In their Primes

[AboveLegit]

Stole this off a forum I'm on, thought it was an interested topic that could spark some good discussion here....

 

If you had to choose out of today's players in there primes what would the list look like?. What players accomplished in there careers have nothing to do with it. I'm simply talking about there primes and or peak years. So someone like T-Mac wouldn't get punished for not making it out of the 1st round in his career.

[kingfish]

I dont understand, are you supposed to rank current players by how good they were in their primes?

[Nitro]

If I were building a team for one season and needed a single franchise player in their prime to carry the load, my list would look something like..

 

1) Shaquille O'Neal

2) Tim Duncan

3) Kobe Bryant

4) LeBron James

5) Dwyane Wade

6) Kevin Garnett

7) Tracy McGrady

8) Chris Paul

9) Dwight Howard

10) Steve Nash

[Real Deal]

Do you mean a five?

 

C - Shaquille O'Neal

PF - Tim Duncan

SF - LeBron James (going to assume he's there right now)

SG - Kobe Bryant

PG - Jason Kidd

[Guest STL10]

My starting 5 of prime players...

 

C-Shaq

PF-Dirk

SF-Ron Artest

SG-Kobe Bryant

PG-Chris Paul

[Warren2ThaG]

Shaq

Duncan

Kirilenko

Kobe

Kidd

[Hawks Fly High]

C: Shaq

PF: Garnett

SF: McGrady

SG: Bryant

PG: Nash

[Dr. Feelgood]

PG - Andre Miller

SG - Brandon Roy

SF - Nicolas Batum

PF - LaMarcus Aldridge

C - Greg Oden

 

Yeah, that just happened. :glasses:

[kingfish]

C - Duncan

PF - Gasol

SF - Durant

SG - Kobe

PG - Nash

 

I dont take Shaq cause hes selfish and wouldnt play defense when the other guys are taking shots.

[AboveLegit]

Not by position, just rank them 1-10.

 

Here's my list:

 

1. Shaq

2. Kobe

3. Duncan

4. Garnett

5. Tmac

6. LeBron

7. Iverson

8. Wade

9. CP3

10. Pierce

Edited September 7, 2010 by AboveLegit

[AboveLegit]

If I were building a team for one season and needed a single franchise player in their prime to carry the load, my list would look something like..

 

1) Shaquille O'Neal

2) Tim Duncan

3) Kobe Bryant

4) LeBron James

5) Dwyane Wade

6) Kevin Garnett

7) Tracy McGrady

8) Chris Paul

9) Dwight Howard

10) Steve Nash

I see you put Duncan over Kobe, any reason why? This was the one that got me thinking the most.

 

I'm really confused with this. Is Kobe in his prime right now? In my opinion, he still is, and that's why he's above guys like Duncan. He's proven everything in his prime. He proved he can win while coexisting with another superstar, he proved that he can showcase all his talents by dropping 35ppg, and he proved he can win as the clear cut leader of a team, twice. Kobe is a much scarier player because he can impose his will through sheer talent at any moment in the game when the team needs it. Whereas Duncan provides a constant wave of excellence and presence, when there is a balance or tipping point in the game, Kobe will succeed more than any other player will, or even has the ability to.

[Guest STL10]

Why no love for Dirk?

[Real Deal]

I see you put Duncan over Kobe, any reason why? This was the one that got me thinking the most.

 

I'm really confused with this. Is Kobe in his prime right now? In my opinion, he still is, and that's why he's above guys like Duncan. He's proven everything in his prime. He proved he can win while coexisting with another superstar, he proved that he can showcase all his talents by dropping 35ppg, and he proved he can win as the clear cut leader of a team, twice. Kobe is a much scarier player because he can impose his will through sheer talent at any moment in the game when the team needs it. Whereas Duncan provides a constant wave of excellence and presence, when there is a balance or tipping point in the game, Kobe will succeed more than any other player will, or even has the ability to.

I think Bryant is on the same level as Duncan, defensively...but back on offense, Duncan isn't even in his realm, and that's what separates them.

[Guest STL10]

I think Bryant is on the same level as Duncan, defensively...but back on offense, Duncan isn't even in his realm, and that's what separates them.

 

I have to agree with RD on the offense, but Duncan is possibly the best low post defender ever.

 

He is the ONLY guy who can stop Dirk on a consistent basis when he was in his prime.

 

Still though, Kobe > Duncan.

 

5>4

[Nitro]

I see you put Duncan over Kobe, any reason why? This was the one that got me thinking the most.

 

I'm really confused with this. Is Kobe in his prime right now? In my opinion, he still is, and that's why he's above guys like Duncan. He's proven everything in his prime. He proved he can win while coexisting with another superstar, he proved that he can showcase all his talents by dropping 35ppg, and he proved he can win as the clear cut leader of a team, twice. Kobe is a much scarier player because he can impose his will through sheer talent at any moment in the game when the team needs it. Whereas Duncan provides a constant wave of excellence and presence, when there is a balance or tipping point in the game, Kobe will succeed more than any other player will, or even has the ability to.

 

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.

[Real Deal]

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.

I am fine debating who is a better defender, because Duncan is amazing in the post...but come on dude. No way, no how, no chance that Duncan is a better offensive threat than Kobe, or a better offensive player, overall. Kobe has had both an offense ran through him AND he ran an offense. He was a second option AND facilitator that averaged 25-30 PPG, and then a primary option AND facilitator that averaged 30-35 PPG. Led the team in assists in almost every single season since the dynasty (except in 2004, Payton, and 2006, 35.4 PPG).

 

The difference between Kobe and Duncan's offensive games...it's greater than the gap between their defense.

[Nitro]

I am fine debating who is a better defender, because Duncan is amazing in the post...but come on dude. No way, no how, no chance that Duncan is a better offensive threat than Kobe, or a better offensive player, overall. Kobe has had both an offense ran through him AND he ran an offense. He was a second option AND facilitator that averaged 25-30 PPG, and then a primary option AND facilitator that averaged 30-35 PPG. Led the team in assists in almost every single season since the dynasty (except in 2004, Payton, and 2006, 35.4 PPG).

 

The difference between Kobe and Duncan's offensive games...it's greater than the gap between their defense.

 

I never said that Duncan was the better offensive player. I just think you got it twisted- I feel the gap between them defensively (in terms of effectiveness and impact) is bigger than the difference between their offensive games. Using volume scoring and assists from a perimeter player against a post-player is a skewed way of looking at things...itt's like me using Duncan's FG% against Kobe. Duncan is one of the 3-4 best post players in NBA history, and could score the ball at respectable volume (24-27PPG in each post-season from 2000-2003) with good efficiency. He is also one of the best passing big men of this generation. However, as much as he'd like to try, Kobe could never make the kind of impact Duncan did every single night on defense. Duncan's defensive stats, both in the box score and in advanced statistics, are absolutely mind-blowing. Blocks, defensive rebounds, DRtg, defensive win-shares...all WAY off the charts, and those Spurs teams were among the greatest ever even with the revolving door of role players. Yes, on a skill level maybe the difference isn't as big as I am making it out to be, but the extra 6" and 40lbs do make the difference that big. Great perimeter defenders can affect their man and occasionally disrupt passing lanes and such. Great interior defenders can disrupt an entire offense consistently throughout the game.

 

It is also kind of unfair to use Kobe faciliating the offense against TD though. Big man don't rack up assists like perimeter players do, but make no mistake about it, the offense was ran through TD during his prime years. Just because he wasn't at the top of the key setting the offense up doesn't mean he wasn't facilitating offense for his teammates. Unfortunately there's no stat for hockey assists (i.e- the pass that leads to the assist), but I'm sure Duncan would have been pretty high up there in the league ranks if they were, as would most great post players who can pass the ball. That's just as valuable as Kobe racking up 2 more assists per game in his prime.

 

And I can't believe you'd bring stats into this...in 2002-2003 (Duncan's absolute peak year) he led the team in points, rebounds, blocks, FG%, ORtg AND DRtg. And he was 2nd on the team in assists. That team won the championship, knocking off you know who. Most seasons during his prime years were much of the same...he led most of the major statistical categories or was 2nd-3rd.

[Universe]

Do you mean a five?

 

C - Shaquille O'Neal

PF - Tim Duncan

SF - LeBron James (going to assume he's there right now)

SG - Kobe Bryant

PG - Jason Kidd

[Real Deal]

I never said that Duncan was the better offensive player. I just think you got it twisted- I feel the gap between them defensively (in terms of effectiveness and impact) is bigger than the difference between their offensive games. Using volume scoring and assists from a perimeter player against a post-player is a skewed way of looking at things...itt's like me using Duncan's FG% against Kobe. Duncan is one of the 3-4 best post players in NBA history, and could score the ball at respectable volume (24-27PPG in each post-season from 2000-2003) with good efficiency. He is also one of the best passing big men of this generation. However, as much as he'd like to try, Kobe could never make the kind of impact Duncan did every single night on defense. Duncan's defensive stats, both in the box score and in advanced statistics, are absolutely mind-blowing. Blocks, defensive rebounds, DRtg, defensive win-shares...all WAY off the charts, and those Spurs teams were among the greatest ever even with the revolving door of role players. Yes, on a skill level maybe the difference isn't as big as I am making it out to be, but the extra 6" and 40lbs do make the difference that big. Great perimeter defenders can affect their man and occasionally disrupt passing lanes and such. Great interior defenders can disrupt an entire offense consistently throughout the game.

