What would Duncan have had to do to be seen in the same category as Kareem?

[70sFan]

If he was healthy in 04 and 06 it'd be closer but still a big advantage to Kareem imo. I'm not as high on 99-01 as you are and I find his drop-off after 07 to be pretty early for an all-time great.

I mean, I assumed 2008 without the injury. That's Duncan's 11th year, how is that early? Especially if you consider that he was MVP level player basically from the beginning of his career.

That's not Kareem's level of sustained prime, but it's not really worse than most top 10 players.

For Duncan I can get to like 5 years if I'm super generous to him but every year outside 02 and 03 he's only the best by process of elimination and not because he was playing at an all-time level those years.

You don't see 2007 as an all-time playing level? To me this season would be easily top 15 peak ever, without counting 2002-03.

[No-more-rings]

To me, healthy Duncan was the best player in the league during 2001-07 period.

Duncan was fully healthy in 01 and still wasn’t better than Shaq.

I think that's arguable, especially if you include regular season performance.

Their regular seasons were comparable at best, Shaq significantly better in the playoffs and head to head in the playoffs. You can argue it, but I don’t know who else would agree with it.

[70sFan]

Duncan was fully healthy in 01 and still wasn’t better than Shaq.

I think that's arguable, especially if you include regular season performance.

Their regular seasons were comparable at best, Shaq significantly better in the playoffs and head to head in the playoffs. You can argue it, but I don’t know who else would agree with it.

I disagree that their regular seasons were comparable. Shaq played with significantly better team and he didn't lead them to a better results. Whenever you look at the team results, on court results or supporting cast, that's the case.

Are you sure that Shaq was significantly beter in the playoffs? Duncan quietly had an all-time great postseason run until the last two WCF games. He absolutely torched Mavs and he did anything he could in the first two games against the Lakers. I mean, I don't see Shaq as the better player in the first two games of the series at all. Duncan disappeared in the last two games, but are they enough to say that the comparison isn't close? I don't think so, to me Shaq vs Duncan debate started in 2001.

[Dutchball97]

If he was healthy in 04 and 06 it'd be closer but still a big advantage to Kareem imo. I'm not as high on 99-01 as you are and I find his drop-off after 07 to be pretty early for an all-time great.

I mean, I assumed 2008 without the injury. That's Duncan's 11th year, how is that early? Especially if you consider that he was MVP level player basically from the beginning of his career.

That's not Kareem's level of sustained prime, but it's not really worse than most top 10 players.

For Duncan I can get to like 5 years if I'm super generous to him but every year outside 02 and 03 he's only the best by process of elimination and not because he was playing at an all-time level those years.

You don't see 2007 as an all-time playing level? To me this season would be easily top 15 peak ever, without counting 2002-03.

I've always been pretty vocal about how I see Duncan's prime being his undoing in GOAT debates as his peak, longevity and accomplishments can compete with anybody. It's no shame to have a prime on the shorter end when your comparisons are the greatest players of all time. As to 2007, it's definitely really good but I see it as a bit worse than 02 and 03. It's probably fair to call it an all-time season though. I don't think 07 Duncan would easily be a top 15 peak if I'm honest. His season seems pretty comparable to the ones we're discussing now in the 15-25 range.

[70sFan]

If he was healthy in 04 and 06 it'd be closer but still a big advantage to Kareem imo. I'm not as high on 99-01 as you are and I find his drop-off after 07 to be pretty early for an all-time great.

I mean, I assumed 2008 without the injury. That's Duncan's 11th year, how is that early? Especially if you consider that he was MVP level player basically from the beginning of his career.

That's not Kareem's level of sustained prime, but it's not really worse than most top 10 players.

For Duncan I can get to like 5 years if I'm super generous to him but every year outside 02 and 03 he's only the best by process of elimination and not because he was playing at an all-time level those years.

You don't see 2007 as an all-time playing level? To me this season would be easily top 15 peak ever, without counting 2002-03.

I've always been pretty vocal about how I see Duncan's prime being his undoing in GOAT debates as his peak, longevity and accomplishments can compete with anybody. It's no shame to have a prime on the shorter end when your comparisons are the greatest players of all time. As to 2007, it's definitely really good but I see it as a bit worse than 02 and 03. It's probably fair to call it an all-time season though. I don't think 07 Duncan would easily be a top 15 peak if I'm honest. His season seems pretty comparable to the ones we're discussing now in the 15-25 range.

Well, for me 2007 Duncan would be ranked higher than Walton, who is already voted in. I don't know, to me people don't have 2007 version that high because he shared offensive duties with Manu and Parker.

[Dutchball97]

I mean, I assumed 2008 without the injury. That's Duncan's 11th year, how is that early? Especially if you consider that he was MVP level player basically from the beginning of his career.

That's not Kareem's level of sustained prime, but it's not really worse than most top 10 players.


You don't see 2007 as an all-time playing level? To me this season would be easily top 15 peak ever, without counting 2002-03.

I've always been pretty vocal about how I see Duncan's prime being his undoing in GOAT debates as his peak, longevity and accomplishments can compete with anybody. It's no shame to have a prime on the shorter end when your comparisons are the greatest players of all time. As to 2007, it's definitely really good but I see it as a bit worse than 02 and 03. It's probably fair to call it an all-time season though. I don't think 07 Duncan would easily be a top 15 peak if I'm honest. His season seems pretty comparable to the ones we're discussing now in the 15-25 range.

Well, for me 2007 Duncan would be ranked higher than Walton, who is already voted in. I don't know, to me people don't have 2007 version that high because he shared offensive duties with Manu and Parker.

There is an argument to be made that Duncan was just as good in 2007 as he was in 2002 and 2003 but the latter years are more impressive due to a relative lack of help compared to later seasons. I agree 07 Duncan deserves to be above 77 Walton but then again I wouldn't have it on a different tier than 08 Kobe or 06 Wade who just got voted in around 20th.

[70sFan]

I've always been pretty vocal about how I see Duncan's prime being his undoing in GOAT debates as his peak, longevity and accomplishments can compete with anybody. It's no shame to have a prime on the shorter end when your comparisons are the greatest players of all time. As to 2007, it's definitely really good but I see it as a bit worse than 02 and 03. It's probably fair to call it an all-time season though. I don't think 07 Duncan would easily be a top 15 peak if I'm honest. His season seems pretty comparable to the ones we're discussing now in the 15-25 range.

Well, for me 2007 Duncan would be ranked higher than Walton, who is already voted in. I don't know, to me people don't have 2007 version that high because he shared offensive duties with Manu and Parker.

There is an argument to be made that Duncan was just as good in 2007 as he was in 2002 and 2003 but the latter years are more impressive due to a relative lack of help compared to later seasons. I agree 07 Duncan deserves to be above 77 Walton but then again I wouldn't have it on a different tier than 08 Kobe or 06 Wade who just got voted in around 20th.

Fair enough, I would still have 2007 Duncan over these guards but I understand your point of view.

[SeattleJazzFan]

he'd have to be a more dominant scorer.

[Jaivl]

Seems I'm way higher on MJ than you are. I've got him as being the clear best for 9 years in 88-93 and 96-98. For Duncan I can get to like 5 years if I'm super generous to him but every year outside 02 and 03 he's only the best by process of elimination and not because he was playing at an all-time level those years. It's not like the likes of Kareem and MJ never had years where they were just barely the best but they've still got way more seasons at the absolute highest level. Duncan not being the top dog for x amount of years absolutely disqualifies him from the GOAT conversation because it is my personal rankings/evaluations and relative dominance over peers is a very important criteria for me. It's also literally the only negative I have against Duncan and every time it comes up people make a big deal out of it.

Brainfart on 89 (but using the criteria some use for Duncan, he didn't win MVP, how could be he the undisputed top dog?), but I don't think 88, 93, 97 and 98 are clear at all, even if I do lean Jordan on most of them.

