Thread Tools

Display Modes

rocketeer · 06-19-2003, 11:23 PM

is this the next kobe-tmac arguement?

IV · 06-20-2003, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theyoungsrm!

The analogy only highlights the arguement that I'm trying to make that when considering or comparing the merits of a player on an indivdual level, it is illogical to use a team performance to answer that question. Maybe you can say that it could be a tiebreaker, but you would have to establish the fact that both teams supporting casts were the same and that one of indivduals you are comparing pushed their team over the top. The problem with that is is that it is just like comparing the players on an indivdual level, which is what you were trying to do. It is a circle.

I agree that a teams success doesn't determine how good a member of that team actually is. However, it will ultimately determine that players place in NBA history pertaining to greatness.

Quote:

As for the conclusion, I never said who was better. My intial post only tried to establish the fact that KG is getting a raw deal if your using team success to establish who's better. Saying that KG doesn't get past the first round isn't a good arguement on why he's inferior to Duncan. Now if you wanna say he's a better lleader, better post player, better defender, that's fine because those are reasons why he is better and they identify his personal traits, not factors that are effected by nine other players.

Agreed

Quote:

Now you go on to argue that Duncan is superior because of awards. I believe using an awards isn't a great way either. