PG? I wouldn't take a single one of the current players over Magic
SG? Jordan
SF? I'm not taking any current player over Bird
PF? If you classify Duncan as a 4 as he has always been listed then I would give it to him, but I've always thought he is a 5 regardless of where he is listed.
C? I suppose an argument could be made for Shaq, but I'm not taking him over Russell/Chamberlin/Kareem

You can't judge a book until it is read.

You are comparing people who's legacy has been defined with those who are in the process of defining their own legacy.

It is a faulty premise.

quote:

---

SF? I'm not taking any current player over Bird

---

I would consider Bird a Power foward and Tim Duncan is a superior player.

If you Keep Bird as a small foward a case could certainly be made for Lebron James.

Not now....but in 5 years probably.

[This message has been edited by Kellso (edited 3/16/2011 5:31p).]

power forward truly is the position with the most promise.

stockton in the race for PG?

quote:

---

I would consider Bird a Power foward

---

If this is the case, what position did McHale and Parrish play?

Duncan could be considered almost a tweener, but really it is his inside & outside game that make him a PF. He does not always play with his back to the basket like most centers.

What Center has an outside game and can hit from 20 feet on a regular basis?

Assuming he wins at least one ring, I think LeBron will be the greatest SF of all time. (and I'm not a big LeBron fan)

Also depending on whether he gets any rings down the road, Durant might creep into the discussion. The kid's only 22 and getting better every year.

And as a non-Texan who neither supports nor hates any of the Texas teams, I will always consider Duncan a PF.

PG-Magic and it's not close
SG-MJ and it's not close
SF-Bird still has this by quite a bit. Anyone that says Lebron or anyone else didn't see or remember how incredible Bird really was. Lebron has more pure physical talent but the shooting and absolute killer instinct of Bird was far beyond Lebron. Lebron could get there but he has a long way before he is like Larry Legend. Durant is great but he isn't in this discussion.
PF-Duncan takes this over Malone. The Rings win.
C-Toughest call. Russell was the best defender and winner. Wilt was an absolute freak and dominated offensively like no one else but wasn't a closer. Kareem was the best all around but he always had a big supporting cast. Hakeem and Shaq were great but not in the same league as the other 3.

quote:

---

What Center has an outside game and can hit from 20 feet on a regular basis?

---

Matt Bonner, Antonio McDyess, Kurt Thomas, Robert Horry...

Duncan plays center

I'd like to consider myself the greatest PF

quote:

---

PF? If you classify Duncan as a 4 as he has always been listed then I would give it to him, but I've always thought he is a 5 regardless of where he is listed

---

finally someone with some sense. For all practical purposes, duncan has been a center for the majority of his career

Don't these threads turn out badly for you murphy?

I'm not saying, I'm just saying...

Except Duncan has played with a true center most of his career.

Duncan's game is a whole lot of high post and facing up - where the PFs live.

First six years of Duncan's career, played next to David Robinson - true center.
Next three years, Duncan played next to Rasho Nesterovic - another true center.
Year after Rasho, half the year was with another true center - Francisco Elson.
After that, Duncan started playing more with power forwards (Oberto, Bonner, Blair, Horry - though old McDyess is more of a center than a PF.) The only reason Blair is considered more of a PF than a C is because he is short. His game is 100% under the basket.

Duncan spent his entire prime as a PF. He certainly spends more time back to the basket now as he isn't as explosive as he was, but anyone saying Duncan was really a C and not a PF doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.

quote:

---

Matt Bonner, Antonio McDyess, Kurt Thomas, Robert Horry

---

Those are PFs dude!

That's a joke. Larry bird was amazing but when lebron is done with his career small forward will go to him no question. Larry bird wouldnt be near as good in the much more athletic game today. He has no athletism just great shooting and will. He wouldn't be near what he was and y'all can say I'm stupid and all that but it's true. He was a great player of his time. Lebron is redefining the SF he does everything and he's only 26 right now

Duncan has played two positions in his career.

As a center, he's an all-star.

As PF, he's the best that's ever played.

quote:

---

PF-Duncan takes this over Malone. The Rings win.

---

Based on your logic wouldn't Robert Horry be the best PF of all time? He has more rings than Duncan.

quote:

---

Based on your logic wouldn't Robert Horry be the best PF of all time? He has more rings than Duncan.

---

And that MIGHT be a good argument if Tim Duncan however:

All-Star:
Tim 13 in 13 seasons
Karl 13 in 19 seasons
All-NBA:
Tim: 13 selections in 13 seasons
Karl: 14 selections in 19 seasons
All-Defense:
Tim: 13 selections in 13 seasons
Karl 4 selections in 19 seasons.
Finals MVP:
Tim 3
Karl 0
MVP:
Tim 2
Karl 2
Championships:
Tim 4
Karl 0

The only thing Karl has over Duncan is scoring. Duncan is better at every other facet of the game. And because Duncan wasn't some scrub following rings - he was THE MAN on four championship teams - the Rings win. Karl was a choker. Tim is a winner.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 3/18/2011 8:22a).]

quote:

---

And that MIGHT be a good argument

---

Well that IS the arguement that was made, THE RINGS WIN, so based on that RObert Horry should be the best PF of all time...I didn't write it, just read it.

quote:

---

The only thing Karl has over Duncan is scoring.

