If you had to chose one David Robinson or Tim Duncan

[StateOfMind12]

Duncan is better but not by a whole lot. He was a better offensive player/scorer in particular but Robinson was just as good at everything else, if not better. It's almost like comparing KG to Duncan really.

[rmt]

During the RS,Pop and Duncan make sure that everybody contributes to the team.It's the right approach in order to build great team chemistry.

As the Spurs got deeper into the PO, the elite competition demands a different approach,so Tim becomes more aggressive in order to take over the game and the series.It's when you see Duncan at his best.

A couple of examples during the Spurs' championship run in 2005.

2005 WCSF - SAS @SEA (Game 6)

Tim scored 12 points in the final 11 minutes,including the game- winning shot to clinch the series.



2005 NBA Finals - SAS DET (Game 7)

The Pistons led 48-41 with 6 minutes to play in the third quarter.That triggered the alarm,so Tim started playing hero ball and scored 12 points in the final 6 minutes.In the fourth quarter, Larry Brown panicked and decided to double team Duncan and the rest is history.

Duncan scored 17 points and dished 2 assists in the final 17 minutes of game 7.He generated 23 of the Spurs' 32 points.Then,in the final seconds Manu made a bunch of FTs to close the game.



On a side note, I think fans are fascinated with RS averages,ignore the context and draw false conclusions.

It's hard to outscore Duncan during a playoff series.Once you face the Spurs (when Tim was young), it's a half-court battle,and that's where Duncan is extremely dominant. In fact,Tim has played 18 series against Shaq,Dirk,Amare and KG.

Duncan outscored his opponents in 12 series

So true. In game 7 when they were down 9, Pop kept going to Duncan over and over again, fouls and double teams came, opening up the shooters.

Dislike when posters look at the box score and say TD went 10-27 without looking at context and that he's playing against 4 time DYOP, Rasheed and McDyess. Those 17 points/2 asst in last 17 mins. and 23 of last 32 points came at the crucial point of game 7. Then they point to Manu's 4th quarter points when he was the beneficiary of all the attention TD was getting and of course, when the game is out of reach, Manu gets the ball because of his free-throw shooting.

[Boston C's]

During the RS,Pop and Duncan make sure that everybody contributes to the team.It's the right approach in order to build great team chemistry.

As the Spurs got deeper into the PO, the elite competition demands a different approach,so Tim becomes more aggressive in order to take over the game and the series.It's when you see Duncan at his best.

A couple of examples during the Spurs' championship run in 2005.


2005 WCSF - SAS @SEA (Game 6)

Tim scored 12 points in the final 11 minutes,including the game- winning shot to clinch the series.




2005 NBA Finals - SAS DET (Game 7)

The Pistons led 48-41 with 6 minutes to play in the third quarter.That triggered the alarm,so Tim started playing hero ball and scored 12 points in the final 6 minutes.In the fourth quarter, Larry Brown panicked and decided to double team Duncan and the rest is history.

Duncan scored 17 points and dished 2 assists in the final 17 minutes of game 7.He generated 23 of the Spurs' 32 points.Then,in the final seconds Manu made a bunch of FTs to close the game.





On a side note, I think fans are fascinated with RS averages,ignore the context and draw false conclusions.

It's hard to outscore Duncan during a playoff series.Once you face the Spurs (when Tim was young), it's a half-court battle,and that's where Duncan is extremely dominant. In fact,Tim has played 18 series against Shaq,Dirk,Amare and KG.

Duncan outscored his opponents in 12 series

that seattle game gave me nightmares especially because duncan was playing horribly all game long somethin like 1-12 from the field and was lacking in the rebounding department as well i just kept thinkin why aren't we pulling away since duncan is having like the worst game of his life and when he went down with the ankle injury (which disgusted me when some sonic fans cheered) and came back to lead his team to victory that was incredible...i knew deep down during the game that if the spurs were in striking distance that tim duncan would sooner or later come alive because thats what franchise players do

[ShaqAttack3234]

Since you agree that Manu didn't blossom till 05 and TP till 06, then it's only since 06 that TD has had both of them at that level. 06 was so close - overtime in game 7, 07 they won, 08 Manu was injured. Since then TD has declined.

Yeah, Parker didn't truly become an all-star caliber player until '06, imo, but he was already quite good for a 3rd option in '05. He was a legitimate scoring and playmaking threat who averaged 17/6 in a system that wasn't ideal for him to put up big numbers.

So, of the 4 championships, it's really only the 07 championship that TD had that level of help. I certainly don't consider Manu in 05 at the level of a Kobe in the last 2 years of the 3 peat

True, Manu was definitely never on '01 and '02 Kobe's level, but those teams didn't have a 3rd guy comparable to even '05 Parker. The '05 Spurs also had the best role player from those Laker teams in Horry, plus Bruce Bowen widely regarded as the game's perimeter defender who was also a specialist on those corner 3s which allowed him to contribute as a productive 3 point shooter(40.3 3P%, 1.3 3PM). Easily a more talented back up guard in Brent Barry than what those Laker teams had off the bench as well as Nazr Mohammed who was a legit center who rebounded and blocked shots very well and was a decent offensive center. I'd say he was better than the supporting big man the Lakers than the Lakers had except for maybe 2001 Horace Grant. And the '05 Spurs were a better 3 point shooting team than those 3peat Lakers with the 8th best 3P% at 36.3%.

So to me, the comparison doesn't end at just Shaq/Kobe vs Duncan/Manu. There's no question the Lakers had a big advantage in their 2nd best player, but there's also no question to me that the Spurs had a big advantage from their 3rd best player on compared to the Lakers.

I think it depends on what you think is most important in a supporting cast. Shaq had a rarity in '01 and '02 since he played with a player who could be an MVP candidate or franchise player on another team, Something Duncan didn't have. But Duncan had multiple scorers, something Shaq didn't have and a more well rounded team. I can't argue with those that would take Shaq's help in '01 and '02 as long as they look at the entire teams before coming to a conclusion. I'm not sure myself, though I'd say that in '01, with everyone firing on all cylinders, Shaq got more support than Duncan in '05, but the result was an all-time best 15-1 playoff record so more support isn't necessarily negative, it depends on what you do with it. But I'd definitely take Duncan's '05 support over Shaq's in '00.

However because truly judging how much "help" a player has is so difficult and subjective, I find it better to look at those player's performances during the championship run and judge by that.

or even both Manu and TP at the level of Magic/Kareem and Worthy or McHale and Parrish.

It's tough to compare 2 players to 1, it's always subjective, but I would never suggest Duncan had as much help as Magic, Kareem or Bird. Though it is worth noting that those great Laker and Celtic teams often had to face each other to win a championship which is a factor. They also had to face teams with more talent than any team in recent history like the '83 and '85 Sixers and the late 80's Pistons.

It's hard to imagine casts today like the one Kareem had in '82, Moses hadin '83, Kareem/Magic had in '85, Bird had in '86 and Magic in '87. Multiple superstars and 4-5 all-star caliber players total as well as super role players like Michael Cooper or '86 Bill Walton.

At a team level I'd agree with the sentiment (though inexcusable is a tad strong).

But for Robinson? He shot 68.6% from the field with a true shooting % of .760 and a PER of 26.1.

That series was lost on the perimeter. In game one Strickland and Willie Anderson played well, combined for 68 points and filled their boxscores (though they also combined for 10 turnovers).

Anyway apparently, though Timmy and Mitch played well on offense apparently Nelson called them out on their D, iirc Richmond recalls this in the Run TMC roundtable, I think in the 2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NuK-HkcymM&feature=plcp .

Thereafter they (Anderson and Strickland) got shut down.
For the remainder of the series:

Willie Anderson shot 15 of 43 from the field 34.8837209%. He added 2 three point baskets, and 6 points from 9 trips to the line.

Rod Strickland shot 17 of 47 from the field 36.1702128%. He added no three point baskets, and 11 points from 11 trips to the line.

For the most part, you make valid points, but I don't think you can put too much into Robinson's stats in '91. If you watch the series, he didn't dominate that team, even commentators when stating his stats would say things like "a quiet 26 points" for example, or a quiet game for Robinson.

He wasn't bad, but pretty much every star put up monster numbers vs those Don Nelson Warrior teams. They played at an insane pace, were one of the worst defensive teams to make the playoffs and often played without a player over 6'7".

They did also take away a lot of Robinson's usual defensive impact by having their center out on the perimeter.

[Owl]

For the most part, you make valid points, but I don't think you can put too much into Robinson's stats in '91. If you watch the series, he didn't dominate that team, even commentators when stating his stats would say things like "a quiet 26 points" for example, or a quiet game for Robinson.

He wasn't bad, but pretty much every star put up monster numbers vs those Don Nelson Warrior teams. They played at an insane pace, were one of the worst defensive teams to make the playoffs and often played without a player over 6'7".

They did also take away a lot of Robinson's usual defensive impact by having their center out on the perimeter.

Quiet goes both ways. It can be that it percieved somehow to have had lower impact than the totals suggest (which I don't totally get unless the points are in garbage time), or it can mean scoring within the flow of the offense, not dominating the ball, not taking a lot of shots, not scoring in flashy manner, not going on streaks but just consistently scoring, scoring off broken plays and offensive rebounds rather than extended isos etc. Certainly Robinson wasn't dominating the offense.

So would I have liked Robinson to take a couple more shots a game? Yes, but your Golden State defense point just makes the Spurs wings alarmingly bad numbers worse.

Playoff PER is calculated from within series so is effectively accounting for pace.

Can't argue with the defensive impact thing, but I would say that it's the coaches responsibility to ensure that Robinson is matched up defending the player/position that is most useful to the Spurs. It certainly isn't on Robinson that a team cleverly used the rules to limit (to 1.5 steals and almost 4 blocks a game though obviously D is more than stats, and pace inflates these) his defensive impact, because there's literally nothing he can do about illegal defense rules.

There's this idea that the best player should or is the one who does, win the series. David Robinson looks like the best player in that series both statistically, and certainly in the big picture, but it's not easy to overcome the fact that the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th both within the series and on the season's play. I wouldn't argue Robinson's performance as dominant, because as you say it was versus a very small, poor defensive team. But it stretches credibility to have 1991 on a list of playoff failures or to suggest Robinson was responsible for the loss. The contrast between the outside players production on the two teams is huge.