What's so funny?
Tim got more rings, more MVP's than both of them and his teams never missed the playoffs. How you not start your team with him
And don't give me that prime Shaq BS when Timmy went through him twice to get titles
Is taking Olajuwon over Shaq to start a team a bad decision?
- Thread starter CarbonBraddock
- Start date
Tim got more rings, more MVP's than both of them and his teams never missed the playoffs. How you not start your team with him
And don't give me that prime Shaq BS when Timmy went through him twice to get titles
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
rings is a team accomplishment and depends on luck also, not just talent. both of those players are more talented than tim duncan and if you put them in san antonion they'd probably win more than him also. also, mvp is subjective. steve nash got 2 mvps and stockton got none despite putting up many seasons equaling or surpassing nash's mvp years.What's so funny?
Tim got more rings, more MVP's than both of them and his teams never missed the playoffs. How you not start your team with him
And don't give me that prime Shaq BS when Timmy went through him twice to get titles
Not if you value maturity.
Neither of them are more talented. More athletic but not more talented. You forget Timmy is the most fundamentally sound big of all time
San Antonio had nothing as a franchise until TD got there. Neither one of them are winning titles with the rosters Duncan played with in SA
Im damn sure taking Tim over Shaq lazy ass to build around
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
hakeem won a ring with a weaker team than duncan has ever had tho.
Weaker than the 99 Spurs or 2003 Spurs?
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
how many hofs was on the 2003 spurs team
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
if tim is top five, then it's off achievement. he is not a top 5 TALENT of all time period. shaq and hakeem are all around better players than tim duncan and i'm a tim duncan fan. plus, it's a bunch of dudes on this site alone who say he is/was a system player and looked better because of the san antonio system. you can put shaq or hakeem anywhere in any time period, and they will at the very least match what they did already.
2 and DRob was old and about to retirehow many hofs was on the 2003 spurs team
And a rookie Manu and second year TP were not hall of fame or elite players at the time
28 Gramz
How U Luv That???
Knowing what each player was at their prime I'm taking Shaq.
who_better_than_me
Time to go!!
Ppl make a big deal about Jordan having no rival counterpart at his position during his prime. But Shaq had nobody even close to him competitively when he three-peated. There was no centers that could make him work. Dream had to go against Ewing, mutumbo, Robinson, even young Shaq.
Shaq was goin against Old Divac, number one overall kwame brown,brad Miller, Matt Geiger, 40 year old sabonis, Jason Collins, Calvin Cato, Antonio Davis. Robinson, Dream, Ewing all during the twilight of the career
Shaq was the most dominant big man I ever seen but I always said that time coincided with the weakest Era of bigs.
Shaq was goin against Old Divac, number one overall kwame brown,brad Miller, Matt Geiger, 40 year old sabonis, Jason Collins, Calvin Cato, Antonio Davis. Robinson, Dream, Ewing all during the twilight of the career
Shaq was the most dominant big man I ever seen but I always said that time coincided with the weakest Era of bigs.
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
2 and DRob was old and about to retire
And a rookie Manu and second year TP were not hall of fame or elite players at the time
ok
CarbonBraddock
You will be trolled
in this era?
Yea it’s stupid