Since when do you and your secretly-spur-loving friends make up the world? I don't understand why you guys can't just wait a few weeks and see. Geez, you're going to be eating your words. Maybe that's why...you need to get your cheap shots in while you still can.
... and I'm sure if the Spurs lose you'll lay it on all Duncan prove he's not all that and if they win you'll find an excuse/reason it doesn't prove anything regarding Duncan. You create your own world ruled by player/team hate.
Ok guys, name me one player more similar to Duncan than Hakeem?-except that Hakeem was even more phenomenal. Aside from his wing bank shot, Hakeem could do everything Duncan could and then some. (BTW Hakeem could shoot 18-20feet away just like Duncan, and other outstanding shooting centers with even more range than them include Sikma, Laimbeer and Sabonis) So stop already with comparing Duncan to Malone or Barkley or Petit or Hayes. Who care what official position he plays, is he not more similar in game to the greatest of the finese centers such as Hakeem or Kareem? I think the answer is he is obviously more similar in his bread and butter game to those guys than he is to the other greatest power forwards. Except as I showed before, he really is a notch below in dominance from Kareem and Hakeem. This is no major slight, this is true for all other bigs save perhaps 2-3 who ever lived.
I agree that Duncan is no Dream. Dream had a plethora of moves that would have destroyed Duncan akin to the destruction of Robinson 95 WCF. The man is on another level. But back to Duncan, Duncan will be a HOFer and will be considered as one of--if not--the greatest power forward of all time. And if you want to list him as a center, he'd still be considered one of the best. I know he'd be right in the middle of the pack below Dream and above Ewing and Robinson. And you know what? If--big if--Spurs lose the Finals to the Pistons (I doubt Miami will advance now that Flash is down), would that take away his other 2 championships? Nope. Does that take away the accomplishment of taking his team to 3 Finals within 7 years? Not at all. So for the ones that wants to judge his greatness soley on this year's performance in the Finals, why aren't you looking at his past accomplishments? The man DOES have two rings under his belt. Horry has 5 of them but he never had to anchor a team nor has he ever been an all-star, all-nba, all-defensive nba, mvp, finals mvp, etc. It's absurd logic to fail to find a common ground between being a statistics nerd and one that takes things at face value (i.e. Horry's 5 rings). Why? Because Duncan does have the stats AND the hardware. I am still waiting on an answer to my question though: How is Dirk Nowitzki a Small Foward?
Of course I agree with you. I agree with you here too. I would place Duncan below Shaq and Hakeem, but ahead of Ewing, Robinson, Barkley and Malone among the greatest bigs of the last 25 years or so. Even if he is ahead of Hakeem and Shaq in titles, the other lead their teams to multiple titles and had far more dominanting performances along the way. I don't think he is. He is what you call a softy power forward.
I wasn't directing this question towards you but it's nice to know that you agree with me that Dirk is a pansy of a PF. It's just we a a debate on why Dirk could be considered to be a SF by some. I just thought that was highly laughable and very disturbing.
I have no problem recognizing that in given years, at his peak, Hakeem was a better, more skilled individual player than Duncan. What remains to be seen is how the careers play out. Fools like NewYorker can't get past Duncan's lack of supreme athleticism and can't see the greatness of the player. As a player, on and off the court, the ability he brings, the tone he sets for the team to be extremely successful, he'll ultimately likely be in a class with very, wery few. That's what counts. That's why so far in Duncan's tenure through multiple personell changes they've always been a title copntender and had the best winning percentage in all major sports.
And you are already weasling your way out if Duncan loses...look at you. You can't win the argument, so you go the passive-aggressive route and project your worst on to me, that I must be a hater and a fool. Pathetic and classless. Don't expect future responses.
How is Dirk not a small forward? I already explainded this to you but I guess you don't really know how to read or whatever. Players like Dirk and Garnett don't fit into any kind of tradtional basketball model. Dirk is more like Larry Bird, Garnett. who can you compare him to! He can play point guard! To call Duncun a better basketball player then Garnett is absolutely ridiculous. Garnett is the most skilled player in the game next to T-mac. You guys are funny, first you say stats mean nothing, it's all rings, and when i show how ridiculous that is, you change your argument that it's STATS and CHAMPIONSHIPS. Guess what, great atheltes don't always win Championships. Charles Barkeley, Karl Malone, all greater then Tim Duncan...because they didn't have the teams...it's a TEAM sport. Duncan didn't CARRY his team to a ring, he was a very good player on a very good team playing against weak competition. San Antonio would have never gone anywhere in the 90's. The post-bull era has been devoid of competition, and now are we seeing a resurgence in the sport. Kobe and Shaq carried the league through what would have been one of it's darkest times without them. Sans Lakers, the NBA sucked, and San Antonio's 2 rings are fine... But San Antonio is the first non-repeat champion in almost two decades!
PF, center, whatever, Duncan has a complete game, he can do it all, do it all well, and do it all the time. I think he is the best all around player in the league today. There are players who do some things better, but none who do so many things well as Duncan. He is so fundamentally sound, I love to watch him. A classic player. He is still not as good as Hakeem in his prime, but who is? How many players ever had the lateral quickness of Hakeem, especially at seven feet?
How is Dirk not a small forward? I already explainded this to you but I guess you don't really know how to read or whatever. Players like Dirk and Garnett don't fit into any kind of tradtional basketball model. Dirk is more like Larry Bird, Garnett. who can you compare him to! He can play point guard! Does someone else want to explain this to me? Because apparently, besides not having class, I don't know how to read either. My definition of a small forward is one that drives and slashes to the basket (Marion, VC, Tmac, Richard Jefferson, Pippen, etc). But I guess I will agree to disagree with you. And comparing Dirk to Bird is an insult to the Basketball Jesus himself. Bird actually played defense. When your small forward makes the all-defensive 2nd team 3 years in a row, then we can talk about comparisons. To call Duncun a better basketball player then Garnett is absolutely ridiculous. Garnett is the most skilled player in the game next to T-mac. *sigh* You're right. Absolutely right. I forgot about Garnett. He's very skilled. In fact, before Spree and Cassell came over, he carried his team as much as Duncan carried the Spurs over the same span. He put that WHOLE team on his shoulders. Then when he had a good team (very good player on a very good team mantra) he couldn't do anything about it. And have you seen Garnett in the playoffs before Spree and Cassell arrived? He deferred more to his role players than any star I've seen. And he played against the same weak competition Duncan did. Lets tally up the WCF appearances, the NBA Finals appearances, and the rings now...but wait.... You guys are funny, first you say stats mean nothing, it's all rings, and when i show how ridiculous that is, you change your argument that it's STATS and CHAMPIONSHIPS. Guess what, great atheltes don't always win Championships. Wait a minute...hold the phone...stop the presses. Did I ever say that stats meant nothing? I said that aside from trying to dominate a particular stat, a great player has to lead his team and win where it mattered. He got the stats and the rings. You want to sniff the stat sheet, stay in the Fantasy leagues but then you'd still find that Duncan still produces. He's ranked 6th in efficiency on nba.com despite playing only SIXTY SIX games. Guess what, great atheltes don't always win Championships. Charles Barkeley, Karl Malone, all greater then Tim Duncan...because they didn't have the teams...it's a TEAM sport. Duncan didn't CARRY his team to a ring, he was a very good player on a very good team playing against weak competition. ...............this is where your credibility sinks into nothingness. Barkley and Malone didn't have teams? You could have used the excuse that they played in the Jordan era and I would have agreed and said fine with it. But to say they didn't win rings because they didn't have the teams? I urge you to put the pipe down because it's messing you up more than you know. And of course it's a TEAM sport...what's your point? That in order to win, you have to play on a good team and have to play a team game? Well the Duncan you're describing is a Duncan didn't carry his team to the ring but rather he only just a very good player on a very GOOD TEAM playing against weak competition? Sounds like he got the ring because he played on a good TEAM doesn't it? And do you see why I could easily argue that, when Duncan retires, he's the best PF ever? It's because he has the stats these guys have and the hardware that these guys DON'T have. That's what separates him from the rest of the pack. San Antonio would have never gone anywhere in the 90's. The post-bull era has been devoid of competition, and now are we seeing a resurgence in the sport. Kobe and Shaq carried the league through what would have been one of it's darkest times without them. Sans Lakers, the NBA sucked, and San Antonio's 2 rings are fine... I don't argue that basketball has gone down a bit. And I don't argue that the Spurs wouldn't have gone anywhere in the 90's because, aside from Houston and Detroit, Chicago Dominated the decade. But then again, if Hakeem didn't decide to annihilate San Antonio all by himself in the 95 WCF who knows...wait...you DO remember San Antonio was sorta good back then right? But San Antonio is the first non-repeat champion in almost two decades! So....should we laugh at them for that? They are certainly winning at a higher frequency than most teams in the league. I rather have the Rockets be the "first non-repeat champion in almost two decades" than to just not go to the Finals at all.
At some point, we just have to say we disagree, that opinions are opinions, and that's that. This is so fruitless it's just not even fun anymore. Look, if the Spurs win, and Duncan gets finals MVP putting up good numbers, I'll tip my hat and say he's might be one of the greatest. No, I can't say I will really believe it, but who knows...but at that point, the case can clearly be made that he is and it can't be argued. But if the Spurs lose...then you have to also admit that there is a legitimate counter-case that he isn't one of the greatest. That what I'm saying does have it's merits - no you don't have to agree, but just say, ok, there's a case here. Whew - hopefully this will end this!
This is a bit interesting article from ESPN. Duncan was rated the number one PF in the league overall with Karl Malone in 2nd. Barkley third http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2074360 Interesting though, that Jack Ramsay thinks so lowly of CB.
Wow, I was dead wrong on this. The Spurs are crushing the defending champs, and duncan is leading the way. I'm shocked, I really though the Detroit D would wreak havoc, but apparently it's the SA D and overall team play that's just too much for Detroit.
Did I just read someone say that they'd rather have Amare over Duncan? Jesus Christ you'd think Amare was the second coming of Hakeem or something.
Honestly the way the whole Spurs team is playing right now you could switch Amare with Duncan and the Spurs still win. You might even switch Sheed with Duncan and the Spurs still beat the Pistons. Right now the Spurs wing play is fantastic on both ends and is making the difference.
Agreed. The Spurs guard play is the one that set the tone for their play so far and Ginobili is making a strong case as the finals MVP instead of Timid Duncan.
That's because Duncan makes it easier for those guys to excel. His presence inspires confidence. You couldn't just switch those other guys in - those guys have better players around them than Duncan does, yet Duncan's team beats them easily so far.
Don't know how Amare was going to play defense anwhere close to the level Duncan's is at, rebound as well, or pass like Duncan. The Pistons are shooting under 40% against the Spurs, don't think that happens without Duncan.
