Duncan And Robinson Today

[Bubbachuck2]

Would prime Tim Duncan & David Robinson still be effective as the twin towers in today's game with all of the switching?

[IdolW0rm]

No. They would be a Capela-McGee double punch in 2023.

[Ein Sof]

Duncan's slow ass wouldn't make a roster spot in the Curry era. That's why he retired in 2016.

[cupcakesnake]

We've been watching a pretty successful pairing of Jarrett Allen and Evan Mobley (I think it would be even more successful with better shooting at the 3 spot). That's an elite modern defense.

Young Tim Duncan wasn't quite Mobley-level in terms of mobility, but he's not as far off as some may think. I think both Duncan and Robinson would be able to adapt to the mobility demands of the present day. They were both extraordinary all-around athletes.

What often makes these things tougher to imagine is that centers, pre-2008, didn't switch very much and we rarely saw them in a perimeter defensive stance. So we picture them in that more upright paint protection mode and imagine them a little stiffer than they probably are. I don't see any problems with David Robinson's foot speed. I'm a little hazier on his change of direction and hip flexibility.

I think older David Robinson is probably not the kind of player you start and play big minutes next to another big in the year 2023. Robinson was 32 when Tim joined the NBA. So we're probably only looking at 2-3 seasons of this combo being quick enough to be super successful. I don't see Robinson having the same type of longevity in that roll.

[Texas Chuck]

Elite players tend to be elite. And you'd only be playing 15-18 mpg of them together anyway.

You also have to strongly consider that one or both would have increased range had they been born 35 and 25 years later respectively. Always silly to have these hypotheticals and make the assumption that the players develop exactly the same instead of developing along current trends.

[70sFan]

Mobley and Allen work just fine defensively and all their issues wouldn't exist in this case, as Robinson and Duncan were far more versatile on offense.

[capfan33]

Somewhat of a tangent, but I think that Robinson would be incredible in today's game because of the amount of perimeter talent available to mitigate his scoring weaknesses in the playoffs. And yea Mobley and Allen are a great analogy for how they would function today.

[prolific passer]

Duncan and Robinson just like Sampson and Hakeem can before them can switch between low post and high post on offense and athletic enough to keep up with anybody defensively.

[Saints14]

I think they'd still be great because they're both amazing players but it wouldn't be optimal - they're both definitely centers in the modern era. I think it's likely one of them gets traded for a nice haul if they were teammates today

[OhayoKD]

Always silly to have these hypotheticals and make the assumption that the players develop exactly the same instead of developing along current trends.

That's probably the most sensible way to do era-translation. But people really want to make things "fair" for some reason

[Texas Chuck]

Always silly to have these hypotheticals and make the assumption that the players develop exactly the same instead of developing along current trends.

That's probably the most sensible way to do era-translation. But people really want to make things "fair" for some reason

For me the most "fair" way to do it, is to simply imagine the player in question being born X years earlier or later with all the advantages/disadvantages that come with that. Dropping them in via DeLorean feels completely pointless to me so I never attempt cross era translations like that. Steph Curry wouldn't have illegal handles and 40 foot range if he was born in 1945 and Satch Sanders isn't having to sell insurance and play in Chuck Taylor's if he was born in 1998.

I can't say for sure if Duncan and/or Robinson would become good spacers today, but I do know for sure they would have tried because basically every big works at that now. Duncan also likely plays at a leaner weight especially if paired with Robinson to start his career. Again I can't state that for sure, but I try and make the most reasonable assumptions.

But mainly those guys were elite, elite player that even if you dropped them in as is, they have skills that translate perfectly well today. David Robinson would be an elite roll man in the PNR today, and almost certainly the best defensive anchor in the league. Duncan the only guy who could really challenge that.

[OhayoKD]

Always silly to have these hypotheticals and make the assumption that the players develop exactly the same instead of developing along current trends.

That's probably the most sensible way to do era-translation. But people really want to make things "fair" for some reason

For me the most "fair" way to do it, is to simply imagine the player in question being born X years earlier or later with all the advantages/disadvantages that come with that.

There's nothing more "fair" about that. Every player is a result of the context that creates them. You want to take wilder guesses, fine, but let's not pretend "fairness" is a factor here.

[Texas Chuck]

That's probably the most sensible way to do era-translation. But people really want to make things "fair" for some reason

For me the most "fair" way to do it, is to simply imagine the player in question being born X years earlier or later with all the advantages/disadvantages that come with that.

There's nothing more "fair" about that. Every player is a result of the context that creates them. You want to take wilder guesses, fine, but let's not pretend "fairness" is a factor here.

You don't have to agree with me, but I absolutely am sincere with that feels like the most fair way. I'm not here to do bits. I'm giving my honest takes and not trying to "rig" anything to a desired result. I find that lame af.

