Where do you rank Tim Duncan all-time? (poll)

[ardee]

Michael
Russell
Wilt
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Duncan
Kobe
Shaq
LeBron

So 7. Kobe may surpass him, may not, LeBron probably will... In which case his worst possible ranking would be 9.

[Nairobi]

I value players by level of play and prime and peak have more value for me than longevity (it's better to have 4 great years, than 10 above average).

Jordan, Russell, KAJ, Shaq, LJ, Oscar, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, KG - all are higher than Duncan. So he is probably 11th, but Dr J, Wilt or even Kobe might be also above Tim.

Olajuwon and Garnett over Duncan? Well, it's ur opinion, so that's to be respected

[therealbig3]

Why do people scoff at ranking Duncan around top 5? He had a monstrous peak. He has great longevity. He was remarkably consistent. He's STILL in the discussion as a top 5 player, even though he's like 90 years old.

He's got a top 5-caliber career. I personally don't rank him that high (I have him 8th, behind Jordan, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, LeBron, Magic, and Hakeem), but I could understand arguments for him over LeBron, Magic, and Hakeem. I personally don't think he has much argument over Shaq, but other people do rank him over Shaq, so maybe he has a case as high as 4th. Where exactly is he lacking in his career that ranking him 4th or 5th is ridiculous?

On top of his obvious on-court dominance, he's also quite possibly the greatest teammate and franchise cornerstone ever.

[bastillon]

Why do people scoff at ranking Duncan around top 5? He had a monstrous peak. He has great longevity. He was remarkably consistent. He's STILL in the discussion as a top 5 player, even though he's like 90 years old.

He's got a top 5-caliber career. I personally don't rank him that high (I have him 8th, behind Jordan, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, LeBron, Magic, and Hakeem), but I could understand arguments for him over LeBron, Magic, and Hakeem. I personally don't think he has much argument over Shaq, but other people do rank him over Shaq, so maybe he has a case as high as 4th. Where exactly is he lacking in his career that ranking him 4th or 5th is ridiculous?

On top of his obvious on-court dominance, he's also quite possibly the greatest teammate and franchise cornerstone ever.

-in some way a product of Pop's brilliant coaching
-his great RS defense had weaknesses that could be exposed come playoff time, both team defense (quickness in particular, which is why Suns were rolling offensively against the Spurs) and man defense (mostly getting hidden behind other people when matched up against Shaq - unthinkable for guys like Hakeem, D-Rob or even Karl Malone)
-his offensive game had weaknesses that could get exposed, particularly his weak jumpshot that gets insanely overrated by everyone - there's a reason why opp often dared him to shoot, his scoring is okay but not dominant and looked pale in comparison to all time greats particularly when he had strong post defenders matched up against him... for that reason he had stretches of epic struggles in the playoffs in his prime (01 Grant, 04 Malone, 05 Sheed)
-unimpressive leader/gtg/crunch time player
-sometimes ended up with nagging injuries in the playoffs that limited his effectiveness
-horrendous competition when he won titles

I could understand Duncan being a top5 career as you said but he's just a lot less talented than top players. he's clearly the worst offensive player in the top10 save Russell. his defense is great in comparison to peers but not to all time greats. I don't think I'd take Duncan's defense over Ewing. much less D-Rob or Dream. so he makes up a lot with his defense but not enough to be in the top5.

[Narigo]

4th. I have only Jordan, Kareem and Russell over him.

[therealbig3]

Except Duncan forced Shaq into one of his worst offensive series ever in 02, when D-Rob was injured. He defended Shaq better than Hakeem did in 95, and Shaq was a much better player in 02 than 95. Duncan always spent a decent amount of time defending Shaq as well, but it's not really his fault when he does have a teammate that can defend him effectively, is it?

Defensively, I don't really know what you're getting at. I'm guessing how the Spurs played against the Mavs and Suns...which really doesn't make much sense, since it is possible for both a defense and an offense to be successful. The Mavs and Suns may have forced the Spurs into giving up a higher ORating than usual, but the Spurs for the most part also prevented them from scoring at their typical ORating.

01 vs Mavericks: -6.7
05 vs Suns: -0.6
06 vs Mavericks: +2.6
07 vs Suns: -6.2

During his prime, the Mavericks only lit up the Spurs once, in 06, when Duncan was suffering from plantar fascitis...and he more than made up for his defense with a monster offensive series. And the series in 05 which everyone likes to point to when they talk about the Spurs defense getting destroyed...they still held the Suns under their average. In 01 and 07, against two great offensive teams, the Spurs defense dominated, led by Duncan.

You're telling me that D-Rob, Ewing, Hakeem, and KG never had opposing teams that played great offensively against their team? Does that point to a weakness in their defensive games? Or maybe every so often, an opposing team just gets hot offensively?

There's really nothing that proves any of those guys were better than Duncan defensively. On par, yes, but better? I haven't seen anything that proves that, outside of RAPM for KG in specific years, which more or less concluded that KG and Duncan were equal.

And Duncan is a better offensive player than KG. As someone who is always talking about the importance of a back to the basket game and how important it is to maintain efficiency in the playoffs...KG's offensive efficiency often went to crap in the playoffs because he had no back to the basket game. Even in Boston with better teammates, he was never that efficient in the playoffs. KG had a better jumpshot, but Duncan had a better low post game, which is why he was actually able to anchor an offense instead of play a complementary role during his prime, like KG did in 08...but even when Duncan has shifted to a complementary role in recent years, he's been fantastic at it. And I've already responded to your list of "epic" playoff struggles before, it's really not that convincing. The only criticism that's true is that he has suffered from injuries in the playoffs, but pretty much only during his 04-06 seasons, when he was still dominant and one of the best in the game anyway. He was a top 3 player in 04, arguably the best player in 05, and still a top 5 player in 06. He returned to best in the game status in 07. He's had 4 seasons where injuries have affected him in the playoffs: 00, 04, 05, and 06. But only 00 is when he actually missed the playoffs. Like I said, he was still a dominant player from 04-06 despite his injuries, so I don't see why that should take away from his career too much. Especially when you compare him to Bird, for example, who had numerous injuries throughout his career that clearly limited him in the playoffs. In 01, I also pointed out how he had 2 dominant games, and then 2 bad games against Grant. Not to mention that the 01 Lakers completely overmatched them and Duncan really didn't have any support to speak of.

You're taking small sample sizes of mainly injured and past his physical prime Duncan to support your claims that he was shut down by competent post defenders, when that really isn't the case.

[bastillon]

re: man defense. yeah, when he was defending Shaq for 15 mins a game, he was effective doing it. but you're kind of missing my point. he was always getting hidden behind other players instead of actually guarding the best in the game himself. he should've been defending Shaq for entire games, not some extremely limited stretches. to me his man defense is for that reason overrated. what good is he for me, if he can't maintain his level of play while defending top opps? Shaq is not the only one either, Bruce Bowen was defending Dirk for christ's sake. what was Duncan's history of playoff man defense? defensive series worth mentioning? guys he stopped? compared to the best, he's very poor in that regard.

re: team defense. Colts thread about Nash:

05 vs Grizzlies: 124.1 Ortg vs 102.9 Drtg (+21.2)
05 vs Mavs: 118.1 Ortg vs. 104.1 Drtg (+14)
05 vs Spurs: 115.7 Ortg vs 98.8 Drtg (+16.9)

06 vs Lakers: 115 Ortg vs 105.7 Drtg (+9.3)
06 vs Clippers: 115.1 Ortg vs 103.8 Drtg (+11.3)
06 vs Mavs: 113.3 Ortg vs 105 Drtg (+8.3)

07 vs Lakers: 111.8 Ortg vs 105.6 Drtg (+6.2)
07 vs Spurs: 109.6 Ortg vs 99.9 Drtg (+9.7)

10 vs Blazers: 111.5 Ortg vs. 107.1 Drtg (+4.4)
10 vs Spurs: 124.5 Ortg vs 104.5 Drtg (+20)
10 vs Lakers: 122 Ortg vs 103.7 Drtg (+18.3)

re: KG. it's undeniable that Garnett's back to the basket game is a weakness compared to other all time greats. but with Garnett I can build a great offensive team with him at the high post. couple good guards who could actually score off the dribble and this team is incredibly hard to stop (say... Parker and Manu...). with Duncan I don't really have that luxury to play him high post because he doesn't have the skillset for that. his mediocre jumper and only good passing skills are not enough to anchor the offense around his high post game. for that reason, I'd rather have KG offensively. neither can be a true #1 offensively on a good offensive team in the playoffs, but Garnett is gonna be a great #2 guy with ability to stretch the floor and make plays from the elbow. Duncan's better in the low post but against good post defenders he's not that effective so it's pointless anyway. I'd only build my offense around a low post guy if I had Kareem, McHale, Hakeem or Shaq.

