This Jordan debate is interesting. The only player I'd ever even CONSIDER taking over Jordan would be Shaq, and I'd still be leaning hard towards MJ
Who would you rather build around ,prime Kobe or prime Tim Duncan?
- Thread starter FukkaPaidEmail
- Start date
Shaq's team got swept for like 7 straight years and this is with the likes of Penny, Nick Anderson, Nick Van Exel, Eddie Jones, young Kobe on his squad. Wilt let the Knicks beat him with a cripple playing across from him and let the old ass Celtics win ring number 11 in his house. It was only like 6 teams in the league at the time. Wilt had HOFers of his own as well. As physically dominant as they were I can't take guys who heart is in question and who I can't even give the ball to late in the game over Mike.
The only guys I'd take over duncan are
Magic
Hakeem
Mike
Kareem
Kobe
That's it
Magic
Hakeem
Mike
Kareem
Kobe
That's it
holidayinn21
:SmugMoneyMike:
kobe
OG Talk
Archived
Poor argument. Of course you take the great HOF caliber perimeter guy over the run of the mill big guy. How many of those guys you takin over Dwight though? And Dwights offensive game is. Perimeter players dominate the league not because thier has been this great sea change in what is important on the basketball court but because there is a derth of big guys that actually play like big guys. Interior play is still paramount though. You gotta rebound, score easy baskets, and prevent easy baskets to win in basketball. Even Mike couldnt' win until he got help in those regards.
Run of the mill? Every big I named has been a recent all star.. And this is my point.. Size isn't that great of an equalizer....Jordan was so much better than Duncan, bringing up the 5 inches that seperates them isn't enough to close the gap...
I realize an inside presence is paramount and you can't win without rebounding and interior defense...That's not what I'm arguing about..I'm just saying it's not the end all be all..It's a piece of the puzzle...
If you look at the past 3 decades of NBA champions... Twenty out of the thirty times the best player on the title winning team wasn't a big... And this began long before the current sea change...
So can you win it all without a quality big man? Rarely.. Can you win it all without a big man being your first option or best player? Often..
It's Tim Duncan, not even close.
Prime Kobe (The black Mamba era 2005/2006) when he was putting up 40/50 pts every other night was 7/8th seed in the west and got bounced out of the first round two years in a row
by Nash 
Prime Tim Duncan was a guaranteed top 2 seed in the west and the league.
Prime Kobe (The black Mamba era 2005/2006) when he was putting up 40/50 pts every other night was 7/8th seed in the west and got bounced out of the first round two years in a row
by Nash Prime Tim Duncan was a guaranteed top 2 seed in the west and the league.
All star status is only based upon who is playing at the time. You gotta have Cs on the roster. Roy Hibbert career high for PPG is 13 and he gives you one rebound more than Durant does. Brook Lopez avg. 4 RPG last year. How is size not a great equalizer? You think Bron is still Bron at 6'2, 180? Could Kobe still do what Kobe does at 5'9? What if Durant was 6'0? All things being equal I'm gonna take the bigger guy? How can you argue that?
All those teams you mentioned had depth at big man (Pistons, Lakers, Mavs, Celtics, Heat) or perimeter guys masquerading as big men (Bulls, Heat) though. You acknowleded the importance of interior play so what are you arguing?
OG Talk
Archived
That it's a no brainer to start a franchise with Michael Jordan over Tim Duncan...
It's not a no brainer by any stretch. Duncan is one of the few guys who are in the convo (Kareem, Dream). It is certainly debatable. What about the rest of my post?
Timmy without question
OG Talk
Archived
I agree with the rest of your post..None of it makes a reasonable argument why Duncan has more value than Jordan though..
But you are generally correct...All things being equal, the taller guy has the advantage.. Where you lose me, is you believe Jordan and Duncan are equals.. I can't rock with that (and I have a plethora of statistics to back up my opinion), so I guess we'll have agree to disagree...
It's Tim Duncan, not even close.
Prime Kobe (The black Mamba era 2005/2006) when he was putting up 40/50 pts every other night was 7/8th seed in the west and got bounced out of the first round two years in a row
Prime Tim Duncan was a guaranteed top 2 seed in the west and the league.
Your comparing the championship spurs to the 06-07 Lakers.
That was Kobe at his peak, but Kobe during his prime was also leading the Lakers to 3 straight finals and back to back titles. Something Duncan never came close to.
Kobe 08-10 playoffs
2008
30.1 ppg 5.7 rpg 5.6 apg 48fg% 30%3P 81%FT 58TS% 51eFG%
2009
30.2 ppg 5.3 rpg 5.5 apg 46fg% 35%3P 88%FT 56TS% 49eFG%
2010
29.2 ppg 6.0 rpg 5.5 apg 46fg% 37%3P 84%FT 57TS% 51eFG%
Back to back finals MVP's
How come Duncan was never able to get to back to back finals? Not once?
I wasn't arguing Duncan over Jordan I was arguing about the importance of big men.
This is the kicker. This is the equivalent of picking the wrong numbers in a lottery after you've been given the winning numbers. I even saw another poster agree with this lunacy, saying that they would draft Hakeem over Mike after we've all seen how that played out. You people cannot be serious. I understand the "always draft a good big man over a good small man" mentality, but Mike was clearly the exception. As great as Hakeem was, Mike was clearly the better more dominant player. I also think that Magic was an exception to that "rule", Lebron may be as well.
King Jove
King Of †he Gawds
duncan easily.
he affected the game more than kobe.
he could give you 20-25 efficiently, give you 12-15 rebounds, solid passing big man, defensive achor, and even someone who you could lean on in the 4th quarter.
he affected the game more than kobe.
he could give you 20-25 efficiently, give you 12-15 rebounds, solid passing big man, defensive achor, and even someone who you could lean on in the 4th quarter.