But agree its all guessing regardless. But since time machines aren't real I need to get that player to the different generation via the miracle of childbirth in an appropriate year.

[HeartBreakKid]

I think they'd still be great because they're both amazing players but it wouldn't be optimal - they're both definitely centers in the modern era. I think it's likely one of them gets traded for a nice haul if they were teammates today

They were not optimal back then either. Tim Duncan is not really a power forward, no one watching college back then would think he was going to be a 4 in the NBA.

It's crazy to trade one of the best players just for optimization. You're talking about a top 10 and top 20 player of all time lol, you're not getting better value.

You do not need to optimize if you're overwhelmingly stronger than the other team.

[henshao]

Perhaps I'm higher on these two than most but they both had solid jump shots and reasonable lateral movement in defense, particularly Robinson. In a world where logic prevailed you would play them like Hakeem and Sampson mentioned earlier, with Robinson effectively a very tall wing and Duncan the unapologetic center as Ultra Draymond

[Woodsanity]

In their prime? Yes. In their late 30s? No.

[pdevos]

David Robinson is a much better shooting more athletic, stronger Giannis. Giannis is longer though, better handle (he's been a ball handler since teens). Giannis has 29" vertical so not nearly as explosive as most think. He takes advantage of carrying rules a lot.

Robinson was considered top 3 in the league in speed from end-to-end. He already had a very good midrange high-post game. He would be much better in this era and wouldn't need to bulk up to try to guard guys like Shaq.

I'd expect Robinson to be a better shooting Giannis in terms of numbers.

Duncan is a little tougher, but he's at least as good as Draymond Green in terms of zone defense and reading plays. And he's longer and shoots better. He by no means passes as well, handles as well, or runs as well as Draymond. But remember Ivan Zubac got a 30-30 game this year. Clint Capela, Rudy Gobert, Jonas Valančiūnas, DeAndre Ayton, Mitchell Robinson, Nic Claxton, Jarrett Allen, Kevon Looney, Jalen Duren, Jakob Poeltl, Mason Plumlee, Myles Turner, Brook Lopez, Walker Kessler, Dwight Powell, Kristaps Porziņģis, Alperen Şengün, Bam Adebayo, and Nikola Vučević all started regularly for their teams this year.

Only Porzingis, Lopez, and Vucevic are better shooters than Duncan. Duncan's low FT% doesn't convince me he's able to pick up the 3P shot with much consistency. I've looked at 100s of guys, many do, but they almost all shoot over 75% FT.

Robinson, Kessler, Claxton probably cover more ground, but Duncan is smarter than all of them in terms of anticipation and would still stack up as good if not better than Gobert and everyone else.

Duncan still shoots better than Giannis from any spot on the floor. He can't create off the dribble most likely as well (even starting him younger) or has as much vision/passing.

Can he be a Gobert defense with slightly better Bam Adebayo offense upside is probably where he lands.

Given Robinson deferred to Duncan and also was in a very physical era, bulked up to guard Shaq -- we didn't get the best Robinson WITH Duncan. And given Robinson would be just so much better in this era -- even while Duncan likely sees a slight decline, I think they're better in this era than during the era they played. Offense would get easier and they'd still be able to stay on the floor in this era.

[tsherkin]

He already had a very good midrange high-post game

Mmmm. He had a really good first step and a lot of length. And he could hit a 15-footer, and his FTs. He did not post well against guys his size, mostly only on size mismatches. He did not have a particularly inspiring back-to-the-basket game. He was a transition NIGHTMARE for the opposition, an outstanding offensive rebounder and he did move well without the ball around the post. He was able to dive in around dribble penetration quite effectively. But yeah, that right elbow "post the small guy off a cross-screen" was a San Antonio staple for a long time.

He certainly had the mobility to play in today's game; D-Rob was an athletic monster, one of the greatest physical specimens we've seen. He'd probably work more on his range today and that would help. He'd also be asked to score less, I think, which would really suit him. He crumbled pretty roughly in the playoffs in the unipolar offensive scheme SAS had due to their complete lack of worthwhile perimeter guys. No disrespect to, like, Sean Elliott, but he doesn't count as a legitimate second option. But you put Robinson with someone like Donovan Mitchell or whomever and that team is laughing.

He'd be great.

Duncan and D-Rob probably wouldn't be a hot pairing in today's game unless Robinson developed a three.... or if the team was willing to trade overall offensive efficacy and just double down on brutalizing teams defensively. Which is basically what they did together anyway, so perhaps that has answered itself. You space well with the other three guys, maybe Robinson develops some range to open it up, and you just asphyxiate the opposition's ability to effectively shoot in the paint. Yikes.

Yeah, they'd still be gross, especially if it was young D-Rob.