NBA Legacy Thread, Update Resumes

In the words of Kobe himself, that was one giant bikram yoga stretch right there CP
laugh.gif
 
absurdity of Duncan being overrated is just about crazy., ill get to it later...but I think y'all maybe looking at him through laker tinted glasses.
 
absurdity of Duncan being overrated is just about crazy., ill get to it later...but I think y'all maybe looking at him through laker tinted glasses.
 
laugh.gif
  Hey, I said I was just going to give an argument, I didn't say it was fair or anything.  And Laker tinted glasses kicked his @#$ 4 outta 5 times, we should be able to point out his overlooked spots in his resume. 
nerd.gif
laugh.gif
 

As I said, I have him at top PF, I have him top 10.  Just giving a fairly reasonable argument against him, ya know?  More in depth than saying  "he sucks, cuz he's tall" or some lame stuff like that. 
laugh.gif
 
laugh.gif
  Hey, I said I was just going to give an argument, I didn't say it was fair or anything.  And Laker tinted glasses kicked his @#$ 4 outta 5 times, we should be able to point out his overlooked spots in his resume. 
nerd.gif
laugh.gif
 

As I said, I have him at top PF, I have him top 10.  Just giving a fairly reasonable argument against him, ya know?  More in depth than saying  "he sucks, cuz he's tall" or some lame stuff like that. 
laugh.gif
 
thats a post full of stuff more about the spurs been overrated then it is TD

Only one problem, SA won not because they were better, but because LA was flat out exhausted
  go some where with that homer crap
 
thats a post full of stuff more about the spurs been overrated then it is TD

Only one problem, SA won not because they were better, but because LA was flat out exhausted
  go some where with that homer crap
 
It doesn't really matter WHY someone won a ring, it is a damn ring. The record books won't say that Lakers was tired so that is why Spurs won. I mean I could see if they only won 1 time then maybe you would have an argument (in your own mind maybe). So can we say the same thing about the Lakers? They only won rings because the Spurs were tired?
 
It doesn't really matter WHY someone won a ring, it is a damn ring. The record books won't say that Lakers was tired so that is why Spurs won. I mean I could see if they only won 1 time then maybe you would have an argument (in your own mind maybe). So can we say the same thing about the Lakers? They only won rings because the Spurs were tired?
 
Originally Posted by Bigmike23

thats a post full of stuff more about the spurs been overrated then it is TD

Only one problem, SA won not because they were better, but because LA was flat out exhausted
  go some where with that homer crap

Duncan is given credit for the Spurs success, much as people give Shaq the credit for LA's, so when the Spurs fail, Duncan fails, yes?  That's all I was getting at.  And my angle wasn't the Spurs being overrated, it was that Duncan's career was one of good timing.  Picture it this way, if Boston got that #1, and he isn't teamed with the Admiral right off the bat, is he still as great?  I'm not hating on the guy there, I'm asking the question that COULD have happened.  Same as any player.  MJ COULD have been a Blazer.  Kobe COULD have been a Hornet.  Durant COULD have been a Blazer, etc etc.  People prop Duncan up like he has ZERO faults, ZERO failures, and that is simply not true.  They have gotten their @#$#@ kicked so many times.  But all people say about Duncan is 4 titles.  He played more than 4 years though didn't he? 
nerd.gif

  

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

It doesn't really matter WHY someone won a ring, it is a damn ring. The record books won't say that Lakers was tired so that is why Spurs won. I mean I could see if they only won 1 time then maybe you would have an argument (in your own mind maybe). So can we say the same thing about the Lakers? They only won rings because the Spurs were tired?

30t6p3b.gif
 

That is what you picked up out of all that? 
laugh.gif
  When did the Lakers only win a title because the Spurs were tired?  When did that happen?  When did the Spurs go to 3 straight finals?  That happened?  Oh, no, it didn't.  Ok, so I say something that actually did happen, and was true.  The Lakers came in after 3 straight finals runs, and you came back at me with something that is no where even remotely close.  That's the plan? 
laugh.gif


Maybe you guys don't remember that series, that's fine.  I said, and will say yet again, I give the man his credit.  I said he is the #1 PF of all time.  I placed him within my own personal top 10.  I was making an argument ANGAINST because someone asked if he was the be all end all slam dunk at his position.  That's all.  This was the angle I came up with.  And all you guys picked out was that we were tired in 03? 
roll.gif
  Gosh damn. 

4 titles
an 8 seed, during a shortened season
a Net team coming off a finals run the year before
a Pistons team coming off a finals run the year before
a dreadful Cavs team that got by the aging Pistons team that had like 300 combined playoff games in their career. 

