idk i've felt that duncan was the best player in the league year in and year out for a while. he plays so fundamentally sound on both ends of the court, been a 1st team every year hes been in the league exept once or twice where he was 2nd team, the reason i give him the nod over shaq is beucase shaq is so much bigger and if you look at averges they are proabably similar
right now it's easy to say Duncan over Shaq, but with both players in their prime????....I just don't know if I can put Timmy ahead of the Diesel........I mean we can say "he should've been more dominant", but realistically speaking he was dominant and has 4 rings to show for it (and some of those came at the expense of outplaying Duncan)
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Why would pace effect Shaq's ability to average 20 rebounds a game? Shaq was never a factor on the offensive glass, which is where he should be able to make the most improvement in his rebounding numbers. Shaq only went after rebounds in his first few years in the league. He averaged close to 14 his rookie year, and normally you see a player improve each season. Maybe 20 is a little farfetched, how about 18?</div> I think 15 is more of a good number if he was playing 40+ MPG, but usually you don't need a C playing 40+ MPG unless it's the playoffs, and during the playoffs in 2000 and 2001 he did grab 15 RPG in 42-43 MPG of play. I think good rebounding numbers for him would've been about 14 RPG playing 37-38 MPG for his career, that's where he should've been. Anyways, the pace wouldn't allow him because there just aren't enough rebounds available. The only guys usually approaching those kind of rebounding are the specialists who are out on the floor just looking to rebound. Even Wilt in this era, the only way he would grab 18-20 RPG is if he was playing 46+ MPG, and I don't think the coach will see the need for that, so even him playing 41-42 MPG (since he did have great stamina) would only be grabbing about 15-16 RPG, about the Dwight Howard if he was playing another 6 mins per game range.
These numbers of 18 rebounds it really hard to get now. When wilt played he was huge, not many could stand up to his stacher, now a PG can out rebound a center, because everyone is big. Howard can most likley avergae 15 rebounds a agme, if he always gets the rebound. Duncan is more dominate becuase he is a much better all around player then Shaq. He can hit free throws, jump shots, pass well. But, IMO I don't think he is the greatest since Jordan, I think, Kobe is the greatest since Jordan, but that's just my opinion. TD is a great player, I rank him right up there, but I just don't consider him the greatest since Jordan.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He can hit free throws</div> Sometimes........ <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I think, Kobe is the greatest since Jordan</div> care to explain why you feel that way?
<div class="quote_poster">THE DREAM Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> care to explain why you feel that way?</div> Kobe in my mind is able to do what he wants when he has the ball. He can hti a 3, drive post up do anything. He makes the game look easy. Duncan does that to, but I rather have kobe to build around then Duncan, becuase I find Kobe a more complete player. You can compare Jordan to Kobe, Jordan was better. But what Kobe has done, to me is far more imperrisve then what Duncan has done. So that's why I think Kobe is the best since Jordan.
<div class="quote_poster">Ford_11 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe in my mind is able to do what he wants when he has the ball. He can hti a 3, drive post up do anything. then why cant he do the most important thing- win? he has the same talent around him as lebron and look at the difference. Kobe is a great individual talent, but he is missing the intangibles. He has the most POTENTIAL in the league because he is the most talented, but he is simply not the best. He makes the game look easy. Duncan does that to, but I rather have kobe to build around then Duncan, becuase I find Kobe a more complete player. Rather build a team around Kobe? Results speak for themselves. You can compare Jordan to Kobe, Jordan was better. But what Kobe has done, to me is far more imperrisve then what Duncan has done. So that's why I think Kobe is the best since Jordan.</div> What has Kobe done? 0 MVPs, 3 Championships...wait those were shaq's teams! Kobe falls somewhere in between Nique and Dr. J. The comparisions to jordan are outright ludicris, as the accomplishments arent and will never be even close. not to even mention the fact that kobe isnt the first or even second OR third(arguably nash) greatest players in his era.
<div class="quote_poster">Ford_11 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe in my mind is able to do what he wants when he has the ball. He can hti a 3, drive post up do anything. He makes the game look easy. Duncan does that to, but I rather have kobe to build around then Duncan, becuase I find Kobe a more complete player. You can compare Jordan to Kobe, Jordan was better. But what Kobe has done, to me is far more imperrisve then what Duncan has done. So that's why I think Kobe is the best since Jordan.</div> Build around Kobe? That had to be a joke. I'm not even gonna comment because you just put Kobe above Duncan and Shaq. <div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Dominique has ZERO rings. How do you draw the conclusion of Kobe ending up like Nique? I never understood the argument if you replace Kobe with player A, B, or C the Lakers would still win a title. If you replace Shaq with Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan than Kobe would likely be winning titles with them. Kobe and Shaq was a dynamic the league has never seen before. They should have accomplished a lot more together, because at one point they were Player 1, and Player1A in the league. I think they're going to look back after retirement and regret a lot of decisions they made as players.</div> HIGHLY unlikely. Neither of those players drew the kind of attention Shaq drew. During Shaq's prime, Kobe basically was WIDDDDDDDDDDDE open and ignored. He still managed to miss a hell of a lot of shots though. Those were Shaq's titles, no question about it. <div class="quote_poster">mmonte4 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">and if Kobe doesnt take his team out of the first or second round before retiring he is going to end up like Dominique. Remember, Kobe has three rings, but Shaq has 3 NBA finals MVPs. I would venture to say that with Phil Jackson as the Lakers coach and a prime Eddie Jones/Ray Allen/T-Mac in place of Kobe, the lakers still get their 3 (with each finals matchup being a breeze against indiana, philly, NJ).</div> Agree completely. No clue why so many don't.
