How many years of Duncan over Peak Giannis?

[Matt15]

How many years of Duncan would you take over Peak Giannis?

[dygaction]

2003

[falcolombardi]

2001-2005 i would feel comfortable with

[LukaTheGOAT]

Projecting forward, I imagine after this year the only years we will be arguing against Giannis are 02 and 03.

[70sFan]

2002 and 2003 for me, then 2001, 2005 and 2007 have very strong cases as well.

[GSP]

99-07

[No-more-rings]

Probably most versions between 01-07.

[Dutchball97]

2002 and 2003, don't really see much of an argument for other years.

[Jaivl]

2002 and 2003

[No-more-rings]

2002 and 2003, don't really see much of an argument for other years.

Duncan was 2nd in RAPM in 2005, and 1st in 2007 and won the title both years. There’s plenty of reason to think he has a good argument in years beyond 02 and 03. People need to start looking beyond PER, ts%, dunks and whatever else they’re looking at.

[Dutchball97]

2002 and 2003, don't really see much of an argument for other years.

Duncan was 2nd in RAPM in 2005, and 1st in 2007 and won the title both years. There’s plenty of reason to think he has a good argument in years beyond 02 and 03. People need to start looking beyond PER, ts%, dunks and whatever else they’re looking at.

2007 you could maybe make an argument for although that is already a stretch imo. It's almost like people forgot Giannis had another MVP level season last year and a dominant run to the title.

2005 is almost laughable to me though. He missed quite a few games in the regular season and then had one of his most mediocre post-season runs in his prime. You wave away all kinds of stats but then put all your stock in RAPM, seems like cherrypicking to me.

[1993Playoffs]

Only 02 and 03 for me.

[70sFan]

2002 and 2003, don't really see much of an argument for other years.

Duncan was 2nd in RAPM in 2005, and 1st in 2007 and won the title both years. There’s plenty of reason to think he has a good argument in years beyond 02 and 03. People need to start looking beyond PER, ts%, dunks and whatever else they’re looking at.

2007 you could maybe make an argument for although that is already a stretch imo. It's almost like people forgot Giannis had another MVP level season last year and a dominant run to the title.

2005 is almost laughable to me though. He missed quite a few games in the regular season and then had one of his most mediocre post-season runs in his prime. You wave away all kinds of stats but then put all your stock in RAPM, seems like cherrypicking to me.

Duncan scored poorly in 2005 playoffs, but he wasn't mediocre at all. He was dominant rebounder during the playoffs and his defense was as good as ever.

[Dutchball97]

Duncan was 2nd in RAPM in 2005, and 1st in 2007 and won the title both years. There’s plenty of reason to think he has a good argument in years beyond 02 and 03. People need to start looking beyond PER, ts%, dunks and whatever else they’re looking at.

2007 you could maybe make an argument for although that is already a stretch imo. It's almost like people forgot Giannis had another MVP level season last year and a dominant run to the title.

2005 is almost laughable to me though. He missed quite a few games in the regular season and then had one of his most mediocre post-season runs in his prime. You wave away all kinds of stats but then put all your stock in RAPM, seems like cherrypicking to me.

Duncan scored poorly in 2005 playoffs, but he wasn't mediocre at all. He was dominant rebounder during the playoffs and his defense was as good as ever.

Mediocre by his standards though. Duncan's rebounding and defense were good every year so a relatively worse scoring performance makes it overall one of his weaker play-off runs during his prime. Most of all how is Duncan's 05 better than Giannis last year? It's like people are treating Giannis like some scrub and taking any prime Duncan season over him by default.

[70sFan]

2007 you could maybe make an argument for although that is already a stretch imo. It's almost like people forgot Giannis had another MVP level season last year and a dominant run to the title.

2005 is almost laughable to me though. He missed quite a few games in the regular season and then had one of his most mediocre post-season runs in his prime. You wave away all kinds of stats but then put all your stock in RAPM, seems like cherrypicking to me.

Duncan scored poorly in 2005 playoffs, but he wasn't mediocre at all. He was dominant rebounder during the playoffs and his defense was as good as ever.

Mediocre by his standards though. Duncan's rebounding and defense were good every year so a relatively worse scoring performance makes it overall one of his weaker play-off runs during his prime. Most of all how is Duncan's 05 better than Giannis last year? It's like people are treating Giannis like some scrub and taking any prime Duncan season over him by default.

To be fair though, Giannis didn't face a single strong defensive team outside of Miami (against which he struggled scoring the ball just as much). Phoenix was decent, but nothing special in historical terms and Nets/Hawks were poor defensively.

People often say that Duncan faced mediocre defensive competition in 2005, but even Suns were better than Nets or Hawks. Not to mention that Pistons were on completely another level.

[Dutchball97]

Duncan scored poorly in 2005 playoffs, but he wasn't mediocre at all. He was dominant rebounder during the playoffs and his defense was as good as ever.

Mediocre by his standards though. Duncan's rebounding and defense were good every year so a relatively worse scoring performance makes it overall one of his weaker play-off runs during his prime. Most of all how is Duncan's 05 better than Giannis last year? It's like people are treating Giannis like some scrub and taking any prime Duncan season over him by default.

To be fair though, Giannis didn't face a single strong defensive team outside of Miami (against which he struggled scoring the ball just as much). Phoenix was decent, but nothing special in historical terms and Nets/Hawks were poor defensively.

People often say that Duncan faced mediocre defensive competition in 2005, but even Suns were better than Nets or Hawks. Not to mention that Pistons were on completely another level.

I'd agree on that. The Sonics were terrible defensively but the Suns were decent, Nuggets pretty good and Pistons straight up great. I don't think this impacts how I view Duncan's 05 run much though. The only series where I'd say Duncan was the clear best player on his team was the WCF against the Suns. For Giannis you could make an argument he wasn't the best player in the Nets series as KD looked the best out of either team and due to missed games even Jrue and Middleton could have an argument over Giannis but other than that he was the clear stand out in 3 series, culminating in an incredibly dominant finals performance.

[70sFan]

Mediocre by his standards though. Duncan's rebounding and defense were good every year so a relatively worse scoring performance makes it overall one of his weaker play-off runs during his prime. Most of all how is Duncan's 05 better than Giannis last year? It's like people are treating Giannis like some scrub and taking any prime Duncan season over him by default.

To be fair though, Giannis didn't face a single strong defensive team outside of Miami (against which he struggled scoring the ball just as much). Phoenix was decent, but nothing special in historical terms and Nets/Hawks were poor defensively.

People often say that Duncan faced mediocre defensive competition in 2005, but even Suns were better than Nets or Hawks. Not to mention that Pistons were on completely another level.

I'd agree on that. The Sonics were terrible defensively but the Suns were decent, Nuggets pretty good and Pistons straight up great. I don't think this impacts how I view Duncan's 05 run much though. The only series where I'd say Duncan was the clear best player on his team was the WCF against the Suns. For Giannis you could make an argument he wasn't the best player in the Nets series as KD looked the best out of either team and due to missed games even Jrue and Middleton could have an argument over Giannis but other than that he was the clear stand out in 3 series, culminating in an incredibly dominant finals performance.

I'd say Duncan was easily the best player in Seattle series and it was debatable in the rest series. I don't know, I think it's quite close.

[Dutchball97]

To be fair though, Giannis didn't face a single strong defensive team outside of Miami (against which he struggled scoring the ball just as much). Phoenix was decent, but nothing special in historical terms and Nets/Hawks were poor defensively.

People often say that Duncan faced mediocre defensive competition in 2005, but even Suns were better than Nets or Hawks. Not to mention that Pistons were on completely another level.

I'd agree on that. The Sonics were terrible defensively but the Suns were decent, Nuggets pretty good and Pistons straight up great. I don't think this impacts how I view Duncan's 05 run much though. The only series where I'd say Duncan was the clear best player on his team was the WCF against the Suns. For Giannis you could make an argument he wasn't the best player in the Nets series as KD looked the best out of either team and due to missed games even Jrue and Middleton could have an argument over Giannis but other than that he was the clear stand out in 3 series, culminating in an incredibly dominant finals performance.

I'd say Duncan was easily the best player in Seattle series and it was debatable in the rest series. I don't know, I think it's quite close.

Could also be the difference in how we value defensive bigs. I know it is pretty much the biggest premium for you and while I definitely see the value there, I'm not a fan of going too heavy that way. Manu is a solid defender himself and him averaging 21/5/4 on 72.4 TS% is at the very least enough for me to say even if Duncan was better against the Sonics, it wasn't easily or by a large margin.

[CharityStripe34]

Duncan's cumulative peak from 99-07 was incredible as he was arguably the best overall player during that stretch. Gianni's current peak of 2017-2022 is pretty incredible as well, so far. Extricating one or two specific years is incredibly tough. A ton of circumstances to consider.

[70sFan]

I'd agree on that. The Sonics were terrible defensively but the Suns were decent, Nuggets pretty good and Pistons straight up great. I don't think this impacts how I view Duncan's 05 run much though. The only series where I'd say Duncan was the clear best player on his team was the WCF against the Suns. For Giannis you could make an argument he wasn't the best player in the Nets series as KD looked the best out of either team and due to missed games even Jrue and Middleton could have an argument over Giannis but other than that he was the clear stand out in 3 series, culminating in an incredibly dominant finals performance.

I'd say Duncan was easily the best player in Seattle series and it was debatable in the rest series. I don't know, I think it's quite close.

Could also be the difference in how we value defensive bigs. I know it is pretty much the biggest premium for you and while I definitely see the value there, I'm not a fan of going too heavy that way. Manu is a solid defender himself and him averaging 21/5/4 on 72.4 TS% is at the very least enough for me to say even if Duncan was better against the Sonics, it wasn't easily or by a large margin.

Fair enough, although I'd say that stopping Sonics offense was quite impressive and Duncan was the main reason for that.