48MoH: Tim Duncan still has questions to be answered

[daslicer]

History2b is an obvious troll. Is there any way we can get this banned from the spurs forum. The NBA forum is for trolls. I don't come to the spurs forum to see threads hijacked by trolls.

[anonoftheinternets]

It appears that no one in the Spurs org has the heart to tell Tim the wheels already fell off some time ago.

Duncan bashing? Lol.

Saying that Duncan is "no longer dominant" is now "Duncan bashing." It is true Spurs fans aren't bright whether its on ESPN or Spurstalk.

lol self ownage ... this troll is almost too easy ...

[mingus]

History83 getting owned in this thread lmao. at least be able to fudge your troll claims, man. you're making this too easy.

[OrEmuN]

It might be time for Duncan to get injured for the season, giving us the #1 pick of the draft, giving us a big man who will lead the team for years to come, this time with Tim Duncan to look up to, thus giving us the perfect storm 2.

No way ! No sane Spur fan will hope for Duncan to be hurt.

[history2b]

I heard somewhere that your some 40 old guy who pretends to be a chick and has nothing else in life to post on spurstalk and displays a pic of some chinese Asian chick so you can cover up the fat you really are.

I heard you were the Spurs fan who jerked it to George Hill's graphic photos leaked on the internet.

[history2b]

Duncan at 90% of his peak is still damm good. Bash him all you want, he is still a DOMINANT force in this game and while the LAL deserve to be heavily favored - if Splitter and Duncan truly gell together watch out West!

90% Duncan would still be pretty good. I think he's more 75-80% but even that is pretty good too.

The point is that the Spurs are built around Duncan and he's no longer good enough to carry a championship team at 90, 80 or 75%. He can be a great number 2 player to a current dominant. If he was on the Lakers, LA wouldn't miss a beat because Kobe is the dominant player. Same if he was on Miami, OKC, etc etc.

The reality of the NBA is that you can't win without having one of the few dominant players in the league. From 23-32 Tim was good enough to make this happen. Not anymore. That's reality.

You can still be a relatively compe ive team because Manu occassionally plays great, Splitter should help ease the offensive load for Tim and the role players (Hill, Blair) should offer solid support. But Championship?? Amazing how soon an entire fan base forgets what cons utes a contender. Manu ain't the same, Tim ain't the same. Bruce Bowen is gone. Those are huge holes.

[history2b]

Yup, by far the dumbest fans regardless of forum.

[Rummpd]

90% Duncan would still be pretty good. I think he's more 75-80% but even that is pretty good too.

The point is that the Spurs are built around Duncan and he's no longer good enough to carry a championship team at 90, 80 or 75%. He can be a great number 2 player to a current dominant. If he was on the Lakers, LA wouldn't miss a beat because Kobe is the dominant player. Same if he was on Miami, OKC, etc etc.

The reality of the NBA is that you can't win without having one of the few dominant players in the league. From 23-32 Tim was good enough to make this happen. Not anymore. That's reality.

You can still be a relatively compe ive team because Manu occassionally plays great, Splitter should help ease the offensive load for Tim and the role players (Hill, Blair) should offer solid support. But Championship?? Amazing how soon an entire fan base forgets what cons utes a contender. Manu ain't the same, Tim ain't the same. Bruce Bowen is gone. Those are huge holes.

Reality check for LAL: Bryant is ALSO getting up there in age/NBA wear (and bigs tend to play longer than perimeter stars at a high level) and LAL is already dealing with him post a knee injury and Bynum is injured again.

Love SAS getting disrespect. Diss them all you want, but they are still a very strong team with an upside from adding Splitter and Anderson etc. Add in a fully healthy Parker in contract year ......

[history2b]

Reality check for LAL: Bryant is ALSO getting up there in age/NBA wear (and bigs tend to play longer than perimeter stars at a high level) and LAL is already dealing with him post a knee injury and Bynum is injured again.

