Well, you have to see how I ranked them- It was by who, for one season, I'd build my franchise around. And historically speaking dominant big men are the easiest to build around. When Tim Duncan was in his prime he could drop 22-25PPG on solid efficiency, clean the glass with 12+ boards per game, be able to dish out a 3.5-4APG, block nearly 3 shots per game, and provide solid consistency. The only time there was ever a big discrepency in his play was when it was elevated in the playoffs. His 2003 post-season run remains legendary and one of the most impressive I have ever witnessed. His stat line in that post-season... 2003 post-season: 24.7PPG, 15.4RPG, 5.3APG, 3.3BPG, 52.9% FG In that post-season, he knocked off the Lakers who were back-to-back-to-back defending world champs. And he did it with Tony Parker in his 2nd season, Manu Ginobili in his rookie season, a very young Stephen Jackson, and a very old David Robinson who retired after they won Game 6 of the 2003 Finals. It was a solid team, but quite probably their weakest of all their championship teams. They did it behind Duncan's brilliance when he was in his absolute prime. As for what RD said about the difference between Kobe/TD's offense and defense, I whole-heartedly disagree. Kobe is a great perimeter defender, but he's not the game-changer that a guy like Scottie Pippen was, and the great perimeter defender NEVER makes the kind of defensive impact a great interior defender does. Besides being an elite shot-blocker Duncan was amazing at post-up defense (gave prime Shaq more fits than anyone, including Hakeem, Mutombo, etc..), could make crisp rotations to cut-off perimeter players trying to drive to the rim, and he was one of the best at contesting all shots around the rim. Kobe can only really affect his man on defense, whereas Duncan can disrupt an entire offense. And offensively, a prime Duncan could put up points in the regular and post-season, and was a very good passer out of the post so the offense was routinely ran through him.