Reply With Quote
dammit, he is the best player when you bring(and you should) defense into the equation
All evidence to the contrary.
Again, there seems to be absolutely no evidence to support that, but supposing it were accurate, it would be due solely to his age. If you could draft a guy out of college knowing what you know now, you'd take Shaq or Duncan.
dammit, he is the best player when you bring(and you should) defense into the equation
A lot of assumptions are being made here.
1. Although I agree that the GMs are giving "expert" opinions, not all expert opinions are created equal. Is Ainge's opinion as valid as Colangelo's? How about McHale and Buford?
2. These percentages are su ious on their face. For example, Stoudemire is listed as "4%" of the vote. Assuming all 30 teams were polled once and allowed one answer, this is mathematically impossible, unless 1.2 people voted for Stoudemire or every fraction was rounded up. This somewhat relates back to Point #1, becuase apparently at least one GM/President was actually idiotic enough to think that Stoudemire is the best PF in the NBA.
3. I think people assume that the GMs polled actually put a lot of care and attention into this poll. Did the poll define its terms? When it asked "build a team today" were we to assume the players' current attained age? Draft age? How many people polled actually went to the trouble to define all of the parameters before shooting back an answer? Did any GM worry that his answer would leak and just named his own player? (I could see D'Antoni being stupid enough to pick Stoudemire.)
I am not a Spurs homer, but I don't see how you would consider anyone in the league today more valuable than Duncan. Duncan was dominant from day one. Duncan may be the one superstar who can mesh into any style or system, and do it quickly (within a single season). Timmy doesn't need the ball to be highly effective. If you consider those criteria, who would anyone take before Duncan? Kobe? Don't kid yourself. LeBron? No low post game, no jumpshot, and needs to have the ball 80% of the time. (To be fair, the last may be a function of the crappy Cavaliers team.) Dirk? You replace Timmy's points, but lose the rebounds, blocks, and defense. Shaq? Too old and broken down today, but you probably take Shaq over Duncan in their primes (even though TD is a better "team" guy). KG? At best, that is a "lateral" move.
I just don't how see you don't take Duncan 1st or 2nd.
So let me guess you think that Dirk would be before Timmy huh?
For someone "not a Spurs homer" you sure summed it up well!
Duncan brings so much to both ends of the court that his value skyrockets over anyone else in the league. Top off his physical talent with his personality qualities, his ability to make his teammates better, and his apparant complete lack of ego and you have the complete package. On the court and in the locker room there's no player I'd take over Duncan.
Duncan is NOT one even one of the top 3 individual players in the league right now..more like top 4-6. Is he as good all around (dribbling, shooting, passing, etc) as Lebron? no. Is he a premier scorer like Kobe? No. Is he a playmaker like Nash? Once again, no. Athletically gifted like Garnett or Wade? No, the list can go on and on.
Lucky for the Spurs, great individual players don't win championships without a great TEAM. Some of you need to take a good look at Tony, Manu, Bowen and realize those guys deserve ALOT of the credit for your teams success.
Exactly. Anyone who doesn't realize this....
Duncan is by far a GREAT cornerstone to any TEAM. I could give a who is best individually. Last time I checked basketball was 5 on 5 at any given time. Isn't it true that a GREAT big man is a lot harder to find then a GREAT small guy?
The ONLY thing Duncan has against him is mileage and age. If we knew what everyone's prime would be and assuming they were all young (Kobe, Duncan, Nash, Dirk, Lebron) I would still pick Duncan first. I take his personality, leadership, clutch ability, and so much more into my decision. The FACT that he doesn't have to be the "best" at all times automatically propels him above Kobe.
Dude, the Spurs don't even make the playoffs in the West without...
Wait a second, did you just suggest that anybody would pick Nash over Duncan? That's the stupidest thing I've heard on this board in a while, and considering Spursdynasty and Sequ are in top form, that's saying something.
What part of he's not a playmaker like Nash don't you understand? I was just throwing a few names out there to make a point.
Realistically, Kobe, Wade, KG, Lebron are all better individual players than Duncan. Team play > individual play. Duncan is a better TEAM PLAYER than all of those guys mentioned.
That put things in perspective for you?
Since it's a team game, then I guess the only thing it puts in perspective is that you'd make a piss-poor GM.
So you're saying any GM that chooses Lebron over TD is a piss-poor GM?
Please, enlighten me.
R O F L
Tim Duncan is a big man, and of course he doesn't have the same skill set as Steve (no defense) Nash or Kobe (I hate me team) Bryant. Do they have the same skills as Duncan?
As one poster already said--- when you factor in defense (and you should) Duncan is the best player in the NBA. So many fans just don't consider defense at all, and it is HALF of the game. Dirk, Nash, Arenas, Lebron--- those guys just are not great defenders. And the players who are on Duncan's level of defense-- Bowen, Bell, Wallace, Camby--- none of those guys are great scorers. So when you put the two together, along with leadership, hustle, rebounding, clutch ability and the WILL TO WIN, Duncan is #1.
Okay, I'll fall for this one:
Let me guess absurd myopic Mavsfan...Nowitzki IS?!?!?!?!?!
I don't see what's so funny about Wade leading an old hobbled Shaq + 13 other scrubs to a championship in only his 3rd season. And Lebron lead his team of nobodies to the finals, which is still an accomplishment for such a young player.
he lead his teams against injured teams
and a team with flip as a coach
1. Who is the best international player in the NBA?
Dirk Nowitzki 89%
Steve Nash 7%
Manu Ginobili 4%
Where's Nowitzki and Nash's Gold Medal? Where's Stevie and ie's Championship Ring? I'm pretty sure Ginobili has them covered, let alone Tim Duncan.
Last edited by remingtonbo2001; 08-15-2007 at 11:31 PM.
Say it with me...
B A S K E T B A L L
I Q !
Tim Duncan has the highest basketball IQ of any player since the likes of Bird, Magic and MJ. I'm sure Tim would attribute some of this to the fact that he stayed in school, unlike Kobe, Tracy, ect. The college game really forces the fundmental aspects of Basketball upon you. Point is, I'm going to take the guy with the highest Basketball IQ, cause history says he's gonna WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS.
Tim does have help to win champions. But the reason they are ing there to begin with is because Tim is a winner and probably should be considered the best player in the last decade. Only Shaq has his tied with championships. And its likely Tim will win a few more to put him over the top. Some of ya'll don't know what you are saying.
Are you so quick to forget that Jordan played in the past decade?
His high basketball iq gets him nowhere without David Robinson, Sean Elliott, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Bruce Bowen, etc. You're a homer if you think he's as good as Jordan and can lead a team to that many championships by himself. He's a great player, top 5 in the league, with great teammates to back him up. What other point are you trying to make?Say it with me...
B A S K E T B A L L
I Q !
Tim Duncan has the highest basketball IQ of any player since the likes of Bird, Magic and MJ. I'm sure Tim would attribute some of this to the fact that he stayed in school, unlike Kobe, Tracy, ect. The college game really forces the fundmental aspects of Basketball upon you. Point is, I'm going to take the guy with the highest Basketball IQ, cause history says he's gonna WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS.
Why wouldn't you put him up there with Jordan? Duncan has taken more players to championships than Jordan did. Jordan never won without Pippen(one of the 50 greatest players of all-time). He also had some of the best role players of all-time in Dennis Rodman, Horace Grant, Steve Kerr, etc. Duncan never had a top 50 talent, besides an old washed up David Robinson. I'm not saying he's better than Jordan, but you could make an argument for Duncan as the best... ever. No question he's the best of the post-Jordan era. Shaq had Kobe and Wade... and nobody else is even in the conversation really. They just keep throwing pieces around Duncan and they keep winning championships. Duncan will have way more rings and more MVPs than Shaq when all is said and done.
That's definitely my take. There just aren't that many people in the entire world 6'11" or taller. The talent pool for guards and small forwards is much greater, which is why most NBA wings are comparable talent-wise.
Usually, people mean "best skill set" when they say "best player." This is very misleading, because you play to win the game. For example, Meadowlark Lemon may have had the best basketball skill set of all time, but he certainly wasn't the best NBA player of all time. (He never played in the league, to my knowledge).
When I think of a "best" or "most valuable" player, I mean who contributes the most to team wins. With very few exceptions, that will usually be a big man, not a wing.
What's with the "little james" crack by the OP? Dude just hates Lebron?
And Jordan didnt win without Pippen , Grant , Rodman , Kukoc etc. so what is your point?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions