Duncan>Hakeem.

[baseline bum]

See the bolded parts in your statement. The difference is Hakeem [/b]didn’t[/b] have a strong supporting cast for the majority of his career. Even Spurs supporters here are dismissing the help he had on his le teams. I have already mentioned the stacked teams from the 80’s and 90’s.

Duncan hasn’t played on the best team every season but his teams always have had top 5-7 talent on them since he entered the league. He has never had to carry a scrub team and never really had to go through a rebuilding phase due to great management and the hitting on the Parker and Manu picks…both of whom didn’t take long to develop.

And again, I am not trying to dismiss Duncan’s les. I am just saying you can’t just say 4 to 2 without bringing the other dynamics into the discussion.

The 01 team started Terry Porter and Danny Ferry, and then Antonio Daniels in the playoffs when Derek Anderson got injured. David Robinson was two months from 36 by the time they met the Lakers. There's no way that could be considered a top 7 supporting cast, especially considering Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson were completely finished by that time, and Jaren Jackson was injured the whole season.

[Holt's Cat]

The 01 team started Terry Porter and Danny Ferry, and then Antonio Daniels in the playoffs when Derek Anderson got injured. David Robinson was two months from 36 by the time they met the Lakers. There's no way that could be considered a top 7 supporting cast, especially considering Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson were completely finished by that time, and Jaren Jackson was injured the whole season.

The '01 team that faced the Lakers had the worse perimeter cast a Spurs team has ever had in TD's career. It was worse than what Hakeem had in the '94 playoffs, without a doubt.

No Manu, No TP.

Typical Rockets fan, sitting in his trailer with his Rockets championship t-shirt from the mid-90s with the dirt stains under the armpits polishing off a 12 pack of Bud and dedicating his life to the preservation of Hakeem's legacy on the internets.

[Holt's Cat]

Uh, that's completely false. Kukoc, Sabonis, Marciulounis, Petrovic, and Divac did not attend a US college.

Also, what the is the relevance of whether they attended a US college or not?

Your argument was that in the 2000's there is more overall talent in the NBA because of the improved accessibility to the league of international players.

The 1990's clearly prove that the NBA has always been open to having the best players not only from America, but from the rest of the World. WTF does where they went to college have to do with anything? Is this basically your way of trying to divert attention from the fact that your premise is just completely wrong. The NBA has always featured the world's best players, not just America's.

The fact that guys like Hakeem, Ewing, and Mutombo went to college in the US if anything emboldens the argument that the effect of international stars on US play was actually stronger in the 1990's than now because several of the 90's stars actually honed their skills in an environment of American basketball, unlike guys like Dirk and Parker who have had to come straight to America from abroad and thus taken much longer to become quality NBA players.

Your argument is basically ridiculous. The only thing you've seen in the 2000's is teams fighting so hard to find the next Manu that they bring over stiffs like Darko, Vujajic, Radmanovic, Spanoullis, Turkan, etc. The majority of these stiffs are marginal at best rotational players and do not impact the overall talent level of the NBA in a positive manner.

Get real. The 'globalization' of the league has only increased its compe iveness here in the 21st Century. Spare me the glory days bull .

[baseline bum]

The '01 team that faced the Lakers had the worse perimeter cast a Spurs team has ever had in TD's career. It was worse than what Hakeem had in the '94 playoffs, without a doubt.

It was worse than what Hakeem had in 91 when his team didn't make the playoffs.

[Holt's Cat]

It was worse than what Hakeem had in 91 when his team didn't make the playoffs.

True.

4>2.

[Galileo]

Jordan not even top 3 all time?

And you have Shawn Marion and Tom Chambers as some of the best players you have ever seen? Vince Carter? Oh but it gets better. Fat Lever and Sidney Moncrief
Moncrief, a career 15ppg 3assist per game guy one of the best ever? Now I think i've heard it all.

Give me a ing break. This is the worst list i've ever seen. Tim Duncan is NOT the best player of all time. Jordan, Magic, Hakeem, Bird, Oscar Robertson, among others were better than him. Add Shaq to that list, in his prime he was one of the most dominant players ever.

