give me Duncan. guy is a monster on d and on the block. some of those finals performances were insane.
Printable View
give me Duncan. guy is a monster on d and on the block. some of those finals performances were insane.
Bird. Not close.
[QUOTE=Kovach]And I can't imagine what what the results would have been like if Bird had played in a 29-30-team joke of the league with more than 70% pure garbage teams.
This goes both ways.[/QUOTE]
Not only that, Duncan in Golden age wouldnt win any MVPs, DPOYs, and certainly would had won less rings compared to Bird.
Now imagine what Bird could do [I]now[/I], with current rules and weak competition. He would be [B]perennial [/B]MVP, and eat current superstars for breakfast.
[QUOTE=Harison]Not only that, Duncan in Golden age wouldnt win any MVPs, DPOYs, and certainly would had won less rings compared to Bird.
Now imagine what Bird could do [I]now[/I], with current rules and weak competition. He would be [B]perennial [/B]MVP, and eat current superstars for breakfast.[/QUOTE]
Certainly would have had less rings? What is the basis for this claim?
[QUOTE=Kovach]And I can't imagine what what the results would have been like if Bird had played in a 29-30-team joke of the league with more than 70% pure garbage teams.
This goes both ways.[/QUOTE]
I think that overstates it a bit, but not sure what relevance that really has...it's not like Duncan's numbers are based on his competition or anything like that.
I have no problem with someone taking Bird...just not an easy choice if we are being objective.
The under-rating of Duncan and what he has done is crazy. If he had played the exact same career in a place like Boston or LA or NY...the answers would be extremely different than they have been in this thread. And that is silly.
Just imagine for a second that Duncan had led the Knicks to 4 titles and 14 straight years over 50 wins...LOL at the idea that people would be saying..."Bird and it isn't close"
I'll roll w/ Larry Joe Bird.
IMO, Bird at his ABSOLUTE best was simply on another level from Duncan. That's what makes me rank him higher (I have him in my top 6; Duncan somewhere around the 8-9 range).
This is getting ridiculous.
I think everybody agrees that Duncan is clearly the better defender.
Bird played in a significantly higher-paced and higher scoring era, so comparing raw numbers doesn't make much sense.
Let's look at advanced stats for the playoffs (because I guess we all agree that should be the measuring stick for comparing all time greats, who cares about regular season games against teams with losing records?).
Bird:
[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img854/4044/birdplayoffs.png[/IMG]
Duncan:
[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img818/8479/duncanplayoffs.png[/IMG]
I don't see how anybody in their right mind could say that Bird was a better playoff performer than Duncan.
Actually, Duncan was better, and it's not even close.
And to those who claim that Duncan had it easy in a weak era: I'd take every bet that the Western Conference during Duncan's era was every bit as tough as the Eastern Conference of the Bird Era.
[QUOTE=brain drain]This is getting ridiculous.
I think everybody agrees that Duncan is clearly the better defender.
Bird played in a significantly higher-paced and higher scoring era, so comparing raw numbers doesn't make much sense.
Let's look at advanced stats for the playoffs (because I guess we all agree that should be the measuring stick for comparing all time greats, who cares about regular season games against teams with losing records?).
Bird:
[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img854/4044/birdplayoffs.png[/IMG]
Duncan:
[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img818/8479/duncanplayoffs.png[/IMG]
I don't see how anybody in their right mind could say that Bird was a better playoff performer than Duncan.[/QUOTE]
stats tell the [B]entire[/B] story :rolleyes:
Look past the box score, and you will see why Bird is better
[QUOTE=kNicKz]stats tell the [B]entire[/B] story :rolleyes:
Look past the box score, and you will see why Bird is better[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, I clearly forgot that Bird won more championship with worse teammates. And that he never lost against lower-seeded teams in the playoffs. My mistake.
[QUOTE=brain drain]Oh yeah, I clearly forgot that Bird won more championship with worse teammates. And that he never lost against lower-seeded teams in the playoffs. My mistake.[/QUOTE]
I don't need to explain to you why Bird is better
[QUOTE=kNicKz]I don't need to explain to you why Bird is better[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I know, cause you just need to smoke some pot, listen to the legends of yore and look beyond the boxscore to see the light.
lol @ people not appreciating Tim Duncan. did you people even watch what he was doing in the playoffs.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I think that overstates it a bit, but not sure what relevance that really has...it's not like Duncan's numbers are based on his competition or anything like that.
I have no problem with someone taking Bird...just not an easy choice if we are being objective.
The under-rating of Duncan and what he has done is crazy. If he had played the exact same career in a place like Boston or LA or NY...the answers would be extremely different than they have been in this thread. And that is silly.
Just imagine for a second that Duncan had led the Knicks to 4 titles and 14 straight years over 50 wins...LOL at the idea that people would be saying..."Bird and it isn't close"[/QUOTE]
I wasn't trying to underrate Duncan, he is one of the all-time greats in my book, I just get agitated by the idea that Bird's success was the reflection of talent he was surrounded by. It was overwhelming team basketball that made Boston a dominant superteam, not individual talents of his team-mates, at least not to an extent people try to present it nowdays.
[QUOTE=brain drain]
And to those who claim that Duncan had it easy in a weak era: I'd take every bet that the Western Conference during Duncan's era was every bit as tough as the Eastern Conference of the Bird Era.[/QUOTE]
Apart from early 00's Lakers no team stands a chance against those Sixers and Bucks teams.
[QUOTE=Bucket_Nakedz]tim duncan is whiter than wayne brady and bryant gumble combined.[/QUOTE]
I see that as a strong quality.