Originally Posted by Big#50
Yes. Duncan is only.second to MJ.
Kobe had Shaq. And vice versa. Two top ten.players in the same team.Then he had the most stacked team in the league for his other two rings.
Shaq had Wade whistle for his other ring.
Magic had KAJ. And vice versa. Two top ten players in the same team.
Russell and wilt have no case. They played in a weak ****ing era.
You want to use that primitive and flawed logic?
Cool, then switch Duncan and Hakeem in time. Duncan is drafted in 84 by the Rockets, Hakeem is drafted in 97 by the Spurs.
Duncan would have the same amount of championships as Hakeem (1994, 1995), and it's certainly debatable whether he'd have beaten Shaq and the Magic in 1995. But, ultimately I think he would have. Duncan would have won MVP in 1994 and 1995 likely, so the same amount of MVPs as he does now.
Hakeem would have the same amount of championships as Duncan does (1999 is debatable though - would he be able to play alongside David Robinson effectively?), if not more (imagine 1993-1995 Hakeem playing on the 2006-2008 Spurs. It's possible that the Spurs get to the Finals in 2006 and 2008 in that hypothetical). He'd have MVPs in 2001 (1989 Hakeem), 2002, (1990 Hakeem), 2007 (1994 Hakeem, arguably peak) and probably 2008 (1995 Hakeem - 28, 11, 4, 3, and 2). That's at least 3 rings, 3 FMVPS, 4 MVPS, and a couple of DPOY awards.
Hakeem would be in the discussion for GOAT right now if Duncan and Hakeem switched career paths, while Duncan would boast a less successful career.
So next time you want to use "played in a weak era" as a legit argument, ask yourself if you really think that Hakeem wouldn't have been even more dominant than Duncan if he played from 1997-2011.