Reply With Quote
Ok...
PWNAGE Total
whottt = 435456456456456456
thewatcher = -0
Meaningful...wouldn't you say?
The Big Fundamental
The Dream
^^^stop the empty speech please
Ok...
PWNAGE Total
whottt = 435456456456456456
thewatcher = -0
Meaningful...wouldn't you say?
-0 doesnt exist!
And we're still waiting for one post from you on this topic that isn't a waste of time and space...
i'm just a spectator
Then IMO, that's what you should stick to doingi'm just a spectator
Watch more, post less
If I was starting a franchise, the obvious choice would be Beno Udrih.
+1 ownage = whottt
*waits bobbyjoe to raise his ownage points*
I am waiting for bobbyjoe to pay me royalties for all the elements of my Pro-Drob argument he is plaigerizing.
He started out Pro Hakeem on this board originally with...Hakeem's got the rings.
I don't think so son....
I don't think your thought particularly bothers me, son
I'm not looking to draw vitriol from the pro-Hakeem camp here, because I think all would agree that starting a franchise with Hakeem would be a dream (pun intended) for any GM. That being said...
Since the question is "Who would you choose to start your franchise with?"---and not "Who was more athletically gifted?" or "Who had the more impressive statistics?"---the clear choice for me is Duncan. If I'm a GM, I'm most interested in getting someone who will give me a consistent high winning percentage, consistent playoff appearances and few early-round exits, and (not to be underrated) the ability to win with various supporting casts, given the risk of changing personnel. Duncan gives me that like few players in NBA history.
And while Duncan has had a few years of stellar supporting casts---Robinson in 99, and Parker and Ginobili in 2005-2007---he led the Spurs to outstanding records and post-season success without such casts for much of his career. Olajuwan's teams suffered when he didn't have a lot of help around him.
Just curious, but after reading all of your arguments, in 3-4 years if Duncan is still putting up 25+, 12+, with 4 dimes and 2.5-3 blocks per game (which could happen as his game is predicated on knowing his opponent and out-thinking them as opposed to using phenomenal athleticism to do all his work and "overpower" other players), what are you doing to say about the two then?
Duncan is as dominant now as he has EVER been. Did you notice the spin move by Okur? Does that look like someone who's in the midst of decline to you? TimmAY has at LEAST two peak years of performance left after this one. He could easily leave the game with 5 or 6 rings, 7+ if the Spurs front office retools around Parker with Duncan as a great role player.
What then? Will Hakeem's 2 years of dominance and long-standing record of impressive individual play overshadow Duncan's incredible ability to drag teams kicking and screaming through the playoffs while being the best defensive player in the league as well as perhaps the most unguardable? Can't double him, because he passes as well as any big ever has. Can't single cover him, because then you really have no hope of stopping 30+15.
Just curious.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 05-26-2007 at 07:25 PM.
THe same people who argue Hakeem over Duncan should never ever own a pretzel stand nevertheless a franchise.
Geez what would i have?
A player who half asses and demands Da Money, or A player who is a workhorse and doesn't demand Money who has more championships, better carreer and wins......
Duh hAkeem...slurp slurp...
Hakeem was Nigerian and Tim Duncan from the Virgin Islands...
who wins in a war..
Nigeria..
Therefore Hakeem > Tim Duncan.
People who think Hakeem half assed it or that Vinny was a better guard than Stockton or Clyde Drexler should be finding other hobbies than watching basketball. Or at least keep their ignorance from themselves so they dont keep embarassing themselves.
I guess someone should tell Elie and Horry, common teammates of Hakeem and TD, that they are idiots. Apparently, they didnt mind the "selfish" Hakeem but what do they know, they were only teammates of both Dream and TD.
Hakeem was a bigger workhorse than Tim on both ends of the court. Anyone who can lead the league in rebounding, shot blocks, rank in the top 10 in steals, and drop 24-26 and 11-12 boards a game year in and year out while "half assing" it is clearly in a league of his own.
Duncan donned the silver and black and once you do that you are automatically one of the GOAT's.
Hakeem didnt wear silver and black so he sucked.
As a side note, I shudder to think the # of blocks Duncan would have if he were on a subpar defensive team which allowed penetration all game.
He'd avg. at least 4. Maybe 4.5. And a ridiculous amount of re-directs.
In the 9 postseasons that Duncan has played in, he has made it past the 1st round every time. In the one postseason he missed due to injury, the Spurs lost in the 1st round.
In Hakeem's first 9 postseasons he lost in the 1st round 5 out of 9 times, including 4 straight years from '88 to '91. He would later lose in the first round in 2 of his last 5 seasons in Houston.
So, in Hakeem's 14 postseasons with the Rockets, he lost in the 1st round of the playoffs in half of them. Duncan has never lost in the first round, and his team did lose in the first round when he missed a postseason because he was hurt.
Why is this even being debated?
It's not. It's a bunch of ty "this guy is more athletic and has better numbers so obviously he's the best" vs. "no way this guy is better cause he's playing now and he's on my favorite team and he has more rings so you're an idiot" "nuh uh" "yuh huh" "Nuh UH!" "yah HUH!" arguments.
That's most of the thread folks.
Though anyone who attempts to measure Duncan and his contribution on court by his statsheet is truly in need an F-MRI scan.
The homerism here is incredible.
Duncan's been the best defensive player in the league?
He has not even won the Defensive Player of the year award ONCE. He never led the league in blocked shots. Hakeem did both on numerous occasions and is top 10 all time in steals.
Why does the best defensive player in the league allow 37 ppg to Amare in the playoffs? That never happened to Hakeem even when he faced much better comp in DRob, Ewing, and Shaq.
Not one person outside of SA, TX would ever imply Duncan was a better defender than Olajuwon. That's simply laughable.
You are in awe of a spin move on Okur (weak defender) but Hakeem was doing this in his prime against a guy named David Robinson, an infinitely better defender than Okur.
To answer your question, yes it would make a difference if Duncan maintained his dominance through his mid 30's. Hakeem was dominant until about age 33, then slowed down. Some rare bigs are like Karl Malone and Kareem who can continue to be great late into their 30's. If Duncan does that, of course it will have to be considered.
However, as for your argument, think of it this way. Let's say Duncan's game starts declining next year and he slows down quickly.
Does that mean Karl Malone in 10 yrs is considered the best PF of all tiem because some fan is talking about how Malone's career was more consistently excellent, he only doesn't have rings because of Jordan, has better stats, etc?
Or will Duncan be the better PF than Malone regardless because he was clearly a better player than Malone in his peak years?
It's the exact same argument you are presenting to me and I'm sure in the latter case you'd say Duncan's supremacy at his peak supersedes Malone's longer period of high quality all star caliber play.
Karl Malone. He was the greatest placekicker of all time.
And how many times would Duncan have beat Magic, Worthy, Byron Scott, etc in their primes with a supporting cast of Mitc Wiggins, Purvis Short, Buck Johnson, etc like Hakeem had from 88 to 91?
It was the Houston TEAM that lost those series.
As a case in point, in one of those series in 1988 you criticize Hakeem for not "getting past the first round" even though that is a TEAM and not an individual outcome, he averaged 38 ppg and 17 ppg on 57% shooting against Dallas. A Jordanesque type individual performance but a TEAM loss due to a weak supporting cast.
It really says a lot that the pro-Duncan crowd here has to always cite a team achievement in this argument. The discussion is not "who had better teams, the late 80's Rockets or the 00's Spurs".
Duncan doesn't win the le this year if you replace Tony Parker, Ginobili, Bowen with 3 average or below average basketball players.
You're also skewing the team achievements rather conveniently. Hakeem got to the WCF 4 times and the NBA Finals 3. Duncan has been to both the exact same # of times, although that is highly likely to change obviously.
Again, answer this: Did Tim Duncan lose last year to the Mavs (he was clearly dominant in this series) or did the Spurs team lose to the Mavs?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