[therealbig3]

Well...02 against Shaq, like I said. 04 against Pau (Pau was efficient, but had limited volume and was kept completely off the glass). Sheed in 05. KG in 99.

And you missed my point regarding team defense. An offense and a defense can both play well at the same time. I don't see anything incriminating Duncan's defense there. The Spurs pretty much always held their opponents under their average, and were rarely lit up by anyone, which actually isn't something I can say about Ewing's Knicks, or Hakeem's Rockets, or Robinson's Spurs.

Colts's numbers for the Suns offense against the Spurs is also a little off, they actually had a 113.9 ORating against them in 05, and had a 114.5 RS ORating, meaning the Spurs actually held them under their average. Again in 07, the Suns ORating against the Spurs was 107.7, while in the RS, they had a 113.9 ORating, meaning the Spurs limited an ATG offense as much as reasonably possible.

BTW, did Hakeem's Rockets or Robinson's Spurs ever have to go up against an offense like Nash's Suns? I'm legitimately curious, can't remember off the top of my head.

And your theory would make more sense if Duncan hadn't already anchored successful offenses in the playoffs as the #1 option. Even against elite defenses like the 05 Pistons (+2.4 against the Pistons defense in the Finals).

[Shot Clock]

Shaq had numerous injuries in the series vs SAS in 2002, cut hand the big toe etc. he was seriously struggling.

As for team defense vs Phoenix. In 2000 the Spurs faced the Suns in the first round without Duncan and crushed them defensively. They still lost the series but SAS has a very strong defensive team system, yet most of the results somehow get attributed to Tim. So in the 05 series the Suns best big goes wild but Duncan gets credit for team defense. How about 2000?

[therealbig3]

Aside from the obvious that Jason Kidd didn't play in 3/4 games in that series, SA still had David Robinson and were able to focus more on the defensive side of the ball...but on the same token, they completely collapsed offensively without Duncan. Teams adjust without their star and tend to focus on one side of the ball where they can compensate. But they clearly collapsed as a team without Duncan.

In 05, Amare dominated in the PnR, which was really because of how awesome Nash was. When he actually went at Duncan in the post, he got owned.

SA does have a strong defensive system, but in a bigger sample size of games during the RS, and without a team shift in strategy that was evident during the playoffs (because their offense sucked without him too), the defense also fell off a cliff without Duncan. And elevating an already solid defensive team to historically great levels is more impressive than taking a mediocre defense to above average levels.

Even ignoring a shift in strategy though, it's very plausible that the Suns offense would have sucked anyway since they didn't have their best offensive player for pretty much the whole series.

[therealbig3]

Yep, Shaq's injuries were why he didn't play well against the Spurs...but somehow they didn't stop him from destroying the Blazers in the 1st round, the Kings in the Conference Finals, and the Nets in the Finals. It only affected him against the Spurs. Seems plausible.

It couldn't possibly be because the Spurs had Tim Duncan.

[Shot Clock]

Yep, Shaq's injuries were why he didn't play well against the Spurs...but somehow they didn't stop him from destroying the Blazers in the 1st round, the Kings in the Conference Finals, and the Nets in the Finals. It only affected him against the Spurs. Seems plausible.

It couldn't possibly be because the Spurs had Tim Duncan.

When you hurts yourself early in a series......he had 2 injuries needing stitches, the toe and a sprained ankle. But I'm sure it was all Duncan.....

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basket ... lakers_ap/

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basket ... juries_ap/

Hampered for months by a painful arthritic big right toe responsible for two trips to the injured list, O'Neal's latest injury is a cut on his right index finger.

"He was numb -- try to shoot with a numb hand. That's tough," Walker said. "He's beat up right now, he's playing hurt, he's playing sore. He's hurting, there's no doubt about it."

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2002/Spurs ... 01f5c2f886

The Lakers' center has long been troubled by an arthritic big toe, and he cut the index finger of his shooting hand during Sunday's playoff victory. What's more, he says he has a sprained left ankle from Game 2.