<div class="quote_poster">Clear It Out Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">HIGHLY unlikely. Neither of those players drew the kind of attention Shaq drew. During Shaq's prime, Kobe basically was WIDDDDDDDDDDDE open and ignored. He still managed to miss a hell of a lot of shots though. Those were Shaq's titles, no question about it. </div> LMAO. How ignorant can you be? Kobe was basically wide open? Have you watched ANY Laker games during the championship run? Kobe was not left WIDE open and IGNORED. LMFAO. I'm really starting to question your intelligence. Why would any team leave an All-Star, let alone an All-NBA 1st Teamer WIDE OPEN and IGNORED??? Give me a break. Your posts just get more ridiculous and more ridiculous by the second. So Kobe had NOTHING to do with the 3 championships. He did absolutely NOTHING right? It was all on Shaq, every single one of those championships
<div class="quote_poster">Clear It Out Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Build around Kobe? That had to be a joke. I'm not even gonna comment because you just put Kobe above Duncan and Shaq.</div> A joke? I think it's reasonable to build around Kobe. And even if Kobe isn't above Duncan and Shaq he's on the same level. <div class="quote_poster">Clear It Out Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> HIGHLY unlikely. Neither of those players drew the kind of attention Shaq drew. During Shaq's prime, Kobe basically was WIDDDDDDDDDDDE open and ignored. He still managed to miss a hell of a lot of shots though. Those were Shaq's titles, no question about it. </div> His 81 point game was WIDEEE open too. The raptors didn't even play defense on him.
Can some one please explain to me what is so superior about Tim Duncan? Dont get me wrong, I think he is a great player, definatley one of the best in the league, I have just never found anything really outstanding about his game. He is a fundamentalist who is consistant with his numbers on what has always been a consistantly good team, so in that regard, I fail to see how some of you regard him as one of the greatest players <u>ever</u>. I would honestly rather build a team around Kevin Garnett.
<div class="quote_poster">NTC Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Can some one please explain to me what is so superior about Tim Duncan? Dont get me wrong, I think he is a great player, definatley one of the best in the league, I have just never found anything really outstanding about his game. He is a fundamentalist who is consistant with his numbers on what has always been a consistantly good team, so in that regard, I fail to see how some of you regard him as one of the greatest players <u>ever</u>. I would honestly rather build a team around Kevin Garnett.</div> I agree co-hardedly. I would consider him a top 50 player of all time. But not one of the greatest of all time.
<div class="quote_poster">Clear It Out Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Build around Kobe? That had to be a joke. I'm not even gonna comment because you just put Kobe above Duncan and Shaq. HIGHLY unlikely. Neither of those players drew the kind of attention Shaq drew. During Shaq's prime, Kobe basically was WIDDDDDDDDDDDE open and ignored. He still managed to miss a hell of a lot of shots though. Those were Shaq's titles, no question about it. Agree completely. No clue why so many don't.</div> KG and Duncan both MVP awards during Shaq's reign. They don't have to draw the attention Shaq does for them to have won a title with Kobe. Kobe was widdddde open? I'm starting to also wonder if you watched the Lakers during their title runs. Kobe was the facilitator of the offense and was the player responsible for closing out games. He was a huge contributor for the Lakers and came up huge in the Pacer series down the stretch, when Shaq was on the bench because they didn't want him to have to shoot free throws. Kobe doesn't have any MVPs, but he's been in the mix every year. The voters just aren't going to ever give him enough votes for him to win it. A lot of writers just don't like Kobe, and a few didn't even place him in the top 5 in the season he scored 81 points. You have these idiot writers who will give a first place vote to PJ Brown, just because PJ gave them an exclusive interview. The MVP award is more of popularity contest more than anything else.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">These numbers of 18 rebounds it really hard to get now. When wilt played he was huge, not many could stand up to his stacher, now a PG can out rebound a center, because everyone is big. Howard can most likley avergae 15 rebounds a agme, if he always gets the rebound. Duncan is more dominate becuase he is a much better all around player then Shaq. He can hit free throws, jump shots, pass well. But, IMO I don't think he is the greatest since Jordan, I think, Kobe is the greatest since Jordan, but that's just my opinion. TD is a great player, I rank him right up there, but I just don't consider him the greatest since Jordan.</div> It wasn't about his stature, being tall doesn't neccesarily make you a better rebounder, look at the league leaders in rebound rate all time, there isn't really a height corrleation, it's about being a good rebound. And numbers wise with Wilt, it's about having mad stamina so you stay on the court the whole game, which obviously helps your stats all around especailly when you're staying on the court without being extremely tired. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">HIGHLY unlikely. Neither of those players drew the kind of attention Shaq drew. During Shaq's prime, Kobe basically was WIDDDDDDDDDDDE open and ignored. He still managed to miss a hell of a lot of shots though. Those were Shaq's titles, no question about it.</div> What are you even talking about? Duncan is a Top 15 player all-time, Kevin Garnett is a top 25 player all time. If Kobe was with Duncan for 10 seasons, they would win at least 2 titles. If Kobe was with KG for a decent amount of time, they'd probalby have at least 1 title. Sometimes we get too crazy with the titles thing though, because people just see a good team and say, oh they'll win multiple titles, but it's not that easy. Duncan has had a contending team for all 11 years or whatever it is for his career, and has won 3 titles, so being a great contender is just the beginning.The thing we can't forget is if Kobe was somewhere else, Shaq would still be in the league and on some team, and they're have to go through his team. Anyways... Kobe obviously doesn't have MVP's because he hasn't had much team success. We can talk about numbers all we want, but team success had been the standard for MVP voting for who knows how long, and Kobe just hasn't had that as the main cog of the team. I just hate when people get in the whiny Kobe vs the world thing where they're acting like everyone is out to stop him from getting MVP. If Kobe wins 50+ games and has a dominant season, he will be very high on the MVP list, and has a great chance at getting it. If he wins 55+ games and has a dominant season, he will definately get it unless someone else has a similarly dominant season with similar wins.
How does Kobe get brought into every thread? But I'd have to say greatest player since MJ was Shaq. Theres no magic answer many think its Duncan many think its Shaq. Shaq won 4 titles, Duncan is closing in on his 4th. They both won MVP for season, finals, all-star game. I don't very much difference its basically based on opinion.
<div class="quote_poster">NTC Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Can some one please explain to me what is so superior about Tim Duncan? Dont get me wrong, I think he is a great player, definatley one of the best in the league, I have just never found anything really outstanding about his game. He is a fundamentalist who is consistant with his numbers on what has always been a consistantly good team, so in that regard, I fail to see how some of you regard him as one of the greatest players <u>ever</u>. I would honestly rather build a team around Kevin Garnett.</div> i dont know, duncan is so fundamentally sound and can score in a variety or ways, just liek garnett. but did you ever think that players like ginobli and parker were late 1st rounder/2nd ronuder and duncan made them into the palyers that they are, something garnett couldn't do since he was never able to get out of the first round except with cassell and spree. im not taking aything away from garnett hes had one hell of a career, proabably top 10 if not top 5 PF to play, but i'd just take duncan over him, cause garnett had a lot of allstar talent around him in cassell, spreewell, brandon (somewhat he was at the end of his career) wally(great player at one point), the last few years have been tough on him since his only other option was davis and a shot first mike james, but both those guys are good players i think they shuold be better than where they are now
<div class="quote_poster">NTC Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Can some one please explain to me what is so superior about Tim Duncan? Dont get me wrong, I think he is a great player, definatley one of the best in the league, I have just never found anything really outstanding about his game. He is a fundamentalist who is consistant with his numbers on what has always been a consistantly good team, so in that regard, I fail to see how some of you regard him as one of the greatest players <u>ever</u>. I would honestly rather build a team around Kevin Garnett.</div> Tim Duncan is amazing because he dominates the interior defensively (the most important aspect of defense). You really can't tell that just by looking at Duncan's offensive numbers. Also, Duncan's teammates are far from great. <div class="quote_poster">THE DREAM Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I believe Tim is the best PF to play the game, BUT he's not top 5 imo....top 10 yes, but I still have (in no order) Magic Bird Michael Hakeem Wilt Kareem Oscar Russell and maybe Shaq ahead of him......Duncan is a great player but (and this is going to sound bad to some of you) he has played in one of the less competitive eras in basketball (when we're talking about team for team)...two of his title wins came against some mediocre (in other eras) New York and New Jersey teams</div> Serously though, what do you know about Oscar Robertson and how are you so sure he is better than Duncan? Oscar didn't win a ring until he played with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in his prime (and Oscar only has ONE btw). The only reason Oscar was able to average a Triple Double was because of the pace of the game back then. I won't get into the Bill Russell argument, and Hakeem isn't exactly a "no-brainer" over Duncan either.
I personally think Shaq is the best player since Jordan. Shaq in his prime, Shaq would have his way in the post against Duncan more often than Duncan would have his way with Shaq. I thought Duncan did about as good a job as anyone could do against Shaq, although David Robinson did a pretty good job.
<div class="quote_poster">Skiptomylue11 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I personally think Shaq is the best player since Jordan. Shaq in his prime, Shaq would have his way in the post against Duncan more often than Duncan would have his way with Shaq. I thought Duncan did about as good a job as anyone could do against Shaq, although David Robinson did a pretty good job.</div> Shaq IMO is way more dominate then Duncan becuase of his size, and ability with the ball. He can do what he wants in the low post, and bang and battle downlow anyway he wants.