And you even leave Pete Maravich off the best college players instead of Christian Laettner. Wow, just wow.

This was a list of players that I personally saw play. I didn't watch much basketball until the late 1970s and never saw Maravich in college. That said, I thought Maravich was an overrated ballhog that played poor defense.

The college list was also limited to players not on my NBA list.

As far as Jordan vs Magic I'll take Magic. I saw both play and I thought Magic was a better player. I'll take a cat quick 6' 9" point guard that gets triple doubles over a 6' 6" shooting guard any day. That's why Magic was a number 1 draft pick and Jordan was number 3.

And I'll take Duncan as the best player I've ever seen play. Duncan is way better than Oscar Robertson who is just an everage sized guard with inflated stats from the early 60s, a le gift from Jabber, and extended career because the ABA diluted the talent.

Duncan is also better than Bird, who would have not done much had not McHale and Parish been behind him. Bird was not an elite defensive player.

4 > 3

Duncan is only slightly better than Hakeem as this forum has indicated.

Fat Lever was another underated triple double man, 6th of all time.

Most triple doubles:

1. Oscar Robertson 181
2. Magic Johnson 138
3. Jason Kidd 87
4. Wilt Chamberlain 78
5. Larry Bird 59
6. Fat Lever 48

http://home.swbell.net/hartley4/tripdoub.htm

Tom Chambers was a great inside outside player who could hit threes and dunk. He had great height for a deadly shooter and was an all-star MVP.

Moncreif was way underrated, and guarded Bird in the 1979 Final Four, and lead his team in scoring, rebounds, and assists in the same year and was defensive player of the year. The only thing holding him back from Magic and Bird was that he was 5 inches shorter.

Vince Carter has been a consistent all star who stepped up in the playoffs, and is another three point/dunk threat.

And Shawn Marion is way underated, as he scores and rebounds just as much as Stoudemire, plus he is a great defender, a very good team player, is very consistent, and can hit threes. He is just as good as Nash, if not better, as well.

So my list is very good, eh?

[bobbyjoe]

Get real. The 'globalization' of the league has only increased its compe iveness here in the 21st Century. Spare me the glory days bull .

Can you read?

International born Guys like Mutombo, Hakeem, Divac, Marciulonis, Petrovic, Schrempt, Kukoc, Peja Stojavokick, etc were NBA stars in the 1990's. The "globalization" of the league began long before 2000. in 1998 the #1 pick was a British Center in Olowakandi.

It's utterly false, inaccurate, and bogus to claim the impact of "globalization" on the NBA is greater in the 2000's than in the 1990's in terms of # of impact players.

Stick to the simple juvenile "4>2" drivel.

[ambchang]

See the bolded parts in your statement. The difference is Hakeem [/b]didn’t[/b] have a strong supporting cast for the majority of his career. Even Spurs supporters here are dismissing the help he had on his le teams. I have already mentioned the stacked teams from the 80’s and 90’s.

Duncan hasn’t played on the best team every season but his teams always have had top 5-7 talent on them since he entered the league. He has never had to carry a scrub team and never really had to go through a rebuilding phase due to great management and the hitting on the Parker and Manu picks…both of whom didn’t take long to develop.

And again, I am not trying to dismiss Duncan’s les. I am just saying you can’t just say 4 to 2 without bringing the other dynamics into the discussion.

And I have repeated it a million times, the Spurs from 00 to 03/04 was basically the Duncan and a bunch of other players. If you take away Duncan, the Spurs did NOT have top 3 talent in the league. As for top 5 to 7, that is really a general statement, that is saying top 17 to 23% in talent should be contenders, and that is simply not true. The Pistons would probably shock the world if they win the championship next year, so would the Bulls, or even the Rockets and the Jazz. These are top 5 to 7 in terms of talent, and they are pretenders, not contenders (yes, they could still win, but it's unlikely). Year-in year-out, there are about 3 to 4 teams, max, that has a legitimate shot at the le. The Spurs from 00 to 04, were not those teams. Lakers, Blazers, Kings, and even Mavs were more talented, the sole reason the Spurs were even contenders was because of Duncan.

