Tim Duncan or Larry Bird? | Page 3 | Syracusefan.com

Tim Duncan or Larry Bird?

Honestly Tim Duncan is the most under-covered superstar of all-time. Is he ever in the papers, I only remember him changing his appearance during the 2004 Olympics when he shaved his head and grew a goatee. He never gets in trouble, and we know very little about the guy except he grew up in the US Virgin Islands and wanted to be a swimmer till he had a growth spurt. The dude needs a profile so people understand he is one of the top 10 players of all-time.
 
SeasonAgeTmLgPosGGSMPFGFGAFG%3P3PA3P%FTFTAFT%ORBDRBTRBASTSTLBLKTOVPFPTS
1984-85 28 BOS NBA SF 80 77 39.5 11.5 22.0 .522 0.7 1.6 .427 5.0 5.7 .882 2.1 8.5 10.5 6.6 1.6 1.2 3.1 2.6 28.7

these are crazy single season stats all around for any player. 42% from 3. 1.6 steals 1.2 blocks(for someone who wasnt considered athletic) 28.7pts 10.5 rebounds ans 6.6 assists.

Birds stats are right up there with anyone. Plus the guy made so many unbelievable huge plays. How many game winning shots or plays did he make. That probably makes the difference. While Duncan is great and won games, I don't feel like he made as many big impact plays like Bird did.
 
Bird. The truly greats are memorable. Within 10 years after Duncan retires the only time Duncan will get mentioned is when people are talking about great players that nobody ever seems to talk about.


He's got quite a few titles. He's kind of like the Bill Russell of this generation.
 
No way in hell that Oscar Robertson should be out of the top 10.

I realize most people haven't seen him play, but c'mon.


Oscar Robertson was Lebron before there was Lebron.
 
Yeah, Duncan has been the best player on 4 title teams. How many people can say that?
 
there's no way you can overrate or overvalue bird. his #s speak for themselves, but remember bird and Magic basically saved the NBA. the finals were shown on freakin tape delay when their careers started. without the magic/bird Lakers/Celtics rivalry the NBA would not be what it is today.
 
Bird...he made everyone around him a better player.
 
Bird obviously has the hype and the stat lines, but people often forget Tim Duncan is also one of the greatest defender of all time. I think this year he surpassed KG for most appearances on the NBA All-Defense teams.
 
I'd draft both of them for my team, but Timmah would be my first pick
 
Different positions, almost hard to say who you would take. Prime for prime for needs I am taking Duncan. He was without a doubt a better defender, both one on one and help. He could pass, rebound and score. He could also be the focal point of the offense or have no issue taking a secondary role, something Bird would have issue with.
 
Bird.

no explanation necessary.
308369_large.jpg
 
People are really arguing that Steve Nash and Tracy McGrady were better than Kobe at any point? C'mon.

Yeah you can "make" that argument...if you like being dead wrong.

That's like saying I can argue that Duncan was never the best big guy, because it went from Shaq, to Garnett, to Howard. That would be equally wrong and ridiculous, but if that what's were going for here...
 
Duncan was/is an elite top 10 player are two different positions (center and power forward) Garnett's a PF Shaq is a C. Duncan is both!


My favorite Kobe stat: Kobe Bryant has missed more FG attempts than anyone in NBA history!
 
People are really arguing that Steve Nash and Tracy McGrady were better than Kobe at any point? C'mon.

Yeah you can "make" that argument...if you like being dead wrong.

That's like saying I can argue that Duncan was never the best big guy, because it went from Shaq, to Garnett, to Howard. That would be equally wrong and ridiculous, but if that what's were going for here...

I think you're severely underrating TMac when he was healthy.

And again, I'm not saying Nash is a better player than Kobe. I'm saying he had a better season, which he did.
 
I think you're severely underrating TMac when he was healthy.

And again, I'm not saying Nash is a better player than Kobe. I'm saying he had a better season, which he did.

Ok, Kobe won MVP too, so that means he had the best season and was thus the best perimeter player that year?

I'm not under rating TMac at all. I know how good he was before he started getting hurt a lot. He wasn't as good as Kobe though, even if he was close for a couple seasons. That's not under rating him severely, that's rating him correctly.

I mean, Kobe has been first team All NBA 10 times. I'd say out of those years, the seasons where he wasn't the best perimeter player are fewer than those where he was.
 
I think you're severely underrating TMac when he was healthy.

And again, I'm not saying Nash is a better player than Kobe. I'm saying he had a better season, which he did.

T-Mac was once healthy?

In all seriousness, he may be one of the most wasted talents in the history of the game. The dude was one of the better perimeter players (offensively at least) of his generation without ever taking practice seriously. Imagine if he had a work ethic like MJ or Kobe -- he could've been one of the greatest ever.
 
I don't think Nash was ever better than Kobe, nor did he have a better season. Those MVP's were very generous. The two years Nash won the MVP he played about 35 minutes a game, which is a good amount. But Kobe was around 40. Even if the numbers were close, Kobe was out there a lot more. And providing a lot more value on the defensive end of the floor.

T-Mac was a legitimately great playter for a few years there. There might be an argument that he was better than Kobe for a year or two.

I mean, Kobe has been first team All NBA 10 times. I'd say out of those years, the seasons where he wasn't the best perimeter player are fewer than those where he was.

That's an interesting one. Your main point is taken (I would say Kobe was the best perimeter player in the league for quite a few years) but I guess it depends on when you think Lebron passed him. I would say as early as 06 he has a pretty good argument. (Just eyeballing PER, which has it's flaws; the two were basically dead even in 06 and 07). Certainly by 2008.

Wade was also pretty incredible by about 2006 or so
 
Duncan is obviously the victim of a San Antonio discount in the public's perception. If he played in Boston and Bird was in San Antonio his "legend" wouldn't be as pronounced.

My answer: Larry in his prime was the better player, but his prime was not nearly as long. It's kind of an unfair argument, a lot like comparing Koufax to guys who won 300 and played 20 years.
 
Different positions, almost hard to say who you would take. Prime for prime for needs I am taking Duncan. He was without a doubt a better defender, both one on one and help. He could pass, rebound and score. He could also be the focal point of the offense or have no issue taking a secondary role, something Bird would have issue with.


Prime for prime, I take Bill Walton over Duncan. He was Duncan with a bit better offensive game, a better passer. Bill Walton's injuries (and depression from the Portland weather) cut short what probably would have been a Top 10 all-time career.
 
I think you're severely underrating TMac when he was healthy.

And again, I'm not saying Nash is a better player than Kobe. I'm saying he had a better season, which he did.
I always felt that McGrady (when healthy) was Drexler to Kobe's Jordan
 
Walton at his best was incredible. Too bad he couldn't stay healthy

I didn't realize (until I just looked it up) that Walton only scored 6,215 points in his entire NBA career.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
169,377
Messages
4,828,302
Members
5,974
Latest member
CuseVegas

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
1,339
Total visitors
1,446


...
Top Bottom