---

Really? Because I'm pretty sure Malone has a better career per game in steals, FG%, FT%, 3P%, assists, as well as points.

So if you wanna say RINGS WIN OUT that's fine, but I've never understood that argument in a team game like basketball. Tim is a winner? Yeah, because he was playing 5 on 1 in the playoffs right? I'm pretty sure it was Shawn elliot that hit that game clinching 3 ball...i'm pretty sure the D-robinson was helping in the low pos...I'm pretty sure that Tony Parker and Manu Ginobilli has some say in 3 of Duncan's 4 championships, but don't let a thing like sense get in the way of a good argument.

Three pointers? Really? Neither player hit 100 threes for their entire career. Matt ****ing Bonner has hit more threes this year than either Malone or Duncan has hit in their entire career and you want to use that as an argument?

Malone's assist per game is .3 higher than Duncan's. That isn't really making up for the fact that Duncan is multitudes better than Malone at defense AND the fact that Duncan is a winner and Malone is a choker.

Even the stupidest people would understand that the Rings argument was made between two people that are the leaders of their team. Not role players. To twist that any other way shows either a lack of intelligence or a desire to approach the argument in an honest way.

Move along, little one.

quote:

---

Malone's assist per game is .3 higher than Duncan's. That isn't really making up for the fact that Duncan is multitudes better than Malone at defense AND the fact that Duncan is a winner and Malone is a choker.

---

A choker? He had more ppg than Duncan in their playoff careers. Please show me the title that Duncan won on his own...don't worry, I'll wait.

quote:

---

Even the stupidest people would understand that the Rings argument was made between two people that are the leaders of their team. Not role players. To twist that any other way shows either a lack of intelligence or a desire to approach the argument in an honest way.

---

Oh I see, so now it's only a handful of NBA players that can use the "RINGS" argument. I can't discuss a topic with anyone that changes the rules midway through. You can't say "RINGS WIN OUT" then say "but only for x number of players." If rings are the end all be all as you say, than this argument is moot because Horry is better than both w/ 7 rings. Your argument not mine.

To use championships to compare players in TEAM games is the inhonest approach to a discussion. A single player doesn't win NBA championships. Put Duncan on the Clippers, or even the Malone Jazz teams and he has no Rings either...TEAM GAME

And I'm not sure if you have a man fetish for Duncan, but to resort to name calling over a grown man is a bit weird. May want to consider that for next time...just a thought.

quote:

---

He had more ppg than Duncan in their playoff careers.

---

How many rings did that translate into? As LeBron has shown us, lots of points doesn't make you a winner.

Duncan won four rings. He was the leader on all four teams.

quote:

---

Oh I see, so now it's only a handful of NBA players that can use the "RINGS" argument. I can't discuss a topic with anyone that changes the rules midway through. You can't say "RINGS WIN OUT" then say "but only for x number of players." If rings are the end all be all as you say, than this argument is moot because Horry is better than both w/ 7 rings. Your argument not mine.

---

It is obviously you aren't interested in a intelligent, intellectually honest discussion.

quote:

---

How many rings did that translate into? As LeBron has shown us, lots of points doesn't make you a winner.

Duncan won four rings. He was the leader on all four teams.

---

Now you're discounting Lebron, perhaps the best pure player the NBA has seen from a Talent stantpoint because he hasn't won a ring? And you say I'm the one not interested in a intellegent discussion? Again, you don understand the concept of a TEAM sport right? You're that guy in the bar that argues that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson are better than Dan Marino because they have rings aren't you...sad.

If Duncan is such a winner and that's what you're using for criteria, please tell me how many Olympic Gold medals he has to his credit...Because Malone won Gold both times he was on an oplympic team, but I'm curious as to how many Duncan has. I guess Malone isn't the "choker" you call him if he can win a Gold medal twice, one of a rare few that can say that. The Olympic team Duncan was on suffered more losses than any Olympic team before them combined, but he's a winner right?

Hakeem Olajuwon was a better power forward than Duncan.

- "It is obviously you aren't interested in a intelligent, intellectually honest discussion."

- LeBron being the best pure player from a talent standpoint

- Comparing Tim Duncan to a Trent Dilfer

- Olympic gold medal smack



SMH @ the last few posts in this thread.

quote:

---

- "It is obviously you aren't interested in a intelligent, intellectually honest discussion."