[ambchang]

The 01 team started Terry Porter and Danny Ferry, and then Antonio Daniels in the playoffs when Derek Anderson got injured. David Robinson was two months from 36 by the time they met the Lakers. There's no way that could be considered a top 7 supporting cast, especially considering Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson were completely finished by that time, and Jaren Jackson was injured the whole season.

The fact that Jaren Jackson was even mentioned kinda drove home the point.

[bobbyjoe]

This was a list of players that I personally saw play. I didn't watch much basketball until the late 1970s and never saw Maravich in college. That said, I thought Maravich was an overrated ballhog that played poor defense.

The college list was also limited to players not on my NBA list.

As far as Jordan vs Magic I'll take Magic. I saw both play and I thought Magic was a better player. I'll take a cat quick 6' 9" point guard that gets triple doubles over a 6' 6" shooting guard any day. That's why Magic was a number 1 draft pick and Jordan was number 3.

And I'll take Duncan as the best player I've ever seen play. Duncan is way better than Oscar Robertson who is just an everage sized guard with inflated stats from the early 60s, a le gift from Jabber, and extended career because the ABA diluted the talent.

Duncan is also better than Bird, who would have not done much had not McHale and Parish been behind him. Bird was not an elite defensive player.

4 > 3

Duncan is only slightly better than Hakeem as this forum has indicated.

Fat Lever was another underated triple double man, 6th of all time.

Most triple doubles:

1. Oscar Robertson 181
2. Magic Johnson 138
3. Jason Kidd 87
4. Wilt Chamberlain 78
5. Larry Bird 59
6. Fat Lever 48

http://home.swbell.net/hartley4/tripdoub.htm

Tom Chambers was a great inside outside player who could hit threes and dunk. He had great height for a deadly shooter and was an all-star MVP.

Moncreif was way underrated, and guarded Bird in the 1979 Final Four, and lead his team in scoring, rebounds, and assists in the same year and was defensive player of the year. The only thing holding him back from Magic and Bird was that he was 5 inches shorter.

Vince Carter has been a consistent all star who stepped up in the playoffs, and is another three point/dunk threat.

And Shawn Marion is way underated, as he scores and rebounds just as much as Stoudemire, plus he is a great defender, a very good team player, is very consistent, and can hit threes. He is just as good as Nash, if not better, as well.

So my list is very good, eh?

Duncan is better than Magic, Bird, and Jordan?

Do you also think Manu is better than Jordan?

David Robinson better than Wilt?

Bruce Bowen better than Scottie Pippen?

, you may as well...

[bobbyjoe]

And I have repeated it a million times, the Spurs from 00 to 03/04 was basically the Duncan and a bunch of other players. If you take away Duncan, the Spurs did NOT have top 3 talent in the league. As for top 5 to 7, that is really a general statement, that is saying top 17 to 23% in talent should be contenders, and that is simply not true. The Pistons would probably shock the world if they win the championship next year, so would the Bulls, or even the Rockets and the Jazz. These are top 5 to 7 in terms of talent, and they are pretenders, not contenders (yes, they could still win, but it's unlikely). Year-in year-out, there are about 3 to 4 teams, max, that has a legitimate shot at the le. The Spurs from 00 to 04, were not those teams. Lakers, Blazers, Kings, and even Mavs were more talented, the sole reason the Spurs were even contenders was because of Duncan.

It's not always about pure talent, but how a team is built.

The Mavs had more pure talent, yes, but the Spurs were better constructed because they had guys like David Robinson and Bruce Bowen who could fill roles and impact the game without the ball.

I'd much rather have a team smartly built with pieces that fit around a superstar than a collection of individual all-stars who couldnt play defense or play well together like the Mavs had, until Avery Johnson took over as Coach and they became a more cohesive team.

As much credit goes to Popovich as anyone for always seeming to find that piece that fits, whether it's a Oberto, Malik, or Bowen.

