Spoiler:
70sFan wrote:Can we focus on Duncan vs Wilt? This thread has nothing to do with Kobe.
You're right, I'll digress after this reply to your question below.
70sFan wrote:LAL1947 wrote:tsherkin wrote:s we have seen with coaching, color commentary and talk shows, playing the game at a high level doesnt correlate with knowing much about the game or possessing insight. There is a reason relatively few All-Star players end up being meaningful coaches or analysts
Honest debate, analysis and comparison are skillsets outside of Durant's wheelhouse. He speaks primarily from an emotional standpoint, recency bias and nostalgia, which is neither surprising nor unique to him. In no way is he practiced at the relevant skills, nor knowledgeable in the appropriate information, to be considered any kind of expert on player comparison.
If that bolded part is true... then neither are you an expert nor anyone else here (myself included).
In any case, if Timmy was so great, Durant would have at least mentioned him... instead of completely leaving him off the list. Timmy didn't even get a mention! Yet here you guys are, coming up with all sorts of reasons for why the players who watched and/or played against both guys have Kobe higher than Timmy but that he should not actually be higher. Perhaps, even doing that to appear more knowledgeable, who knows?
Why do you ignore players opinions that are different than yours? Some players believe Duncan was better than Kobe, why don't you quote them?
I'm not ignoring those but the players who believe Duncan was better than Kobe are just simply and greatly outnumbered by players who believe that Kobe was better than Duncan.
For example: someone who owes so much to Duncan, Steven Jackson. This is someone who was part of the Spurs 2002-03 title win, who Duncan "carried" to a title according to you guys (along with carrying Parker, Ginobili, Bruce Bowen, David Robinson, Malik Rose, etc) and so should have been a prime witness to Duncan's greatness. Even he has always said Kobe was a greater player than Duncan... and even that he'd pick Kobe over Duncan as the player to build a team around because, "Kobe gives you everything that you need in one body to lead a team to a championship".
(starts at 19:00)
This echoes what I've always said too. Which is that compared to Kobe's success which was more a result of his own talent/skills, Tim Duncan's success was a bit more of a product or result of his situation at the Spurs with Pop as coach and the system Pop used, as well as the FO they had and the amazing deep/quality rosters that those guys put together. When are we going to factor in these things?