Love SAS getting disrespect. Diss them all you want, but they are still a very strong team with an upside from adding Splitter and Anderson etc. Add in a fully healthy Parker in contract year ......

Kobe is getting up there in age, no doubt. But we're talking about a Kobe who just won another Finals MVP and 'ship 3 months ago, not an even older former superstar who last won 3 years ago.

Someone younger has to knock them off before they can be written off and that's something that already happened to San Antonio back in 2008. It's not about disrespect, it's about acknowledging reality.

[J_Paco]

Kobe is getting up there in age, no doubt. But we're talking about a Kobe who just won another Finals MVP and 'ship 3 months ago, not an even older former superstar who last won 3 years ago.

Someone younger has to knock them off before they can be written off and that's something that already happened to San Antonio back in 2008. It's not about disrespect, it's about acknowledging reality.

You do realize that Bryant has played more combined regular season and playoffs games than Duncan, Bryant has been in the NBA longer and has had his left knee scoped three times? Bryant is still a dominant player, but he's teetering in the same direction as Duncan.

Also, it's false to suggest that a "dominant" player is necessary to win a championship. Otherwise, what were the Celtics doing in the NBA Finals with a game 7 win away from winning a le? Or the 2004 Detroit Pistons before them that actually won. I'm not suggesting that S.A. is going to win a championship, but it isn't completely out of the realm of possibility. Nothing is guaranteed for either Los Angeles or Miami and a injury could completely derail either teams season.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah that's the one. Do you need a copy of games sent to you for true analysis or does your stat sheet reference do all the thinking for you? Where were the stops when the Spurs needed them? That defensive anchor sure didn't make a inkling of difference to the lowly Suns who scored at will even on SA's home court.

Anyone remember game 3 in SA? Suns 2nd unit literally destroying SA's 2nd then 1st unit? Duncan had that same baffled look on his face that he had after 0.4.

But I guess if his stat sheet looked great at the end of the day that's all that should matter to Spurs nation. Duncan worship > winning. That's the mantra around here.

I'm pretty sure you're trolling because this is a fairly stupid way to go about proving a point. Duncan can't carry a bad Spurs team anymore. Duncan is still the best bigman in the game. If that means the wheels have fallen off, then I guess the wheels have fallen off but no one is going to agree with you on such a stupid take.

No one is saying he's in his prime but he's still really ing good. Just goes to show how good he was in his prime.

[Cane]

history2b is just a dumbass troll considering his ty posts and profile pic:



Kobe should be declining even more next season after getting another surgery on his knee. Boston was so beat up that Kobe shot 6-24 in a Game 7 Finals and the Lakers still won.

[Trill Clinton]

This guy...smh.

Okay look, Yes Tim's best years are behind him but if his wheels have already fallen off then what does that say about the rest of the big men in the league?

Tim ranked 5th amongst Centers in the league last year in ppg with 17.9, 3rd in rebounds with 10.1 per game, 13th in blocks, 2nd in assists and 4th in double doubles with 39.

What other 34 year olds are doing that? I'll wait....

And championships are won by great teams, not dominant players.

Men lie, women lie, TROLLS lie, numbers don't

[mingus]

90% Duncan would still be pretty good. I think he's more 75-80% but even that is pretty good too.

The point is that the Spurs are built around Duncan and he's no longer good enough to carry a championship team at 90, 80 or 75%. He can be a great number 2 player to a current dominant. If he was on the Lakers, LA wouldn't miss a beat because Kobe is the dominant player. Same if he was on Miami, OKC, etc etc.

The reality of the NBA is that you can't win without having one of the few dominant players in the league. From 23-32 Tim was good enough to make this happen. Not anymore. That's reality.

