Yeah... Right...

quote:

---

I would consider Bird a Power foward

---

Bird was the SF, McHale the PF and Parrish the C on those celtics teams.

Bird was in no way shape or form a PF, and his game was that of a SF not a PF.

quote:

---

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

---

LOL

No love for "Pistol" Pete for PG?!?

I consider Pete Maravich more of a center than point guard.

Haven't been back to this thread in a while, it's funny how it developed. I would never have guessed there would be anyone making a serious argument against Duncan vs Malone and especially acting as though 4 Rings to 0 is irrelevant or a sidenote. The point of when I said that was the 2 are fairly close when you put them side to side. Malone is the slightly better offensive player and Duncan the better defensive player. Both had lengthy careers of dominance with great accomplishments. You could argue Malone's scoring numbers vs Duncan consistently being the 1st Team All NBA PF in the era of the PF against Dirk, KG, and even Malone. The Rings though are where it really separates. Duncan closed the deal 4 times and he got Finals MVP 3. That's huge and Malone has no response, not a single title. People also forget that when Duncan led the Spurs to the Title in '99 it was a year many thought the Jazz would win with Malone and Stockton finally "free" of Jordan. I remember the game the Spurs went into Salt Lake at the end of the regular season and spanked them to put HCA effectively out of reach and then rolled to the title. Duncan also led the Spurs' teams that shut down the Lakers run in '03 by humiliating Kobe, Shaq, and Co so badly they were in tears while getting slammed on their home court. Duncan also had the head to head battles with KG and Dirk in the playoffs as well. He didn't win every one but he certainly won most. Malone also had serious talent around him including a truly elite PG in his prime virtually his entire career. He just couldn't get it done whether it was Jordan, Hakeem, Isiah Thomas, or of course Duncan blocking him.

It's also foolish to not call Duncan a PF because he played with a true C up until very recently. I suppose you can call Jordan a SF because he played one as a Wizard then too? I loved the Bird as a PF argument considering he played next to McHale who is in the Top 10 argument for PF's. Anyone that doesn't think Larry Bird was a freakish talent and considered him just a "shooter with a lot of heart" needs to Youtube some old Bird video. Here is one that has over 7 minutes of freakish passes from him http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhnRtgBGMl4&feature=fvsrHe probably was a better passer than a shooter and he may have had the highest Bball IQ of any person to play the game. The ability to dunk from the FT line does not make you a great player, it makes you a great athlete. Love Lebron but is no Bird and I doubt he ever will be.

Yeah I haven't had chance to reply to the comments above about Bird. Just because he was white and had a bad hair cut some people discount him and his legacy. Had injuries not shortened his career by 4-6 years, he would likely be in the top 10 scorers of all time.

A few stats (for the "uninformed" above):

-5th all time in triple-doubles
-Only player to average 20 pts, 10 rebounds, 5 assists for their career
-3 times All-defensive second team
-3 league MVP's
-2 Finals MVP's
-3 Rings

Red Auerbach said he was the greatest player of all time (granted he was probably a bit biased, but he was associated with the league for over 40 years)

On a side note, I've heard for years that he was one of the most noted trash talkers of the 80's and early 90's. Some of the examples on Wikipedia are pretty funny.

For those of you that don't want to include him because you claim that he only succeeded due to his competition (80's basketball), I'm curious as to who you WOULD include from pre 1990? Kareem? Barkley? Magic? Dr. J? Bill Russell? Wilt? The Big O? Jerry West? Pistol Pete? Isiah Thomas? Geez...I'm on the record saying that Jordan is the greatest ever, but even his greatness in the mid/late 80's couldn't get past those Celtics and Pistons teams.

Dude, prepy, give it up. You sound ridiculous. The rings winning out thing is just the topping, it isn't the end all be all. To put Horry in the discussion with Malone and Duncan is beyond ridiculous. And before you saying anything, I know what you're trying to say. I'm just telling you your argument is ridiculous. Everyone knows that Duncan and Malone are on a different planet than Horry. Again, the rings is just what seperates the two. That was all that was meant by the poster.

You have two players who have both had outstanding careers. Both have a great claim to the best PF ever title. Both have similar resumes and similar talents. One has the rings and the other doesn't. It isn't the only factor, it's just the seperating one. That's why your Horry argument just simply sounds dumb.

quote:

---

It's also foolish to not call Duncan a PF because he played with a true C up until very recently.

---

He gradually transitioned to full time C starting in 2003 when Robinson retired. The Spurs adapted his role as the NBA perimeter rules changed in 2005 and Ginobili/Parker emerged as the main scoring threats. Horry arrived in 2004 and was the best complement to Duncan as a stretch 4. Duncan was playing C full time by 2007, and the NBA writers recognized it and listed him as a center on the all-star ballot.

You can still say Duncan is the best PF of all-time, but right now he is not playing as a PF so it doesn't count for the original question. By 2004 Duncan had already passed playoff choker Karl Malone imo, even if his career was only average from then on. Malone had plenty of chances to win title even with Jordan out of the way. If Malone hadn't flamed out in 1999 then maybe the Jazz win that title and the debate gets a little interesting.

Duncan is one of the few all time greats that could play both PF and C in any era. Russell, Hakeem, Moses are others that immediately come to mind.

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 3/22/2011 12:05a).]

quote:

---

He gradually transitioned to full time C starting in 2003 when Robinson retired.

---

Except he played with traditional centers Rasho Nesterovic, Kevin Willis, Francisco Elson, and Nazr Mohammed for the four years after that.

quote:

---

Duncan was playing C full time by 2007, and the NBA writers recognized it and listed him as a center on the all-star ballot.

---

O rly?
http://www.nba.com/news/2007_allstar_secondreturns_061228.html
The Minnesota Timberwolves’ Kevin Garnett leads all Western Conference forwards with 785,865 votes, followed by San Antonio’s Tim Duncan (715,916).

quote:

---

Malone had plenty of chances to win title even with Jordan out of the way.

---

Indeed. He choked two years in a row to Hakeem.

quote:

---

quote:
Duncan was playing C full time by 2007, and the NBA writers recognized it and listed him as a center on the all-star ballot.

O rly?

---

http://www.woio.com/Global/story.asp?S=7359691Duncan immediately *****ed about being listed as a center and got the NBA to move him back to PF

quote:

---

Except he played with traditional centers Rasho Nesterovic, Kevin Willis, Francisco Elson, and Nazr Mohammed for the four years after that.

---

lol Kevin Willis. Why not throw in Jackie Butler as well?

Make a chart of minutes for the Cs listed compared to minutes for all the PFs that play next to Duncan since 2004 like Malik Rose, Horry, Kurt Thomas, Bonner, Oberto, McDyess, Drew Gooden. I would guess that there is a gradual decline of C minutes.

quote:

---

I would guess that there is a gradual decline of C minutes.

---

Good job, Columbo. No one has said he hasn't gradually moved towards more post play in the last few years as he has gotten less mobile. But Duncan certainly wasn't playing mostly center as soon as Robinson retired in 03, in fact, he still rarely played it then.

That doesn't change the fact that Duncan started with a true center every year through the 2006-2007 season.

So your big argument for Duncan is really a center is the fact that for one year, he was on the all-star ballot as a center. Awesome.

Heck, even now, the Spurs will go small with Parker/Hill/Ginobili/Jefferson/Duncan. Does that mean Jefferson is a PF? Like most teams, Pop has gone with smaller lineups that don't have a traditional center role for large parts of the game. I think part of that is the rule changes and part of that is the fact that there are really only a couple of serviceable true centers in the NBA. The teams that can slash are the teams winning (Kobe, Pierce, Ginobili/Parker, Wade, etc).

But you also have to consider with guys like Oberto and MyDyess - they are spending most of their time in the paint. Horry and Bonner came in to stretch the defenses. Malik Rose and DeJuan Blair don't have range and get most of their buckets in the paint off backdoors and put backs.

LOL at you scoffing at Kevin Willis, then bringing up Drew Gooden - who only played 19 games for the Spurs.

quote:

---

Good job, Columbo. No one has said he hasn't gradually moved towards more post play in the last few years as he has gotten less mobile. But Duncan certainly wasn't playing mostly center as soon as Robinson retired in 03, in fact, he still rarely played it then.

---

And I never said he played mostly center starting in 2003

quote:

---

That doesn't change the fact that Duncan started with a true center every year through the 2006-2007 season.

---

And usually finished next to a PF

quote:

---

So your big argument for Duncan is really a center is the fact that for one year, he was on the all-star ballot as a center. Awesome.

---

If Duncan hadn't complained then he would have continued to be listed at center.

quote:

---

Heck, even now, the Spurs will go small with Parker/Hill/Ginobili/Jefferson/Duncan. Does that mean Jefferson is a PF?

---

Yes, in that lineup Jefferson is a PF. If Jefferson plays in a similar lineup for the majority of his minutes then I might consider classifying him as a power forward. But in the Spurs system that would not happen.

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 3/22/2011 1:13a).]

quote:

---

And usually finished next to a PF

---

Depended who they were playing. Rasho played quite a bit of crunch time.

quote:

---

If Duncan hadn't complained then he would have continued to be listed at center.

---

Link to Duncan complaining?

Also, if he did, which I never remember seeing, I couldn't blame anyone for not wanting to go up against Yao Ming in voting, considering Yao was voted in this year despite only playing like 30 minutes all season.

quote:

---

Yes, in that lineup Jefferson is a PF.

---

So it is not possible for a team to play with three guards, a SF and a PF?

Jefferson is a SF, but he plays PF in that lineup. Every 5 man unit has a defined PG/SG/SF/PF/C

quote:

---

Every 5 man unit has a defined PG/SG/SF/PF/C

---

Wow. If you say so.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 3/22/2011 1:46a).]

Duncan telling Marc Stein he doesn't like to be listed at center in 2007:

quote:

---

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-071117-18

But what I can and did do -- something I've wanted to do for a long time -- is ask Duncan why he has a philosophical problem with being listed as a center, as we've always heard.

"I'm not playing as a center and I don't like being labeled a center," Duncan said. "Without trying to cause too much of a stir, it just seems like a limited position. I think I can do a little bit more than what a center is labeled as [doing]. But it's just a label."

I'll never understand why Duncan and Kevin Garnett insist on being listed at 6-11, because they apparently regard inclusion in the 7-Footers Club to be even more limiting, whereas I see their 7-footness as something that only makes their versatility more impressive. But I get what Duncan is saying here about the center stuff.

I think.

---

I didn't know that Duncan also makes an issue out of his official height

quote:

---

quote:
Every 5 man unit has a defined PG/SG/SF/PF/C

Wow. If you say so.

---

I don't see the big deal. I like the 82games.com analysis based on maintaining the defined 5 man units. You can say the Spurs run a 3 guard lineup and at the same time say that Ginobili switches down to SF. He's a guard that plays SF in that temporary small-ball lineup. I'm not breaking new ground here

quote:

---

I didn't know that Duncan also makes an issue out of his official height

---

Because teams always (HS, College, NBA, NFL) always fudge players height or weight. Hakeem was officially listed at 7' when he was really 6'10. Barkley was listed at 6'6 when he is really like 6'4 or 6'5. Avery Johnson was listed at 5'10, but is really like 5'8.

Duncan is really 6'11, not 7' and asked them to change it. Robinson is legitimately 7'1.



Duncan just asked to be correctly labelled.

quote:

---

I don't see the big deal. I like the 82games.com analysis based on maintaining the defined 5 man units. You can say the Spurs run a 3 guard lineup and at the same time say that Ginobili switches down to SF. He's a guard that plays SF in that temporary small-ball lineup. I'm not breaking new ground here

---

You are labeling them as playing a position that they really aren't playing. When the Spurs play small ball and put Jefferson in with three guards, Jefferson isn't playing PF. He is still playing on the wing. He isn't posting people up, crashing the boards. He is still playing SF. That's why it is dumb to say he is playing PF - because he really isn't. He is still playing SF, they are just using plays drawn up to run without a PF. This isn't the 80s. Teams aren't always playing with the traditional 5 set positions. The plays and the lineups are much more creative now. I don't understand how that isn't understood.

quote:

---

You are labeling them as playing a position that they really aren't playing. When the Spurs play small ball and put Jefferson in with three guards, Jefferson isn't playing PF. He is still playing on the wing. He isn't posting people up, crashing the boards. He is still playing SF. That's why it is dumb to say he is playing PF - because he really isn't. He is still playing SF, they are just using plays drawn up to run without a PF. This isn't the 80s. Teams aren't always playing with the traditional 5 set positions. The plays and the lineups are much more creative now.

---

Which means that the position definitions are expanding. The PF position has evolved to where it's not crazy to list a strictly perimeter player as playing PF part time.

Much of this has to do with how the game has evolved over time in terms of play and rules. The hand check rule and other changes to favor the perimeter players that can drive to the basket shifted the NBA from a league dominated by the giants in the middle to a league dominated by guards and very athletic big men. Many of the perimeter players today would have struggled in the old NBA because guys like Bill Laimbeer would have been allowed to put them in the hospital.

Duncan is someone I think who would have succeeded in either game. He's just pure fundamentals, outside of FT shooting he really just does everything well and even there he has nearly gotten his career FT shooting up to 70% (nearly 72% this year) which isn't horrible for a big man. I don't think we will ever see anyone quite like him again because of the way he came up (learning the game late, going 4 years to college in spite of being the clear #1, etc.) and the fact he seems to have the smallest ego of any superstar in history.

The game is dominated by guards because big men no longer care about doing the little things and only care about trying to get on the highlight reel. The game used to be dominated by the giants because those giants could actually play the game of basketball ridiculously well and had excellent fundamentals.

Just take the main centers from the 90s (Olajuwon, Robinson, Ewing, etc.), they would utterly dominate nowadays just as they did then because they had good footwork, knew how to pass really well and could shoot jump shots. The difference between those guys and guys like Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudamire, etc is astronomical. Duncan truly is the last of the old guard for big men because he is exactly the same type of player as the previous guys I listed.

I always laugh when I hear about any of the current big men working with one of the great centers of the past to improve their footwork and such because nothing ever comes of it. They never actually improve and their game never changes. They still have **** post moves and can't shoot beyond 5 feet. They don't realize that Olajuwon didn't have those moves when he was in college, he developed them over the course of his career. Olajuwon in 93-95 was a VASTLY different player than he was in his rookie year. The guys in the NBA now look like exactly the same type of players 7 years after their rookie years.

The NBA is dominated by guards because no one cares about fundamentals anymore. The reason guards are more successful than the big men is because guards have to learn some fundamentals by default just to play their position, whereas the Cs and PFs just have to know how to dunk the ball and half-ass a rebound.

quote:

---

The game is dominated by guards because big men no longer care about doing the little things and only care about trying to get on the highlight reel. The game used to be dominated by the giants because those giants could actually play the game of basketball ridiculously well and had excellent fundamentals.

---

I agree, which is why I think Bill Russell must be at the top of a short list. 11 tits in 13 year, 2 straight at the University of San Franciso. His defensive skills and understanding were the keys to those Celtic titles, imho. Fundamentals.

Can anyone imagine an NBA center today studying when to time a blocked shot, like Shaq? Shaq plans his next quarter pounder, not his fundaments. UCLA Coach John Wooden called Russell "the greatest defensive man I've ever seen".

Duncan’s retirement will be celebrated by my wife, a hard-core Mavs fan. If he gets his position, he’s almost certain to score or be fouled. It is rare to see a player that can play with his back to the basket as well as do other things.

I would take Amar'e Stoudemire in a over Barkley, although no question few have done it better—carried a team in some situations—as did Sir Charles.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/player/amar'e-stoudemire/careerstats/105077

I thought the papers were wrong when Nash won his first MVP. He was not even the MVP of the Suns. Stoudemire was. I never did understand Nash winning 2 MVPs. I have not been able to understand black holes, either.

Bird and Magic suffer from short careers (Bird more so than magic).

As for PG, I think a case can be made for Stockton for the overall career (most assists and steals) but Magic was much more "dominant".

quote:

---

I agree, which is why I think Bill Russell must be at the top of a short list. 11 tits in 13 year

---

I'm not sure which way to go with this but I wanted to be the first to point it out.

quote:

---

Bird and Magic suffer from short careers (Bird more so than magic).

---

I don't mind someone saying that either/both of these guys can't be the GOAT at their respective positions because of the length of their careers. What drives me nuts is the fool that judges them based on the era in which they played.

In some ways, the 80's was a rougher league than the one we see today. If you doubt me, go read up on the "Jordan Rules" instilled by the late 80's Pistons. Bird, Barkley, Laimbeer, etc., got in fist fights FAR more often on the court than any of the players in this day and age. It was just considered part of the game.

I realize Lebron is much bigger muscle-wise than some of his counterparts, and thus would be able to muscle his way to a lot of points. But if those guys had the weight training programs that these guys have, they would have held their own and then some. On the flip side, had Lebron played in the 70's/80's with those guys, he would not be as big as he is today and would be competing on "their" terms.

If Lebron were 225 pounds instead of 260 he might have a 50" vertical.

Actually Lebron is a physical freak of nature. He was naturally HUGE and never seriously worked out with weights until a few years into his NBA career. I heard he put up like 350 on bench the first time he ever lifted.

He's probably the most naturally gifted athlete to ever play the game of basketball.

[This message has been edited by Vander (edited 3/24/2011 3:41a).]

quote:

---

He's probably the most naturally gifted athlete to ever play the game of basketball.

---

Read up on Wilt... , etc... 7'+ with a 40" vertical.. according to some reports. There is not a single NBA player in the modern combine era to have a 40" no step vertical....

As far as natural..... everyone today in professional sports is guilty until proven innocent (for me) by a full career with only meaningless accusations.

There are golfers on that stuff now a days.

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=All&sort2=DESC&draft=0&pos=0&sort=6


[This message has been edited by BBDP (edited 3/24/2011 8:01a).]

I completely agree Lebron is one of if not the greatest pure athletes ever to play in the NBA (and all of professional sports for that matter). It takes more than that though. Lebron doesn't have the mental toughness, bball IQ, shooting ability, passing ability, or leadership skills to even be close to a guy like Bird.

I can think of a dozen PF's that would smoke TD in athleticism that aren't even close to him. Jordan and Magic were probably as athletic as anyone but they had all the other factors to go with it. I still don't think you can definitively name a Center because there are at least 4 who can make a strong argument but Wilt was the best athlete and likely not the best Center.

quote:

---

Duncan just asked to be correctly labelled.

---

this reminds me of the Onion article where Duncan was shouting out the angles on his bank shots.

Completely agree with aggie93.

Look I'm not saying Lebron isn't an incredible athlete. He has PHENOMINAL potential to be the greatest at his position. What I am saying is that until he SNIFFS Larry's resume he isn't even in the discussion for greatest players at each position.

When he's finished his career, we may be saying something different. But so far.....not even close.

If you want to include yourself in the discussion when it comes to ALL TIME greats in a given sport, you either need to be old enough to have seen multiple generations of players, or willing to research the guys that played before your time. It sounds like some of you people weighing in on this discussion didn't start watching basketball until 1998 or so. That's like calling A&M basketball one of the elite all-time programs in the country. A little perspective would do you some good!