Duncan > Kobe

2,545 Views | 78 Replies | Last: 12 yr ago by yawny06
Post removed:
by user
aggie93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He was actually at home. I was at that game, the real bummer was he had some very questionable fouls called on blocks that would have put him over the top.

Duncan absolutely would have thrived with Phil. Duncan is one of the most intelligent players ever to play the game and he has a psychology degree. He and Phil would have been a great match.

Kobe likely would not have meshed as well with Pop though. Kobe likes to play 1 on 1 and takes a LOT of bad shots (which he makes many). He also has a monster ego and if things aren't going his way he whines like a little girl. Maybe it would have worked, maybe not.

Kobe was clearly the better scorer of the two but Duncan could fill it up as well. He was just a guy that hated taking bad shots. If you doubled him he dumped it to the open guy for a 3 or to the guy slashing open down the lane. He had some 50+ point games but it was just rarely necessary.

As for the talent around Duncan. Outside of maybe when Duncan first came in the league with Robinson and more recently with Parker hitting his stride he has never had another Top 10 player around him. Parker and Manu were generally considered Top 25 type players in the mid '00s until more recently (where Manu is now a role player and Parker is Top 10 or higher).

Kobe has only won with significant talent around him.

They are both great players without question and very hard to compare. Their games couldn't be more different. Much of it depends on what you value most in a player.
Sher Thing
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lebron James:

quote:
Probably one of the best players to ever play the game of basketball. If I just look at the last 15 years, he's probably been the most consistent, most dominant player that we've had as far as 15 years all together. He's won four titles, multiple All-Stars, MVP, and so on and so on.I think he doesn't get a lot of recognition because he's not flashy like a lot of guys are. He's not jumping over people and high-flying and doing the things that attracts people to the game. But I think true basketball, true IQ people, players know how great he is. What else can you say?
3 William 56
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:
I just find the discussion funny because here is Tim Duncan, getting ready to play for #5, with the same core that won #2, #3, and #4. A ten year period of excellence, not even taking into account #1...

Kobe has #5, but do you think he has both of those championships if Memphis doesn't trade Pau Gasol for a sack of marbles, some baseball cards, and Petey in '08? Does Kobe have any without Shaq? Hard to say and not entirely fair to Kobe either...


Would Timmy have any titles without Robinson, Manu, and Parker?

quote:
None of those three are even in the same ball park


You're saying Karl Malone isn't even in the same ballpark as Duncan? Do you really believe that or is that just for shock value?

quote:
Duncan or Shaq were in the Finals evey year from '99 to '07. They are arguably the dominate players of their era. Saying that one is clearly ahead of another is just dumb...


Please tell me you're trolling...first you say that Karl Malone isn't even in Duncan's "ballpark" and now you're saying Duncan may be better than Shaq?

quote:
You can say top 10 or whatever, but the fact is he is about to play for Ring #5 while Shaq is talking about it an Kobe is watching it...


So I guess that means Duncan's better than Jordan since MJ's not even talking about the finals...

quote:
And I would argue that Duncan is a much more complete player than Shaq. Shaq was the most dominate post player ever. But that doesn't put him clearly above Duncan.


Wait what? So Shaq is the most dominate post player ever (your words), but he's not better than Duncan? Isn't Duncan a post player?

quote:
Unless you purely care about stats neither is Wilt


Ok, not Duncan is better than Wilt? Holy cow...
Post removed:
by user
Look Out Below
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Threads like this make me want the Heat to win.

..and this:

quote:
A ten year period of excellence


The Spurs haven't even BEEN to the Finals in more than half a decade. I'll give them all the credit in the world for winning all four times they've been there but they've only managed to get there five times during their 15 year run (vs. L.A. who went seven of 11 years between 2000-2010).
Ulrich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In the last 10 years the Spurs have won 2 titles and are in the finals again this year, been to the conference finals 5 times, lost in the first round only twice, never missed the playoffs, and won an average (adjusted for the lockout) of 58 games per year in the regular season, a 70.6% winning percentage, the best in the NBA over that period by an enormous margin. For reference, I believe the Lakers, Heat, and Celtics combine for just 6 seasons over the last 10 years better than the Spurs average.

What exactly do they have to do to be considered excellent in your opinion?
Deluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Is it possible that simplebay has trolled on this thread without even posting on it? His trolling transcends traditional trolling.
Judge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
yawny06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:

Please tell me you're trolling...first you say that Karl Malone isn't even in Duncan's "ballpark" and now you're saying Duncan may be better than Shaq?


Maybe you go back and read those posts again...I never said anything about a "ballpark"...

Just because me and Guitarsoup have 3*'s doesn't mean we are the same person dumbass...

quote:
So I guess that means Duncan's better than Jordan since MJ's not even talking about the finals...


Because that was clearly the argument I was making...

quote:

Wait what? So Shaq is the most dominate post player ever (your words), but he's not better than Duncan? Isn't Duncan a post player?


There is a difference between "dominate" and "complete". Shaq was the dominate post player, but where Duncan lacked in dominance he made up with fundamentals. This isn't really a hard concept to understand...unless you are you...

If you would read anything I have said and used any recognizable form of reading comprehension perhaps you would have noticed that I never said any one of the players, Kobe, Shaq, or Duncan are "clearly" ahead of one another in terms of their greatness.

For instance:

quote:
Nobody is denying that Kobe isn't one of the greats, but he is not head and shoulders above Duncan, neither is Shaq. They are three completely different players and there is no objective way to compare them.


quote:
Duncan or Shaq were in the Finals evey year from '99 to '07. They are arguably the dominate players of their era. Saying that one is clearly ahead of another is just dumb...


Of course in your giddiness to attempt to stick it to this Spurs fan in what I am sure you felt was a classic gotcha moment, you completely failed to realize you were quoting two people that were saying almost two completely different things...and all you ended up with was an epic fail...

quote:
The Spurs haven't even BEEN to the Finals in more than half a decade. I'll give them all the credit in the world for winning all four times they've been there but they've only managed to get there five times during their 15 year run (vs. L.A. who went seven of 11 years between 2000-2010).


You are right...10 years is far to little. The Spurs have won 50+ games in 14 straight seasons, won 4 championships, are now playing for a 5th, 10 division titles and have never missed the playoffs.

I never said they were the "most" excellent team, but there aren't many teams who have done what the Spurs have done in the last 15 years. Sorry if that makes you hate them or their fans, but facts are facts.


[This message has been edited by yawny06 (edited 6/7/2013 6:17p).]
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.