[USA Today] One mind-blowing stat to sum up Tim Duncan's dominance

Agreed

 

If Pops took the All Star game seriously enough that he would make TD play PF his entire career just so he can be perpetually in the All Star Game then he would've taken the games seriously when he was coaching the Western team. I was watching the season he became coach and all he really said was "guys don't get injured and let's have fun". Is that the behavior of someone who takes the ASG so seriously he'd make TD play PF full time just so he won't have to compete with Yao Ming on the all star ballot?

You're the one who keeps embarrassing yourself, why the **** would Popovich care about the All Star contest?

 

Hopefully you're not really that dense and are just arguing to be arguing.

It's not about winning the exhibition game, silly guy... it's the All-Star appearance (historical purposes) on your resume. Things that help a player's greatness. All-Star selections (being a starter) don't define a career, but it helps. Already provided a link to Popovich's words, so you two are really arguing with him. Perhaps you should become his (or one of his assistant coaches) twitter follower and debate with them.

Another guy actually said move Harden to SF to help him start over Durant... and acts like Yao's 2 billion Chinese votes wouldn't hurt Duncan if he was listed at center... smh.

No use in continuing this convo if you don't understand by now.

 

There are lots of players with more championships than Duncan. There are not lots of players that have led a team to as many titles than Duncan has (four). Russell, Jordan, Magic, and ??

 

It's not subjective. Duncan received more MVP votes and All-NBA votes than any other Spur during each title season. I don't even believe one other Spur made the 1st All-NBA team during those years. You can't point to one thing to show anyone thought any other player was more valuable to the team. Arguing that any other Spur was better than Duncan in 99, 03, 05 or 07 is silly.

I completely agree with your take that it's a team game, but in this sport it has been proven that one player makes all the difference in the world. That's why so few guys have led their teams to titles.

 

My goodness you are braindead. It is a miracle you can operate a computer.

 

He spent his prime playing the majority of minutes at the PF position. That isn't All-Star voting/HOF voting/etc, that is just fact.

 

Basketball-reference.com has a nice table which shows Duncan's position estimate based on lineup data:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html#advanced_pbp::none

He was mostly a PF in his first several years in the league, perhaps more accurately a PF-C hyrid, but has played almost exclusively as a C in the last several years.

The decision to treat Duncan as a PF on the roster is mostly likely because he (or his agent) requested this. I doubt very much Popovich cares one way or the other, but he wants to keep his best player happy. Big deal.

 

My issue is you keep saying that Pops' primary reason for moving TD to PF because of Yao's Chinese followers doesn't make a lick of sense. There are lots of legit reasons why Popovich wanted TD to start at PF instead of C, chief among them he wanted to preserve TD's health by matching him up against guys like KG and Dirk instead of the bruisers at the C spot. There's also the fact that the Admiral was a C so TD started his career as a PF, so maybe Pops didn't want to disrupt his flow, or maybe they had a hard time finding good PFs while bangers at the C spot were cheap and plentiful. Point is Popovich wouldn't prioritize the all star game over tactics and winning an actual NBA game.

Sure Popovich said that quote, but you've got to be kidding if you think he was serious about it, maybe TD was the one who was against playing the C spot and getting benched in favor of Yao (IIRC he was always adamant about being a PF and threw a hissy fit when people referred to him as a C) but it's hard to believe Popovich would be the guy who care about whether TD got in an all star game or not. Most likely TD or his agent was the one behind it and Pops just wanted to keep him happy.

At the end of the day though who cares, he's still one of the best franchise players in the history of the NBA, in fact I would argue I'd rather have him than Shaq since Shaq is a drama queen and has no leadership skills.

 

Decent post. Thanks for a sensible response.

The bolded part really echoes my main sentiment. Duncan can't hang with the great centers... he knows it and Popovich does too. That's mostly why he's considered a "PF". Yes DRob was there first, but it took SA 3 years after he retired to finally change his position. Olajuwon came into league with a ROY center and immediately went to C... AND was shorter than Sampson!!!Meanwhile, SA drafts and signs shorter, weaker players (Oberto, Nazr, Kurt Thomas) to fill a role that was EVERY BIT DUNCAN's... the center position. Timmy at PF is one of the biggest myths in basketball history. He's a great, great player... would take away MVPs from LeBron and Durant if he was prime... but he's been spoon-fed his entire career. I didn't even realize SA finally changed his position (in '07) to be honest. Easy to do when your lies are already believed.

Greatest Power Forward sounds better than 6th Best Center

 

"Duncan can't hang with the great centers"

Really? Why not?

 

He's not good enough.
Too much competition.

There's a legit argument (and a general consensus) Olajuwon isn't even top 3.

Competition at PF..... Mikan, Karl (no rings) Malone, Sir (no rings) Barkley, McHale??? What a joke.

 

general consensus amongst who?

Dirk.

 

If I could choose any player in the history of the game to start my team with, I'd be Tim Duncan.

Not Jordan, Lebron, Shaq, Akeem, Wilt, or Magic, Kareem, Big O, Larry. It'd be Tim Duncan. I'm not saying Tim Duncan is the greatest player of all time, but I do feel that Tim Duncan is grossly, negligently, unappreciated.

Tim Duncan SHOULD be in the conversation for the greatest player of all-time, but isn't, because of flare and marketability. Some of the stats that duncan has accumulated are simply mindblowing and yet people still want to discount his greatness.

 

Whenever it's brought up with the media. Olajuwon is almost an afterthought.
Whenever I bring it up amongst b-ball fans outside of Houston.

Good call on Dirk.

I bet most of your perceived amazing stats are team based.

This thread is one of them.

 

We're not talking about every title season. Just the last two. As if MVP voting (when not winning the MVP) is such a tell all thing. If voters weren't biased during that franchises would not be sending out packages trying to remind voters to vote for their guy.

Once gain, never said any Spur was better than Duncan in 05 or 07. But Duncan was injured/purposely kept out of many games in 05 during which Ginobli really stepped up and Parker did as well. You keep trying to discount those contributions (which were huge).

"leading" a team to a championship is inherently subjective. That was most of the point of this entire discussion. Duncan had other stars and a HOF coach/front office on his side the entire time. So trying to attribute the Spurs success to Duncan leading them seems silly to me. How do you even define leading?

During that span from about 98-06 Duncan and KG were the two best PF's in the game. KG didn't do anything in Minnesota because he had no help and a terrible front office. Same player gets two borderline all stars in Cassell and Sprewell and goes to the WCF. Later on, a declining KG gets two other stars and wins a championship.

So, no. Your statement of "in this sport it has been proven that one player makes all the difference in the world" is not as accurate as you're making it seem. It's still completely a team game. Without other "stars" and a good coach/management nothing is possible.

Hakeem is the only one in the last 30 years (perhaps ever) to be a single star on a championship team.

 

I can see where you're coming from. I love Duncan like mad ( I rank him #6 on my all-time list), and if you're a more conservative franchise which is leery of how say, Jordan's megalomania could wreck a time, there might be a case for Duncan. But even then, what, you're ignoring Russell - Duncan has no case over Russell, and is basically just an inferior version of him. That doesn't mean much given how freaking good Russell was, but still.

 

This is the same guy with the thread ( Lebron, Kd and Harden's dunks are not all that )

 

So, if Duncan wasn't really a PF, that would mean he came into the league and immediately supplanted a 1st team all-NBA center (Robinson) to claim his rightful position?