You can still be a relatively compe ive team because Manu occassionally plays great, Splitter should help ease the offensive load for Tim and the role players (Hill, Blair) should offer solid support. But Championship?? Amazing how soon an entire fan base forgets what cons utes a contender. Manu ain't the same, Tim ain't the same. Bruce Bowen is gone. Those are huge holes.

you do realize that with Manu being injured in 08-09 and Parker in 09-10 that Duncan has been forced to carry more of a load than normal, right? you also realize that going on 4 years Duncan has had absolutely no help in the post offensively, and more importantly, defensively, too, right? it'd be like if Kobe didn't have Artest this year or Ariza the year before to help him defensively. that's what you're not understanding. this is an exciting season for the Spurs because Duncan for once actually has help this year, which will hopefully help keep him fresh for the playoffs. Last time Duncan had help down low the Spurs won a championship in '07. so yeah, you should be scared. i don't blame you.

if you want to argue injuries, fine. but Duncan has actually been GREAT the last two years before the all-star break, after which the heavier load and lack of help down low begins to take its toll. the fact that you can't seem to put together an even decent argument is telling. you've been all over the place in this thread with your unsupported claims--you're grasping at straws, trying to futily dismiss the Spurs.

sorry, bro, the Spurs ARE still here. and as long as they are SO WILL YOU.

hopefully you take less of an ass assault in this forum then the one you took in The Forum in '99. it shouldn't be that hard, but you seem to be proving that wrong.

[history2b]

You do realize that Bryant has played more combined regular season and playoffs games than Duncan, Bryant has been in the NBA longer and has had his left knee scoped three times? Bryant is still a dominant player, but he's teetering in the same direction as Duncan.

Also, it's false to suggest that a "dominant" player is necessary to win a championship. Otherwise, what were the Celtics doing in the NBA Finals with a game 7 win away from winning a le? Or the 2004 Detroit Pistons before them that actually won. I'm not suggesting that S.A. is going to win a championship, but it isn't completely out of the realm of possibility. Nothing is guaranteed for either Los Angeles or Miami and a injury could completely derail either teams season.

Of course I realize that Bryant has played more games than Tim, even though most of the first 2 years minutes were insignificant garbage minutes on the Laker bench, but sure each of those 7 minute games counts the same as Tim playing 37.

Even so Kobe's the one playing at the 1st team all-NBA, 1st team all defense, MVP-caliber, Finals MVP type level. Tim is not.

2010 Celtics were missing that elite player that could carry them. Pierce declined, KG declined and Rajon was not ready (or able).

2004 Pistons were an interesting anomaly. They had the right combination of youth, athleticism, low post defense, low post offense, excellent team defense and top notch coaching. Very rare team. And they could not sustain it either in part because they lost their top notch coach but also because they didn't have that bona fide superstar to carry them.

Going back all the way back to 1980, you can't make another case for any other team that won and with good reason.

[history2b]

I'm pretty sure you're trolling because this is a fairly stupid way to go about proving a point. Duncan can't carry a bad Spurs team anymore. Duncan is still the best bigman in the game. If that means the wheels have fallen off, then I guess the wheels have fallen off but no one is going to agree with you on such a stupid take.

No one is saying he's in his prime but he's still really ing good. Just goes to show how good he was in his prime.

Uhhh, no he is not. That may be something a bunch of homers on a Spurs worship site can get away with saying but in reality, no Tim isn't the best big. Would the best big get swept by the lowly Phoenix Suns? Would 2003 Tim Duncan have lost that series?

[history2b]

you do realize that with Manu being injured in 08-09 and Parker in 09-10 that Duncan has been forced to carry more of a load than normal, right? you also realize that going on 4 years Duncan has had absolutely no help in the post offensively, and more importantly, defensively, too, right? it'd be like if Kobe didn't have Artest this year or Ariza the year before to help him defensively. that's what you're not understanding. this is an exciting season for the Spurs because Duncan for once actually has help this year, which will hopefully help keep him fresh for the playoffs. Last time Duncan had help down low the Spurs won a championship in '07. so yeah, you should be scared. i don't blame you.

if you want to argue injuries, fine. but Duncan has actually been GREAT the last two years before the all-star break, after which the heavier load and lack of help down low begins to take its toll. the fact that you can't seem to put together an even decent argument is telling. you've been all over the place in this thread with your unsupported claims--you're grasping at straws, trying to futily dismiss the Spurs.

sorry, bro, the Spurs ARE still here. and as long as they are SO WILL YOU.

hopefully you take less of an ass assault in this forum then the one you took in The Forum in '99. it shouldn't be that hard, but you seem to be proving that wrong.

