RealGM

is Tim Duncan a top 5 player of all time?

The only guys I have above him as locks are Lebron/Jordan/Kareem

Wilt and Russell and arguably (I tend to put Russell 4th but wilt a good bit behind at like 7-10 personally)

I think it’s relatively hard to argue him below 6th unless your taking into account impact on the game and legacy and stuff like that

i would put jordan/lebron/kareem/russell/shaq/hakeem ahead of him. hakeem/shaq is a very close call with duncan but i tend to feel pretty good about it. could be convinced on magic but wouldn't personally do it. i feel like i'm getting too low on wilt these days but i have him behind duncan. not sure anybody else has much of an argument.

I think he at least has a case even if you're not quite as high on him as I am. He's essentially the defensive Kareem that got to go to a better team from the start and didn't have those kind of lost middle years. Doesn't have to be top 5 either though, if one was low on bigs in general (relatively, not absurdly so or anything) I think it's fairly straightforward to get LeBron/MJ/Magic/Oscar all above him and several bigs have reasonable cases as well - Wilt/Russell/KAJ/Hakeem/Shaq/KG notably, though I imagine it'd be a bit tricky to get him below all of them if staying consistent in your criteria.

I'd say top 10 lock though potentially towards the back of it, decent case for top 5, I personally am quite high on him and have him #2 to LeBron.

He's a lock top 10 for me. I go back and fourth between him and Wilt at #5 though. I have him #6 since I think Wilt was a lot more dominant and ran into the Celtics who had the greatest dynasty of all time

I have him 5th, so yes.

He has a fairly strong case

Yeah I have him #5 but it's pretty close IMO. He has a strong case any way you slice it.

I have him in the 6-8 range with the likes of Shaq, Magic. etc. Still incredibly impressive career though.

No, but he has a reasonable argument.

Just shy for me. Maybe 6th-7th.

For me no. Though he has a case

mdonnelly1989 wrote:is Tim Duncan a top 5 player of all time?

NO. Fringe Top 10 AFAIC, i.e., I have him at #10 but it's very close between guys like him, Russell, KG, Durant, Karl Malone, Steph... and newer guys like Giannis, Jokic and Luka could end up over-taking him. Timmy was a great and consistent player but did not push past the boundaries of excellence like the guys I consider better than him, namely: MJ, Wilt, Lebron, Larry, Kobe, Magic, Hakeem, Kareem and Shaq. These 9 guys were best of the best at what they did. Duncan was really well rounded and intelligent but he ended up being more of a floor-raiser than a ceiling-raiser compared to them.

He won four titles as the clear-cut best player and has one of the sport’s best career win percentages, what “ceiling” are you talking about.

AEnigma wrote:He won four titles as the clear-cut best player and has one of the sport’s best career win percentages, what “ceiling” are you talking about.

Not enough cool looking fadeaways made.

LAL1947 wrote:

mdonnelly1989 wrote:is Tim Duncan a top 5 player of all time?

NO. Fringe Top 10 AFAIC, i.e., I have him at #10 but it's very close between guys like him, Russell, KG, Durant, Karl Malone, Steph... and newer guys like Giannis, Jokic and Luka could end up over-taking him. Timmy was a great and consistent player but did not push past the boundaries of excellence like the guys I consider better than him, namely: MJ, Wilt, Lebron, Larry, Kobe, Magic, Hakeem, Kareem and Shaq. These 9 guys were best of the best at what they did. Duncan was really well rounded and intelligent but he ended up being more of a floor-raiser than a ceiling-raiser compared to them.

If TD had played with a player as good as prime Kobe or Magic (like Kareem and Shaq did) I think the team ceiling would have looked more than fine (99 Drob was great but he was the best player Duncan played with in his prime, not even in this century, and results were not bad ....).

70sFan wrote:

AEnigma wrote:He won four titles as the clear-cut best player and has one of the sport’s best career win percentages, what “ceiling” are you talking about.

Not enough cool looking fadeaways made.

According to discussions i had here in real gm. Not being on teams as good as durant/curry warriors or 96 bulls apparently

I would argue that you would have to give him prime kawhi, ginobili, parker, bowen simultaneously at his prime for the former to be a fair comparision

And peak ginobili, parker, bowen and elite depth for the latter

Neither of which ever happened.

Spurs had a ton of great players but they never could get them all together at their primes like that. 2005-2007 is the closest and they won 2 rings there

Which explains why they were such a long term dinasty as they always had great players but "staggered" over a long term

AdagioPace wrote:

LAL1947 wrote:

mdonnelly1989 wrote:is Tim Duncan a top 5 player of all time?

NO. Fringe Top 10 AFAIC, i.e., I have him at #10 but it's very close between guys like him, Russell, KG, Durant, Karl Malone, Steph... and newer guys like Giannis, Jokic and Luka could end up over-taking him. Timmy was a great and consistent player but did not push past the boundaries of excellence like the guys I consider better than him, namely: MJ, Wilt, Lebron, Larry, Kobe, Magic, Hakeem, Kareem and Shaq. These 9 guys were best of the best at what they did. Duncan was really well rounded and intelligent but he ended up being more of a floor-raiser than a ceiling-raiser compared to them.

If TD had played with a player as good as prime Kobe or Magic (like Kareem and Shaq did) I think the team ceiling would have looked more than fine (99 Drob was great but he was the best player Duncan played with in his prime, not even in this century, and results were not bad ....).

This goes to the team building dominance of the small market Spurs. Drafting and grooming is the ideal way for small markets to grow. I personally have Timmy at 6. He was able to win in 3 decades with a revolving door of teammates. Longevity is important to think and elongating the importance of big men until the end. Would tony and manu be as relevant without the Big Fundamental?

One of the only 5 GOAT candidates imo, so yes I definitely think he is.

And while some judge players on skills rather than accomplishments, it's impossible for anyone to deny he has a top 5 NBA career resume.

falcolombardi wrote:

70sFan wrote:

AEnigma wrote:He won four titles as the clear-cut best player and has one of the sport’s best career win percentages, what “ceiling” are you talking about.

Not enough cool looking fadeaways made.

According to discussions i had here in real gm. Not being on teams as good as durant/curry warriors or 96 bulls apparently

I would argue that you would have to give him prime kawhi, ginobili, parker, bowen simultaneously at his prime for the former to be a fair comparision

And peak ginobili, parker, bowen and elite depth for the latter

Neither of which ever happened.

Spurs had a ton of great players but they never could get them all together at their primes like that. 2005-2007 is the closest and they won 2 rings there

Which explains why they were such a long term dinasty as they always had great players but "staggered" over a long term

I think 7-8 SRS team + title contending is the best you can hope for with these rosters. Spurs went beyond their limits in the early-mid 10s only because something clicked collectively (including Pop), but it's not replicable. Using a traditional 2 superstars duo (+ good supporting cast) is the conventional way to reach higher team ceilings. Of course, one could argue if they could have had even better offensive results with Duncan having less primacy down-low in the mid'00, but it's not easily demonstrable.