in their primes, who's the better player- robinson or duncan
51 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
in their primes, who's the better player- robinson or duncan
by air gordon on Tue Jun 17, 2003 4:36 pm
this is a tough call but i would go with duncan. robinson was terrific in his prime but i'll always remember him as a soft player, something duncan isn't.
Jump.
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
-
air gordon - Posts: 7867
- Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 4:06 pm
- Location: windy city
by The Big Racist on Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:47 pm
Dan Gadzuric wrote:I'm not sure Duncan is in his prime yet.
i think so too!
- The Big Racist
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 11:37 pm
by Andrew on Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:27 pm
Good topic. 
Duncan is probably going to end up surpassing Robinson, but the Admiral in his prime was a special player. I'd say Robinson in his prime was the better player, but in a few years it will probably be a different story.
Duncan is probably going to end up surpassing Robinson, but the Admiral in his prime was a special player. I'd say Robinson in his prime was the better player, but in a few years it will probably be a different story.
-
Andrew - Retro Basketball Gamer
- Posts: 115071
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
- Location: Australia
by Shep on Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:03 pm
Robinson can't even reach the finals at his prime
well in his prime he had dennis rodman, and nobody else for a supporting cast. with that pitiful team up robinson still manages to win 55 games. throughout robinson's early days, most years he had nothing in support.
in 1990, robinson's rookie year, the spurs go from winning 21 games in '89, to 56.
- Shep
by Stevan on Wed Jun 18, 2003 1:26 am
David Robinson... possibly one of the most agile centres of all time? Did it well on both ends, athletic, jumper extended to mid range, and damn chiseled.
Does TD do weights or what? Looking at that pic above... I thought a thing or two about weight training would have rubbed off on TD after these few years with the Admiral.
Does TD do weights or what? Looking at that pic above... I thought a thing or two about weight training would have rubbed off on TD after these few years with the Admiral.
-
Stevan - Posts: 1509
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 10:10 pm
- Location: Melbourne
by MAKAVELI THE DON on Wed Jun 18, 2003 2:20 am
David Robinson was better in his than Tim, and he would have won alot more championships, if he had a good supporting cast like Duncan has now! Look back at all the greatest players who won multiple NBA titles, Jordan, Magic, Bird, Russell, Kareem, Dr. J! Yes they're the superstars but they couldn't do it without a good support!
But eventually, Duncan will surpass David!
But eventually, Duncan will surpass David!
- MAKAVELI THE DON
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 5:47 am
- Location: West Indies
by The Big Racist on Wed Jun 18, 2003 2:56 am
Laddas_KB8 wrote:D-Rob did have 72 in a single game
mr.robinson had 71 ponts in a single game
- The Big Racist
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 11:37 pm
by air gordon on Wed Jun 18, 2003 6:36 am
MAKAVELI THE DON wrote:David Robinson was better in his than Tim, and he would have won alot more championships, if he had a good supporting cast like Duncan has now!
i'm not trying to take anything away from this years nba champion, the Spurs, but duncan's supporting cast is really nothing to brag about. take a look at the starting 5
-robinson is barely a shade of '99 player that deferred to duncan
-stephen jackson probably wouldn't be starting on most nba teams
-bruce bowen: see above. he's Ira Newble with a better 3pt shot
-parker is still inconsistent and disappeared in the last 2 games of the finals
now if you took those 4 and surround them around the admiral in his prime (early 90's-98), i think that starting 5 would be lucky to even get 1 championship.
just my opinion, i could be wrong here...
Last edited by air gordon on Wed Jun 18, 2003 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jump.
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
-
air gordon - Posts: 7867
- Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 4:06 pm
- Location: windy city
...
by Poollit on Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:12 am
really how good are the Spurs supporting cast w/o Tim to set them up?
I mean, like limpdilznik said, none of them takeaway Robinson (MAYBE DEPENDING ON THE TEAM) and Parker (DEPENDING) would have started on another team.
D-Rob has now become that soft average old man basketball player who has a good past and that's all.
Parker is good, sometimes. About Troy hudson status.
Who else?
What did Duncan have that was so special that KG didn't have? Or Kobe? or T-mac <-----in his case what does he not have that Kobe does except a fatass center D.L. that breaks his rythm because he wants to touch the ball too? Duncan absolutely has shit. That team would go nowhere w/o.
MJ he had alot of shit, and he didn't mean AWHOLE lot to that team, cause if we're talking support, THAT was support. not what Kobe or Shaq has, and not what Duncan has.
Duncan or D-Rob? I don't know. I guess Robinson in his Prime V.S. Duncan now. And i think Duncan won't get much more better, he's like 27
how much more can he go? D-rob averaged like 4 blks one year, Duncan has yet to reach 3 per game. his steals is nowhere near D-rob's and never will be. his points might go as high as 27 28, maybe as high as 29. Assists seem the same.
