Let's settle this. Do you think of Duncan as a PF or C?

[LAL1947]

Best PF in the history of the game...

Why shouldn't Hakeem be the best Power Forward in the history of the game? He and Duncan were the same height and weight. More importantly, Hakeem took more shots from 10-16 feet (while Duncan played more in the 0-3 feet and 3-10 feet ranges than Hakeem did), was a better shooter, a better defender on the perimeter, had a better face-up game, and was better in the high-post too. Aren't all these things more of what you expect/want from a Power Forward rather than a Center?

And what will we say about Giannis vs Duncan as a Power Forward, when Giannis has finished playing?

[evilpimp972]

What's the problem being called a PF? You'd think reading at this thread that this notion makes a lot of people uncomfortable lol
Anyway he was a PF to start his career, then a center.

[AdagioPace]

He's not even a top10 center but he's a top pf so if you love him you see him as a pf

If he's top 10 player ever, then he's likely to be top 10 center, you know?

Well, I agree that Duncan is a Top-10 Center... but Duncan is not a Top-10 player outside of Timmy-loving/Kobe-hating polls on RealGM... that do their best to put down Kobe because some Duncan fans here realize it's their best chance of putting Duncan into the all-time Top-10.

In chronological order: Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe and Lebron.

That's 10 players right there who are ahead of him in the opinion of the rest of the world... as well as in the eyes of players. Anyone looking at this list should also notice there is no Power Forward in there. Hence the obsession with some to call Duncan a Power Forward even though he is a 7-foot, 250lb Center... so he can be put in the Top-10 as the supposed "best Power Forward of all-time". If Duncan is a Power Forward, then so is Hakeem... and since Hakeem is better than Duncan, we don't have any positional gaps to fill.

Tim Duncan is below those 10 and should be grouped with Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Durant, Steph Curry, etc. Perhaps, leading this group of players as the #11.

what a convoluted wall of deliriums!
Timmy was already flirting with a top 10 placement in 2007. He's not there because of definitions.
He's been better than Kobe most of their career (aside from the 2008-2011 timespan)

[LAL1947]

What's the problem being called a PF? You'd think reading at this thread that this notion makes a lot of people uncomfortable lol

Anyway he was a PF to start his career, then a center.

Why? Well, because there are many people who downplay Kobe for being a lesser version of MJ at the Shooting Guard position. These same people then laud Tim Duncan for being "the greatest Power Forward", while neglecting that there has never been a Power Forward who is on the same level as MJ, ever. It's a very disingenuous thing that these people do... dismiss Kobe for being slightly less than Mike, the greatest player ever... but don't dismiss Duncan for being even further away from Bigs like Wilt/Kareem/Hakeem, who were less than MJ themselves... all by using the "best Power Forward" thing as an excuse.

Timmy needs to be correctly classified as a Big/Center AFAIC.

If people want to classify Duncan as a Power Forward, then Hakeem Olajuwon should also be classified as a Power Forward from this point on too... so that Hakeem will be rightfully elected into every Top 10 as the best Power Forward.

[JoseRizal]

Best PF in the history of the game...

If we're calling Centers, Power Forwards... then Hakeem is the best Power Forward in the history of the game. He and Duncan were the same height and weight. More importantly, Hakeem took more shots from 10-16 feet (while Duncan played more in the 0-3 feet and 3-10 feet ranges than Hakeem did), was a better shooter, a better defender on the perimeter, had a better face-up game, and was better in the high-post too. Aren't all these things more of what you expect/want from a Power Forward rather than a Center?

And what will we say about Giannis vs Duncan as a Power Forward, when Giannis has finished playing?

Nah! Hakeem has always been an Center. Even when the Rockets had 7-4 All-Star, Ralph Sampson, they still drafted Olajuwon in '84 to form their twin towers. Ralph was PF, the Dream as Center.

On the other hand, when David Robinson got injured, the Spurs were able to get the first pick in the '97 draft and took Tim Duncan. D-Rob played Center, while Timmy suited up as PF, to form their own version of the Twin Towers.

As Duncan aged, he slowly shifted to C. But majority of his playing years were played at the 4. Hence, widely regarded as the best in that position.

P.S.
Hakeem is probably one the best Centers in my eyes, so this is by no means a disrespect to his greatness.

[magicman1978]

He was a C/PF. He played the majority of his minutes at C. The only time he was really a true PF was when he was playing alongside DRob. Look at how much time he logged at each position in the post season (29% at PF and 71% a C). Even in the championship seasons it was less PF and more C overall (82/19, 50/50, 47/53, 22/78, 0/100).

[LAL1947]

Nah! Hakeem has always been an Center. Even when the Rockets had 7-4 All-Star, Ralph Sampson, they still drafted Olajuwon in '84 to form their twin towers. Ralph was PF, the Dream as Center.

You haven't addressed my actual point. If Tim Duncan is a Power Forward, then why are we calling Hakeem a Center when he did more things that a Power Forward is supposed to do better? Here, I'll list them as bullet points instead, if it'll help you consider them.

- Hakeem took more shots from 10-16 feet, whil Duncan played more in the 0-3 feet and 3-10 feet ranges.
- Hakeem was a better shooter.
- Hakeem was a better defender on the perimeter.
- Hakeem had a better face-up game.
- Hakeem was better in the high-post too.

On the other hand, when David Robinson got injured, the Spurs were able to get the first pick in the '97 draft and took Tim Duncan. D-Rob played Center, while Timmy suited up as PF, to form their own version of the Twin Towers.

As Duncan aged, he slowly shifted to C. But majority of his playing years were played at the 4. Hence, widely regarded as the best in that position.

Agreed, he suited up as a PF to start... but the rest of this is just not true, i.e., saying, "As Duncan aged, he slowly shifted to C. But majority of his playing years were played at the 4". David Robinson retired at the end of 2002-03. Duncan was 27 years old to start the 2003-04 season.

Another poster (thanks, Baddy Chuck) uploaded two images that shows the percentage of minutes of Duncan's career at different positions. As you can see, he only played 36% at PF vs 63% at Center over his whole career during the regular season.



The difference is even bigger during the playoffs, 29% at PF vs 71% at Center. Only the first 3 years of his career were primarily at PF. In 2001-02, he played mostly at Center. Then 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 was about 50-50. Then 2005-06 and onward, he almost exclusively played at Center.

[CometGM]

Career-wise, Tim Duncan is easily a top 10 player ever.

Impact-wise (skills/demeanor/leadership), Tim Duncan IMO is top 3 ever, and a case can be made that he could be the most impactful player ever, but it's debatable. His presence made the Spurs what they were.

As far as him being either PF/C, in his era he could play either and played both, so I have no problem with "greatest PF ever".

[LAL1947]

If he's top 10 player ever, then he's likely to be top 10 center, you know?

Well, I agree that Duncan is a Top-10 Center... but Duncan is not a Top-10 player outside of Timmy-loving/Kobe-hating polls on RealGM... that do their best to put down Kobe because some Duncan fans here realize it's their best chance of putting Duncan into the all-time Top-10.

In chronological order: Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Jordan, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe and Lebron.

That's 10 players right there who are ahead of him in the opinion of the rest of the world... as well as in the eyes of players. Anyone looking at this list should also notice there is no Power Forward in there. Hence the obsession with some to call Duncan a Power Forward even though he is a 7-foot, 250lb Center... so he can be put in the Top-10 as the supposed "best Power Forward of all-time". If Duncan is a Power Forward, then so is Hakeem... and since Hakeem is better than Duncan, we don't have any positional gaps to fill.

Tim Duncan is below those 10 and should be grouped with Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Durant, Steph Curry, etc. Perhaps, leading this group of players as the #11.

what a convoluted wall of deliriums!
Timmy was already flirting with a top 10 placement in 2007. He's not there because of definitions.
He's been better than Kobe most of their career (aside from the 2008-2011 timespan)

I think you may be delirious with Timmy-love.

1) Timmy was flirting with a Top 10 placement in 2007: I have Timmy at #11, flirting with the Top-10 as you put it, and I think that's exactly right. If Timmy was not in the Top 10 in 2007 and only flirting with it, as you yourself have said, then why should he be in there now? 8 of the players listed in there did all of their best work pre-2007. All 10 of those players have elevated the game of basketball to new heights with their skills and/or athleticism while Timmy has not.

2) He's been better than Kobe most of their career (aside from the 2008-2011 time-span): Not true. Duncan came into the league more ready to play and was 2 years older. So yes, he was better in 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000. From 2000-01 to 2004-05, they were equals IMO, great in their own ways... the most talented front-court and back-court players in the league. Duncan was a great system player... but Kobe could do everything with his skills, without needing anyone. Although Timmy did have some better years with metrics. Then Kobe was clearly the better player from 2005-06 until they retired. In 2005-06, Kobe was the first player in NBA history to score 35+ PPG and get elected to All NBA First-Team Defense. In 2006-07, he almost repeated that, with 31 PPG and getting elected to All NBA Defense First team again. So the gap between Kobe and Duncan was close in 2007... then Kobe finally got a crew in 2007-08 that was similar in strength to Timmy's and blanked him, showing everyone that he could lead his team to titles as the main man. Timmy could do nothing with the Spurs in that time, until they got Kawhi. Didn't do a repeat during the whole decade either.

[dhsilv2]

Sometimes I think people forget/don't really know how athletic young Tim Duncan was. And it's a pretty common belief that he came into the NBA already in his 'prime.' He also shot more from midrange and better from the line earlier in his career. So I don't really see the problem with him being considered a PF.

Because he was never a powerforward...that's the issue.

[dhsilv2]

He was clearly a C from the beginning, everything about his game, size, physical abilities and limitations was pure C, but the technicality of Admiral's presence got him that PF title, and we're not going to go back and retroactively rewrite the history there.

I agree, he was clearly a C from the beginning. It was partly the Admiral's presence that got him a "PF" designation... and partly the existence of Shaq. Timmy didn't want to be on the receiving end of these, lol. He stayed away from prime Shaq unless he really had to.

I have no idea where you're going with this shaq stuff. He was the spur's best off ball defender, they weren't going to put him on Shaq "center" title or not.

[dhsilv2]

The best years of his career came at the PF position. He started to play C once he started to get older (as most players do) & began to lose his mobility due to his knee.

I remember them always starting a C next to him most of his career. Guys like McDyess, Oberto, Splitter, Rasho, Blair, Bonner, etc all started next to him.

Bonner who couldn't guard the rim or the paint and took over half his career shots from behind the 3 point line?

DeJaun Blair who was 6'7 and averaged 0.3 blocks a game for his career.

6'9 McDyess...who in his two years on the spurs took 80% of his field goal attempts 10+ feet from the basket and took 24% at the rim.

At least Splitter and Oberto were actually natural centers like Duncan. The others aren't center in any sense.

[dhsilv2]

Nowadays he would definitely be a C. But people tend to forget that he didn't just camp in the paint on offense and was a pretty effective jump shooter and face up player out to the key.

What great center outside of maybe shaq didn't have a face up game? Robinson was a worst post player than Duncan. Same with Ewing for that matter. Both were more of face up players than Duncan and both are still seen as centers.

[70sFan]

The best years of his career came at the PF position. He started to play C once he started to get older (as most players do) & began to lose his mobility due to his knee.

I remember them always starting a C next to him most of his career. Guys like McDyess, Oberto, Splitter, Rasho, Blair, Bonner, etc all started next to him.

Bonner who couldn't guard the rim or the paint and took over half his career shots from behind the 3 point line?

DeJaun Blair who was 6'7 and averaged 0.3 blocks a game for his career.

6'9 McDyess...who in his two years on the spurs took 80% of his field goal attempts 10+ feet from the basket and took 24% at the rim.

At least Splitter and Oberto were actually natural centers like Duncan. The others aren't center in any sense.

Honestly, Oberto was typical 1980s power forward. I agree that Splitter was a center though.

[dhsilv2]

The best years of his career came at the PF position. He started to play C once he started to get older (as most players do) & began to lose his mobility due to his knee.

I remember them always starting a C next to him most of his career. Guys like McDyess, Oberto, Splitter, Rasho, Blair, Bonner, etc all started next to him.

Bonner who couldn't guard the rim or the paint and took over half his career shots from behind the 3 point line?

DeJaun Blair who was 6'7 and averaged 0.3 blocks a game for his career.

6'9 McDyess...who in his two years on the spurs took 80% of his field goal attempts 10+ feet from the basket and took 24% at the rim.

At least Splitter and Oberto were actually natural centers like Duncan. The others aren't center in any sense.

Honestly, Oberto was typical 1980s power forward. I agree that Splitter was a center though.

Oberto was an odd guy, but his "position" in terms of where he was on the floor was generally in the low post. But yeah, he would fit into that lesser talent other big slot.

[Texas Chuck]

I repeat this is the dumbest. When you have to argue that Rasho wasn't a center in order to insist Duncan was never a PF.....

He was a big. And one of the 3 best to ever play. Why do any of you care if its PF or C?

[dhsilv2]

I repeat this is the dumbest. When you have to argue that Rasho wasn't a center in order to insist Duncan was never a PF.....

He was a big. And one of the 3 best to ever play. Why do any of you care if its PF or C?

Mostly because this topic leads to every other topic that refuses to accept all teams don't have 5 unique positions on the floor at all times. If someone can't understand that Rasho AND Duncan were in a two center lineup, I'm not sure what else can be said.

[The_Hater]

Duncan was a Center his entire career, even Greg Popovich finally admitted that much.

However the Spurs started 2 centers early in his career because they had an HOFer on the roster, but offensively, DRob was the high post option and Duncan played on the block.

[Texas Chuck]

I repeat this is the dumbest. When you have to argue that Rasho wasn't a center in order to insist Duncan was never a PF.....

He was a big. And one of the 3 best to ever play. Why do any of you care if its PF or C?

Mostly because this topic leads to every other topic that refuses to accept all teams don't have 5 unique positions on the floor at all times. If someone can't understand that Rasho AND Duncan were in a two center lineup, I'm not sure what else can be said.

Yeah sorry that feels like trying to justify a position way too hard. With Admiral you could argue they played 2 centers because hey you have two of the best players in the world, get them both on the court and make it work. But you wouldn't then intentionally go out and sign a really average player like Rasho to force a two center lineup when you could go get a PF to pair with your super talented and versatile guy who for some crazy reason you think can only play center.

Just doesn't add up.

[clyde21]

in today's NBA he'd definitely be a center and the best one in the game, and in an ideal lineup he plays the 5, not for, if ur building an all-time team.