A hipotetically "healthy Duncan" probably has 02, 03, 05, 06 and 07 on lock (I think 04 KG is too good to just slot Duncan ahead), with 00, 01 and 04 still being all-time years. That's not really that far behind Jordan, if any.

I have Kareem clearly above Jordan and Jordan clearly above Duncan as it is, but 00 alone is just an enormous amount of value lost to injury. Enough to make things fuzzy.

[Warspite]

Score about 10ppg more.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Duncan needs to be 2 inches taller than he was and Duncan needs to score more efficienty.

[falcolombardi]

Duncan needs to be 2 inches taller than he was and Duncan needs to score more efficienty.

Couldnt you twist this the other way and say kareem needed to be stronger and smarter defender to be on duncan level?

Kareem is clearly a superior scorer by a clear amount, but duncan is superior in other aspects like rebounding and defense

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Duncan needs to be 2 inches taller than he was and Duncan needs to score more efficienty.

Couldnt you twist this the other way and say kareem needed to be stronger and smarter defender to be on duncan level?

Kareem is clearly a superior scorer by a clear amount, but duncan is superior in other aspects like rebounding and defense

No you can't twist it the other way. Karrem was better at what Duncan was good at than Duncan was at what Kaerrm was good at. I don't see Duncan having any great defensive advantage over 1970s Kareem's defense except perhaps consistency of effort. If young Kareem really tries on defense I think young Kareem will have more defensive impact than Duncan.

Duncan had the better basketball IQ and better work efort but if you include 1970s Kareem then Kareem is the better rebounder and perhaps the better defender because of superior athletic talent and size despite Duncan being the smarter defender and the more motivated defender.

Duncan may have maximized his potential more as a rebounder but Kareem still has a small edge over Duncan in career rebounds per minute despite Kareem neglecting rebounding for the entire decade of the 1980s. I don't know if it was 1980s Lakers coaching that made Kareem prioritize shot blocking over rebounding or if it was Kareem liking to avoid body contact that hurt Kareem's rebounding in the 1980s.

Vs my Celtics in the 1980s in games after the Lakers lost the game because Kareem failed to rebound, Kareem would usually pay attention to rebounding in the next game and have a good rebounding game. My impression was that in the 1980s Kareem would only rebound if he had to rebound for the Lakers to win the game. Otherwise he does not want his hips touching some other mans hips so let Rambis or AC green dirty thenselves by banging with the other team's big men.

[falcolombardi]

Duncan needs to be 2 inches taller than he was and Duncan needs to score more efficienty.

Couldnt you twist this the other way and say kareem needed to be stronger and smarter defender to be on duncan level?

Kareem is clearly a superior scorer by a clear amount, but duncan is superior in other aspects like rebounding and defense

Duncan had the better basketball IQ and better work efort but if you include 1970s Kareem then Kareem is the better rebounder and perhaps the better defender because of superior athletic talent and size despite Duncan being the smarter defender and the more motivated defender.

Duncan may have maximized his potential more as a rebounder but Kareem still has a small edge over Duncan in career rebounds per minute despite Kareem neglecting rebounding for the entire decade of the 1980s. I don't know if it was 1980s Lakers coaching that made Kareem prioritize shot blocking over rebounding or if it was Kareem liking to avoid body contact that hurt Kareem's rebounding in the 1980s.

Vs my Celtics in the 1980s in games after the Lakers lost the game because Kareem failed to rebound, Kareem would usually pay attention to rebounding in the next game and have a good rebounding game. My impression was that in the 1980s Kareem would only rebound if he had to rebound for the Lakers to win the game. Otherwise he does not want his hips touching some other mans hips so let Rambis or AC green dirty thenselves by banging with the other team's big men.

