Best Big Men to Ever Play the Game

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


In Duncan's 2nd title, I don't believe he had a single player in the top 50 in the league on his team.

[/ QUOTE ]

that team had aging david robinson who was still good for something around 8/8 in 25 mpg, stephen jackson, ginobili, parker, bowen, and a bunch of solid bench contributors like malik rose, steve smith, steve kerr, and speedy claxton. So while you may be right about not having another top 50 player that season, that team was still way loaded.

[/ QUOTE ]

We must have a different definition of "loaded." If we were to take every championship team ever and take away teh best player and then compare the teams, this one would be bottom 5 definitely.

First off....a 34 year old Steve Smith, a 38 year old STeve Kerr, and Speedy Claxton shouldn't even be mentioned.

Secondly, its unfair for you to list Ginobli because most people think of him as the player he is today, but he only averaged 7 points per game that year on 43.8% shooting.

As you said, DR was giving them 8/8 in 25 minutes...thats good, but its not anything special.

Parker and Stephen Jackson were ok players.

Take away Duncan and thats one of the worst teams in the league though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, but teams like this with a good mix of experienced vets contributing solid minutes and young up and coming players, mixed in with one or two superstar players perform very well in the NBA.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just described the Clippers of this year. And come to think of it, if you remove Brand and Duncan then this year's Clippers were a better team.

[joel2006]

[ QUOTE ]


apparently you don't know THAY3R that well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, its unfair for you to list Ginobli because most people think of him as the player he is today, but he only averaged 7 points per game that year on 43.8% shooting.

[/ QUOTE ] LOL at sighting Ginobli's regular season stats for a playoff run. Do you remember the playoffs that year? Ginobli came out of nowhere during the playoffs and was insanely good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Manu Ginobli in the playoffs that year:

27.5 minutes
9.4 points
38.5% FG
2.9 assists
3.8 rebounds


I find your comments "interesting."

Edited to add: Seriously guys....http://www.basketball-reference.com/.....please start looking up facts and stats before posting. It'll help the discussion a ton.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


In Duncan's 2nd title, I don't believe he had a single player in the top 50 in the league on his team.

[/ QUOTE ]

that team had aging david robinson who was still good for something around 8/8 in 25 mpg, stephen jackson, ginobili, parker, bowen, and a bunch of solid bench contributors like malik rose, steve smith, steve kerr, and speedy claxton. So while you may be right about not having another top 50 player that season, that team was still way loaded.

[/ QUOTE ]

We must have a different definition of "loaded." If we were to take every championship team ever and take away teh best player and then compare the teams, this one would be bottom 5 definitely.

First off....a 34 year old Steve Smith, a 38 year old STeve Kerr, and Speedy Claxton shouldn't even be mentioned.

Secondly, its unfair for you to list Ginobli because most people think of him as the player he is today, but he only averaged 7 points per game that year on 43.8% shooting.

As you said, DR was giving them 8/8 in 25 minutes...thats good, but its not anything special.

Parker and Stephen Jackson were ok players.

Take away Duncan and thats one of the worst teams in the league though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, but teams like this with a good mix of experienced vets contributing solid minutes and young up and coming players, mixed in with one or two superstar players perform very well in the NBA.

[/ QUOTE ]

You just described the Clippers of this year. And come to think of it, if you remove Brand and Duncan then this year's Clippers were a better team.

[/ QUOTE ]

dang you're right, that one example totally dismisses every team that has succeeded like that like the 02-03 spurs, 03-04 pistons, even the Shaq/Kobe Lakers teams are pretty much in this mold although Shaq and Kobe are obviously ridiculously big superstars.

All I was saying is that basically, you look at championship teams and what do they usually have. 1 or 2 superstars, a bunch of experienced vets and a couple young up and comers.

Also 02-03 spurs minus duncan definitely takes this year's clippers minus brand. You really just seem to consistently underrate the players duncan has around him.

[Assani Fisher]

Theres a huge difference between having one superstar and having two superstars. You simply can't group those two things together.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Theres a huge difference between having one superstar and having two superstars. You simply can't group those two things together.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about one superstar + 2 minor stars + 1 aging but still decent former star + a loaded bench. That team was an awesome team. Acting like it was Duncan caring a bunch of hacks is ridiculous. You think that team won 60 regular season games and had the best record in the league that year just because of Duncan?

Duncan + Jackson and Parker + all-defensive nba player and league leading 3 pt shooter Bruce Bowen + All rookie teamer manu ginobili + still decent david robinson + malik rose having the season of his life + steve smith and steve kerr contributing off the bench. That team was loaded, plain and simple.

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]


apparently you don't know THAY3R that well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you are retarded.

When you spout of stupid cliches like "His desire to win was higher so he was better" as your argument it's just dumb.

[rubbrband]

Can't believe no one has brought up shooting percentages. The true measure of a dominant center is his defensive presence and his ability to shoot over .500

Shaq has the highest lifetime shooting percentage at .580
Wilt has the single season record at .727

These guys both took a lot of shots so it wasn't just due to easy put backs and dunks.

The other shooting percentages include three pointers wich none of the big men mentioned have anything to do with except maybe KG, and foul shooting.

Obviously centers are typically bad free throw shooters. Shaq was one of the worst ever, and never won a championship until he got his foul shooting up.

I would like to see how things stack up when shooting percentages are used because no matter how good a player looks on paper FG% tell more of the story.

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously guys....http://www.basketball-reference.com/.....please start looking up facts and stats before posting. It'll help the discussion a ton.

[/ QUOTE ]


OMFG MY HEAD JUST ASPLODED

[blindside]

[ QUOTE ]

Total agreement with you here. Your earlier stats comparison included some funky years from both. Just look at their primes, seven years, playing full minutes: Eaton - 84-91, Wallace 00-07. Basically, Eaton just has a one block per game edge over Wallace, and that's it.


[/ QUOTE ]

i think 1.2 blocks over an entire career is huge... you also have to adjust for pace and taking that into account the wallace's probably become non-existant and the blocks advantage more pronounced... then it probably boils down to wallaces steals vs. eaton's blocks... and i'm pretty sure a block is worth more than a steal...

anyway, i was actually comparing eaton with bosh... as bosh has only had two very good years... but i thought eaton and wallace was somewhat of a wash also...

but yeah... i would think anyone is crazy to think that with the golden age of centers in the 90s... and hakeem being clearly the best out of all of them... david robinson, patrick ewing, alonzo mourning, dikembe mutombo and shaq... the only one that really is a comparison for duncan that matches up as far as longevity over the course of duncan's career is ben wallace ...and suffice it to say you can really only compare him to dikembe who's probably the worst out of the whole group... i'd be willing to throw KG in there also but it's really tough to say with his supporting cast being so bad... if KG and duncan trading places, we could easily be talking about KG right now...