Tim Duncan vs Kobe Bryant [in terms of accomplishments]

[dn0774]

Initiald- one thing you are forgetting- Kobe may not have had an all time cast in 09, but compared to the rest of the league, he had the best team around him.

The Magic had 3 All-Stars plus Hedo. Utah had Deron, Boozer, AK47, Milsap, Okur, Harpring, Korver. Phoenix had Nash, Shaq, Amare, Barbosa, J-Rich, and Grant Hill.

All of those are as good or better than Pau, Odom, Ariza, and Fisher.

You kinda completely left Kobe out of that comparison. Y'know, if you're gonna compare an entire roster from 1 team (Magic/Jazz/Suns in this instance) against the roster of another team (Lakers) minus their best player (Kobe) what do you expect to happen? At least drop the best player off the other teams for the comparison. Also, Bynum should be listed as well (granted his playoff impact was small that year).

[USA]

The Spurs have been contenders every year that Duncan has been in the league. No matter who else was on the team.

Kobe whined and bitched and pouted like a baby because he couldn't do it by himself until they traded for Pau.

Speaking of 'people ignoring facts'...

No, the Spurs haven't been contenders every year. Duncan was never able to even get to back to back finals. Kobe has to lead a team to 3 straight finals and most likely a 4th this season as the undisputed #1 option. Something no other player in NBA history has done, going off of memory. Bill Russell was never a #1 option. The Lakers have never even been to 4 straight finals even though they have played in half of all NBA finals.

[mopper8]

No, the Spurs haven't been contenders every year.

lol.

Duncan was never able to even get to back to back finals.

So, you can only be a contender if you go to the Finals I don't think anyone who wants to seriously discuss this would agree

Kobe has to lead a team to 3 straight finals and most likely a 4th this season as the undisputed #1 option. Something no other player in NBA history has done, going off of memory. Bill Russell was never a #1 option. The Lakers have never even been to 4 straight finals even though they have played in half of all NBA finals.

You talk like they've already gone to their 4th Finals. Guess what: they haven't, so let's not give Kobe credit for things he flatly has not done simply because you think he will do it this year.

[USA]

No, the Spurs haven't been contenders every year.

lol.

They haven't been contender for the last 2 seasons and aren't considered on this season.

So, you can only be a contender if you go to the Finals I don't think anyone who wants to seriously discuss this would agree

Nope, never said that. See above answer.

You talk like they've already gone to their 4th Finals. Guess what: they haven't, so let's not give Kobe credit for things he flatly has not done simply because you think he will do it this year.

No **** sherlock, that is why I said most likely. I am not giving Kobe credit for anything he hasn't done. I never said it was a done deal. Quit assuming.

[Patterns]

Duncan has always had a crappier supporting cast. He makes his team-mates exponentially better. It's not a coincidence that San Antonio is famous for it's ability to draft "Diamond in the roughs". It's not FO genius, it's Duncan's ability to command the floor and lift his team-mates to higher levels of ball.

Kobe has yet to win a championship without the most talented big man in the league playing beside him. Until he does, I stand by my sentiment.

Read the bold parts. Now tell me, was Gasol considered the most "talented big man" in the league before he played with Kobe? He wasn't even an All-Star player anymore in Memphis.

[Vincent 666]

Initiald- one thing you are forgetting- Kobe may not have had an all time cast in 09, but compared to the rest of the league, he had the best team around him.

false.

Melos, Pierce, Nash all had casts AT LEAST as good.

[Vincent 666]

. Also, Bynum should be listed as well (granted his playoff impact was small that year).

Bynum averaged 6 points and 3 rebounds.

He was a non factor.

Neither Bryants 2009 or 2010 casts were as good as people making them be. Bynum was injured again last year and Artest sucked on offense.........which means that Bryant won a title with Gasol, Odom and a bunch of role players in 2010.....just like he did in 2009

[jaypo]

Initiald- one thing you are forgetting- Kobe may not have had an all time cast in 09, but compared to the rest of the league, he had the best team around him.

false.

Melos, Pierce, Nash all had casts AT LEAST as good.

No, they had TALENT. Not the better TEAM. According to the panel of experts at ESPN, he had the best supporting cast (and not to mention, the GOAT coach) around him every year he won without Shaq. And when he didn't, he didn't win. Again, I'm not comparing his cast to other year's teams. I'm comparing him to who he played against.

BTW- Gasol, odom, Artest, 5 time champion DFish, and Phil Jackson is not too bad of a supporting cast to have, especially in today's league. You don't think Lebron could have won with that cast around him?

[Vincent 666]

No, they had TALENT. Not the better TEAM. According to the panel of experts at ESPN, he had the best supporting cast (and not to mention, the GOAT coach) around him every year he won without Shaq. And when he didn't, he didn't win. Again, I'm not comparing his cast to other year's teams. I'm comparing him to who he played against.

lol who cares what espn experts think.

Anthonys cast was just as good if not better.

If Bryant played with Billups, Smith, Martin, Hilario, Anderson posters like you would be calling it the greatest supporting cast in the history of sports.

And if you're going to use this logic of using supporting casts against a player, then obviously you must think Duncans rings mean more than Shaq right?

[Doctor MJ]

Would you rank kobe who was 1b for 3 chips and 1a for 2 over Tim who has 4 chips as 1a?

Duncan. Also find it funny this whole 1a/1b thing. Duncan was "1a", 1 time. He was straight "1" the last 3. To call Duncan in 2003 "1a", and Bryant in 2000 "1b" is not reasonable in the slightest.

I will say though, if Kobe has a great season this year and leads his team to another title over the Miami Thrice, that may prove enough to move him ahead of Duncan (and Bird for that matter).

[jaypo]

No, they had TALENT. Not the better TEAM. According to the panel of experts at ESPN, he had the best supporting cast (and not to mention, the GOAT coach) around him every year he won without Shaq. And when he didn't, he didn't win. Again, I'm not comparing his cast to other year's teams. I'm comparing him to who he played against.

lol who cares what espn experts think.

Anthonys cast was just as good if not better.

If Bryant played with Billups, Smith, Martin, Hilario, Anderson posters like you would be calling it the greatest supporting cast in the history of sports.

And if you're going to use this logic of using supporting casts against a player, then obviously you must think Duncans rings mean more than Shaq right?

No. No. And No.

So you'd take Billups, Smith, Martin, and Nene over DFish, Artest, Odom, Gasol, with PJ as the coach? Well, then, the little bit of seriousness that I'd given to your posts has been taken away!

And to expand a bit- what I'm trying to get across is that Kobe's supporting casts had been widely accepted as the best supporting cast FOR THOSE YEARS. Not compared to 2000, 2001, 2002, 1969, 1980, etc. He had the best team around him compared to the rest of the teams THAT YEAR!

Shaq never had the best team (again, according to the experts) in any of the years he won. As a matter of fact, teams like Portland, San Antonio, and Sacramento were all favored to beat them. As well as Dallas in 06. But the Lakers found a way to win each series.

[Malinhion]

Big over small is no different when it comes to the all time greats.

Okay, a little different. But not different enough.

[Doctor MJ]

Big over small is no different when it comes to the all time greats.

Okay, a little different. But not different enough.

I don't know how that makes sense here. Are you going to rate every single big's accomplishments ahead of every single perimeter guy? No? Well, then Kobe's going to be ahead of some bigs. State where you see him fitting in.

[bigrussia]

big > small puts kobe behind duncan/shaq/hakeem and ahead of everyone else, and unless the heat are favorites to win next year, and kobe actually steps up in the finals to beat them (for pretty much the first time in his career) there's about a 1% chance of him moving up

[Mourning_Would]

In conclusion

Duncan is not on Kobe's level, it's not just about rings, in 10 years Tim Duncan will be forgotten outside of San Antonio but Kobe will continue to be compared to the up and coming greats

My new sig

[initiald]

Really? I'd like to see Kobe lead this decade's weakest championship team to a ring? Give me one team in all of Kobe's championship teams that was as weak as 03' spurs? And what does a longer career have to do with their accomplishments? Based on their accomplishments Duncan is better but it's close. And I agree with no-kg-ai. I'd take either KG and duncan before Kobe because they both have shown they can anchor a whole teams defense in their prime.

You mean 2003 Spurs with David Robinson, Young Manu, Tony Parker, and Stephen Jackson. Not to mention a hustler in Malik Rose and Steve Smith? Are you kidding me? That team compliment Duncan so well.

Compare that with Kobe's 09. What Kobe got? Pau Gasol is the only consistent player with Bynum almost a non-factor. The 3rd best player is Trevor Ariza, not even LO. Talking about weak championship cast!

Check KG's accomplishment during his time with Minnesota. He rarely get passed the 1st round. Part of it because he got bad supporting cast and he can't elevate them past the 1st round or making the playoff. My point is if replace Duncan with KG, he would be in the same boat considering at their prime, KG/Duncan are very closed. Kids need to rewatch more tape.

Please stop name-dropping David Robinson as if it meant something in 2003. He was done by that time, so was Steve Smith. Manu was a rookie spark off the bench. Stephen Jackson was solid but just as likely to be a liability as he was an asset in big games. Tony Parker was getting bailed out by Speedy Claxton in close games. That 2003 Spurs squad had no business winning a ring...it was thought to be a development year and they heavily overachieved (due almost entirely to Duncans huge playoff run).

Then you go on to mention the '09 Lakers as if they were short on talent? By virtue of having even 1 all-nba'er (Pau) next to him Kobe already had more help than Tim in 2003. Dont try and downplay LO's contributions either, if he weren't on such a stacked team he'd still avg 15/10 easily.

The 2000-2002 rings dont weigh that much into this comparison either. For those rings it wasn't even about how much help Kobe had...Kobe WAS the help.

Again, the typical kids who don't watch enough tape to understand the complexity of a complete team. The Spurs ARE A COMPLETE TEAM. They got every ingredient of a championship team. A young, quick PG in Claxton and Parker. A closure in Manu, a dominant player in Duncan, a serviceable big in D-Rob. Yes D-Rob is not the same player he was but he WAS still more of a factor in the playoff than Bynum in '09. I give you LO, but LO is EXTREMELY INCONSISTENT. The same reason he never been an All-Stars playing for 3 teams! Don't give me this crap that Ariza was good. HE WAS NEVER GOOD until he played with Kobe. He is basically a role player. Ariza is not even as good as Bowen in '03, let alone Stephen Jackson who are better than anybody on the Lakers in '09. You mean it, Sasha? Walton? Ariza? Morrison? Farmar? Shannon? None of those guys are as good as Steve Smith who is still a damn good spot up shooter for the Spurs.

The only player Kobe can relied on is Pau. But lets not forget here, in '09 Pau was consider SOFT. He was nothing in Memphis, only been 1 all-stars, until he got to LA where he was 2 times ALL-STARS. More than he was in Memphis. Tell me where is this Pau becoming HoF or superstar material??

[Bgil]

Initiald- one thing you are forgetting- Kobe may not have had an all time cast in 09, but compared to the rest of the league, he had the best team around him.

The Magic had 3 All-Stars plus Hedo. Utah had Deron, Boozer, AK47, Milsap, Okur, Harpring, Korver. Phoenix had Nash, Shaq, Amare, Barbosa, J-Rich, and Grant Hill.

All of those are as good or better than Pau, Odom, Ariza, and Fisher.

You kinda completely left Kobe out of that comparison. Y'know, if you're gonna compare an entire roster from 1 team (Magic/Jazz/Suns in this instance) against the roster of another team (Lakers) minus their best player (Kobe) what do you expect to happen? At least drop the best player off the other teams for the comparison. Also, Bynum should be listed as well (granted his playoff impact was small that year).

I figured you guys were smart enough to subtract the best player (and the best player on some of those teams is disputable ala Deron vs Boozer or Nash vs Amare).

[Day in the Life]

Duncan's on the decline. Hasn't proven much since getting demolished by Kobe Bryant and the 2007-2008 Los Angeles Lakers in 5.

Duncan and Kobe have similar accomplishments right now. But it's pretty much inevitable that Kobe Bryant's accomplishments are going to surpass Duncan's as his championship window is still 3-4 years.

[Bgil]

No, they had TALENT. Not the better TEAM. According to the panel of experts at ESPN, he had the best supporting cast (and not to mention, the GOAT coach) around him every year he won without Shaq. And when he didn't, he didn't win. Again, I'm not comparing his cast to other year's teams. I'm comparing him to who he played against.

lol who cares what espn experts think.

Anthonys cast was just as good if not better.

If Bryant played with Billups, Smith, Martin, Hilario, Anderson posters like you would be calling it the greatest supporting cast in the history of sports.

And if you're going to use this logic of using supporting casts against a player, then obviously you must think Duncans rings mean more than Shaq right?

No. No. And No.

So you'd take Billups, Smith, Martin, and Nene over DFish, Artest, Odom, Gasol, with PJ as the coach? Well, then, the little bit of seriousness that I'd given to your posts has been taken away!

And to expand a bit- what I'm trying to get across is that Kobe's supporting casts had been widely accepted as the best supporting cast FOR THOSE YEARS. Not compared to 2000, 2001, 2002, 1969, 1980, etc. He had the best team around him compared to the rest of the teams THAT YEAR!

Shaq never had the best team (again, according to the experts) in any of the years he won. As a matter of fact, teams like Portland, San Antonio, and Sacramento were all favored to beat them. As well as Dallas in 06. But the Lakers found a way to win each series.

You can't get your point across because it isn't true. Kobe's cast wasn't "widely accepted as the best" until after the Lakers beat everyone. For example, prior to the start of last season a ton of people thought San Antonio had a better cast an would make it to the Finals. After the midseason trades were done many people felt Dallas (Marion, Bulter, Kidd, Terry, Damp, Haywood, Barea etc.) were superior. Same goes for Denver, Orlando when they got VC, and Cleveland after they dominated another regular season and kicked our ass twice.

It's just revisionist history to say otherwise.

[dn0774]

Pau was leaps and bounds beyond anything Duncan had that year...he alone tilts the entire argument by himself. If you honestly cant acknowledge that fact then we're just wasting each others time. For you to attempt to completely trivialize what LO brings by just saying hes "EXTREMELY INCONSISTENT" as if that totally nullifies his place in this comparison shows you have an agenda to push here and nothing to contribute in terms of intelligent basketball dialog.

David was an 8pts/6rebs a game shell of his former self essentially playing backup minutes. Steve Smith was done, he barely saw the floor in the playoffs that year. Manu was a rookie who shot a lights out .386 over the course of that playoff run. Parker wasn't much better with a blistering .403 shooting percentage. In fact, the highest shooting % from a rotation player besides Duncan and Robinson was a paltry .414 from Stephen Jackson.

You want to rethink your stance on Manu/Parker/Steve Smith/Robinson/Jackson's contributions that year? They were mediocre at best. Duncan however was not...he put up 25/16/5/3 a game on .529 shooting and carried the Spurs to a championship in what was considered a transition year for an aging team (Robinson/Smith/Willis/Kerr) trying to integrate/develop younger and unproven talent (Parker/Manu/Jackson).

Pau and Odom are easily better than anyone on the Spurs team that year outside of Duncan. Pau shot .580 and Odom shot .524. Yea, Kobe definitely had some help, downplaying that fact only pisses people off.