ballzboyee wrote:tsherkin wrote:ballzboyee wrote:What in the world are you talking about? Duncan was 33-34 when he scored 13ppg.
You do understand that he was playing 28.4 mpg that season, right? He posted about 17/11/3.5 PER36 that season as Pops began to understand the value of perimeter-oriented offense. That wasn't a decline in ability, that was a strategic shift in how the team was attacking the opposition, entering the ball to Tim more as a decoy or to start motion than anything else. NONE of the starters on that team played more than the 32.4 mpg Parker played, and Tony was 28.
You need to actually know what you're talking about for a player in their given season if you want to attack them for what went down in terms of their productivity.
He scored 13ppg and controlling for pace about 24 per 100, which is basically garbage tier when compared to any other top 10 player. 17ppg per 36 is also garbage tier for a supposed top 5 player. There have been so many players in the NBA that could score 13ppg. It's not special and it is not elite. Even if we take into account the idea that Popovich was somehow holding him back, Duncan career stats aren't that impressive for his position for an all-timer. He was not even Moses Malone level dominant for a big man. Nobody has Moses in the top 5. If he had been a better player, Popovich would not have schemed around him. He's just played for a great franchise with a lot of good payers throughout his career. Spurs were the Duke Blue Devils of the NBA and just reloaded year after year with elite role players and sub all stars that were under the radar. He probably wasn't even the best player his team for most of 2004 to 2014. On-off numbers just suggest he was part of a big three with Manu and Parker and with many years those two having better lineup impacts.
The issue is not whether he is an all-time great because he clearly is. But to say he is top 5 and top 3 in any era is insane to me. Based on what? There is nothing that supports that idea. Even if you look at his championships, he's a committee guy and the stats and awards reflect this. He wasn't the consensus "the man" on his team 2 out of 5 of his championships and his statistical fall off certain seasons is not consistent of an all-time ranking of a top 5 guy. If Jordan or Lebron for any reason had scored 13ppg when they 33 to 34 years old, nobody would make excuses for them. God forbid Kobe scores 13ppg for a season, he would have been excommunicated from the NBA as far as the all-time rankings.
Oh, well, people are free to believe what they want.
For a topic that's specifially about 2003 Tim Duncan, you are oddly fixated on the scoring numbers of 2011 Tim Duncan.
As many others have said, scoring wasn't Duncan's main value. He was pretty good at it, but no one has ever said Tim Duncan was a great all-time volume scorer.
Your on-off argument is a bit misleading. While there are a couple seasons where you can argue for Manu Ginobili's value, it's much harder to find good stretches of data that supports Tony Parker as being the best (or second best) Spur.