And rang.. ding dong
But it was. At the moment the Lakers saw this image, Kobe knew he would finally step out of Shaq's shadow. LA would be one step closer to catching Boston in the ring count.
He hoodwinked you. You dropped your guard. You allowed yourself to light the cigar to spite the memory of Red. And for that, he made you pay. Kobe had to wait a year to see 4. Meanwhile, you allowed this to happen.
Damn you.
How many DPOY trophies has Duncan been robbed of?
1 for sure...
arguably 2
Nothing. Team accomplishments mean little for individual legacy, if you listen to rank and file ... plus he would not be the "alpha" ...for the
last two...
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? But this is spurstalk ...
Duncan statistically wasn't quite as good as Jordan looking at the advanced stuff. But Duncan is arguably top 5.These are Frizzle/Great got/Avante-caliber takes
The only reason Duncan with six rings wouldn't be in the mainstream conversation with DK is because Duncan isn't a media/marketing like DK was. Duncan already surpassed Kirby on April 25, 1976.
Duncan was the best player of last year's whole playoffs run
He led the team in advanced stats, mpg, ppg and rpg before the finals started.
"Not being the alpha"
oops double post
Another reason why Duncan with 6 rings > DK. Dude won an alpha ring at damn near 40 years old in today's stacked eraDuncan was the best player of last year's whole playoffs run
He led the team in advanced stats, mpg, ppg and rpg before the finals started.
"Not being the alpha"
Meanwhile, Kirby couldn't even win an alpha ring in his prime, in the iso-thugball era, with stacked teams around him
I wouldnt go that far. Winning a 3-peat twice while clearly being the best player on the planet is just surreal and on another level. But I don't really give a tbh, Tim's already a cemented top 5. And if he leads the Spurs, statistically and obviously mentally, to a 6th then that would surely propel him to top 3 imho.Another reason why Duncan with 6 rings > DK. Dude won an alpha ring at damn near 40 years old in today's stacked era
Meanwhile, Kirby couldn't even win an alpha ring in his prime, in the iso-thugball era, with stacked teams around him
Discussion's not too relevant now especially with how the Spurs has looked so far but I can't accept someone saying that Tim wasn't the alpha for 5 when he was the best player for the entire run, based on stats and not on bull .
I usually agree with most of your posts but I dont get how Duncan is not ahead of shaq already. I know rings are probably weighted a bit higher by me than most, but I think based on career I would give Tim the edge. At his peak and most dominating this is not even a question it was and is Shaq. But adding the rings consistency and higher level of defensive play even at Shaq's peak plus Tim's versatility I think Tim has the edge is it a HUGE gap? No. But a edge imho.
Funny thing though Jam, a small group of Spur fans agree with you. SO maybe I am wrong here but for me it's Duncan career wise. Peak wise you could argue HAkeem and Shaq over him though but we already have a thread on that, LOL
Duncan is even under estimated by his own fan base tbh..
Dude is a legend. He leads his team to 6 finals in three decades, has 5 rings and was 28 sec away to 6. He carried a small market team on his back, never played with an all time great (except past prime Robinson) like Shaq, Kobe, Pippen etc... led his team to the best winning % in history etc etc etc and Spurs fans should feel bad to compare him with MJ ? gimme a break
I dont feel bad tbh but I don't think he's greater than MJ.
It would not put him above Jordan, or in the conversation.
But with guys like Kareem or Magic, who by and large are still ranked ahead of Duncan, it would be a legit debate. Potentially you could argue that Duncan had the 2nd greatest career ever. That's the way I like to say it, because who was a "better player" is very subjective to me. At the end of the day you measure careers and contributions to your team. And a 6th ring could elevate Duncan up to 2nd I think. Russell to me is always the enigma, because as great as he was, those Celtics teams were absolutely stacked. I have a hard time believing the narrative that he was a winner whereas Wilt was a loser. Russell certainly seems to have been a guy who competed and gave 100% to the cause, but he was helped by playing with far and away the best cast possible.
To me it would also create a great debate on Duncan v. LeBron regarding the best post-MJ player. For me Duncan was always the best player of his generation, late 90s-early 2000s, player. But LeBron was headed for arguably a greater career after his 2013 le. With a 5th ring and his great longevity, and LeBron seemingly going down a gear now in his 30s, Duncan v. LeBron I think will be interesting.
As for the rest, I think Shaq is clearly behind those two now, if he can be considered in the post-MJ era. Also, I will honestly not be convinced that Kobe is somehow much higher than Dirk or KG. The advanced metrics revolution will not be kind to his legacy at all. I think more and more people will see Kobe as someone that greatly benefited from very stacked teams, which he clearly had, but on the other side played a very innefficient hero-ball to the detriment of his team. He is definetely as step below Duncan, Shaq and LeBron to me. And you could make a case that both Dirk or KG can be considered the 4th. I'd obviously support Dirk, but the Dirk v. KG debate has been done to death here so I am not going to go there again.
True most likely. But the question I would ask is "given what I know, if I had a chance to select them in a draft, who would I go for?". And the answer is Duncan, because someone who gives me 5 extra years of elite production is much more valuable. It gives me the chance to go ahead and rebuild another cast around him, with a 21 year old Kawhi, that gives me an extra ring. The fact that Shaq was marginally better at his peak (though 2002-2004 Duncan was truly a monster as well) still gives me one ring per season, not more, just like with Duncan. The fact that he was brilliant in those 3 seasons, can't give me more than 3 rings.
I don't think you make a case for Duncan vs Jordan. Jordan just trumps Tim in major categories, be it team success or advance statistics. Duncan vs Magic or Kareem would be a great conversation though.
I don't feel either, I don't think he's greater too but nothing to be ashamed of discussing.
You can definitely discuss 6 or not with the likes of Magic, Kareem etc... tbh
as of today I think the only big you can argue is better is Kareem imho fwiw
Duncan is gonna retire it will give one week of headlines and that's all while what he has done is simply amazing
I don't think a 6th ring will affect his legacy much. If his legacy were to change noticeably, he would need to get the FMVP when he gets his 6th. Doing so will really bring to light the sustained excellence that is Tim Duncan.
he got one for the thumb now it's time to get one for the !!!
...for the 2nd time.
I agree. with this. As the above Dirk was great KG too but Kobe is above those guys. I get the metric dudes will argue whatever they wanna argue, but outside of analytic nerds who goes back and cares retroactively what Jordan's metrics are? Besides really hard core fans with a leaning that way? Harlem, CN and others have said the same in 10 years etc. perceptions will change on Kobe but in reality I doubt it. First those that care now probably wont care as much. And I have yet to hear anyone debating win shares, DPRM at any barbershop here in DFW or Cali, at pickup games or even on the Select teams I am around when I coach when debating Kobe/Lebron, Lebron/Jordan, Duncan/Shaq. Of course the best coaches and informed people are aware of those numbers (some of them) but in the end no one uses those to argue Jordan over Lebron or any other debate. Kobe is polarizing. those that support him wont change and those that hate him wont either. some will overrate him greatly others will underrate him just as much.
And I mention the barbershop because outside of here and Real deal sportstalk (FB) that is the only place outside of inbetween pickup games at 24 hour fitness that i get to have passionate debates on hoops. Years from now if I am still able to play Im am 99% sure we wont be arguing win share per 48
Last edited by Killakobe81; 02-17-2015 at 10:52 AM.
I don't know why people actually care about FMVP when talking about career and achievements. Duncan was the best player of the 5 rings, the fact on a given serie Parker, Kawhi flourished is not relevant imo.
For the rest I agree 5 or 6 won't change dramatically things
Disagree. You don't hear about how Kareem was a s of his former self in '87/88. You just hear that he has 6 rings.
Obviously winning a le when you're the 2nd or 3rd option means less, but it still adds to a player's legacy. It's not like Duncan is some benchwarmer at this point. In last year's playoffs, he led the team in minutes, rebounds, and was 2nd in points. He still had a big role on the team.
this. and I dont get why Spur fan of all people are devaluing rings when that is one of Tim's gretest legacy arguments. Sure he is no longer alpha but '86 is right no one cares that Kareem was carried by Magic later he still was a key part of all of them, same as Tim.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