[ambchang]

True Hakeem had worse supporting casts than Duncan throughout their careers, but it's not like it was so bad that he had to miss playoffs.
In 91-92, when the Rockets missed the playoffs, Hakeem had Otis Thorpe, Vernon Maxwell, Kenny Smith, Sleepy Floyd, and their 3rd string PG, Avery Johnson, became David Robinson's best PG. Sure, that team may not win the championship, but miss the playoffs?

[mavs>spurs2]

This was a list of players that I personally saw play. I didn't watch much basketball until the late 1970s and never saw Maravich in college. That said, I thought Maravich was an overrated ballhog that played poor defense.

The college list was also limited to players not on my NBA list.

As far as Jordan vs Magic I'll take Magic. I saw both play and I thought Magic was a better player. I'll take a cat quick 6' 9" point guard that gets triple doubles over a 6' 6" shooting guard any day. That's why Magic was a number 1 draft pick and Jordan was number 3.

And I'll take Duncan as the best player I've ever seen play. Duncan is way better than Oscar Robertson who is just an everage sized guard with inflated stats from the early 60s, a le gift from Jabber, and extended career because the ABA diluted the talent.

Duncan is also better than Bird, who would have not done much had not McHale and Parish been behind him. Bird was not an elite defensive player.

4 > 3

Duncan is only slightly better than Hakeem as this forum has indicated.

Fat Lever was another underated triple double man, 6th of all time.

Most triple doubles:

1. Oscar Robertson 181
2. Magic Johnson 138
3. Jason Kidd 87
4. Wilt Chamberlain 78
5. Larry Bird 59
6. Fat Lever 48

http://home.swbell.net/hartley4/tripdoub.htm

Tom Chambers was a great inside outside player who could hit threes and dunk. He had great height for a deadly shooter and was an all-star MVP.

Moncreif was way underrated, and guarded Bird in the 1979 Final Four, and lead his team in scoring, rebounds, and assists in the same year and was defensive player of the year. The only thing holding him back from Magic and Bird was that he was 5 inches shorter.

Vince Carter has been a consistent all star who stepped up in the playoffs, and is another three point/dunk threat.

And Shawn Marion is way underated, as he scores and rebounds just as much as Stoudemire, plus he is a great defender, a very good team player, is very consistent, and can hit threes. He is just as good as Nash, if not better, as well.

So my list is very good, eh?

When someone doesn't have Jordan on their list of top 3 all time players that should immediately raise a white flag. Jordan was just incredibly dominant on both sides of the ball and there wasn't a thing he couldn't do. The man just had an incredible drive to win and always come out on top, he was probably the best compe or this league has ever seen. He was very clutch and you never saw him shy away from the big shot, usually knocking it down. Aside from the fact that there was no way to stop him, he was also one of the best perimeter defenders this league has ever seen. And all of Jordan's accomplishments come from an era where it was extremely hard for a guard to dominate the way he did. The handcheck rule made it a whole different ball game. That rule would kill guys like Tony Parker or Barbosa who's main talent is to use their speed to get to the rim. When Jordan got through the hand check and tried to make it to the rim, he still had some of the best big men and shotblockers of all time under the rim. Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, and even Mutumbo was a great shotblocker. The man probably could have rightfully been MVP almost every year he was in the league, but that would have gotten dull and they wanted to give other guys a chance.

Everyone so far wants to use the 4>2 argument to say Duncan>Hakeem, but you fail to realize Jordan would probably have twice as many rings as Duncan had he not left for baseball. Just think, 8 in a row, that would probably be the most dominant stretch in sports history. And there wasn't a damn thing anyone could do at the time to stop him.

Not to mention the Jordan went through on a game by game basis, he was beaten up almost every time down the court. The NBA as a whole was just extremely rough in the late 80's early 90s. I don't think alot of today's players would be able to adapt. I don't think Kobe could score half the points he does back in those days. I'm surprised that people forget how rough the game was and how hard it was on a perimeter scorer to get to the rim especially with the hand check rule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZLUV_Hc2_I

Just take this video for instance, half the that went on in this game would be an ejection in today's league. Look at all the missed shots around the rim because guys are just getting hammered every time they go up. Tim would be screaming bloody murder if any of this happened to him at all, much less every time down the court.

As far as the rest of the list goes, right off the top I can tell you that most on this board will agree that Marion is overrated to to his inflated stats from Phoenix's system. He's also way overrated as a defender, i've never seen him shut anyone down. And as much as I used to love watching Carter, he's been reduced to an overrated low % jump shooter who plays no defense because of his knee surgury.

You say Magic>Jordan simply because he was a little taller, and was a number 1 overall pick? Please tell me this is a joke, it's not where you're drafted that counts it's what you do with your career.

I also find it interesting that 3 players I listed as being better than Duncan you also listed as being in the top 5 all time in triple doubles.

Bottom line is that Duncan is good, there's no doubt about that, but putting him in the top 5 all time is a joke, as is leaving Jordan out of the top 3.

Edit: And as for what you said about Maravich, you could call him an overrated ball hog with no defense because of his pro career. But since you admit you never watched him play in college, i'll fill you in.

Maravich averaged an incredible 44.2 points per game in college over 3 seasons and is still the NCAA's all time leading scorer. It has since been calculated that he would have averaged 57 points per game with the benefit of the college 3 point line.

[Holt's Cat]

Can you read?

Yes. Can you bathe?

International born Guys like Mutombo, Hakeem, Divac, Marciulonis, Petrovic, Schrempt, Kukoc, Peja Stojavokick, etc were NBA stars in the 1990's. The "globalization" of the league began long before 2000. in 1998 the #1 pick was a British Center in Olowakandi.

There are a greater number of international born players today in the league. A few in the 80s and 90s does not disprove that.

It's utterly false, inaccurate, and bogus to claim the impact of "globalization" on the NBA is greater in the 2000's than in the 1990's in terms of # of impact players.

No it's not.

Stick to the simple juvenile "4>2" drivel.

I thought it'd be easier for you to understand.

[Cry Havoc]

Stating that one era is better than another is pointless.

You CANNOT compare eras.

It wastes any logical discussion's time.

[saporvida]

Stating that one era is better than another is pointless.

You CANNOT compare eras.

It wastes any logical discussion's time.

agreed.

it's almost as stupid as comparing _____(lebron, kobe, carter, etc.) to jordan.

[kingmalaki]

The 01 team started Terry Porter and Danny Ferry, and then Antonio Daniels in the playoffs when Derek Anderson got injured. David Robinson was two months from 36 by the time they met the Lakers. There's no way that could be considered a top 7 supporting cast, especially considering Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson were completely finished by that time, and Jaren Jackson was injured the whole season.

Name 7 other squads better 1-12. I give you Dallas, LA, Portland, Utah and Sacremento.....

Ferry only started 29 games. Anderson got hurt in the playoffs but he still started the entire season and was definately not a scrub. When y'all signed him everyone thought he was the missing piece at SG. Robinson was still able to play very solid defense, similar to in 2002 when y'all beat LA (he was the one counted on to hold Shaq, after all).

[kingmalaki]

It was worse than what Hakeem had in 91 when his team didn't make the playoffs.

You mean the season where he missed 12 games (really 13 cuz he didn't start 1 after the injury) and we missed the playoffs by 3 games? The same season where we went 2-10 in the 12 games that he missed? Where the starting SF was Buck Johnson and the main players off the bench were Sleepy Floyd (at 31) and Matt Bullard?

http://www.basketballreference.com/p...lkid=OLAJUHA01

And the playoff backcourt was worse than ours because D.Anderson was injured. He wasn't injured during the regular season.

[kingmalaki]

And I have repeated it a million times, the Spurs from 00 to 03/04 was basically the Duncan and a bunch of other players. If you take away Duncan, the Spurs did NOT have top 3 talent in the league. As for top 5 to 7, that is really a general statement, that is saying top 17 to 23% in talent should be contenders, and that is simply not true. The Pistons would probably shock the world if they win the championship next year, so would the Bulls, or even the Rockets and the Jazz. These are top 5 to 7 in terms of talent, and they are pretenders, not contenders (yes, they could still win, but it's unlikely). Year-in year-out, there are about 3 to 4 teams, max, that has a legitimate shot at the le. The Spurs from 00 to 04, were not those teams. Lakers, Blazers, Kings, and even Mavs were more talented, the sole reason the Spurs were even contenders was because of Duncan.

Sorry, but this is completely untrue. Please list 7 teams from that period with better rosters 1-12 than SA. The Spurs were in the contender convo in each of those seasons. True, they were not always considered the favorite but they were always in the convo.

Remove the best player from the other teams and 2-12, SA still had top level talent (again, name 7 better squads).

[kingmalaki]

True Hakeem had worse supporting casts than Duncan throughout their careers, but it's not like it was so bad that he had to miss playoffs.
In 91-92, when the Rockets missed the playoffs, Hakeem had Otis Thorpe, Vernon Maxwell, Kenny Smith, Sleepy Floyd, and their 3rd string PG, Avery Johnson, became David Robinson's best PG. Sure, that team may not win the championship, but miss the playoffs?

Hakeem also missed 12 games that season, in which the team went 2-10. We missed the playoff by 3 games.

[baseline bum]

Name 7 other squads better 1-12. I give you Dallas, LA, Portland, Utah and Sacremento.....

Ferry only started 29 games. Anderson got hurt in the playoffs but he still started the entire season and was definately not a scrub. When y'all signed him everyone thought he was the missing piece at SG. Robinson was still able to play very solid defense, similar to in 2002 when y'all beat LA (he was the one counted on to hold Shaq, after all).

The Spurs beat LA in 2003.

I'm also not talking 1-12, I'm talking 2-12 (ie, Duncan's supporting cast). These 9 are obviously better supporting casts than what Duncan had in 00-01:

1. Allen Houston's supporting cast in NY
Latrell Sprewell > Derek Anderson
Larry Johnson > Danny Ferry
Marcus Camby = David Robinson
Kurt Thomas = Malik Rose
Charlie Ward = Terry Porter
Glen Rice > Antonio Daniels

2. Shaq's supporting cast in LA
Kobe Bryant >> Derek Anderson
Rick Fox > Danny Ferry
Horace Grant < David Robinson
Robert Horry = Malik Rose
Derek Fisher > Terry Porter
Brian Shaw < Antonio Daniels

3. Webber's supporting cast in Sac
Doug Christie >= Derek Anderson
Peja Stojakovic >> Danny Ferry
Vlade Divac = David Robinson
Hedo Turkoglu = Malik Rose
Jason Williams > Terry Porter
Bobby Jackson > Antonio Daniels

4. Nowitzki's supporting cast in Dallas
Michael Finley > Derek Anderson
Christian Laettner / Juwan Howard > Danny Ferry
Shawn Bradley < David Robinson
Calvin Booth < Malik Rose
Steve Nash >> Terry Porter
Howard Eisley = Antonio Daniels

5. Rasheed's supporting cast in Portland
Steve Smith = Derek Anderson
Scottie Pippen >> Danny Ferry
Arvydas Sabonis < David Robinson
Dale Davis > Malik Rose
Damon Stoudamire > Terry Porter
Bonzi Wells >> Antonio Daniels

6. Glenn Robinson's supporting cast in Milwaukee
Ray Allen >> Derek Anderson
Tim Thomas > Danny Ferry
Ervin Johnson << David Robinson
Jason Caffey < Malik Rose
Sam Cassell >> Terry Porter
Lindsey Hunter > Antonio Daniels

7. Allen Iverson's supporting cast in Philly
Aaron McKie = Derek Anderson
George Lynch > Danny Ferry
Dikembe Mutombo > David Robinson
Tyrone Hill = Malik Rose
Eric Snow >= Terry Porter
Toni Kukoc = Antonio Daniels

8. Jalen Rose's supporting cast in Indiana
Reggie Miller > Derek Anderson
Austin Croshere > Danny Ferry
Jermaine O'Neal = David Robinson
Al Harrington = Malik Rose
Travis Best > Terry Porter
Sam Perkins < Antonio Daniels

9. Eddie Jones' supporting cast in Miami
Dan Majerle < Derek Anderson
Bruce Bowen > Danny Ferry
Brian Grant = David Robinson
Anthony Mason >> Malik Rose
Tim Hardaway > Terry Porter
Cedric Ceballos < Antonio Daniels

[bobbyjoe]

Yes. Can you bathe?




There are a greater number of international born players today in the league. A few in the 80s and 90s does not disprove that.




No it's not.



I thought it'd be easier for you to understand.

International born stars from the 00's:

Dirk
Manu
Tony Parker
Yao Ming
Mehmet Okur
Andrei Kirilenko
Pau Gasol
Zydrunas Igauskas

International born stars from the 90's:

Hakeem Olajuwon
Dikembe Mutombo
Sarunas Marciulonis
Vlade Divac
Detlef Schrempf
Toni Kukoc
Drazen Petrovic
Rik Smits

http://jonesonthenba.blogspot.com/20...-born-nba.html

Notice that the majority of the top international born players (this list incidentally ranks Hakeem over Duncan as well) are actually from the 90's. Not "a few" as you suggest, but in fact the majority on this list played in and/or were drafted in the 1990's.

Are there more international born scrubs in today's NBA than in the 1990's? Yes, that is definitely true. The quan y has increased.

But are there more impact international stars in today's NBA than in the 90's? Uh, no. As this list shows, the majority of the international stars and the truly top echelon ones like Hakeem and Ewing were in the 1990's, not in the 2000's.

And as a result, arguing that the influx of international born players has bolstered the quality of the NBA is short-sighted and erroneous. Because at the end of the day, it's the top stars who impact the league, not stiffs like Vujajic, Radmanovic, Darko, etc. Quality>>>>>>>>>>>> Quan y.

[bobbyjoe]

Hakeem also missed 12 games that season, in which the team went 2-10. We missed the playoff by 3 games.

So basically Houston was 40-30 that year when Hakeem actually started. I guess this should put to rest the garbage about "hakeem didnt make the playoffs that 1 yr of his 18 yr career".

[bobbyjoe]

When someone doesn't have Jordan on their list of top 3 all time players that should immediately raise a white flag. Jordan was just incredibly dominant on both sides of the ball and there wasn't a thing he couldn't do. The man just had an incredible drive to win and always come out on top, he was probably the best compe or this league has ever seen. He was very clutch and you never saw him shy away from the big shot, usually knocking it down. Aside from the fact that there was no way to stop him, he was also one of the best perimeter defenders this league has ever seen. And all of Jordan's accomplishments come from an era where it was extremely hard for a guard to dominate the way he did. The handcheck rule made it a whole different ball game. That rule would kill guys like Tony Parker or Barbosa who's main talent is to use their speed to get to the rim. When Jordan got through the hand check and tried to make it to the rim, he still had some of the best big men and shotblockers of all time under the rim. Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mourning, and even Mutumbo was a great shotblocker. The man probably could have rightfully been MVP almost every year he was in the league, but that would have gotten dull and they wanted to give other guys a chance.

Everyone so far wants to use the 4>2 argument to say Duncan>Hakeem, but you fail to realize Jordan would probably have twice as many rings as Duncan had he not left for baseball. Just think, 8 in a row, that would probably be the most dominant stretch in sports history. And there wasn't a damn thing anyone could do at the time to stop him.

Not to mention the Jordan went through on a game by game basis, he was beaten up almost every time down the court. The NBA as a whole was just extremely rough in the late 80's early 90s. I don't think alot of today's players would be able to adapt. I don't think Kobe could score half the points he does back in those days. I'm surprised that people forget how rough the game was and how hard it was on a perimeter scorer to get to the rim especially with the hand check rule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZLUV_Hc2_I

Just take this video for instance, half the that went on in this game would be an ejection in today's league. Look at all the missed shots around the rim because guys are just getting hammered every time they go up. Tim would be screaming bloody murder if any of this happened to him at all, much less every time down the court.

As far as the rest of the list goes, right off the top I can tell you that most on this board will agree that Marion is overrated to to his inflated stats from Phoenix's system. He's also way overrated as a defender, i've never seen him shut anyone down. And as much as I used to love watching Carter, he's been reduced to an overrated low % jump shooter who plays no defense because of his knee surgury.

You say Magic>Jordan simply because he was a little taller, and was a number 1 overall pick? Please tell me this is a joke, it's not where you're drafted that counts it's what you do with your career.

I also find it interesting that 3 players I listed as being better than Duncan you also listed as being in the top 5 all time in triple doubles.

Bottom line is that Duncan is good, there's no doubt about that, but putting him in the top 5 all time is a joke, as is leaving Jordan out of the top 3.

Edit: And as for what you said about Maravich, you could call him an overrated ball hog with no defense because of his pro career. But since you admit you never watched him play in college, i'll fill you in.

Maravich averaged an incredible 44.2 points per game in college over 3 seasons and is still the NCAA's all time leading scorer. It has since been calculated that he would have averaged 57 points per game with the benefit of the college 3 point line.

Jordan in today's NBA with the lax rules favoring perimeter players and the lack of physical play would just be ridiculous. I mean he'd probably average 35-38 ppg on 55-58% shooting.

I remember those Bulls-Knicks and Bulls-Pistons series where MJ would just get murdered physically.

Today's NBA is so weak that his dominance would stand out that much moreso.

You have to keep in mind that some of these fans undoubtedly never saw Magic, Hakeem, or MJ play or they wouldnt be able to rate Duncan over them with a straight face. Those guys did what they did in a much, much tougher league.

I mean some of the younger fools who never saw MJ play undoubtedly actually compare Kobe to him, which is absurd.

[Nikos]

Jordan in today's NBA with the lax rules favoring perimeter players and the lack of physical play would just be ridiculous. I mean he'd probably average 35-38 ppg on 55-58% shooting.

I remember those Bulls-Knicks and Bulls-Pistons series where MJ would just get murdered physically.

Today's NBA is so weak that his dominance would stand out that much moreso.

You have to keep in mind that some of these fans undoubtedly never saw Magic, Hakeem, or MJ play or they wouldnt be able to rate Duncan over them with a straight face. Those guys did what they did in a much, much tougher league.

I mean some of the younger fools who never saw MJ play undoubtedly actually compare Kobe to him, which is absurd.

Why can't you rate Duncan up there with Magic or Hakeem? Personally I think Hakeem was better than Magic, and that Duncan might possibly be better than him as well. But it all depends how much you value defense and someone who is an assist machine.

As far as Hakeem goes, I think I would give him the slight edge on Duncan for his 1994 and 1995 playoff runs over Ewing and Robinson. Hakeem did seem to be more athletic and effective on defense overall. Duncan plays it safe more and fouls less, but Hakeem was quicker. As far as offense goes they are very close. Hakeem had some more moves, but don't forget one of Hakeems best assets was his turnaround, not necessarily banging and scoring in the deep post. He was like Garnett somewhat with more moves and tougher underneath.

As far as MJ scoring 38ppg on 58% shooting I highly doubt that. He probably would do the same now as he did back then. Not much of a difference. He would still be the best player in the league, but he wouldn't be scoring 38-40ppg. As a rule I would say that defense is better than it was in the 80s, and yes the late 80s even if you factor the Pistons PHYSICAL, but not necessarily superior defense (to teams like the Spurs of today for example).

Sure the Knicks and Pistons were great on defense, but lets not act like they were much better than the Spurs of today. Just because they might have allowed more contact without penalty doesn't mean the teams in the 80s would score 130ppg or whatever. The talent level has not gotten any worse then those days, and if it has gotten worse it is minimal at best.