Is ANY of that information, untrue?  ANY of it? 

Ok then, so there is an angle.  And I presented that angle, that's all.  If someone wants to take the other side of the debate, and give the pro Duncan angle, by all means, I will post that directly underneath his resume, with mine below it.  I merely gave the other side of the coin guys.  Just as I did Lebron, just as I did Nash.  None of it makes me right, it's just a differing opinion.  That is what this thread is intended for.  Examining these great NBA players careers and resumes.  The good, the bad, and the ugly. 
bfe15f69a6b6fa20a2956815c5e1a03ffcddf92.gif
 
Originally Posted by Bigmike23

thats a post full of stuff more about the spurs been overrated then it is TD

Only one problem, SA won not because they were better, but because LA was flat out exhausted
  go some where with that homer crap

Duncan is given credit for the Spurs success, much as people give Shaq the credit for LA's, so when the Spurs fail, Duncan fails, yes?  That's all I was getting at.  And my angle wasn't the Spurs being overrated, it was that Duncan's career was one of good timing.  Picture it this way, if Boston got that #1, and he isn't teamed with the Admiral right off the bat, is he still as great?  I'm not hating on the guy there, I'm asking the question that COULD have happened.  Same as any player.  MJ COULD have been a Blazer.  Kobe COULD have been a Hornet.  Durant COULD have been a Blazer, etc etc.  People prop Duncan up like he has ZERO faults, ZERO failures, and that is simply not true.  They have gotten their @#$#@ kicked so many times.  But all people say about Duncan is 4 titles.  He played more than 4 years though didn't he? 
nerd.gif

  

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

It doesn't really matter WHY someone won a ring, it is a damn ring. The record books won't say that Lakers was tired so that is why Spurs won. I mean I could see if they only won 1 time then maybe you would have an argument (in your own mind maybe). So can we say the same thing about the Lakers? They only won rings because the Spurs were tired?

30t6p3b.gif
 

That is what you picked up out of all that? 
laugh.gif
  When did the Lakers only win a title because the Spurs were tired?  When did that happen?  When did the Spurs go to 3 straight finals?  That happened?  Oh, no, it didn't.  Ok, so I say something that actually did happen, and was true.  The Lakers came in after 3 straight finals runs, and you came back at me with something that is no where even remotely close.  That's the plan? 
laugh.gif


Maybe you guys don't remember that series, that's fine.  I said, and will say yet again, I give the man his credit.  I said he is the #1 PF of all time.  I placed him within my own personal top 10.  I was making an argument ANGAINST because someone asked if he was the be all end all slam dunk at his position.  That's all.  This was the angle I came up with.  And all you guys picked out was that we were tired in 03? 
roll.gif
  Gosh damn. 

4 titles
an 8 seed, during a shortened season
a Net team coming off a finals run the year before
a Pistons team coming off a finals run the year before
a dreadful Cavs team that got by the aging Pistons team that had like 300 combined playoff games in their career. 

Is ANY of that information, untrue?  ANY of it? 

Ok then, so there is an angle.  And I presented that angle, that's all.  If someone wants to take the other side of the debate, and give the pro Duncan angle, by all means, I will post that directly underneath his resume, with mine below it.  I merely gave the other side of the coin guys.  Just as I did Lebron, just as I did Nash.  None of it makes me right, it's just a differing opinion.  That is what this thread is intended for.  Examining these great NBA players careers and resumes.  The good, the bad, and the ugly. 
bfe15f69a6b6fa20a2956815c5e1a03ffcddf92.gif
 
you really think a great player like Duncan doesnt get a ring some how? that spurs team was built around him. you dont think boston would do the same?

u touched on about all those PF tht had more talent then him. IMO that is what made him so great. he didnt have all the talent in the world but would work on his game summer after summer and add stuff to it. you wont find many bigman that lock down both sides of the floor like he did. he is one of the most clutch players in the 2000's.
 
you really think a great player like Duncan doesnt get a ring some how? that spurs team was built around him. you dont think boston would do the same?

u touched on about all those PF tht had more talent then him. IMO that is what made him so great. he didnt have all the talent in the world but would work on his game summer after summer and add stuff to it. you wont find many bigman that lock down both sides of the floor like he did. he is one of the most clutch players in the 2000's.
 
We could knock the Lakers' championships since 2000 too, no?

Not that I am going to do that.
laugh.gif
 
think he's being under sold on how much skill and talent he really had.

Kg was more talented..Webber..maybe..Rasheed..hell no.
 
think he's being under sold on how much skill and talent he really had.

Kg was more talented..Webber..maybe..Rasheed..hell no.
 
We could knock the Lakers' championships since 2000 too, no?

Not that I am going to do that.
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted by Bigmike23

you really think a great player like Duncan doesnt get a ring some how? that spurs team was built around him. you dont think boston would do the same?

u touched on about all those PF tht had more talent then him. IMO that is what made him so great. he didnt have all the talent in the world but would work on his game summer after summer and add stuff to it. you wont find many bigman that lock down both sides of the floor like he did. he is one of the most clutch players in the 2000's.
No no, absolutely he could have gotten a ring elsewhere, OR, he could have been wasted to death, ala Garnett. 
wink.gif
 
As much credit as we all give Duncan, don't Pop and the SA front office get some love too?  What about Admiral?  I've seen people around here say that Manu is a HOF'er, if Duncan was in Boston, and their FO was a damn mess, would Duncan be 4-4 right now?  That's what I'm askin man.  Duncan was in the right place, at the right time.  It was a perfect set up for him. 


I take nothing away from the guy, I do NOT mean to make it sound like the guy is overrated like Nash is.  He is great on both sides of the court, he was clutch in the playoffs, he did work on his game.  I give him ABSOLUTE credit for those things.  Like I said, I was merely making a case.  That's all. 
laugh.gif



Allen, I was throwing Sheeds raw skill.  The guy had no brain, I know that, but raw skill, range from anywhere, high shooting form, quick as hell feet, hell, he gave Duncan more trouble than any PF during their primes, that has to count for something.  The guy was just lazy.  And we all lost out for that. 
tired.gif
  But pure, raw, uncut skill, Sheed COULD have matched or exceeded Duncan.  Duncan worked, Sheed did not.  There was the difference right there. 

  
 
Originally Posted by Bigmike23

you really think a great player like Duncan doesnt get a ring some how? that spurs team was built around him. you dont think boston would do the same?

u touched on about all those PF tht had more talent then him. IMO that is what made him so great. he didnt have all the talent in the world but would work on his game summer after summer and add stuff to it. you wont find many bigman that lock down both sides of the floor like he did. he is one of the most clutch players in the 2000's.
No no, absolutely he could have gotten a ring elsewhere, OR, he could have been wasted to death, ala Garnett. 
wink.gif
 
As much credit as we all give Duncan, don't Pop and the SA front office get some love too?  What about Admiral?  I've seen people around here say that Manu is a HOF'er, if Duncan was in Boston, and their FO was a damn mess, would Duncan be 4-4 right now?  That's what I'm askin man.  Duncan was in the right place, at the right time.  It was a perfect set up for him. 


I take nothing away from the guy, I do NOT mean to make it sound like the guy is overrated like Nash is.  He is great on both sides of the court, he was clutch in the playoffs, he did work on his game.  I give him ABSOLUTE credit for those things.  Like I said, I was merely making a case.  That's all. 
laugh.gif



Allen, I was throwing Sheeds raw skill.  The guy had no brain, I know that, but raw skill, range from anywhere, high shooting form, quick as hell feet, hell, he gave Duncan more trouble than any PF during their primes, that has to count for something.  The guy was just lazy.  And we all lost out for that. 
tired.gif
  But pure, raw, uncut skill, Sheed COULD have matched or exceeded Duncan.  Duncan worked, Sheed did not.  There was the difference right there. 

  
 
Allen, you touched on KG perfectly earlier, tell me, what would David, KG, and Bowen been like defensively in the 01-02 seasons?  David and Dunc both cleaned house in the paint, but KG was good enough to chase the whole floor, he could guard PG's if you asked him.  And yet still grab boards and block shots down low.  Do you see where I was comin from that back then, that 3 on D could have surpassed what Dunc did with them?  Or you think I'm totally off the reservation? 

Duncan certainly had the 4th quarter nuts that KG didn't, I can't argue there, but in terms of aspects, there were things KG could have been just as great as Duncan, and this convo would be a lot closer, yes? 
 
Allen, you touched on KG perfectly earlier, tell me, what would David, KG, and Bowen been like defensively in the 01-02 seasons?  David and Dunc both cleaned house in the paint, but KG was good enough to chase the whole floor, he could guard PG's if you asked him.  And yet still grab boards and block shots down low.  Do you see where I was comin from that back then, that 3 on D could have surpassed what Dunc did with them?  Or you think I'm totally off the reservation? 

Duncan certainly had the 4th quarter nuts that KG didn't, I can't argue there, but in terms of aspects, there were things KG could have been just as great as Duncan, and this convo would be a lot closer, yes? 
 
correct if im wrong but sheed range for days didnt come till later in his career right? he also didnt start to really lock up on D till later on. which is also when he forgot how to rebound and score in the post
 
Back
Top Bottom