- LeBron being the best pure player from a talent standpoint

---

Yeah you're right...players like Lebron happen all the time in the League

quote:

---

- Comparing Tim Duncan to a Trent Dilfer

---

Actually I was mocking the RINGS WIN OUT argument but thanks for playing.

quote:

---

- Olympic gold medal smack

---

Um, ok...

quote:

---

SMH @ the last few posts in this thread.

---

But yet you still felt the need respond

quote:

---

anyone saying Duncan was really a C and not a PF doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.

---

Some PF's play a post up game, some play in space. In my opinion, TIm Duncan has always been a guy they get the ball to in the post, even if he does often turn and face. Whether you consider him a center or not, he is certainly a post-up guy. He sure as hell is not a 4 like Dirk is a 4. (Maybe you want to call Dirk a 7 foot 3 guard, but that seems strange.)

In many offenses, there is no true difference between the 4 and the 5. I don't see much difference in the way the Spurs Blair the ball and the way they get Duncan the ball, but I don't watch them as much as you.

[This message has been edited by Whistling For Flies (edited 3/18/2011 11:12a).]

quote:

---

Some PF's play a post up game, some play in space. In my opinion, TIm Duncan has always been a guy they get the ball to in the post, even if he does often turn and face. Whether you consider him a center or not, he is certainly a post-up guy. He sure as hell is not a 4 like Dirk is a 4. (Maybe you want to call Dirk a 7 foot 3 guard, but that seems strange.)

---

Dirk really isn't the prototypical POWER forward. He is a fantastic scorer, but, like you said, is more of a 7' SF. Ideally, your PF is a guy that can run the pick and roll with you, then hit the 18' open jump shot if they collapse. They can face up from 15 and hit the shot or drive in or back down. Dirk really doesn't fall into any position because he doesn't have the athleticism of a SF, has the height of a center, but not the body.

quote:

---

I don't see much difference in the way the Spurs Blair the ball and the way they get Duncan the ball, but I don't watch them as much as you.

---

This year isn't really a defining year in Duncan's career. More of a last hoorah. There is a big difference between how Duncan got the ball in 2003 and how he gets the ball now.

If you watched Duncan's game over the years, he spent it out in the mid range more than he did the post. As he has gotten older and his feet and knees have given him problems, he has relied on his post game more and more. Duncan plays more of a center game now, but his game has changed a lot as he has gotten older.

Why all the whining about Duncan and Malone.

Clearly Duncan is superior to Malone because Malone couldn't get it done with one of the best PG that has ever played the game, along with one of the best 3 point shooters to ever play.

Duncan has gotten it done with a mix of washed up vets and players too young to be in their prime. (especially in 99 and 03)

Duncan vs. Malone was an argument back in 2003 or 2004. At this point, it isn't even close.

And yes, Duncan does play more of a center role NOW, but he was pure PF for most of his career.

Even now, he still is hitting 19-20 foot jumpers with regularity--which is something you just don't see many centers doing (Shaq, Howard, Wilt, Russell)

I love how the requirements of "best ever" change from time to time. At one point, a player with more rings is better, at other points, other players are better because of other reasons.

Also note that if many players (such as Kobe, Duncan, etc.) who have a lot of rings had played in the Jordan era, they'd have considerably fewer rings.

quote:

---

At one point, a player with more rings is better, at other points, other players are better because of other reasons.

---

I would say there are a conglomeration of reasons that go into determining the best ever at each position. It would be idiotic to use just one stat while ignoring the rest. It is all about the entire body of work.

I definitely agree.

I'd personally say Barkley is a top 5 PF of all time (definitely my favorite player to ever play the game), mainly because of his lack of height, but he was still able to go out and dominate at times. But sadly he never won a ring because he had the unfortunate luck of never playing for a really good team and playing in the same time when MJ was. Meanwhile, you've got a few random players who never did much who were on the bench on the 90s Bulls teams. Or players like Rodman with 5 championships... but we all know Rodman isn't as good as Duncan.

[This message has been edited by Aggies2009 (edited 3/18/2011 2:20p).]

I'd take the peak of Barkley over the peak of Malone, but if you are talking about careers, it is hard to ignore how long Malone was great and how injury-free he stayed.

Barkley's career highs:
28 points
15 rebounds
5.7 offensive rebounds
5.1 assists
2.2 steals
1.6 blocks
.600 FG%


Malone's career highs:
31points
12 rebounds
3.4 offensive rebounds
4.5 assists
1.8 steals
1.5 blocks
.560 FG%

quote:

---

Also note that if many players (such as Kobe, Duncan, etc.) who have a lot of rings had played in the Jordan era, they'd have considerably fewer rings.

---

Take note that if Jordan had played in the Kobe/Shaq, Duncan/Manu/Parker era then Jordan would have less rings

[This message has been edited by Kasey Kelso (edited 3/20/2011 10:23a).]