DRob vs Timmy

[maddnezz]

During their short overlapping prime vs. prime matchups spanning '89-'94 Robinson completely schooled Ewing. Look it up.

Thank you!!!!!!!!
The dream was the only one,besides Shaq who really gave Dave problems but at the same time the could only smell his farts as he blew past them!! Unstopable when he was foucused!!!!! Same with Tim!!! What a blessing to have been around to see that magic every game!

[dbreiden83080]

I didn't say anything about Manu or bashed Duncan, so you are preaching to the choir.
But there is not one solid reason you can give to say that Ewing is better than Robinson. He went to the finals twice? SO what? He had better supporting cast in a weaker conference. It's comparing apples to oranges.
Robinson had more MVPs, DPoY, All NBA teams, ALl Defensive Teams, well, everything you could name, and both played their prime years at around the same time. So how could you argue otherwise in an objective manner?

A better supporting cast, LOL like who, do you know how many all stars Ewing played with in his prime? The answer is 1, Starks got there in the 94 season, when they went to the finals. By 97, when they brought in Larry Johnson, he was way past his prime and Houston never fit in right with the team until Ewing had left. Both Ewing and Robinson got whipped by Hakeem in the playoffs. D-Rob needed for me anyway to get his Spurs to the finals one time. The west was not as loaded as you seem to think. There was no dominant team in the west at all in the Spurs way. So what they were not better at any point then the, Blazers or the Suns or Rockets or the Sonics, Jazz all these teams in and out of the finals every year. Knicks are losing to MJ and the Bulls every year and they pushed them every year. Knicks having that team in their way is a much bigger challenge then what D-Rob had in the west, there is no questioning that.

[maddnezz]

A better supporting cast, LOL like who, do you know how many all stars Ewing played with in his prime? The answer is 1, Starks got there in the 94 season, when they went to the finals. By 97, when they brought in Larry Johnson, he was way past his prime and Houston never fit in right with the team until Ewing had left. Both Ewing and Robinson got whipped by Hakeem in the playoffs. D-Rob needed for me anyway to get his Spurs to the finals one time. The west was not as loaded as you seem to think. There was no dominant team in the west at all in the Spurs way. So what they were not better at any point then the, Blazers or the Suns or Rockets or the Sonics, Jazz all these teams in and out of the finals every year. Knicks are losing to MJ and the Bulls every year and they pushed them every year. Knicks having that team in their way is a much bigger challenge then what D-Rob had in the west, there is no questioning that.

I can respect that. Good point!

[THE SIXTH MAN]

My point is that the Spurs should have beaten them in 1995. That 1995 Rockets team was a bad team, not bad as in meaning good, but bad as in meaning bad.

Are you serious? Or are you to much of a bag to realise that we lost to that years CHAMPIONS. I don't recall regular season records having to do a damn thing with post season play(look up last years pistons). Any body who watched that series wouldn't say that about that team. So again I ask, your point is?

[maddnezz]

Are you serious? Or are you to much of a bag to realise that we lost to that years CHAMPIONS. I don't recall regular season records having to do a damn thing with post season play(look up last years pistons). Any body who watched that series wouldn't say that about that team. So again I ask, your point is?

Don't worry Six, that fool is smoking draino!!!

[whottt]

Or are you to much of a bag

You have to ask?

[Nikos]

David was the superior regular season player. Duncan played better than his regular season self regardless of his supporting cast in the playoffs. David almost every season did worse than his regular season capapbilities. Some of that is bad teamattes, bad matchups, and just plain bad luck.

Not sure who was the real BETTER player. If Drob just played near his regular season output for half of his playoff appearences in his prime -- then I would say David was superior. But Duncan's playoff success bumps him up in career value.

Excluding the playoffs -- I would take Drob. Better defense, and slightly better offense.

[Phenomanul]

i dont understand why ppl always say duncan had better [;ayers. its not like manu and tony came on the team as all stars. who is to say that duncan's greatness didnt bring out the greatness in his teammates? part of being a great player is making those around you better. robonson had better stats, and was one of the greates in his own right...but duncan made those around him better every year.

so many years we put different people around duncan. when they work out, fols always say "spurs found another gem." or "duncan always has great teammates." no one EVER says "duncan makes his teammates better." anyway what do i know?

Manu was an MVP type player (albeit in the Euroleague) before joining the Spurs... and he also proved he could be a leader and a winner even without Duncan as his running mate ('04 Olympics)...

As Pop would say it, "Manu is a stud"....

Winning les has everything to do with constructing complete and deep teams around star player(s)... by getting role players who know their niche... clutch players who can deliver when it matters most... and compe ive players who can drive themselves without being pushed and who never give up on plays...

DRob's teams never had that combination of players... EVER.
It wasn't 'till Robinson became second fiddle himself that he was able to see the promised land. But also because those teams were complimented with the addition of clutch performers such as Jaren Jackson, Mario Ellie, Steve Kerr, and to an extent Stephen Jackson. Not to mention the sprinkle of luck that is needed to win Championships (Horry's missed shot in GM5 of 2003 playoffs, Elliott's MDM vs Portland)...

From the get-go Duncan has had the advantage and fortunately for us Spurs fans he has capitalized by leading HIS teams to les. That however does not automatically suggest that Duncan >>> Robinson. Much like one can't say that Rip Hamilton >>> George Gervin.

[baseline bum]

That 1995 Houston Rockets team that beat the Spurs in the playoffs won 47 regular season games.

47.

That 95 Rockets team also went through a 60-win Utah team in the first round, a 59-win Phoenix team in the second, a 62-win Spurs team in the WCF, and a 57-win Orlando team in the Finals. They might have had the toughest playoffs of any champ I've ever seen. Anyone who followed that season has to remember all the hype about the Rockets just resting Olajuwon a lot of that year at the expense of regular season wins.

[ZStomp]

I hate this thread. Seems like it comes up about once a month. Man, a lot of us, at least myself, took David for granted so many years. Even at age 38, with a destroyed back and a bum knee, he was still better than anyone else the Spurs have ever had at center.... by far. I know I won't make the same mistake with Tim, even if TP or Manu are putting up better PPG.

Exactly. Agree 100% I guess Kris doesn't.

[ambchang]

A better supporting cast, LOL like who, do you know how many all stars Ewing played with in his prime? The answer is 1, Starks got there in the 94 season, when they went to the finals. By 97, when they brought in Larry Johnson, he was way past his prime and Houston never fit in right with the team until Ewing had left. Both Ewing and Robinson got whipped by Hakeem in the playoffs. D-Rob needed for me anyway to get his Spurs to the finals one time. The west was not as loaded as you seem to think. There was no dominant team in the west at all in the Spurs way. So what they were not better at any point then the, Blazers or the Suns or Rockets or the Sonics, Jazz all these teams in and out of the finals every year. Knicks are losing to MJ and the Bulls every year and they pushed them every year. Knicks having that team in their way is a much bigger challenge then what D-Rob had in the west, there is no questioning that.

It would be all nice if it was true:
Starks was an all-star in 1994, all defensive in 1993.
Oakley was an all-star in 1994, all defensive 1st in 1994.
Anthony Mason, though not an all-star, was better than any low-post side kick Robinson ever had outside of Duncan and mings, and Duncan came in after DRob’s prime and took the Spurs to another level, while mings crapped out after three seasons with DRob.
He also played with a Bill Cartwright who, despite hurt, still averaged 17 ppg in 1987
ROY Mark Jackson from 88 to 92
Had Rod Strickland, the best point guard Robinson ever had in his career, as a backup point guard in 89
An over the hill Kiki Vanderwedge who still averaged 16 ppg.

Who did Robinson have?
Sean Elliott, All Star in 93 and 96
Terry mings, no all-star appearances with DRob
Rod Strickland, his best ever point guard, aka back up for Mark Jackson the year before with the Knicks
Willie Anderson with broken legs
Journeyman Avery Johnson as his second best point guard
Don't even mention Dennis Rodman, for he was just a wacko who destroyed any chance the Spurs had of winning anything in his two years with teh Spurs.
Remember when Sweet Pea Lloyd Daniels was supposed to be the saviour? Jerry Tarkanian? Bob Hill? John Lucas? The only year Robinson had a decent coach was his first season in Larry Brown! It would be nice if Robinson had a coach like Pat Riley, now wouldn’t it? , even Jeff Van Gundy would be great!

West not loaded? The SUns had Kevin Johnson, Charles Barkley, and Dan Marjele. Rockets had Hakeem and Otis Thorpe/Clyde Drexler, who also happen to win back to backs, Blazers had Clyde, Porter, Kersey and Duckworth (3 all-stars), Sonics had Kemp, Payton and Schempt, Jazz had Malone and Stockton, the two best players at their respective positions, and you argue that they are not loaded, guess what, let’s put in Jeff Hornacek as well!
Knicks pushed the Bulls and went to the finals when Jordan retired, so they are better than the Spurs? That’s about the most illogical argument I have ever heard. What backs you up in saying that the Spurs would not have went to the Finals in that Leastern conference, even with that weak supporting cast? The two years MJ retired, the West won BOTH championships, including a sweep of Orlando in 1995.
Again, using your logic:
4>3, 4>1
3>2
So 1>2, right?

[ambchang]

I can respect that. Good point!

You can respect points that are wrong?

[dbreiden83080]

Knicks pushed the Bulls and went to the finals when Jordan retired, so they are better than the Spurs? That’s about the most illogical argument I have ever heard. What backs you up in saying that the Spurs would not have went to the Finals in that Leastern conference, even with that weak supporting cast? The two years MJ retired, the West won BOTH championships, including a sweep of Orlando in 1995.
?

Neither Ewing nor Robinson in their primes had that 2nd go to guy. Niether one of them had the best supporting cast to compliment their talents. I always laugh when people try and say that Jordan has 6 les without Pippen, he might have 3 but no way 6. To me in the 2 years Jordan was gone the Knicks should have won 1 le. They were better than the Rockets, Hakeem was the better player but that year in 94 the Knicks had great chemistry and should have beat them. The following year the chemistry was not as good. Partly fueled by the fact that the players knew Riley was leaving and they faltered in the playoffs to the Pacers. I admit largely due to Ewings missed finger roll at the buzzer. Here is how i break it down in terms of paths to the finals. Knicks lost to the bulls in 2 of their 3 best years i feel to win it all. 92 they lost in 7 games, 93 they lost in 6 games and 94 when Jordan was gone they lost in 7 to the Rockets. Throw in the 96 team as well that lost in 5, to the unbeatable 72 win Bulls team. The Knicks had one of the single greatest dynasties in the history of Pro-sports standing in their way. I would seriously hope you do not doubt that Wilt would have more than 2 rings if not for Russels Celtics, because he was a better player than, Duncan, Ewing, Robinson or Hakeem. Spurs in Robinson's prime in their best seasons lost to the Jazz in 4 games of the first round coming off a 55 win season, a year in which the Jazz did not go on to finals. 94-95, 62 win season, lost to the Rockets in 6, Knicks pushed them to 7 games in the finals. 95-96, won 59 games and lost to the Jazz in 6 games a team that did not go the finals yet again. Spurs in those years were seen as favorites to go the finals. They were not seen as underdogs in any sense of the word, they were blasted for underachieving in those years. I get that it is a lot of speculation on both our parts but i believe that Ewing got more out of his team than did Robinson. Robinson had to get his Spurs to the finals in 1 of those seasons for me to say he is better than Ewing. As far as be being better or even as good as Duncan, i think that is downright laughable.

[TurkishTimDuncan]

David robinson says that "Duncan is ever greatest player." After this Why we discuss. You think that after tim duncan joined this organization. We have 3 champions and minumum west semi final every year.Okey I lihe to admral.He has really good player also good leader.But Duncan is the best ever players in the Nba. So this answer is Duncan

[Louae]

My point is that the Spurs should have beaten them in 1995. That 1995 Rockets team was a bad team, not bad as in meaning good, but bad as in meaning bad.

I believe the rockets made a mid-season trade to get clyde drexler and that's what turned their season around. thus, the team playing in the playoffs was not a true reflection of the team's record that year.

[dbreiden83080]

David robinson says that "Duncan is ever greatest player." After this Why we discuss. You think that after tim duncan joined this organization. We have 3 champions and minumum west semi final every year.Okey I lihe to admral.He has really good player also good leader.But Duncan is the best ever players in the Nba. So this answer is Duncan

To me this debate was put to bed when they won it in 05. Some people felt that Timmy had to get it done when it was seen solely as his team and he did.

[101A]

To me this debate was put to bed when they won it in 05. Some people felt that Timmy had to get it done when it was seen solely as his team and he did.

It was put to bed emphatically in the 4th quarter of game 6 of the WCSF '03.

[Duncanoypi]

^what happened on that game?

[Sec24Row7]

How could Timmy have had a better compliment of players than David?

Timmy is better and David had him as teammate...

Timmy only had David.

[dbreiden83080]

It was put to bed emphatically in the 4th quarter of game 6 of the WCSF '03.

I personally think that the only way Duncan gets respect as an all time great by just about everyone is if he wins 2 or 3 more les and walks away with like 5 or 6. I mean the man has 3 rings and 3 finals mvp's and he still gets disrespected by so many people that want to diminish his legacy. In a decade if Lebron has 3 rings, the media will act like MJ never existed.

[ambchang]

Neither Ewing nor Robinson in their primes had that 2nd go to guy. Niether one of them had the best supporting cast to compliment their talents. I always laugh when people try and say that Jordan has 6 les without Pippen, he might have 3 but no way 6. To me in the 2 years Jordan was gone the Knicks should have won 1 le. They were better than the Rockets, Hakeem was the better player but that year in 94 the Knicks had great chemistry and should have beat them. The following year the chemistry was not as good. Partly fueled by the fact that the players knew Riley was leaving and they faltered in the playoffs to the Pacers. I admit largely due to Ewings missed finger roll at the buzzer. Here is how i break it down in terms of paths to the finals. Knicks lost to the bulls in 2 of their 3 best years i feel to win it all. 92 they lost in 7 games, 93 they lost in 6 games and 94 when Jordan was gone they lost in 7 to the Rockets. Throw in the 96 team as well that lost in 5, to the unbeatable 72 win Bulls team. The Knicks had one of the single greatest dynasties in the history of Pro-sports standing in their way. I would seriously hope you do not doubt that Wilt would have more than 2 rings if not for Russels Celtics, because he was a better player than, Duncan, Ewing, Robinson or Hakeem. Spurs in Robinson's prime in their best seasons lost to the Jazz in 4 games of the first round coming off a 55 win season, a year in which the Jazz did not go on to finals. 94-95, 62 win season, lost to the Rockets in 6, Knicks pushed them to 7 games in the finals. 95-96, won 59 games and lost to the Jazz in 6 games a team that did not go the finals yet again. Spurs in those years were seen as favorites to go the finals. They were not seen as underdogs in any sense of the word, they were blasted for underachieving in those years. I get that it is a lot of speculation on both our parts but i believe that Ewing got more out of his team than did Robinson. Robinson had to get his Spurs to the finals in 1 of those seasons for me to say he is better than Ewing. As far as be being better or even as good as Duncan, i think that is downright laughable.

No need going into the Bulls, because I don’t think Jordan would have won squat without Pippen, and I actually think that if you put Jordan in the Spurs team of the early 90’s, the only team that could have remotely won anything would be the 89-90 team, with Rod Strickland and Terry mings, but that is not the point.
If you allow me to summarize your argument, it’s the Ewing is better than Robinson because the Knicks were better than the Spurs, with absolutely NO regard of Ewing’s supporting cast nor coaching, which are both much better than Robinson. And the reason the Knicks are better than the Spurs is because they were more compe ive against a bunch of teams that the Spurs have never played in the playoffs? Not saying the Eastern Conference were the Bulls and a bunch of high school teams, but the disparity in talent in the two conferences are laughable. In fact, many analyst argued back in the day that the Spurs, Blazers, Jazz, Sonics, Rockets and Suns were so beat up, that they were burned out by the time they reach the finals and face the Bulls, who only had to go through the Knicks and the Pacers (later on in the decade).
And you are actually penalizing Robinson’s greatest for taking a team that featured a bunch of nobodies and some coaches who never managed to get other head coaching jobs by making them over achieve in the regular season? Honestly, ask yourself, take the 62 win Spurs, how many games would you think a Bob Hill coached team, mind you, who is a coach who couldn’t land another head coaching gig for another decade or so after he got canned by the Spurs, with a lineup of Sean Elliott, Avery Johnson, Vinny Del Negro, Dennis Rodman, Chuck Person and J.R. Reid could win in the regular season? 20? 25? , I will put in 35 wins, which is an extremely inflated number, given it’s about the same as the Celtics, Warriors, and Rockets won last year with far more superior talent, that means Robinson, by himself, is worth about 27 wins. Could you say the same for Ewing?
Let’s put it another way, the worst Robinson ever did in his prime was led the Spurs to “only” 47 wins, the year where Robinson missed the final 14 games of the season with a broken wrist, also the year where the Spurs were swept out of the first round by the Suns.
Can the same be said of Ewing? no, because we KNOW that the Knicks missed the playoffs in his rookie year. So he was injured and only played 50 games? What about his sop re year? Missed the playoffs AGAIN despite playing 63 games? The year after that? Won 38 games and lost in the 1st round as a 7th seed. The least I can say about Robinson is that he never missed the playoffs when he played over SIX games a year, and helped the Spurs to Midwest Division les 4 times and never lower than 2nd when his teammates are a bunch of weak players that shouldn’t even be in the league!
Look at the 62 win team again, Avery Johnson started in 82 games, Elliott 81 games, Vinny Del Negro 71 (are you kidding me? He was so bad, he couldn’t get consistent minutes with the suck-ass Sac teams in the early 90s, and the Milwaukee teams after he left the Spurs), JR Reid in 37 games, Dennis Rodman in another 20 or so games. That team was so devoid of talent, it shouldn’t even BE in the playoffs. But guess what? Robinson dragged them there. Now that they are in the playoffs, the other team goes “Guess what? I will let the other guys beat us, let’s double/triple Robinson every chance we got, because we KNOW that they can’t get any points even though they are wide opened.” They were right! It’s not that hard to beat one-man teams, see T-Mac and the Magic, see Bosh and the Raptors, see Shaq and the Magic in 92, see Hakeem and the late 80’s/early 90’s Rockets, see Barkley and the 76ers in the same time frame. The only difference? Robinson actually got those otherwise extremely weak teams into the playoffs, and you are penalizing him for it?
See your own point about Wilt, he lost to a better team, the Spurs lost to better teams, so why would Wilt not be penalized in your eyes? Why are you applying different rules to different players under the same cir stances? I can say the Spurs GM SUCKED in the 90’s, wasting the prime years of one of the best players to ever play the game of basketball, but that is not his fault.
I always thought Duncan > Robinson because of the rings, but I am not so sure about that anymore. I would say that Robinson probably wouldn’t have won the rings in Duncan’s role, but I doubt Duncan would have the level of success Robinson had with those 90’s Spurs.

[Sec24Row7]

He is getting talked down by people who are trying to make conversation or controversy during playoff matches.

When his career is over, he will have to be considered one of the all time greats... even if he never wins another championship.

If you didnt play on the Bulls, Lakers or Celtics there is no way you could get 3 les in a career on one team unless you played with Tim Duncan.

I'm Pretty sure thats true.

That's actually pretty impressive.

[dbreiden83080]

No need going into the Bulls, because I don’t think Jordan would have won squat without Pippen, and I actually think that if you put Jordan in the Spurs team of the early 90’s, the only team that could have remotely won anything would be the 89-90 team, with Rod Strickland and Terry mings, but that is not the point.
If you allow me to summarize your argument, it’s the Ewing is better than Robinson because the Knicks were better than the Spurs, with absolutely NO regard of Ewing’s supporting cast nor coaching, which are both much better than Robinson.

I have no clue why you just said this when i in 2 posts now i have adressed the supporting cast that Ewing had. He had the better coach in Riley during their best years but not the better supporting cast. They were on par in that area, you are trying to act like Ewing had an excellent supporting cast and that was never the case. Had Ewing had that great 2nd player they would have beat the Bulls once or twice because they were close a few times when it was Ewing out there trying to do it all. Both these guys are great players and had great careers, but if Duncan does not come along and Robinson retired with no rings, he would not be viewed as better than Ewing. The perception is that he is better than Ewing because of those rings, in spite of the fact that Duncan was the dominant force that made that happen. We can agree to disagree on this one, i just feel that Ewing did more with about the same level of talent around him. I believe he wanted to win more than Robinson did and he got more out of his teamates as a result.

[Phenomanul]

I have no clue why you just said this when i in 2 posts now i have adressed the supporting cast that Ewing had. He had the better coach in Riley during their best years but not the better supporting cast. They were on par in that area, you are trying to act like Ewing had an excellent supporting cast and that was never the case. Had Ewing had that great 2nd player they would have beat the Bulls once or twice because they were close a few times when it was Ewing out there trying to do it all. Both these guys are great players and had great careers, but if Duncan does not come along and Robinson retired with no rings, he would not be viewed as better than Ewing. The perception is that he is better than Ewing because of those rings, in spite of the fact that Duncan was the dominant force that made that happen. We can agree to disagree on this one, i just feel that Ewing did more with about the same level of talent around him. I believe he wanted to win more than Robinson did and he got more out of his teamates as a result.

For Ewing to be considered a better basketball player than Robinson he would at least have had to beat him at something, no?

Frankly nothing comes to mind... except maybe at hitting fallaway 15 ft jumpers.

Robinson was a more talented,
more athletic player,
faster player,
a better defender (better shotblocker, steals man, and rebounder)
did more with less (check out who won the IBM award in back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back seasons - Robinson meant more to his team than any other player did to theirs).

I would therefore have to disagree with your assessment based on that alone. Again, I'm not even factoring in Robinson's les... cause again, much more than talent alone factors into winning championships... TEAMS win championships.

[dbreiden83080]

Robinson was a more talented,
more athletic player,
faster player,
a better defender (better shotblocker, steals man, and rebounder)

.

People all say those same things about D-Rob compared to Duncan and yet the consensus is that Tim was the better player.