u love stats so much, u must also gloat about the amare/duncan series where he avg +35ppg....but who won the series?
I love that Spurs fans say "you cant judge a players passing ability based off assists, you cant judge a players shooting ability based off scoring/fg%, you cant judge a players defense by blocks etc."
It appears Duncan is only "extraordinary" is ways are immeasurable! Otherwise he's at best 3rd.
The challenge remains. Create a query where Duncan appears in the top two (he doesnt even have to be first even though its easy to do with the other greats), including regular season and playoffs. Preferably a results set where the values are at least ten (otherwise its just counting fluke games rather than consistent play).
If Duncan is "the greatest", why is he as always at best, THIRD?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
using straightforward stats like POINTS to rate how "awful" Duncan is, but somehow points go completely out the window when it comes to rating how good Carmello is
third at what actually?
so tell me those players u listed needs to be dominant to win games, while duncan puts up his usual 20/10 to win games...so tell me again whats more important? stat padding or winning games?
can't get more arbitrary than 26-12
3rd at any query you can come up with (at best third).
It was actually 26/12/5 (which was the quintessential Barkley game). But its not arbitrary..Barkley was really good at both points and rebounds and even "pretty good" at getting assists.
He wasnt good at great at blocks, but pretty much any query looking for high points, high rebounds and a "decent" number of assist will yield Charles Barkley as number one. Heres 30/12/5:
1 Charles Barkley* F 70
2 Karl Malone* F 66
3 Hakeem Olajuwon* C 47
4 Shaquille O'Neal C 44
5 Tim Duncan F 38
The original point of the thread, though, was that Duncan didnt have many great games compared to the other greats, which every query proves. Keep it generic (30/15) and Duncan is fifth. Throw in blocks (to filter out Barkley and Malone) and Hakeem and Shaq will still be ahead. Throw in assists (to filter out Shaq and Hakeem) and Barkley and Malone (and others) will be ahead.
Whatever Duncan did "well", there were at least two other players who did it "better".
NBA All-time defensive rating.
Rank Player DRtg
1. Gar Heard 95.30
2. Tim Duncan 95.37
3. Dave Cowens* 95.52
4. David Robinson* 95.65
5. Ben Wallace 95.76
6. Clifford Ray 96.26
7. Wes Unseld* 96.31
8. Sam Lacey 96.45
9. George Johnson 96.67
10. Paul Silas 96.77
Oops Duncan is 2nd again.
Except way, way ahead of anyone else on the lists.
Marc Gasol just won DPOY with a defensive rating that's slightly worse than Duncan's career average. Something to think about.
Because he's not as good as those two? FWIW, Hakeem also played nearly half his career in the 80's/early 90's, so it stands to reason he'd have more "big games."
Barkley and Malone didn't get many blocks because they were terrible/average defenders. Not to mention, they played the majority of their career in an era where the PF had a very different role than it did in Duncan's era (and Tim Duncan dominating the mid-00s at the PF is primarily what forced the change. Competing teams started to employ more long, 7 footer post oriented PFs to match up with Duncan. And once again we're seeing the PF position redefined with more "stretch 4s" who can shoot from outside).
And lol at using assists, which if you watched any Spurs game in their championship era, you'd understand why Duncan didn't tally a lot of big assist games (although he did lead the Spurs in dimes during their '03 run). And no, assists do not quantify passing ability. Larry Bird was tens times the playmaker John Stockton was, but averaged much less assists. If you're a ball dominant stat- , you can easily rack up the assists in the NBA.
And I don't care who features number one in your arbitrary "big game" definition, but for arguments sake and to show you how re ed your reasoning is:
http://bkref.com/tiny/Iajj4
Duncan is tied for number one all-time in playoff 20-15-5 assist 50% shooting games.
And tied with your hero if we bump up scoring to 25.
http://bkref.com/tiny/dmXXe
And when we exchange shooting percentage for 1 block (I filtered for only 1 block so it wouldn'tBe unfair to Barkley
http://bkref.com/tiny/zshWb
I await your spin.
this clown is so up his ass with stats, then tell us what did wilt chamberlain achieve with his godly stats with nothing or little to show for it?
...
And Duncan has a 4 game lead on Shaq in the 25-15-3a-3blk (the "quintessential Duncan game") category:
http://bkref.com/tiny/nTCaw
There have been few threads in SpursTalk history that are as embarrassing to the OP as this one. If it gets any worse we're going to start posting pictures of Naruto.
As I already mentioned, filtering for playoffs is stupid considering the number of playoff games played is so dramatically different for each player.Because he's not as good as those two? FWIW, Hakeem also played nearly half his career in the 80's/early 90's, so it stands to reason he'd have more "big games."
Barkley and Malone didn't get many blocks because they were terrible/average defenders. Not to mention, they played the majority of their career in an era where the PF had a very different role than it did in Duncan's era (and Tim Duncan dominating the mid-00s at the PF is primarily what forced the change. Competing teams started to employ more long, 7 footer post oriented PFs to match up with Duncan. And once again we're seeing the PF position redefined with more "stretch 4s" who can shoot from outside).