I think because of Robinson's game, he would never have been a true winner w/o the cast. But Tim has a more powerhouse game, and is already a true champion.
So statistically Robinson the better player. If i had to choose one for my team, timmy D
I mean, like limpdilznik said, none of them takeaway Robinson (MAYBE DEPENDING ON THE TEAM) and Parker (DEPENDING) would have started on another team.
D-Rob has now become that soft average old man basketball player who has a good past and that's all.
Parker is good, sometimes. About Troy hudson status.
Who else?
What did Duncan have that was so special that KG didn't have? Or Kobe? or T-mac <-----in his case what does he not have that Kobe does except a fatass center D.L. that breaks his rythm because he wants to touch the ball too? Duncan absolutely has shit. That team would go nowhere w/o.
MJ he had alot of shit, and he didn't mean AWHOLE lot to that team, cause if we're talking support, THAT was support. not what Kobe or Shaq has, and not what Duncan has.
Duncan or D-Rob? I don't know. I guess Robinson in his Prime V.S. Duncan now. And i think Duncan won't get much more better, he's like 27
how much more can he go? D-rob averaged like 4 blks one year, Duncan has yet to reach 3 per game. his steals is nowhere near D-rob's and never will be. his points might go as high as 27 28, maybe as high as 29. Assists seem the same.
I think because of Robinson's game, he would never have been a true winner w/o the cast. But Tim has a more powerhouse game, and is already a true champion.
So statistically Robinson the better player. If i had to choose one for my team, timmy D
- Poollit
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 3:36 am
by MAKAVELI THE DON on Wed Jun 18, 2003 12:39 pm
Like I've been saying, I don't think it's fair for people to compare the Spurs with the Bulls, or any past NBA championship team!
And it doesn't matter what people say about the Spurs supporting cast, and let it be known, just as no team is a winner without their star player, no star player is a winner without his teammates!
I hope certain people remember games 6 vs. the Mavericks, when Tim Duncan was shut down, couldn't even get a shot at the basket because of the Mavs sworming defense, and the Spurs were down, who it was that kept them in the game, who it was that took over the game, and who won the game for them, Steven Jackson (with the help of Steve Kerr); and also in game 4, who scored 19 points in the 3rd quarter when the spurs couldn't hit a single shot, it was Tony Parker!
And it doesn't matter what people say about the Spurs supporting cast, and let it be known, just as no team is a winner without their star player, no star player is a winner without his teammates!
I hope certain people remember games 6 vs. the Mavericks, when Tim Duncan was shut down, couldn't even get a shot at the basket because of the Mavs sworming defense, and the Spurs were down, who it was that kept them in the game, who it was that took over the game, and who won the game for them, Steven Jackson (with the help of Steve Kerr); and also in game 4, who scored 19 points in the 3rd quarter when the spurs couldn't hit a single shot, it was Tony Parker!
- MAKAVELI THE DON
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 5:47 am
- Location: West Indies
by slam37 on Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:05 pm
The supporting here is not the real issue... In his prime, David Robinson's San Antonio Spurs had to battle with Jordan/Pippen's Bulls, Ewing's Knicks, Shaq's/Hardaway's Magic, Kemp/Payton's Sonics, Olajuwon's Rockets, Barkley/Johnson's Suns, Malone/Stockon's Jazz ... Come guys, these teams were excellent. (Portland Trail Blazers, Los Angelas Lakers, Detroit Pistons, all very good during The Admirals earlier years too...)I don't think the Spurs of today could match up with any of them and come out on top, and there were other competitive teams as well.. Robinson in his prime single-handidly led his team to a high in a highly competitive league. Give Duncan his due credit, and soon he may e better than the Admiral was, but his competition is nothing compared to what Robinson faced.
- slam37
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2002 8:09 am
- Location: Frankfort, IL
by Andrew on Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:11 pm
When comparing two teammates, you really have to look at their individual brilliance rather than team success. After all, Duncan has never won without Robinson, and Robinson has never won without Duncan. Ignoring everything else but the players themselves, I say the Admiral was the better player. But Duncan will very likely end up surpassing him.
-
Andrew - Retro Basketball Gamer
- Posts: 115071
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
- Location: Australia
by MAKAVELI THE DON on Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:23 pm
In his prime, David Robinson's San Antonio Spurs had to battle with Jordan/Pippen's Bulls, Ewing's Knicks, Shaq's/Hardaway's Magic, Kemp/Payton's Sonics, Olajuwon's Rockets, Barkley/Johnson's Suns, Malone/Stockon's Jazz ... Come guys, these teams were excellent. (Portland Trail Blazers, Los Angelas Lakers, Detroit Pistons, all very good during The Admirals earlier years too...)I don't think the Spurs of today could match up with any of them and come out on top
You're right, which proves that Robinson was better in his prime because of the other competition! But like I said it's not fair to put the 1999 or 2003 champion Spurs against MJ's Bulls or anybody else, because it's not Tim Duncan's & the Spurs' fault, why teams in the NBA now are weak and not as competitive!
- MAKAVELI THE DON
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 5:47 am
- Location: West Indies
by benji on Fri Jun 20, 2003 1:47 pm
Well, I suppose Robinson's prime came in his 5th season, when he won the MVP scoring 30 a game, grabbing 11 boards and handing out 5 assists...won 55 games with the all-star teammates of Dennis "becoming a headcase" Rodman, Vinny Del Negro manning the point, Dale Ellis, Willie Anderson and Negele Knight...oh, and Jack "Freakin" Haley....
So...you can compare him from that year to Duncan this year...and I doubt anyone would complain until their kidneys exploded...
So...you can compare him from that year to Duncan this year...and I doubt anyone would complain until their kidneys exploded...
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
...
by Poollit on Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:16 pm
lol competition too low huh?
But what makes u fell Duncan can't compete in Robinsons era?
He did pull 1st seed in the L with this weak competition. So u say
And why can't i compare with the bulls is it because the supporting cast there did more than the all star?
So Duncan was shut out one game and we're tlking the supporting cast is everything? no no, I don't believe anyone said the Spurs cast is no good. But rather they are not starters anywhere else, and without tim they could do nothing. It's good their there one game when needed. But unlike the Bulls they are not going to go to the playoffs without tim Duncan.
I did not watch game 6, but tell me when Jackson and Kerr took over for One game, which is good to know they can do, did Tim not play ANY role in them getting open, getting the shot off? I need feedback there.
okay so u say there were 10 tough team David had to face. of the ten 4 are in the East.
so 6 to get into the finals.
now Duncan has to face 1)Lakers 2)Portland 3)Sacremento 4)Dallas 5)T-wolves 6)Suns
okay so how r they any worse? The wolves and Suns i can see, maybe the suns put up a hard fight though. wolves---I got no idea for them. other than that what are the differences?
okay now that the competition is out of the way, and supporting cast they both need one another. Let's get to them indivdually.
the only difference is the pts. But since we are saying tim has a better supporting cast he didn't have to score as much, right? not as many shots.
So now everything else seems to be about the same. Knowledge---who had more, they are both smart players right? Fundamentals are both pat. Reb. and Down.Low. intimidation is both there. But what was Robinson's range compared to tim, did he have that same touch from further out? Or his handling the ball was it as good as tim's or his foot work?
But what makes u fell Duncan can't compete in Robinsons era?
He did pull 1st seed in the L with this weak competition. So u say
And why can't i compare with the bulls is it because the supporting cast there did more than the all star?
So Duncan was shut out one game and we're tlking the supporting cast is everything? no no, I don't believe anyone said the Spurs cast is no good. But rather they are not starters anywhere else, and without tim they could do nothing. It's good their there one game when needed. But unlike the Bulls they are not going to go to the playoffs without tim Duncan.
I did not watch game 6, but tell me when Jackson and Kerr took over for One game, which is good to know they can do, did Tim not play ANY role in them getting open, getting the shot off? I need feedback there.
In his prime, David Robinson's San Antonio Spurs had to battle with Jordan/Pippen's Bulls, Ewing's Knicks, Shaq's/Hardaway's Magic, Kemp/Payton's Sonics, Olajuwon's Rockets, Barkley/Johnson's Suns, Malone/Stockon's Jazz ... Come guys, these teams were excellent. (Portland Trail Blazers, Los Angelas Lakers, Detroit Pistons, all very good during The Admirals earlier years too...)I don't think the Spurs of today could match up with any of them and come out on top
okay so u say there were 10 tough team David had to face. of the ten 4 are in the East.
so 6 to get into the finals.
now Duncan has to face 1)Lakers 2)Portland 3)Sacremento 4)Dallas 5)T-wolves 6)Suns
okay so how r they any worse? The wolves and Suns i can see, maybe the suns put up a hard fight though. wolves---I got no idea for them. other than that what are the differences?
okay now that the competition is out of the way, and supporting cast they both need one another. Let's get to them indivdually.
the only difference is the pts. But since we are saying tim has a better supporting cast he didn't have to score as much, right? not as many shots.
So now everything else seems to be about the same. Knowledge---who had more, they are both smart players right? Fundamentals are both pat. Reb. and Down.Low. intimidation is both there. But what was Robinson's range compared to tim, did he have that same touch from further out? Or his handling the ball was it as good as tim's or his foot work?
- Poollit
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 3:36 am
by Boyk on Sat Jun 21, 2003 12:09 am
mac dady wrote:Robinson plays well in regular season but in the playoffs he's nowhere to be seen.
he had 13 and 17 in game 6, he gave it his heart and went out in great style, this is why Jordan shouldnt of comeback, he will be remembered as retiring as a loser............as bad as it sounds, its quite true.
-
Boyk - Posts: 1697
- Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 1:51 am
- Location: Kalgoorlie, Western Australia
51 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests