Reply With Quote
I will always be a huge fan of the admiral but one of the big differences between him an Timmy is that Timmy always seems to come up huge in big playoff moments and the admiral never seemed to shine in the playoffs.
If Tim and David Switched eras they played, and all other things stayed the same (teammates/opponents/etc) would the franchise have won more or less rings and who would have had the better career?
I would assume that a majority think Tim is the better player due to rings?
Interestingly enough David is 4th all time in PER, while Duncan is 13
Win Shares Per 48 has David 2nd all time behind Jordan by .0003, while Duncan is 12.
Numbers wise Robinson looks to be well ahead of Tim...
Thoughts?
I will always be a huge fan of the admiral but one of the big differences between him an Timmy is that Timmy always seems to come up huge in big playoff moments and the admiral never seemed to shine in the playoffs.
Duncan is clearly the superior player, however, it's very unlikely he would have won in the 90s having the same awful teams DRob had to play with. He was dragging them scrubs through the regular seasons, but couldn't do more in the playoffs when teams were triple teaming him and his shooters were being defended like teams defend Rajon Rondo nowadays.
All I know is that prime DRob with a little more talent around him gets some rings.
Tim had more influence on team success than David did.
David was more spectacular but Tim was more consistent and consistency yields a sameness that can be repeated and practiced and creates a comfort zone in teammates. Hence more poised and effective (less erratic) play in tough situations.
longest off season ever. These threads are ridiculous
David Robinson was an absolute freak, I would argue David Robinson did more with less talent than any player in recent memory (Lebron's playoffs this year withstanding). That team with Rod Strickland, Willie Anderson, Terry mings, and Sean Elliott was one of my favorites, but trades and injuries derailed that group. Everything after that was one bad move after another (Tark the Shark and Sweet Pea, Good Lawd).
It's easy to say Tim was a better teammate, but Pop plays a huge role in that. The best player Robinson partnered with pre-Duncan was Dennis Rodman, and that's with John Lucas coaching in year one and Bob Hill in year two. Y'all can criticize D Rob, but I have a hard time believing Duncan would have faired better.
I'd say David's ability to play true center with his athleticism would have been a better a fit in todays NBA. He is the perfect small ball center. The one edge Duncan has is his game sustains longer because it isn't built on athleticism.
The admiral was always a better regular season player and never seemed to have that killer instinct in the playoffs.
David averaged 36 plus minutes a night and never got a night off till his back gave out and the Spurs got Duncan. It's easy to hold David's playoff performances against him, but he put more into the regular season because he had to at the time.
Timmy also averaged over 36 minutes per game in the regular season during his 1st 6 seasons in the league and always seemed to come up bigger in the playoffs. The admiral is the reason I became a Spurs fan but I don't think he ever gets a ring without Timmy.
This is true, but David was still in his prime in 99 and the Spurs didn't start getting more chips till Timmy started coming down in minutes. In 03, David did his part too, David made a big difference on the defensive end. I question how many championships Tim wins in the beginning without D Rob.
Timmy is the more accomplished, but I don't agree David wasn't a playoff performer.
Robinson equals Wilt Chamberlain
Duncan equals Bill Russell
Russell, like Duncan are very team oriented. Not to say that Robinson was selfish, just that the team concept is Duncans gift. I think in his prime years (are we still in them?) Duncan could've scored more but deflected to get others involved
I texted you and you never responded wtf bro
This analogy works in that Russell had better teammates, but Wilt still got a chip in 1966-67. There was also only 10 teams in the league that year.
People fault David for not having good teammates and losing to the Rockets in 1994-95. The starting 5 that year was David, Rodman, Del Negro, Avery, and Elliott. The bench was basically Doc, JR Reid, Person, mings and Anderson. Who on that team could create and penetrate to make David's life easier on offense? Sure, Rodman helps on defense, but his man practically can ignore him on the other end. Prime Hakeem could focus on shutting down the Spurs only offense threat then come back to the other end with likes of Drexler, young Horry, Kenny Smith, Ellie, and Cassell spreading the floor. Of those 5 shooters, only Drexler shot less than 40% from three those playoffs. The Spurs only had one guy shoot over 40% from three (Del Negro).
How can people say David wasn't as good a teammate? As soon as really gifted player on both ends joined the team (Timmy) he handed the reigns over after Tims rookie year, helped him become the all time great he is. David would have happily passed the ball or elevated a real talent had there been one earlier in his career.
The thing that separates them is the playoffs
D-Rob was always amazing when it comes to advanced stats in the regular season, but his playoffs numbers aren't even close to be as impressive.
D-Rob is 4th in career PER and Duncan is 13th, but in the playoffs, Duncan is 7th while Robinson is 15th.
Advanced numbers in the regular will tell you that D-Rob and KG are probably as good as anyone, but their numbers in the playoffs fall apart compared to transcendental players like Duncan, MJ or Shaq.
Prime Duncan would never let himself get punked by Hakeem in the West Finals.
You haven't watched the Houston series, I assume?
What? So Chris Paul is a more "transcendental" playoff performer than Duncan? David Robinson's playoff PER is above Magic's and Bill Russell is 61 on the list. The thing that separates them is rosters. The entire ethos of the "Spurs Way" was established with Robinson. Did the people criticizing Robinson's playoff production not experience seeing D Rob pre-Duncan?
+1000 They double and triple teamed him with the main defender being Hakeem playing out his mind. Tim Duncan would have had no chance with that roster and Bob Hill on the sideline, there's some laughably awful takes going down in here.
This much is obvious. Anyone who watched David play knows that he was a freak with the basketball, he could do anything. It's really easy for Hakeem to get one up on him when Houston was able hard double or triple team Robinson Every. Damn. Time. down the floor.
Just STFU.
The difference in stats is probably attributable to teammates, Robinson having to do more therefore having an edge. As far as winning, IMO the main difference is Duncans low post scoring which iirc Robinson lacked. Duncan was easier to build around / more dependable as a scorer thanks to that.
The "David never performed well in the playoffs argument" I always thought was a cop out for fans who only look at the stats and/or are too young to have seen the 90's playoff games. Playoff teams would double and triple David and dare someone else to beat them: a strategy that worked for most teams. A guy like Vinny Del Negro might make you pay one game for doubling DRob, but not for four games. Playing with Avery Johnson as your PG put David behind the 8 ball too many times. Teams regularly used his man to double the Admiral. Look at the teams that knocked David out; they had multiple, reliable weapons on offense:
1990: 2nd Rnd lost to Portland in 7, who had Drexler, Porter, Kersey, Duckworth (who was an All Star in 89), a rookie Cliff Robinson, and young Drazen Petrovic (Spurs were a bad Strickland pass way from Conf Finals)
1991: 1st Rnd lost to Warriors in 4 (3-1): Mullin, Hardaway, Richmond (all over 20ppg) Robinson averaged 25pts, 13reb, 1.5stl, 3.8blks (he did all he could, but the rest of the team folded after performing well in Game 1)
1992: 1st Rnd lost to Suns (3-0): Robinson out with injury for playoffs
1993: 2nd Rnd lost to Suns (4-2): Suns roster had Barkley, Kevin Johnson, Majerle, older Chambers, young Ced Ceballos. David averaged 25pts, 11rebs, 1.7stl, 3.3blks in that series (up from 23 ppg regular season) while an older Dale Ellis and a young Sean Elliott under performed in that series. Both averaged 17ppg in reg season but 15 ppg (Elliott) and 12 ppg (Ellis) vs the Suns. Elliott shot 11% from 3pt and Ellis shot 33%. mings and Anderson had been derailed that season by injuries and were never the same.
1994: lost in 1st round to Jazz (3-1): David nemesis Karl Malone & Stockton did a number on the entire team. Yes David's production fell off (20ppg on 41% shooting vs. 30ppg on 51% in reg season) but no one else on the team stepped up when he was being doubled by Malone & Felton Spencer. No other starter shot over 39% that series or scored more than 10ppg. This was also the series where they made Rodman sit out a game because of his antics.
1995: lost in Conf Finals to Houston (4-2): everyone saw the video with the MVP Robinson getting schooled by Olajuwon, no need to rehash this one.
1996: lost to Utah in 2nd Rnd (4-2): Robinson faced double teams again from Malone and Spencer, but no one made them pay. While Robinson scored a disappointing 19pts on 47% FG (compared to reg season #'s of 25pts on 51%) Starting PF Charles Smith averaged a whopping 5pts and 3 rebs vs Utah and "All Star" Sean Elliott averaged 14pts on 33% shooting and 25% from 3pt (after averaging 20ppg and 46% Fg and 41% 3pt in the regular season). Not to mention that Del Negro shot 40% FG and Avery shot 38% FG in that series.
1997 is when the injuries derailed Robinson's career and he was never the same player.
As for Duncan, teams couldn't afford to double Duncan as liberally as they did David in the 90's because Duncan has had guys around him (90% of the time) that made teams pay consistently for doubling him. Whether that be an older Robinson, Elie, Parker, Manu, etc. he had other guys that could step up when teams are intent to stop him . I think of the 2003 1st rnd series vs Marbury, Marion, and Stoudemire's Suns. They doubled Tim relentlessly. Tim averaged on 18pts in that series (compared to 27ppg in the other 3 series), but had 5ast per game in that series because guys like Stephen Jackson made them pay for doubling Tim.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the admiral is better overall than Tim. Just saying people don't give 5-0 enough credit for the fact that he carried those 90's teams while Duncan had more reliable sidekicks who performed under pressure when teams try to make someone else beat them.
Its all debatable but I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that Russell may actually be the best player of all time. He was the best player on a team that won eleven les. Sure there weren't as many teams and basketball wasn't as popular but we're talking eleven. And one thing else that doesn't get mentioned is that they only stopped getting rings because Russell retired. Ifhe wouldn't have how many more would they have won? As for Russell having better teammates, where's the proof? Good players make those around them better. If Russ would have been like Wilt what's the use of having anybody else on your team? You are doing everything. When you absolutely take care of your duties, and if you are a center that's rebs and blocks, but defer to others to let their talents shine, you have a well oiled machine. This is what Duncan does. And as I said, Robinson may be as good a teammate as Duncan or better but I don't think he understands how to think as a unit as much.
Last edited by skulls138; 07-18-2015 at 02:06 PM.
Never said that, you don't need to get defensive because of it. Just used PER because the OP used it trying to prove that D-Rob was better than Duncan. But in the playoffs the history is different. Not only in PER, but overall efficiency as well.
Great players sustain their level and their efficiency when it comes to playoff games. That's why Karl Malone should never be in the same conversation of Tim Duncan, despite having monster RS numbers.
D-Rob numbers are way better in the regular season, it's a fact and very easy to be proved.
Bill Russell having a low PER is not a surprise since PER mostly benefits great offensive players and it doesn't measure well defense.
The "Spurs way" could have been established by Robinson, but SA was only able to reach greatness when Duncan arrived.
D-Rob was probably the greatest defensive player of all-time along with Russell, but he was not in the same level of Duncan offensively. No shame on that. Duncan is probably a top 5 player of all-time, D-Rob is not.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