 

It is also kind of unfair to use Kobe faciliating the offense against TD though. Big man don't rack up assists like perimeter players do, but make no mistake about it, the offense was ran through TD during his prime years. Just because he wasn't at the top of the key setting the offense up doesn't mean he wasn't facilitating offense for his teammates. Unfortunately there's no stat for hockey assists (i.e- the pass that leads to the assist), but I'm sure Duncan would have been pretty high up there in the league ranks if they were, as would most great post players who can pass the ball. That's just as valuable as Kobe racking up 2 more assists per game in his prime.

 

And I can't believe you'd bring stats into this...in 2002-2003 (Duncan's absolute peak year) he led the team in points, rebounds, blocks, FG%, ORtg AND DRtg. And he was 2nd on the team in assists. That team won the championship, knocking off you know who. Most seasons during his prime years were much of the same...he led most of the major statistical categories or was 2nd-3rd.

Hockey assists, what he led the team in, that stuff doesn't come into play if we're comparing Kobe and Duncan. That's comparing him and his teammates, when you wanted to throw out Kobe's assists and how he led his team. You make it sound like Duncan was close to a prime Shaq on the offensive end of the court.

 

I never said the offense wasn't ran through him, but that doesn't mean he's on the level of Shaq or Kobe, either (or Jordan, or other amazing offensive players of the last 20 years).

 

Agree to disagree, I guess. I don't know why I would even have to say anything when it comes to their offensive production. Kobe by a mile.

 

Defensively? Bryant locks down whoever he wants and is a mess for opposing teams as a help defender. Duncan is in the same boat. His impact as a big? Okay, he takes Kobe in that regard, but so does Shaq and many other big men. Do you think Shaq was a better defender than Bryant? Not a chance, but his big body changed shots, even when he was late getting back to the rim.

 

If you say it's unfair to look at Kobe's assists numbers, why are we looking at rebounds and blocks for Duncan? Your argument for Duncan's dominance on the defensive end was his size and how he changed the way teams attacked San Antonio. Say the same for Dwight Howard? Only problem is, Dwight's on-ball defense isn't even as good as Gortat's, and we've seen players give Duncan trouble, consistently, in the past...and one of them is Amare Stoudemire.

[Multi-Billionaire]

C - Shaquille O'Neal

PF - Tim Duncan

SF - LeBron James

SG - Kobe Bryant

PG - Steve Nash (put him above Kidd, Kidd passed slightly better, but Nash beat Kidd in his long range shooting, decision making at clutch, shooting and free throw at clutch)... As far as scoring, Nash in his prime was a beast... the Spurs had to put Bowen on him and he still kept scoring. I remember the 51 pts he had on Nets in 3 OTs.

[ChosenOne]

C - Shaquille O'Neal

PF - Tim Duncan

SF - LeBron James

SG - Kobe Bryant

PG - Steve Nash

 

I really cant see anyone being able to dissagree with any one of thoes players.

 

 

As for the Duncan vs Kobe bookwriting contest we have going on above I would alos have to agree with Brandon. Defensively it can be debated, but at the end of the day they played to complete opposite positions so no one can really win in that aspect. But offensively....come on man Kobe is far greater of an offensive player than Duncan was in this prime.

[Nitro]

Hockey assists, what he led the team in, that stuff doesn't come into play if we're comparing Kobe and Duncan.

 

Yes it does, when we're talking about who we'd rather build a team around. I'd rather have the guy who can dominate more aspects of the game, and if on a championship team a guy can lead the team in so many statisitcal, that's pretty amazing. And if the concept of hockey assists are to be thrown away in this arguement, then you are being COMPLETELY biased towards Kobe. It is roughly as relevant as using raw statistical assists when talking about big men.

 

That's comparing him and his teammates, when you wanted to throw out Kobe's assists and how he led his team.

 

I didn't throw it out, but at the same time saying Kobe's facilitating and playmaking is way beyond that of Duncan is false. The fact that a big man's playmaking value statistically can't be proven is why I disregarded Kobe's 2APG advantage.

 

You make it sound like Duncan was close to a prime Shaq on the offensive end of the court.

 

I never said the offense wasn't ran through him, but that doesn't mean he's on the level of Shaq or Kobe, either (or Jordan, or other amazing offensive players of the last 20 years).

 

Agree to disagree, I guess. I don't know why I would even have to say anything when it comes to their offensive production. Kobe by a mile.

 

Duncan was putting up 24-27PPG in the post-season during his prime years on 50%+ shooting, along with 4-5APG. I fail to see how Kobe putting up 2-3 more points on worse FG % and getting less than 1APG more equates to him being miles ahead offensively. We're not comparing Kobe to Chris Bosh here...we're talking about one of the premiere post players in NBA history who was the primary scorer on multiple championships.