Kareen peak defense being better than duncan peak defense is a fairly unusual opinion, wont say you are fpr sure wrong, but most posters will be starting from the idea duncan has somedge on kareem defensively so that is where part of your disagreement with the board opinion may come

I also would ask how much kareem and duncan rebounded -per 100 possesions- rather than by minutes

Remember the 70's were a much higher pace era with lower efficiency than duncan 00's. So there were just more rebounds to grab (before even getting into how duncan usually played in big lineups with another 7 footer like robinson, nesterovic or oberto)

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Couldnt you twist this the other way and say kareem needed to be stronger and smarter defender to be on duncan level?

Kareem is clearly a superior scorer by a clear amount, but duncan is superior in other aspects like rebounding and defense

Duncan had the better basketball IQ and better work efort but if you include 1970s Kareem then Kareem is the better rebounder and perhaps the better defender because of superior athletic talent and size despite Duncan being the smarter defender and the more motivated defender.

Duncan may have maximized his potential more as a rebounder but Kareem still has a small edge over Duncan in career rebounds per minute despite Kareem neglecting rebounding for the entire decade of the 1980s. I don't know if it was 1980s Lakers coaching that made Kareem prioritize shot blocking over rebounding or if it was Kareem liking to avoid body contact that hurt Kareem's rebounding in the 1980s.

Vs my Celtics in the 1980s in games after the Lakers lost the game because Kareem failed to rebound, Kareem would usually pay attention to rebounding in the next game and have a good rebounding game. My impression was that in the 1980s Kareem would only rebound if he had to rebound for the Lakers to win the game. Otherwise he does not want his hips touching some other mans hips so let Rambis or AC green dirty thenselves by banging with the other team's big men.

Kareen peak defense being better than duncan peak defense is a fairly unusual opinion, wont say you are fpr sure wrong, but most posters will be starting from the idea duncan has somedge on kareem defensively so that is where part of your disagreement with the board opinion may come

I also would ask how much kareem and duncan rebounded -per 100 possesions- rather than by minutes

Remember the 70's were a much higher pace era with lower efficiency than duncan 00's. So there were just more rebounds to grab (before even getting into how duncan usually played in big lineups with another 7 footer like robinson, nesterovic or oberto)

I think people have mythologized Duncan's defense. I don't remember Duncan's defense as being that much better than Robert Parish's defense and I prefer peak Robinson's defense to Duncan's defense.

Young mobile Kareem was a defensive force but would he have looked as good vs modern teams.Did the 1970s make Kareem look better than he was?

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

I would much rather have 2001 Shaq than 2001 Duncan.
Shaq recks defenses. Shaq can't be boxed out.
Duncan is just a faster better version of Robert Parish which is not an insult because a faster better Parish would be great.

Shaq can't guard speed but if the defense can't find a way for Shaq to not have to guard speed then I blame the coaching staff.

[falcolombardi]

Duncan had the better basketball IQ and better work efort but if you include 1970s Kareem then Kareem is the better rebounder and perhaps the better defender because of superior athletic talent and size despite Duncan being the smarter defender and the more motivated defender.

Duncan may have maximized his potential more as a rebounder but Kareem still has a small edge over Duncan in career rebounds per minute despite Kareem neglecting rebounding for the entire decade of the 1980s. I don't know if it was 1980s Lakers coaching that made Kareem prioritize shot blocking over rebounding or if it was Kareem liking to avoid body contact that hurt Kareem's rebounding in the 1980s.

Vs my Celtics in the 1980s in games after the Lakers lost the game because Kareem failed to rebound, Kareem would usually pay attention to rebounding in the next game and have a good rebounding game. My impression was that in the 1980s Kareem would only rebound if he had to rebound for the Lakers to win the game. Otherwise he does not want his hips touching some other mans hips so let Rambis or AC green dirty thenselves by banging with the other team's big men.

