that Duncan is now.
agreed, a guy like gasol, who although a good player, is the undisputed hands down best post player in the league today. the 2nd best big man, dwight howard, barely even has 1 move, an ugly running jump hook. and you hit it on the head about players not having a mid range game. if anything, fundamentals are much worse today due to today's players growing up trying to imitate yesterday's generation with all the flashy dunks and pretty fadeaways and failing miserably.
uh no, rockets fans are not ting on duncan. most posts that says dream > duncan MAKE IT A POINT to say that it doesnt mean duncan sucks ass or his accomplishments mean nothing. buncha butt hurt spurs fans i say.
I don't blame you for not reading through the whole thread, but there's been about 7-10 Spurs fans who said Hakeem was better in his prime (myself included). I even went through the effort to make a case for Hakeem as weird as that felt. Its just that some Spurs fans won't let it go, and are filibustering the out of this thread.
Rockets fans are still stuck on the Dream. Get over it. He won a couple of rings when the dominant force of his era left. Duncan won a couple when the dominant force of his era was still around. Not only that, but beat him. Hakeem was more athletic and that was that. He also played in a weak ass era. Duncan would make all those stiffs look really bad. Duncan had it all.
Weaksauce
How am I reaching? Jordan was the dominant force of the 90s; Olajuwon never got to, let alone beat, Jordan. O'Neal/Bryant were the other dominant force of the 00s; Duncan beat them twice. This is fact; not opinion.You are really reaching in so many ways, but I'll play along.
Duncan only got past the dominant force once...in 2003, and that was a of an accomplishment for him. Kobe wasn't "Kobe" in 1999, when the Spurs beat LA. Phil Jackson wasn't there either. He lost to them 3 more times (01, 02, 04) and lost to Kobe again in 08. Are you bragging on a losing record to those guys, with one of the wins coming when Kobe was a pup? Really now?
Additionally, the dominant force of the 80's was Magic Johnson, not Jordan. Hakeem got his Rockets past the Lakers (who went to the Finals 8 times in the 80's) in 1986. Jordan also played in 95, and got ousted by Orlando, the team Hakeem swept. If you are arguing that Shaq was the dominant force that Duncan got past (as opposed to Shaq & Kobe), then Hakeem swept him in 95.
Get a solid argument please.
So Duncan doesn't get credit for beating O'Neal/Bryant in '99 because Bryant was still a "pup", but Olajuwon get's credit for beating O'Neal in '95; as if O'Neal wasn't a "pup"? Both Bryant and O'Neal were in their third seasons at the time both of these occurred, but only one has significance because it suits your argument? You just lost all credibility.
I get really sick of hearing Rocket fan about how weak Olajuwon's supporting casts were and how that excuses everything in the early 90s and then have him go on and disrespect Duncan for not being able to beat one of the great dynasties in NBA history with a starting lineup featuring Terry Porter on his last legs, Antonio Daniels 6'4" ass trying to guard Kobe, Danny Ferry, and a way past his prime Robinson in 01. And then in 02, a rookie Tony Parker who couldn't finish at the rim, a Steve Smith who had regressed to the point of worthlessness in the 2 years since he was a decent weapon for Portland, Bruce Bowen, and Mark Bryant for 2 games / a David Robinson who could barely walk the final 3.
If you take this approach, you have to factor in the fact that the Spurs and Lakers played in the same conference which made it much easier to meet in the playoffs.
And the corollary is, Olajuwon was the best center of the 90's, and Jordan never had to go through him to win any les. Does that cheapen Jordan's les? According to your "dominant force" theory, it should.
Additionally, it's not like everyone assumes the Bulls would've beaten the Rockets. The Rockets crushed them in the season series from 91-93 and Jordan has even gone on record saying the Rockets would've been the most difficult matchup.
Also, Jordan did play in the 1995 playoffs....pretty well too.
Don't want to be mean, but you look foolish when you say that. Maybe it would be ok if you had an airtight argument, but you don't.
There's a big difference between a 3 year NBA pro who spent 3 years in college and started 100% of his NBA games and another 3 year NBA pro who skipped college and started 29% of his NBA games.
Last edited by wekko368; 05-27-2010 at 01:35 AM.
On a per minute basis, that "way past his prime Robinson" averaged more rebounds, steals, and blocks than Duncan in the playoffs. And he shot a similar fg%.
I never said this approach was a bullet proof argument, but it flies in the face of all those who claim Duncan played in a weak era and act like he always had it easy.
I'm aware of the parts I put in bold, but it doesn't change what I said.
I get that O'Neal had more experience than Bryant (don't think that fact was lost on me), but the point is kingmalaki comes off as a fool saying Bryant was a "pup" in '99 while neglecting to mention the fact that so too was O'Neal in '95, particularly in comparison to where Olajuwon was at then. If he's going to act like Duncan didn't beat a prime Bryant in '99 (Duncan wasn't in his prime then, either), then be sure to mention that Olajuwon didn't beat a prime O'Neal in '95, either.
Of course Duncan is a great player. One of the best. Olajuwon was much better though for me.
You may have been aware of the bolded parts, but if you don't incorporate them into your arguments, then you might as well be unaware of them.
No, you don't get it.
It's not totally about experience. It's more about the realization of potential. In 1999, Kobe was far from the player he would eventually become. His statistics corroborate this. In 1999, his PER and his win shares were 18.9 and 5.2. In 2003, his PER was 26.2 and his WS was 14.9.
That's a huge improvement.
In case you're wondering, Shaq's PER and WS in 1995 were 28.6 and 14. In 2003, they were 29.5 and 13.2.
Therefore, an argument can be made that Olajuwon DID beat Shaq in his prime.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