 

Defensively? Bryant locks down whoever he wants and is a mess for opposing teams as a help defender. Duncan is in the same boat. His impact as a big? Okay, he takes Kobe in that regard, but so does Shaq and many other big men. Do you think Shaq was a better defender than Bryant? Not a chance, but his big body changed shots, even when he was late getting back to the rim.

 

Kobe doesn't lockdown whoever he wants, and he's only wanted to lock someone down in less than 50% of his games since the middle of the 3-peat.

 

And yes, the fact that big men make a greater defensive impact is precisely why I'd rather build a franchise around a prime Duncan over a prime Kobe. Not to mention he's the better, smarter defensive player to begin with. The fact that he's a PF/C and Kobe is a SG widens the gap immensely.

 

If you say it's unfair to look at Kobe's assists numbers, why are we looking at rebounds and blocks for Duncan? Your argument for Duncan's dominance on the defensive end was his size and how he changed the way teams attacked San Antonio. Say the same for Dwight Howard? Only problem is, Dwight's on-ball defense isn't even as good as Gortat's, and we've seen players give Duncan trouble, consistently, in the past...and one of them is Amare Stoudemire.

 

First off, I brought those stats in because you were so quick to bring Kobe's volume scoring and assists numbers into the mix.

 

My arguement for Duncan on defense was not only his size and shot-blocking ability like Dwight Howard, but also his elite post-up defense, sharp rotations, defensive rebounding and all-around defensive IQ. Amare did go to work on TD in the past, but Kobe has been lit up before as well. The fact that he's RARELY had the most difficult swingman matchup defensively in his prime hurts his cause. But even if Kobe was Scottie Pippen defensively, I'd still say Duncan has the edge defensively by a comfortable margin.

[Real Deal]

You can't give me Duncan's 27 PPG playoff run, the sample size he had against Predrag Drobnjak and Shaq. For one...Drobnjak? I could score 30 on him every game...but Shaq was so ignorant in that Spurs/Lakers series, he almost lost us leads I don't know how many times. He and Duncan played "good game, bad game" the entire series, while Bryant basically beat the Spurs by himself. Plus, despite what anyone claims, Shaq was a pathetic defensive player. Heard it enough from Phil Jackson, then had to watch it for years. Pick and roll, he was D-League bad, and his on-ball defense (especially against versatile centers) was ugly.

 

Was the 24 PPG playoff run the year he dominated Dirk? If so, it was also the year Kevin Garnett locked him up, badly, after he kept helping off Duncan that first game of the series, and Robinson had to win it for San An.

 

I'm not going to dive into a 4-12 game playoff run, though. I'm sure he averaged in the 20's when he won his titles, but when you tell me that Kobe has rarely had the most difficult swingman assignment, I can't help but say that Duncan didn't exactly play against any good defenders in the playoffs. Amare, Dirk, Shaq, Drobnjak, four that just come to mind. When he did, against Garnett, he didn't show me anything to drop my jaw about.

 

If this is all about the big man and how you'd build around one over any guard, then I don't see the point of going any further with this. In other words, you would take Shaq over Jordan? Both Duncan and Shaq had a lot of help winning their rings. It's not just about being a seven-footer. Tell me who we put around these guys first, and then I'll decide.

 

Using that logic, you should want to take Hakeem over all of the bigs AND guards, because the truth is, Hakeem had the least amount of help winning his titles.

[Multi-Billionaire]

^Sam Cassell, Kenny Smith, Robert Horry were all clutch. It doesn't matter how many PPG they scored, what matters is when the game matters they balled. Drexler was in still in his prime and was the West starting SG for All Star.

 

 

 

 

I can't believe y'all chose Kidd over Nash, really?

 

Nash won 2 MVPs, was the better shooter, long range, free throw, clutch with decision making (scoring or passing) was the superior scorer.

[Real Deal]

^Sam Cassell, Kenny Smith, Robert Horry were all clutch. It doesn't matter how many PPG they scored, what matters is when the game matters they balled. Drexler was in still in his prime and was the West starting SG for All Star.

Drexler wasn't on the 1994 team that won the title, and in 1995 (when Drexler was dealt to Houston), he was not on the all-star team. Put up good numbers, nonetheless, but he was no Kobe.

 

And, Cassell wasn't playing at the end of games during that first championship season. Not as a rookie.

 

All of that is beside the point, anyway, just one sentence of my post.

 

 

I can't believe y'all chose Kidd over Nash, really?

 

Nash won 2 MVPs, was the better shooter, long range, free throw, clutch with decision making (scoring or passing) was the superior scorer.

In other words, he was the better shooter...lol.

 

You can't tell me Kidd isn't on Nash's level as a passer.

 

And, unfortunately for Nash, Jason Kidd is one of the best defensive players in the last 10-15 years, while Nash is one of the worst defensive players starting at the point in that time span.

 

Kidd is the complete player. Nash is the shooter. It's a no-brainer, for me.