Kareen peak defense being better than duncan peak defense is a fairly unusual opinion, wont say you are fpr sure wrong, but most posters will be starting from the idea duncan has somedge on kareem defensively so that is where part of your disagreement with the board opinion may come

I also would ask how much kareem and duncan rebounded -per 100 possesions- rather than by minutes

Remember the 70's were a much higher pace era with lower efficiency than duncan 00's. So there were just more rebounds to grab (before even getting into how duncan usually played in big lineups with another 7 footer like robinson, nesterovic or oberto)

I think people have mythologized Duncan's defense. I don't remember Duncan's defense as being that much better than Robert Parish's defense and I prefer peak Robinson's defense to Duncan's defense.

Young mobile Kareem was a defensive force but would he have looked as good vs modern teams.Did the 1970s make Kareem look better than he was?

You are more than allowed to be lower on duncan defense than most here, just pointing out that differencr is why you and mpst of the board dont see eye to eye on duncan. So the discussion should be about why you think duncan was not that great on D as the board thinks

The 70's had even less spacing than the 00's and tougher reffing on ballhandling, both of which would benefit kareem in defense to some degree

Also i think you didnt see the rebounding part of my comment about why i wouldnt compare their per minute rebounding at face value (faster pace amd more missed shots in kareem era, duncan played with bigger interior teammates)

[falcolombardi]

I would much rather have 2001 Shaq than 2001 Duncan.
Shaq recks defenses. Shaq can't be boxed out.
Duncan is just a faster better version of Robert Parish which is not an insult because a faster better Parish would be great.

Shaq can't guard speed but if the defense can't find a way for Shaq to not have to guard speed then I blame the coaching staff.

Nobody should disagree shaq is a better offensive player, but he was also not as good at defense as duncan. That trade off is what needs to be evaluated as we already agree shaq beats him in Offense

Shaq issues in defense compared to duncan were partially related to his body mass (less stamina, less mobility on space) and less defensive effort/intelligence

Smart coaching can minimize these to a degree but never completely

[JordansBulls]

Been the clear best player in his era for more than 1-2 seasons.

[70sFan]

Duncan had the better basketball IQ and better work efort but if you include 1970s Kareem then Kareem is the better rebounder and perhaps the better defender because of superior athletic talent and size despite Duncan being the smarter defender and the more motivated defender.

Duncan may have maximized his potential more as a rebounder but Kareem still has a small edge over Duncan in career rebounds per minute despite Kareem neglecting rebounding for the entire decade of the 1980s. I don't know if it was 1980s Lakers coaching that made Kareem prioritize shot blocking over rebounding or if it was Kareem liking to avoid body contact that hurt Kareem's rebounding in the 1980s.

Vs my Celtics in the 1980s in games after the Lakers lost the game because Kareem failed to rebound, Kareem would usually pay attention to rebounding in the next game and have a good rebounding game. My impression was that in the 1980s Kareem would only rebound if he had to rebound for the Lakers to win the game. Otherwise he does not want his hips touching some other mans hips so let Rambis or AC green dirty thenselves by banging with the other team's big men.

Kareen peak defense being better than duncan peak defense is a fairly unusual opinion, wont say you are fpr sure wrong, but most posters will be starting from the idea duncan has somedge on kareem defensively so that is where part of your disagreement with the board opinion may come

I also would ask how much kareem and duncan rebounded -per 100 possesions- rather than by minutes

Remember the 70's were a much higher pace era with lower efficiency than duncan 00's. So there were just more rebounds to grab (before even getting into how duncan usually played in big lineups with another 7 footer like robinson, nesterovic or oberto)

I think people have mythologized Duncan's defense. I don't remember Duncan's defense as being that much better than Robert Parish's defense and I prefer peak Robinson's defense to Duncan's defense.

Young mobile Kareem was a defensive force but would he have looked as good vs modern teams.Did the 1970s make Kareem look better than he was?

Well, that's why we should find a way to evaluate defense better. We have a lot of reasons to pick Duncan over Parish defensively. He has one of the best impact profile ever. He looks significantly better on the tape.

Sometimes I wonder if you base your defensive evaluation of high flying blocks. I bet you'd take Parish over Draymond on defense as well.