Lifestyle > Sports & Entertainment
Tim Duncan = The Best PF Ever
M Dogg™:
--- Quote from: LIVE SQUAD on May 21, 2009, 04:16:10 PM ---hey NIK
bill russel > kareem
for sure
--- End quote ---
???
I guess
Don Jacob:
naw it's very debatable
the only people who disagree are those who didn't really see malone and barkley in their prime.
.:DaYg0sTyLz:.:
--- Quote from: Don Jacob on May 21, 2009, 05:08:23 PM ---naw it's very debatable
the only people who disagree are those who didn't really see malone and barkley in their prime.
--- End quote ---
They took a poll of NBA analysts on ESPN last year during the playoffs. It was a virtual wash for Duncan as best ever. There were a couple of picks for Malone and Barkley. But it was a landside on the voting. Malone IMO just had the great numbers. He scored alot. And I watched him in his prime for sure. Like Ive said tho, he had the luxury of the greatest assist guy ever. And played in the pick n roll which they ran great. He benefited from a lot of what Stockton did on the court. We used to have a pretty heated rivalry with the Jazz before Duncan came along. And Stockton was the one you were more worried about stopping the Malone. Barkley gets over-looked sometimes. People seem to think its between Duncan and Malone all the time. But I put Barkley>Malone. He doesnt have the points that Malone put up, but Barkley was able to carry a team by himself. I dont think Malone could. Malone needed that guy feeding him the ball. Barkley was more likely to create by himself.
"THE" MoSav:
--- Quote from: .:DaYg0sTyLz:. on May 21, 2009, 04:14:29 PM ---
--- Quote from: "THE" MoSav on May 21, 2009, 03:13:10 PM ---td beat some weak teams in his finals wins
--- End quote ---
I dunno, the Pistons team was pretty much the exactly same (with a little more experience) as the one that crushed the Laker team that was supposed to be built for a title. It doesnt matter who they played in the finals, they beat the best team the East had to offer on any of those years. Not to mention, those titles were more impressive for what they got through in the West...not so much who they beat from the East.
--- End quote ---
great pistons team, yes. Weak Nets team, weak weak cavs team, and weak Knicks team. Not taking anything away from TD cuz he still got thru the west, just stating a fact
.:DaYg0sTyLz:.:
--- Quote from: "THE" MoSav on May 21, 2009, 09:20:47 PM ---
--- Quote from: .:DaYg0sTyLz:. on May 21, 2009, 04:14:29 PM ---
--- Quote from: "THE" MoSav on May 21, 2009, 03:13:10 PM ---td beat some weak teams in his finals wins
--- End quote ---
I dunno, the Pistons team was pretty much the exactly same (with a little more experience) as the one that crushed the Laker team that was supposed to be built for a title. It doesnt matter who they played in the finals, they beat the best team the East had to offer on any of those years. Not to mention, those titles were more impressive for what they got through in the West...not so much who they beat from the East.
--- End quote ---
great pistons team, yes. Weak Nets team, weak weak cavs team, and weak Knicks team. Not taking anything away from TD cuz he still got thru the west, just stating a fact
--- End quote ---
the thing is, the Pistons team was great...and we beat them. The Nets and Cavs were not so great, but we beat the Nets fairly easily...and completely demolished the Cavs. So although they were great teams, they gave us no real trouble. The Knicks actually werent that bad. But does getting to the finals and demolishing a team that isnt that great make u any less dominant then getting to the finals and winning a hard faught series against a great team? We werent a better team the year we beat the Pistons then we were the year we beat the Cavs.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version