i have a feeling deuce is about to give this thread the deuce.
I always laugh at people who try to make rookie Manu, filling-in-an-injury young malcontent working for a contract Sjax, and second year, benched for Claxton Parker out as the players they were years later.
It doesn't surprise me that a post-Gasol lakerfan is the latest one trying to do this.
Manu
- Lega A (Italy) MVP (2001)
- Euroleague Final Four MVP (2001)
- FIBA Americas Championship MVP (2001)
- All-Euroleague First Team (2002)
- Italian Cup MVP (2002)
- Lega A MVP (2002)
- FIBA World Championship All-Tournament Team (2002)
he won the championship and MVP in Europe before, he was already experienced, age 25 in 2002-03 season
The 01-02 Spurs to me shows how great of a player Duncan once was. The second leading scorer on that team was David Robinson at 12 points a game. That team was poor offensively at which they only averaged around 96 points a game but still managed to win 58 games. I doubt if you put Kobe on that team they crack even 50 wins but more so a 40 win team at best. Kobe's 04-'05 lakers had more scorers then Duncans '01-'02 Spurs but still sucked major record wise at a measly 34 wins.
Here are both teams statistics. Duncan's '02 spurs http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2002.html
Kobe's '05 Lakers http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/2005.html
Dude, Manu was experienced at the far lower than NCAA scrub Euro levels?!?! Nevermind, I give up.
2001-02 Duncan - 26/13/4
2004-05 Kobe - 28/6/6
and this was an injured kobe, how was duncan better?
oh yeah i forgot, he won it by himself with a bunch of scrubs
As if it was really a debate.. Duncan's line is clearly better. Rebounds>assists even when they're the same number.
Post FG% and games played so we can laugh at you some more.
kobes has 2.1 more PPG, and 2.3 more APG,
fg%, lol duncan is a post player, kobes a perimeter player
Which +7 rebounds a game and a much higher efficiency scoring s on.
???? and?fg%, lol duncan is a post player, kobes a perimeter player
ill take more points and assists than rebounds
You'll take 2.1 more PPG, 2.3 more APG, and 8%+ less FGM with more FGA over 7 rebounds because you're a kobefan. It's okay to be a homer bro.
points and assists are 2 categories, rebounds is 1
simple
You need a rebound before you can get a point or an assist.
simple
or after a made basket, lol
Brazil is bigger than Portugal.
lol you think kobe gets rebounds off his makes or what?
let's add up: 05 kobe assists 2 more baskets, makes 1 more than 02 Tim.
Tim Duncan assures at least 5 more baskets aren't makes (defensive rebounds), while also assuring a possession; and, Tim gives a chance for 2 more baskets (offensive rebounds).
(5/2 numbers calculated going off the fact approximately 1/3 of Tim's defensive rebound total for '02 was his offensive rebound total)
Pat Riley never told his Lakers, "No assists, no rings."
Only a re /lakerfan would take kobe over duncan.
Dominant bigs like, hakeem, shaq, duncan, are far mor valuable than chucking sgs like kobe, tmak, iverson. They give you easy baskets in the post and provide defence and rebounding on the other end. Thats why these post players can be surrounded by scrubs and still win championships.
lol there are those stats again.then again you go back to ppg. is that your only argument ever? funny how tds finals perofmance in game 6 in 03 is considered top 5 performance ever. lol your low BB IQ never seizes to amaze me.lol duncan averaged 25/15/5 in the playoffs, its not like he averaged 30+, he didnt do everything
enough with
hakeem had no other star. td won without a 2nd option. its a fail because kobe couldnt do?
this is when you try and make gasol look like hes a scrub with your "stats" to try and make kobe look better than he really is.
I did a simple analysis of the value of Shaq and Duncan through two comparible teams a while back.
The first is looking at Shaq's and Duncan's performance through the Nets. Shaq played the Nets in the 2002 finals, and Duncan did so in the 2003 finals. The 02 and 03 Nets teams were essentially the same, with minimal difference.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132810
The second analysis is to look at the two players through the Pistons. Shaq played the Pistons in the 04 finals, and Duncan did so in the 05 finals. The 04 Pistons, could be argued, was slightly better than the 05 Pistons, but the frontline was essentially the same.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133031
Both players were at or close to their prime (Shaq was at prime 02, slightly past prime 04, Duncan was at prime 03, slightly past prime, and with injuries to both ankles, in 05).
Basically, Shaq and Duncan are very similar in production against both teams when pace is factored in. It's hard for people to perceive this, but Duncan has always played on one of the most defensive minded teams in the league, that is deliberate in their pace by taking time to set up the offense. People look at absolute PPGs and think that one player is a better scorer than the other, and in many cases, it is simply not true.
Look at a guy like Rodman. As much as I dislike him, I have to admit that he is, without a question, the best rebounder in the history of the league, and yet, there are 22 players who grabbed more rebounds did in their careers, and 10 with a higher average. It simply a case where Rodman played in a different era than those 10 players with a higher rebounding average, when rebounds were more avaialble.
People who simply look into scoring average as some sort of vindication that Player A > Player B is just simply showing an overall ignorance to the game. Was Pierce and T-Mac better than Duncan in the 01-02 season because they averaged more points? Only an idiot would think that.
To top if off, ignoring important factors such as pace shows further ignorance and general misunderstanding of the game.
It is sad, really.
No one knows... but let's see. Mj's dad dies. He was incredibly drained after the 3 peat, they lost Horace Grant, and Olajawon went HAM on the NBA. Of course i cant say that it is impossible he wins 5 straight but since that has not been done since what the 60's? ... I feel pretty comfotable arguing that the odds were aginst MJ and even Shaq/Kobe even if they were not fighting like two es.
As lazy as shaq got after the first ring let alone after 3 ... if the Lakers had not jettisoned him, it's very possible that as constructed at the time the Lakers would of been stuck at 3 les ...Only way Lakers would of won more if both men checked their egos and neither did.
BTW, Which of the Spurs les do you see the Lakers taking if they stayed together? Maybe Lakers squeak out a le the year the heat won because the league was weak that year ...but spurs were better than the aging Lakers core.
AND LOL at the continued clinging of the duncan>Kobe debate. that was settled 2 years ago. and in fact the past two seasons just makes the pro duncan's case worse.
If you argue who would you choose if both players are in a NBA draft, of course it's duncan. GM's almost always draft big over small. and duncan was one of the best college bigs of the past 20 years. so that argument is foolish.
If you ask who has been the more consistently great Finals performer? Again that is duncan. Kobe has been great and awful in the Finals sometimes in the same series.
IF you want a quiet, unassuming superstar who doesnt shoot too much at times than duncan is your man.
But just talking "ball" ...at this point, hard to argue that duncan is a greater overall player in league history, or that he has had a greater career than Kobe. Kobe bryant has been to the finals 7 times winning 5. He has dominated the head to head playoff matchups both in the win column as well as in dominant performances. Don't get me wrong, Duncan has killed the Lakers at times as well. and in fact, even after the Lakers beat the Spurs in 2008 I did not put Kobe over Duncan until 2009. Last year just further cemented Kobe's status as the greater player ... where he no longer is the best but the fact that he is still a top 5-10 player and Duncan is probably 20-25 right now. Each season that Kobe puts up as top 10 player tightens his grip on the best player since Mj le.
Of course both shaq and duncan have strong cases in that argument as well. ESPECIALLY Timmy, because his play did not slip as fast as Shaq's ...he won faster and he did not have Kobe or shaq on his side.
But pretending that the past 4 seasons hasnt swayed the argument in his favor is silly. Many of yall are still lving in 2003-2005 when Duncan was the NBA's best player ...that was a long time ago. If we had this debate then i would be on your side. Now? Come on ...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