[therealbig3]

It says his big toe was bothering him for months, and injuries that occurred in the SA series after 2 games (which means he only played the last 3 games injured) should still have bothered him against Sacramento and NJ, but he still destroyed them. And the article does state that the Spurs were wary of Shaq's injuries.

And in the first two games in which Shaq was "healthy", he still combined for 21/12 on 46% TS. Those were actually his 2 worst games of the series...so...yeah.

[Shot Clock]

It says his big toe was bothering him for months, and injuries that occurred in the SA series after 2 games (which means he only played the last 3 games injured) should still have bothered him against Sacramento and NJ, but he still destroyed them. And the article does state that the Spurs were wary of Shaq's injuries.

And in the first two games in which Shaq was "healthy", he still combined for 21/12 on 46% TS. Those were actually his 2 worst games of the series...so...yeah.

O'Neal sustained two injuries that required stitches Sunday before leading the Lakers to an 86-80 victory over the San Antonio Spurs in the opener of their Western Conference semifinal series.


So...no

Even if you watch the series you will hear lots of talk about Shaq's state. I'm sure the cuts and sprain were improving by the next round. His toe required surgery in the off season.

[ronnymac2]

Wait what? Shaq got hurt in the middle of Game 1. That isn't playing the last 3 games injured. That's playing the last 4.5 games injured.

[TheChosen618]

I personally don't think he has much argument over Shaq, but other people do rank him over Shaq, so maybe he has a case as high as 4th.

I use to think this as well but then I realized that Duncan clearly has a good argument over Shaq.

Shaq clearly had the better peak and both of these two players had good longevity. The issue is that these two had different types of longevity. Shaq was one of the most consistent offensive players of all-time but he was inconsistent defensively outside of the 1999-00 season (his peak). Duncan on the other hand has always been a consistent force on every aspect of the game especially on defense and rebounding.

I would say Duncan has better longevity because of that. However, I did mention earlier that Duncan was not that consistent due to injuries and it was part of why he was never able to repeat as champions but Shaq had his share of injuries as well. He generally preserved himself in the regular season and for the playoffs but even then he had some injury problems in the playoffs like in 2002 and 2005.

I suppose if someone were to value offense above all than Shaq would clearly be better than Duncan because Shaq was always better offensively but if you value the other aspects of the game, the comparison gets closer and could even go to the edge to Duncan.

[Durins Baynes]

Shaq was no more hurt in 2002 than he was in the preceding year, or subsequent two years.

[therealbig3]

It says his big toe was bothering him for months, and injuries that occurred in the SA series after 2 games (which means he only played the last 3 games injured) should still have bothered him against Sacramento and NJ, but he still destroyed them. And the article does state that the Spurs were wary of Shaq's injuries.

And in the first two games in which Shaq was "healthy", he still combined for 21/12 on 46% TS. Those were actually his 2 worst games of the series...so...yeah.

O'Neal sustained two injuries that required stitches Sunday before leading the Lakers to an 86-80 victory over the San Antonio Spurs in the opener of their Western Conference semifinal series.


So...no

Even if you watch the series you will hear lots of talk about Shaq's state. I'm sure the cuts and sprain were improving by the next round. His toe required surgery in the off season.

The last article says that O'Neal himself stated that he sprained his ankle in game 2. Yes, he got some cuts before and during game 1, but they didn't seem to bother him, as he played better when he came back into the game after getting stitched up. It seemed to be the ankle and the toe that really bothered him, one injury which he had dealt with for the previous couple of months and bothered him throughout the playoffs anyway, and an ankle sprain that most likely bothered him well beyond the series with SA. I mean, if these injuries were serious enough to force him into a terrible offensive series, I don't think they'd magically heal to the point where he goes from struggling offensively to dominant offensively in a matter of days.

Yes, he got injured during the series against SA, but his injuries seemed to be lingering injuries that should have bothered him throughout the playoffs moving forward...but it was only against SA that he seriously struggled. Seems really weird to not give credit to Duncan for that, who along with Malik Rose, was the main guy defending him in Robinson's absence.

[The Infamous1]

He be benefits greatly from not having any haters who try to tear down his legacy and playing in a small market. Generally being seen as a "nice guy" helps as well. Perception matter alot

[Durins Baynes]

That's not true I don't think. There are plenty of Kobe/KG/Shaq/Hakeem fans desperate to prop up their own guys by tearing down Duncan.