And lol at using assists, which if you watched any Spurs game in their championship era, you'd understand why Duncan didn't tally a lot of big assist games (although he did lead the Spurs in dimes during their '03 run). And no, assists do not quantify passing ability. Larry Bird was tens times the playmaker John Stockton was, but averaged much less assists. If you're a ball dominant stat- , you can easily rack up the assists in the NBA.
And I don't care who features number one in your arbitrary "big game" definition, but for arguments sake and to show you how re ed your reasoning is:
http://bkref.com/tiny/Iajj4
Duncan is tied for number one all-time in playoff 20-15-5 assist 50% shooting games.
And tied with your hero if we bump up scoring to 25.
http://bkref.com/tiny/dmXXe
And when we exchange shooting percentage for 1 block (I filtered for only 1 block so it wouldn't
http://bkref.com/tiny/zshWb
I await your spin.
Duncan has played in 70 more playoff games than the likes of Barkley, KG (yet Barkley still has more 30/20 playoff games which just really shows how infrequent Duncan was at that feat).
Take off the playoff filter, pussy.
Once again, Duncan can only manage third.
Hes either the third best center or third best power forward any way you spin it.
Full game logs (all stats) available for the 1985-86 through 2012-13 seasons.
Partial game logs (FG, FT, FTA, and PTS) available for the 1963-64 through 1984-85 seasons.
You can include the playoffs, I said just dont ONLY have the playoffs. Despite playing in 70 less playoff games, Barkley still has more 30/20 games IN THE PLAYOFFS than Duncan.
The le of the thread is "Duncan really hasnt had that many "great" games relative to other greats..." which we have found to be undeniably true.
End of thread, I think.
This thread was over a couple of pages ago after you were humiliated, son.
Although I give Barkley the advantage as the superior offensive player, his playoffs production doesn't really surpass Duncan in any metric, offensively, tbh, even if we ignore totals..
Prime and slightly past prime Barkley's playoff Rebound % is 18.9, while Duncan(using the same criteria) has a rate of 18.7..
Assists is Barkley at 18.3%, and Duncan at 18.9%..
Using PER and WS to summarize the box score numbers(which is essentially what the OP is doing, using simple box score numbers), Barkley posted a total 25.3 PER and 0.201 WS/48, while Duncan posted a 25.6 PER and 0.214 WS/48..
So, offensively, their playoff output is virtually the same, once you adjust for pace, as shown by these numbers..defensively, as pulp already pointed out, the difference is the disparity between Marc Gasol and David Lee, tbh..
If you want to include Karl Malone, it's even easier to roast, since Malone had a reputation of choking in the playoffs, similar to David Robinson, tbh..
OP used arbitrary, cherry-picked numbers to form an argument..once you expand the discussion to include actual evidence and facts, Duncan blows Barkley and Malone out of the water..as for Hakeem and Shaq, I'd have Duncan below both in terms of peak play, but ahead of them from a career perspective..
Here you go:
number of double doubles
Rank Player Double-Doubles Total Games Played % of DD
1 Karl Malone* 811 1476 55%
2 Tim Duncan 767 1180 65%
3 Kevin Garnett 735 1323 56%
4 Shaquille O'Neal 727 1207 60%
5 Hakeem Olajuwon* 718 1238 58%
6 Charles Barkley* 677 1073 63%
7 Patrick Ewing* 580 1183 49%
8 David Robinson* 543 987 55%
Taking your rant against playoff games because it skewed the data due to total number of games played(I agree) into considering, note that Malone played 1476 regular season games vs. 1180 for Duncan. In fact, of the players with the top number of double double games, Duncan was the most consistent in registering a double double in 65% of the career regular season games he played. The good news is, your idol, Barkley, who I rank as the #2 PF of all time, shows up 2nd at 63%, and #6 overall in number of double doubles.
Last edited by ambchang; 04-25-2013 at 12:08 PM.
Also, expanding on stretch's argument(re: OP and Carmelo), OP seems to contradict his beliefs from other threads, tbh..
He stupidly had Tyson Chandler(a defensive player that only has 1 skill with the ball on offense, catching for a dunk) on his all-NBA 1st team, yet all of a sudden he doesn't value defense in this thread?..
Nope. That's when it counts. That's the "real season." The best players in NBA history define themselves in the playoffs. Nobody gave a about Lebron's statistical dominance when he was choking against the Mavs. Or Dirk's MVP after he failed against Golden State. Likewise, Kobe's '06 scoring outburst became an afterthought when he underperformed against your Suns.
Spurs fans learned this first hand with David Robinson. In his prime, the most statistical dominant player in the league. If he didn't oblige his naval commitments, if he never got injured, and if Tim Duncan never existed, Robinson would have had a 10-12 year career as a first option player and would've likely led all centers in regular season "big games," and it wouldn't have meant if he couldn't meet that same standard in the real season, which players like him and Malone never did.
Barkley is indeed an offensive powerhouse and a much a better player than Malone, but the reason the majority of the NBA world considers Duncan the superior player is because he's in another universe defensively (the same exact argument who used to place Ibaka on the All NBA 2nd team). Call Duncan a center, fine. Give Barkley the label of greatest PF, fine. Ultimately, though, Tim Duncan is a better player than Charles Barkley.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote