RealGM

Duncan's BBIQ was off the charts, he'd have great success in this low IQ era.

ItsDanger wrote:Duncan's BBIQ was off the charts, he'd have great success in this low IQ era.

Pretty crap take insisting that this is a "low IQ era," lol.

I feel like he'd be more of a hub on offense than he was before. Like Bam but wayyyyy better / more dynamic. He could be a walking triple double

It is absolutely crazy that somehow Jokic is still so underrated on this sub.
No one from the past 40 years other than Prime LeBron, Shaq(2000-02) or MJ were better than current version of Jokic.

C3H6N6O6 wrote:It is absolutely crazy that somehow Jokic is still so underrated on this sub.
No one from the past 40 years other than Prime LeBron, Shaq(2000-02) or MJ were better than current version of Jokic.

Oh please. Duncan has been rated the 5th best player on realgm's PC board for the top 100 consistently. He is rated similarly by most people on this board too. He's better than Jokic, and Shaq and MJ too to be frank. Duncan matched up with Shaq 5 times on his prime in the playoffs, and was better at least 3 of those match ups (99, 02 and 03). In 01 Shaq was better, and 04 it was pretty even despite Duncan being constantly doubled by Shsq and Mailman.

1A, 1B with Jokic

Jokic is that good offensively I can’t put prime Duncan above him even with Tim being a top 5 all time defensive player.

Imagine Duncan playing the 5 spot with shooters around him, higher pace, inflated stats etc. I think Duncan could put up 27-30 PPG, 15 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One_and_Done wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:It is absolutely crazy that somehow Jokic is still so underrated on this sub.
No one from the past 40 years other than Prime LeBron, Shaq(2000-02) or MJ were better than current version of Jokic.

Oh please. Duncan has been rated the 5th best player on realgm's PC board for the top 100 consistently. He is rated similarly by most people on this board too. He's better than Jokic, and Shaq and MJ too to be frank. Duncan matched up with Shaq 5 times on his prime in the playoffs, and was better at least 3 of those match ups (99, 02 and 03). In 01 Shaq was better, and 04 it was pretty even despite Duncan being constantly doubled by Shsq and Mailman.

lol wut?

FarBeyondDriven wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:It is absolutely crazy that somehow Jokic is still so underrated on this sub.
No one from the past 40 years other than Prime LeBron, Shaq(2000-02) or MJ were better than current version of Jokic.

Oh please. Duncan has been rated the 5th best player on realgm's PC board for the top 100 consistently. He is rated similarly by most people on this board too. He's better than Jokic, and Shaq and MJ too to be frank. Duncan matched up with Shaq 5 times on his prime in the playoffs, and was better at least 3 of those match ups (99, 02 and 03). In 01 Shaq was better, and 04 it was pretty even despite Duncan being constantly doubled by Shsq and Mailman.

lol wut?

Did I stutter?

One_and_Done wrote:

70sFan wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:Guys are going on about Jokic carrying scraps to the 6th seed. They should take a look at the garbage Duncan was carrying to contention in 02, or to the title in 03. Even the 01 support cast was pretty pitiful.

It was much weaker and primitive league though.

Am I doing it right?

Sure, the league was weaker. But as I've told you, guys can transcend their league. There's plenty of reason Bill Russell wouldn't be a top 10 player today; he had no offense for example. Duncan's game translates just fine. I think he might not have quite as much longevity, because his lesser mobility in his old age would hinder him too much in certain match ups. But young Duncan was far more mobile and athletic than Jokic, even playing the 3 as a rookie.

Bill Russell would definitely be a top 10 player today.

He'd be like a mix of 2008 PnR Dwight and 2014 peak Joakim Noah or peak Draymond without the 3pt shot. But with Tim Duncan's basketball IQ, leadership, and intangibles. Like, KG if he couldn't shoot but finished plays like prime Dwight. The type of player that would elevate weak and strong supporting casts alike - portable. Anchors a defense to elite status by himself; is the ultimate play finisher and connective tissue piece on offense.

The type of player that just seems to get the most out of any and all players. Give him Washington and he'd have them in the playoffs right now. Add him to Atlanta and they'd be right there with Boston as leading contenders.

Averages would look something like 18-22 ppg, 13-15 rpg, 6-8 apg, 1-2 spg, 2-3 bpg, and shoot 60-65% FG.

Elite screener, PnR roll man, finisher around the basket, and rebounder on both ends. Would function as a DHO elbow passing hub in the half-court like Sabonis. His fantastic ball handling and passing allow him to secure defensive rebounds and attack the fast break like Westbrook. He may also have some Giannis-like ball handler action in the PnR too.

FrodoBaggins wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:

70sFan wrote:It was much weaker and primitive league though.

Am I doing it right?

Sure, the league was weaker. But as I've told you, guys can transcend their league. There's plenty of reason Bill Russell wouldn't be a top 10 player today; he had no offense for example. Duncan's game translates just fine. I think he might not have quite as much longevity, because his lesser mobility in his old age would hinder him too much in certain match ups. But young Duncan was far more mobile and athletic than Jokic, even playing the 3 as a rookie.

Bill Russell would definitely be a top 10 player today.

He'd be like a mix of 2008 PnR Dwight and 2014 peak Joakim Noah or peak Draymond without the 3pt shot. But with Tim Duncan's basketball IQ, leadership, and intangibles. Like, KG if he couldn't shoot but finished plays like prime Dwight. The type of player that would elevate weak and strong supporting casts alike - portable. Anchors a defense to elite status by himself; is the ultimate play finisher and connective tissue piece on offense.

The type of player that just seems to get the most out of any and all players. Give him Washington and he'd have them in the playoffs right now. Add him to Atlanta and they'd be right there with Boston as leading contenders.

Averages would look something like 18-22 ppg, 13-15 rpg, 6-8 apg, 1-2 spg, 2-3 bpg, and shoot 60-65% FG.

Elite screener, PnR roll man, finisher around the basket, and rebounder on both ends. Would function as a DHO elbow passing hub in the half-court like Sabonis. His fantastic ball handling and passing allow him to secure defensive rebounds and attack the fast break like Westbrook. He may also have some Giannis-like ball handler action in the PnR too.

You're kidding yourself. He could't shoot, and lacked even Dwight's post game. He would be a pure rum runner on O and nothing more. Even if we grant his passing was solid, it can't be compared to guys with modern point guard skills like Draymond or even Sabonis. He would be at best a Rudy Gobert type; shorter but quicker. That sort of player doesn't have top 10 impact in today's league.

One_and_Done wrote:

FrodoBaggins wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:Sure, the league was weaker. But as I've told you, guys can transcend their league. There's plenty of reason Bill Russell wouldn't be a top 10 player today; he had no offense for example. Duncan's game translates just fine. I think he might not have quite as much longevity, because his lesser mobility in his old age would hinder him too much in certain match ups. But young Duncan was far more mobile and athletic than Jokic, even playing the 3 as a rookie.

Bill Russell would definitely be a top 10 player today.

He'd be like a mix of 2008 PnR Dwight and 2014 peak Joakim Noah or peak Draymond without the 3pt shot. But with Tim Duncan's basketball IQ, leadership, and intangibles. Like, KG if he couldn't shoot but finished plays like prime Dwight. The type of player that would elevate weak and strong supporting casts alike - portable. Anchors a defense to elite status by himself; is the ultimate play finisher and connective tissue piece on offense.

The type of player that just seems to get the most out of any and all players. Give him Washington and he'd have them in the playoffs right now. Add him to Atlanta and they'd be right there with Boston as leading contenders.

Averages would look something like 18-22 ppg, 13-15 rpg, 6-8 apg, 1-2 spg, 2-3 bpg, and shoot 60-65% FG.

Elite screener, PnR roll man, finisher around the basket, and rebounder on both ends. Would function as a DHO elbow passing hub in the half-court like Sabonis. His fantastic ball handling and passing allow him to secure defensive rebounds and attack the fast break like Westbrook. He may also have some Giannis-like ball handler action in the PnR too.

You're kidding yourself. He could't shoot, and lacked even Dwight's post game. He would be a pure rum runner on O and nothing more. Even if we grant his passing was solid, it can't be compared to guys with modern point guard skills like Draymond or even Sabonis. He would be at best a Rudy Gobert type; shorter but quicker. That sort of player doesn't have top 10 impact in today's league.

Doesn't need to shoot. And he doesn't need to be a post-up hub; that's why I specified "2008 PnR Dwight."

What matters is that Bill would be good enough in the post to take advantage of when forwards and guards switch ball screens. And he would. He was arguably the best athlete in NBA history, had a bigger standing reach than Ralph Sampson and Kareem, and would weigh a muscular and lean 250-260 pounds. He'd bully his way to the rim like Moses Malone. No need for finesse against wings and guards.

You're right: he'd be an elite rim runner and get a hyper-efficient 13-17 ppg like Rudy, Deandre, and Capela. However, you're wrong that that's all he'd be. He was a legitimate DHO high-post/pinch-post/elbow passing hub. You see how Sabonis plays? That's exactly what Russell would be doing. That's a lot of what he was doing back then.

Bill Russell would be a composite of three offensive archetypes:

1) Rim-runner (Young Dwight, Deandre, Capela, Rudy)
2) DHO/short roll/post passer (Sabonis, Noah, Draymond)
3) Defense-to-offense transition shot creator (Jason Kidd, Giannis, Westbrook, Noah, Draymond)

Blend these three qualities, add modern strength and conditioning, and today's rules, and it's not hard to imagine what he'd be doing today.

And this projection isn't a stretch because he was doing all three of these things in his own era. It's just that the rules, lack of spacing, and poor playing conditions (four-paneled ball lacking grip, cold arenas, wonky rims, floors, and backboards, excessive scheduling, etc) limited how the game was played back then. Bill didn't have the opportunity to play in a PnR era.

The wildcard element of his game would be his PnR ball-handling creation in the half-court. Bill is a strong ball handler, passer, and freakishly athletic. The obvious modern comparison to this is Giannis.

- Giannis 2023-24 PnR ball handler: 3.3 possessions per game; 1.16 ppp (96.6th percentile); 3.9 points per game

I'm not sure how this element of his game would translate. Hence why I referred to it as the wildcard element.

dhsilv2 wrote:

dj20001 wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:
Nobody thought Pau's fat brother was going to be anything close to what he was. I'm not going to really spend time debating nuanced context while you're out there just throwing out names of spurs without context. There's simple not coherent argument you can make with any objective standards that will argue for Kobe being better over their careers than Duncan. Some seasons sure. But career vs career, it's just not a debate. The best you could do is argue that Duncan's career was better because it's easier to be a better basketball player by being tall. And that's fair, but Duncan was taller and that's that.

And what was Pau exactly at the time of that trade? A one time all star, no time all NBA or all defense type of player? What was he actually worth? This is what you have to cut against my argument that Kobe was better than Duncan?

I don't know who random Spurs players are. I've focused on the three hall of fame players and POP. Get a clue fam.

We are not family.

Pau was a top 15 player at the time of the trade. 11th in WS, 9th in VORP, and 17th in PER. He was not only on the rise after being hurt the prior year and missing nearly 30 games, but he was a perfect fit with his passing game to complement Kobe. At the time it was a shocker to everyone that they'd trade him for so little given his epic 2006 season.

You're right, we're not. That's why I said fam. Stay on topic anyways. No need to be emotional - its just sports.

Pau's brother being included was a deal breaker. The Grizzlies had already scouted Pau in Spain, they knew ALL about Marc. Pau accomplished all of those things and still barely cracked 20 PPG as a main option. One all star appearance and no All NBA teams pre LA. Sounds like you want him to be a Top 15 player to fit a narrative.

Ruben Quevedo wrote:Duncan saw early versions of the pace and space style (Nash suns and Lebron heat) and he was awesome. He would do just fine in today’s NBA.

Facts. Duncan has beaten the SSOL Suns. The 04/05 Pistons and Shaq and Kobe. 2003 Duncan would be a top 3 player today.

dj20001 wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

dj20001 wrote:
And what was Pau exactly at the time of that trade? A one time all star, no time all NBA or all defense type of player? What was he actually worth? This is what you have to cut against my argument that Kobe was better than Duncan?

I don't know who random Spurs players are. I've focused on the three hall of fame players and POP. Get a clue fam.

We are not family.

Pau was a top 15 player at the time of the trade. 11th in WS, 9th in VORP, and 17th in PER. He was not only on the rise after being hurt the prior year and missing nearly 30 games, but he was a perfect fit with his passing game to complement Kobe. At the time it was a shocker to everyone that they'd trade him for so little given his epic 2006 season.

You're right, we're not. That's why I said fam. Stay on topic anyways. No need to be emotional - its just sports.

Pau's brother being included was a deal breaker. The Grizzlies had already scouted Pau in Spain, they knew ALL about Marc. Pau accomplished all of those things and still barely cracked 20 PPG as a main option. One all star appearance and no All NBA teams pre LA. Sounds like you want him to be a Top 15 player to fit a narrative.

As long as we agree that it was a terrible trade and it nobody knew how good Marc would get. We good.

Duncan would be the best but its not crazy to say it's debatable with Jokic and this is coming from Duncan's greatest fan.

70sFan wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:

70sFan wrote:It was much weaker and primitive league though.

Am I doing it right?

Sure, the league was weaker. But as I've told you, guys can transcend their league. There's plenty of reason Bill Russell wouldn't be a top 10 player today; he had no offense for example. Duncan's game translates just fine. I think he might not have quite as much longevity, because his lesser mobility in his old age would hinder him too much in certain match ups. But young Duncan was far more mobile and athletic than Jokic, even playing the 3 as a rookie.

I don't think you have the authority to decide which player would translate and which not, but do your things if you like.

Who are you to say he doesnt?

Similar to Jokic as impact
Would be the equivalente of Gobert in defence + 70% of Jokic on offence

UglyBugBall wrote:

70sFan wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:Sure, the league was weaker. But as I've told you, guys can transcend their league. There's plenty of reason Bill Russell wouldn't be a top 10 player today; he had no offense for example. Duncan's game translates just fine. I think he might not have quite as much longevity, because his lesser mobility in his old age would hinder him too much in certain match ups. But young Duncan was far more mobile and athletic than Jokic, even playing the 3 as a rookie.

I don't think you have the authority to decide which player would translate and which not, but do your things if you like.

Who are you to say he doesnt?

Nobody does, that's the point.

70sFan wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:

70sFan wrote:I don't think you have the authority to decide which player would translate and which not, but do your things if you like.

Who are you to say he doesnt?

Nobody does, that's the point.

We're on an anonymous message board. We should stick to judging people's arguments. I get you have trouble with that concept.

One_and_Done wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:It is absolutely crazy that somehow Jokic is still so underrated on this sub.
No one from the past 40 years other than Prime LeBron, Shaq(2000-02) or MJ were better than current version of Jokic.

Oh please. Duncan has been rated the 5th best player on realgm's PC board for the top 100 consistently. He is rated similarly by most people on this board too. He's better than Jokic, and Shaq and MJ too to be frank. Duncan matched up with Shaq 5 times on his prime in the playoffs, and was better at least 3 of those match ups (99, 02 and 03). In 01 Shaq was better, and 04 it was pretty even despite Duncan being constantly doubled by Shsq and Mailman.

Agreed. One thing that always surprises me when people say Duncan wouldn't be able to guard Jokic in the post when he used to be the best post defender ever on Shaq who was even more massive than Jokic.