Reply With Quote
So, Shaq's prime was his first few years in the league? in' stat geek, only fantasy geek would put stats above actual success. You are a in' idiot. End of story.
You think I was saying some pretty stupid ? You're the one who has changed his story twice now, within the same thread, I'm sticking to my story. As far as me arguing about Duncan and Shaq, after carying on for pages out this thread with you over Robinson and Shaq, I might be wasting my time. I'm sure you'll put out a new list later with Shaq ahead of him and tell me that even though I was saying that all along I was still wrong, just like with Robinson. Besides I already addressed that on one of the first pages of this thread, basically said it was very premature.
You seem to think that calling Shaq the most unguardable player of the modern game was stupid, but I stand by it. I've never seen a player able to consistantly dominate double teams and even go through triple teams. Jordan didn't even draw the crowd that Shaq did in his prime, and that isn't saying that he's better.
BTW, that is a pretty stupid yardstick if you ask me, strickly rings. So if that is your yardstick, then where do Bill Cartwright, Luc Longley, and Bill Wennington fit in on that list. Ahead of Hakeem, Ewing, Dirk and KG?
I can't believe that Shaq get's has gotten as little respect as he has in this thread. The guy has only been in the finals 6 out of 14 years in the NBA, and to the Conference finals 9 out of 14 years. Duncan has a ways to go to catch him.
Last edited by BAkriD; 06-08-2006 at 04:10 PM.
So, Shaq's prime was his first few years in the league? in' stat geek, only fantasy geek would put stats above actual success. You are a in' idiot. End of story.
You utter dumb , that's the stupidest ing thing I've ever heard...
DRob didn't win les until he could barely walk, were those his best seasons?
Duncan won a le his second year in the NBA, was that his best season?
If Shaq wins the le this year, will this be one of his 4 best seasons?
Stupid .
Don't argue unless you know you what the you are talking about.
You talked and ran your mouth stupidly earlier in this thread...it's time for you to back it up.
You need to type David Robinson in google, find out how many years of highschool ball he played, find out where he went to college, why he went to college at that ins ution, if he was going on a basketball scholarship, then find out how many #1 picks in NBA history didn't recieve a basketball scholarship, then I want you to find out basically how many games of organized basketball he had played by the age of 24, compared to every other player on the original list...
BTW, Shaq said the 95 season was the best of his career. Dumb . Only a bigger idiot tries to use team success as a barometer for arguing individual dominance.
Shaq never won jack until Kobe and Phil arrived, Hakeem never won jack until Casell arrived, so on and so forth...lame argument that reveals a limited understanding of the game.
For the 1 trillionth time...teams win championships, not individual players, as evidenced by Tim Duncan just playing the best playoff series of his career...and losing.
Robinson was there for two and if I remember the talk last year was can Duncan do it
again with out Robinson or another big guy? Of course we all knew he could and he did.
I know.
Where would Duncan have been last season without Robert Horry's game 5 performance in Detroit? How quickly they forget...
You know Horry, that same guy that neither Hakeem nor Shaq won les without...
Duncan would still have two rings as the leader and best player of a championship basketball team. Horry would be waiting for someone to set him up for the majority of his three's. Just like he did for most of the 2005 NBA Playoffs.
More importantly, I think, Duncan had Parker and Ginobili in '05, both of which have been All-Stars. Robinson or not, Duncan definitely didn't win '05 solo.
That is an understatement. You can argue that Manu was easily more valuable then Duncan offensively throughout the playoffs. Yeah the offensive started with Duncan, but statistically Manu was extremely efficient and did not score much less than Tim. Tim was better overall cause of his defensive presense and his rebounding -- but offensively Tim had plenty of help, actually he had more then he should have had from Manu (who overachieved big time in that regard).
Repeat after me...being the best player on the best team does not = being the best player.
Stoudamire tore us up last year, he averaged 37 PPG and outscored Duncan by a similar margin to Hakeem over Drob...
His team lost in 5 games, they were disposed of like tissue paper.
This year, Duncan had a returning cast of a championship team, and got beat by Dirk Nowitzki..
Is Dirk now > Duncan? Or was his team better? The way you answer this question will determine if you are an idiot or not.
[stupid ass logic]
And don't tell me Duncan had beaten Dirk previously, Duncan is 0-1 against Dirk without Drob...
And he's 0-2 against Shaq without Drob.
[/stupid ass logic]
I like how you put words into my mouth.
Duncan was one of the best players in the league and by far the most productive for his team in the 99 and especially the 03 le. Never said anything about Maxwell, or Billups. Evenso, Billups was barely the best player statistically in the playoffs. He dominated LA in 04, but Rip was their best player in the first 3 series (which were close). Even though at the time and at the moment I feel Billups is superior, he wasn't by far the best player on his team. Spurs in 03 on the other hand, Duncan was by far the best player on his team, most productive throughout the season and the playoffs.
The comparison to Horry and your putting words in my mouth is stupid. Even if you are giving a bunch of hyperbole and being an idiot as usual.
Better words than your father's for a change.
Man Drob was the leading scorer and rebounder against Portland...on paper the toughest team we played in 99...
Duncan got held to 5 ing points in one of those games...
How the is that leading his team to win?
And yes we won...you think..any of David's teams were capable of winning a game where he only scored 10 points? Much less freaking 5.
You think any of David's teams were capable of winning 63 ing games with him only scoring 18ppg?
His teams weren't even capable of having winniing record without him....
Unlike Shaq, unlike Hakeem, unlike Duncan.
And Duncan wasnt' the one guarding Shaq on those ing le runs either.
Hey fantasy nerd, don't you suppose that Shaq was actually in his prime from 2000-02? Just because he maybe grabbed 1.5 more rebounds and half a block more doesn't make him a better player, I'd bet only fantasy nerds actually ignore a basketball player's basketball IQ. You know, when he was able to contribute more through the intangibles and through leadership. I figured that a fan of a smart basketball team like the Spurs would know about that, but I guess you don't have to be an intelligent basketball fan to root for an intelligent team. I mean hey, I you don't think that averaging 29.7ppg, 13.6rpg, 3.8apg, and 3bpg while leading his team to 67 wins and the le would qualify as his prime, then tell me when exactly it was. Because I'll guarantee you it wasn't in his first 2 seasons like you implied.
I made sure to include that last part to show what your arguement is really about, you hate on Shaq and homer for Robinson. You obviously have no respect for and can't stand Shaq, why because he gets respect that you think your 2 favorite Spurs deserve? Jealousy?
Here is the other half of your arguement:
Your butt-love for David Robinson, defending your crush? Seriously, what does any of that have to do with who was better in their prime? Because you think that Robinson was naturally gifted and skilled? Which I do believe, but I'll never believe that a hard worker like Robinson "didn't work hard at developing his game." in' homeristic bull . Because I didn't believe that statement you act like I don't remember him in college, or why he had to sit out a couple of years after getting drafted, more of your self serving bull . Honestly, are all 11K of your posts like that? Your shtick, you know that I'm so smart and you're so stupid rant, if that is what you have been doing for 11K posts, I feel sorry for the regulars on this board. Holy obnoxious, like an 8th grader, really.
What is interesting is that I heard some discussion on the radio and television today, very relevant the conversation in this thread. First, this morning on "The Herd," Collin Cowherd started to discuss and rank the greatest centers to ever play the game. His list went: 1. Kareem 2. Wilt 3. Russell 4. Hakeem 5. Shaq. He did happen to mention Ewing and Robinson as pretty much an afterthought, he stated that they were greats that couldn't be passed up by the first pick, since great bigs don't come along often. Then on the pregame to tonights game Dan Patrick, Wilbon, and Mark Jackson were discussing the greatest centers of all-time, I believe Jackson put Shaq 2nd and Wilbon had him 4th. They mentioned Wilt, Russell, Shaq, Kareem, and maybe Hakeem (not sure); again Robinson got no love, not even mentioned as an afterthought. Then to top it off they interviewed Bill Russell right before the game, and they asked him how great Shaq is and where is his place in history. He answered by telling how he had a vote in the 50 greatest players that they announced like ten years back, that Robinson also made, but he said Shaq was in his top ten of all-time. I thought it was pretty interesting considering the debate have going on in here. Especially how former greats and professional sports annalysts gave Shaq such high praise and David Robinson the big squa . But you are apparently much smarter than those guys, maybe if you told them about how Robinson "didn't work hard at developing his game," or that he played the saxaphone they would reconsider.
BTW, I don't think you ever answered my question, who is better Duncan or Robinson?
And only an idiot thinks Shaq has one...How much of an IQ do you have to have to weigh 400lbs and slam dunk the ball? Which is basically Shaq's game.
To tell you the truth...Shaq is probably a lot like David Robinson in that he never really added anything to his game during his career...although he did develop that baby hook. That's it though.
If intangibles mean having Kobe rip us for 35 a game...then yeah, I guess he did add that...You know, when he was able to contribute more through the intangibles and through leadership.
Suffice to say, if Drob had been able to add 2 guard often compared to Jordan to his game he'd probably be a lot more respected as well...
Then again, I am probably wasting this point on you, since you think Del Negro is as good as Kobe already.
But basically...you are saying that Shaq this year is better than any of his pre-2000 years...intangibles being what they are and all...and that makes you an idiot.
His first year in the league he posted far and away his best block and rebound totals and shot FT's at the second best PCT of his career.I figured that a fan of a smart basketball team like the Spurs would know about that, but I guess you don't have to be an intelligent basketball fan to root for an intelligent team. I mean hey, I you don't think that averaging 29.7ppg, 13.6rpg, 3.8apg, and 3bpg while leading his team to 67 wins and the le would qualify as his prime, then tell me when exactly it was. Because I'll guarantee you it wasn't in his first 2 seasons like you implied.
His second year in the league he finished second in the league in scoring, shot the best FG% of his career(up unil last year), pulled down the most offensive boards, still blocked about 3 shots per game.
That year you noted was only his best in points and assists...nothing else.
He didn't even score those points at an efficient rate compared to many of his other years.
In any case, those seasons had a whole lot to do with adding a coach with 6 NBA champions and Kobe getting on the court full time.
I made sure to include that last part to show what your arguement is really about, you hate on Shaq and homer for Robinson. You obviously have no respect for and can't stand Shaq, why because he gets respect that you think your 2 favorite Spurs deserve? Jealousy?
Basically, yeah...plus I am right.
Shaq gets way too much respect and Drob does not get near enough.
Duncan does ok in the respect department.
Your butt-love for David Robinson, defending your crush? Seriously, what does any of that have to do with who was better in their prime? Because you think that Robinson was naturally gifted and skilled? Which I do believe, but I'll never believe that a hard worker like Robinson "didn't work hard at developing his game."
And no doubt you never saw him play...he added nothing to his game during his career and his game developed from him becoming 7 feet tall He wasn't even planning on being a basketball player, and he had a full time job while he was sitting out.
The thing is...what makes you an idiot is you think that's nothing but a compliment...
You obviously don't, otherwise you'd know it was impossible for him to have put in as much work as the others.in' homeristic bull . Because I didn't believe that statement you act like I don't remember him in college, or why he had to sit out a couple of years after getting drafted, more of your self serving bull .
Pretty much...I'd say at least 5000 of my posts have been arguing on the behalf of David Robinson in threads exactly like this...rest assured, I know what the I am talking about when it comes to David Robinson.Honestly, are all 11K of your posts like that? Your shtick, you know that I'm so smart and you're so stupid rant, if that is what you have been doing for 11K posts,
You shouldn't...it's only the true dumbasses stupid enough to argue with me when they haven't checked their info, that get assreamed like you are getting now.I feel sorry for the regulars on this board. Holy obnoxious, like an 8th grader, really.
The regs aren't stupid enough to dig their own graves.
What is interesting is that I heard some discussion on the radio and television today, very relevant the conversation in this thread. First, this morning on "The Herd," Collin Cowherd started to discuss and rank the greatest centers to ever play the game. His list went: 1. Kareem 2. Wilt 3. Russell 4. Hakeem 5. Shaq. He did happen to mention Ewing and Robinson as pretty much an afterthought,
And I should give a what Collin Cowherd thinks why? I suspect I have seen more games with David Robinson in them than he has.
And what the are Wilbon and Patrick supposed to know that I don't? Wilbon's an idiot and Patrick is a mouth piece....he stated that they were greats that couldn't be passed up by the first pick, since great bigs don't come along often. Then on the pregame to tonights game Dan Patrick, Wilbon, and Mark Jackson were discussing the greatest centers of all-time, I believe Jackson put Shaq 2nd and Wilbon had him 4th. They mentioned Wilt, Russell, Shaq, Kareem, and maybe Hakeem (not sure); again Robinson got no love, not even mentioned as an afterthought.
You are getting more pathetic by the second.
And who gives a what Mark Jackson thinks...does he have any championships? Did he have to guard David Robinson?
Then to top it off they interviewed Bill Russell right before the game, and they asked him how great Shaq is and where is his place in history. He answered by telling how he had a vote in the 50 greatest players that they announced like ten years back, that Robinson also made, but he said Shaq was in his top ten of all-time. I thought it was pretty interesting considering the debate have going on in here. Especially how former greats and professional sports annalysts gave Shaq such high praise
Well I am pretty sure that Bill Rusell rates Wilt, himself, and Tim Duncan all over Shaq...so if you want to keep using him, by all means go ahead, his claim is based on rings, so I expect him to have that at ude...I want to see him when a championship with Avery Johnson and Vinney Del Nergo as his guards then we'll see if I agree with him.
BTW, I realized bill Russell was pretty much full of when I listened to him give a 5 minute disertation on how he could have stopped Shaq...
He said something about not letting him not letting Shaq get close to the basket, it was then I realized he needed to be in a nursing home.
You're the idiot that kneejerked that and automatically assumed it was nothing but a compliment...and David Robinson the big squa . But you are apparently much smarter than those guys, maybe if you told them about how Robinson "didn't work hard at developing his game," or that he played the saxaphone they would reconsider.
BTW, I don't think you ever answered my question, who is better Duncan or Robinson?
Individually?
David ing Robinson...beyond all doubt. It's not even arguable. It's not even arguable.
More driven to win? Duncan.
And the way they used their influence on the Spurs bears this out...Duncan was ing gonnamundo if the Spurs didn't put a winner and talent around him...Drob pulled his strings to make sure his buddy AJ had a job as something other than a ballboy.
That settles that...
Settles what? He's a ing royal jerk off, and you're his piss on lacky? All he proved is his hate and complete disrespect for Shaq while verifying that he has a woody for David Robinson.
And all you have is hate for David and a disturbing irrational love for Shaq.
Come on BAkrid, you can do better than that.
Again, we have yet to define what makes a player the "best." whottt seems to totally ignore team play, and that's a problem with his analysis.
I believe Tim is a better player than David, not because Tim is physically stronger than David in his prime, or more skilled than Robinson in his prime (he's not).
But Tim, IMO, will end up as being "greater" than David simply because of what he accomplished. He made the people around him better. He's won 3 Championships, and 3 Finals MVPs... and doesn't look like he's done yet. You can't tell me that doesn't count for something.
But that's what's fun about these discussions, we all have different definitions of what "best" means.
In BAkrids case, best means winning three Championships in a row. That's fine for him, but I'm guessing when Tim retires with more Rings than Shaq, the majority of people will agree that Tim was the best all around player from 1999 - ???. (Shaq's supposed "prime" years).
i think it's amazing that someone:
a. listens to "the herd"
b. after listening to "the herd", quotes it and uses it for argumentative purposes.
So not only are you ignorant of David Robinson's career...you are also ignorant of the history of bad blood between Shaq and the Spurs...not to mention seemingly ignorant of the history of bad blood between Shaq and your own purported team.
The more you type, the stupider you look.
Some forget what an absolute monster David Robinson was from 1989-96 or what he had as a supporting cast during that period. He was the original Garnett, Stoudemire, or whoever. 'cept he was 100 times the player. DRob kicked the ass of guys like Mourning and, yes, Shaq during that period on a regular basis. If DRob had a teammate like Kobe to play with during that period Spurs fans wouldn't have had to wait until 1999 to see the 1st Larry O'Brien trophy.
DRob as "soft" was a media fiction due to his media persona as the straightlaced Navy man and encouraged by some players in the league of less talent and character (ie Mourning and Jayson Williams). DRob punked those guys on a consistent basis.
For NBA centers since DRob's rookie year of 1989, I'd rate Hakeem higher since he had the more complete offensive game and was solid at every aspect of the game, offensive and defense.
DRob's back was the death knell for him as a superstar.
I won't argue with you about how great Duncan is, I know he's great. But, like I've said couple of times in this thread I think it is premature to put him ahead of Shaq or Hakeem, we'll just see what he does in the 2-3 years. Honestly, I think that Duncan is at the end of his prime or close to it so it will be judged on his next couple of years.
I'm not basing it soley on Shaq's or Dunan's 3 rings, that is not why I think that they are better than Robinson, but I'd be lying if I said it didn't play a part in my opinion. I'm looking at how they are able to put their team at the top of the league year after year, they have had great supporting casts but they still have to perform and lead for their teams to be contenders, every year.
Again, I think that Duncan and Shaq have a killer instinct that Robinson didn't. I think that Robinson's a super nice guy, and was never able to get mean and reach down deep enough to stick it to the other team. I don't think he was a leader like the other two players, personally I think Duncan and Avery played that role when they were in contention. I'm sure he was a very positive guy in the lockerroom and was a leader to an extent, but I really don't believe that he ever grabbed the reins, he was passive.
Seriously, why you make the assumption that Duncan will retire with more rings, that is just bias. You have to make it to the finals to get rings, and the last I checked somebody is in the finals right now with a great shot at #4.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