Oh now it's the "Tim didn't have any help" argument. Awesome. I love this one. Spurs fans were claiming before the 2009-10 season that this may be the best roster in the Duncan era. Many argued Richard Jefferson was going to provide exactly what the Spurs needed to get right back into elite status. McDyess was said to bring that defensive help you claim Tim didn't have...

That didn't happen so naturally Tim had no help. Injuries are apart of the game. Just ask the Lakers who've had to play the last 3 post seasons either without or a severely limited starting center. Not to mention Kobe playing through bum knee, broken fingers in his shooting hands. Cry me a river just because Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili are as soft as double pack twinkie.

Tim has looked good before all-star break that's true. Too bad every season can't be an *** shortened 50 game season huh? Age does that to people; you slow down. Some man up and manage to persevere (Kobe) and others get swept out of the 2nd round by garbage no defense hacks. It happens but we have to acknowledge these facts if we want to understand what's really going on.

[MannyIsGod]

Uhhh, no he is not. That may be something a bunch of homers on a Spurs worship site can get away with saying but in reality, no Tim isn't the best big. Would the best big get swept by the lowly Phoenix Suns? Would 2003 Tim Duncan have lost that series?

Who's better? Being the best big is a relative metric and it has no bearing on whether or not they would have been swept. Basketball is a team sport and the rest of the team matters.

No one is saying he's as good as he was in 2003. That doesn't mean he's not the best big in the league. This is apparently something that is beyond your scope of logic.

But yeah, I guess understanding these things makes me a Spurs worshiping homer. Like I said, you're just trolling.

[MannyIsGod]

Oh now it's the "Tim didn't have any help" argument. Awesome. I love this one. Spurs fans were claiming before the 2009-10 season that this may be the best roster in the Duncan era. Many argued Richard Jefferson was going to provide exactly what the Spurs needed to get right back into elite status. McDyess was said to bring that defensive help you claim Tim didn't have...

That didn't happen so naturally Tim had no help. Injuries are apart of the game. Just ask the Lakers who've had to play the last 3 post seasons either without or a severely limited starting center. Not to mention Kobe playing through bum knee, broken fingers in his shooting hands. Cry me a river just because Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili are as soft as double pack twinkie.

Tim has looked good before all-star break that's true. Too bad every season can't be an *** shortened 50 game season huh? Age does that to people; you slow down. Some man up and manage to persevere (Kobe) and others get swept out of the 2nd round by garbage no defense hacks. It happens but we have to acknowledge these facts if we want to understand what's really going on.

You're really bad at connecting dots. Some Spurs fans claimed prior to the season that this was the best team he'd ever had so obviously that is the case. Reality be damned.

You're really a terrible troll.

[J_Paco]

Of course I realize that Bryant has played more games than Tim, even though most of the first 2 years minutes were insignificant garbage minutes on the Laker bench, but sure each of those 7 minute games counts the same as Tim playing 37.

Even so Kobe's the one playing at the 1st team all-NBA, 1st team all defense, MVP-caliber, Finals MVP type level. Tim is not.

2010 Celtics were missing that elite player that could carry them. Pierce declined, KG declined and Rajon was not ready (or able).

2004 Pistons were an interesting anomaly. They had the right combination of youth, athleticism, low post defense, low post offense, excellent team defense and top notch coaching. Very rare team. And they could not sustain it either in part because they lost their top notch coach but also because they didn't have that bona fide superstar to carry them.

Going back all the way back to 1980, you can't make another case for any other team that won and with good reason.

Yeah, just like Duncan continues to a play at a 3rd-team All-NBA, 2nd-team All-Defense and all-star level even at 34-years-old. Obviously, the man has past his athletic prime but he continues to play at a high level because of his great skills and fundamentals. He's still a top 3 big man in a league with one truly dominant big (Howard) and another that is by default (Gasol).

Um, you can make the case that the 2008 Celtics didn't have a "dominant" player during their le run. They were just a great nucleus that played elite defense, which they still do, with both good coaching and a great defensive leader in Garnett.

[Duncan2177]

[mytespurs]

Yup, by far the dumbest fans regardless of forum.

And what does it say about you who continues to regur ate the same point over & over & over......

[history2b]

Yeah, just like Duncan continues to a play at a 3rd-team All-NBA, 2nd-team All-Defense and all-star level even at 34-years-old. Obviously, the man has past his athletic prime but he continues to play at a high level because of his great skills and fundamentals. He's still a top 3 big man in a league with one truly dominant big (Howard) and another that is by default (Gasol).

Um, you can make the case that the 2008 Celtics didn't have a "dominant" player during their le run. They were just a great nucleus that played elite defense, which they still do, with both good coaching and a great defensive leader in Garnett.

Big difference between 1st team all-NBA / MVP caliber and 3rd team types. Big difference. And that difference is exactly what I am talking about. Tim was at one point one of those elite elite players who could carry his team deep into the playoffs while sustaining a very high level of play. Not anymore. This does not mean he's not a good player, again it's just about acknowledging what the Spurs have the capacity to accomplish realistically.

Keep your team exactly as is but take Tim back through a time warp 4-5 years and then you'd be a contender. It's his decline that has taken the Spurs out of contention.

[history2b]

Alright troll, heres some reality for you. Kobe only has a few really good years left as well. If Kobe is so damn "DOMINANT" then how come he couldn't win a ring w/o Shaq and Gasol?

"amazing how soon an entire fan base forgets what cons utes a contender"

Let me remind your nuthugging, Kobe ball sucking ass how lucky the Lakers were to get past a team w/o Yao and Tmac in '09, then get a game 7 against a Celtic team that was missing a vital big man last year?

Dude, don't talk like the Lakers are heads and shoulders above the rest of the West. You put Yao and Tac in that series that went 7 games, then put Perkins in game 7 of the Finals last year and history may and very likely would be different.

Don't get me wrong, like Pop always says, there is some good fortune involved iin winning a le, and the Lakers won the last two, but get off your high and mighty head up your ass trip your on and realize the Lakers arn't that "dominant".

Move on troll, you have been exposed.

ps: While your down there on Kobe, how does that poop of that Colorado skank taste?

More ignorance from the typical garbage fan base. When you can't muster a legitimate response make personal attacks. That always works great on the internet!

Not sure what TMac ball would have done to the Rockets in 09. Not sure anyone cares besides yourself. Tmac was hurt and the Rockets moved forward playing well. Yao+TMac never really panned out as they planned in all the years they played together not sure why this one series is your point of emphasis how everything would have been different if they played. Rockets went on their 22 game win streak in 08 without Yao. By your logic they probably would have broken the 33 game streak record if Yao played because they would be that much betterer!

Meanwhile back in the real world, The Lakers were up 2-1 against the Rockets when Yao played and they ended up slaughtering each other at home the rest of the way. If you think Yao was going to change those 20-30 point Laker wins, cool! You're on your own on that one.

Maybe we should focus on Amare being hurt in 06 or being suspended for a game in 07. Yeah, those kind of hypotheticals are all that really matter, not reality.

Celtics up 13 in the 4th against LA in game 7 too. If Perk had played it would have been up 50 points and the Lakers never would have been able to come back. Obviously.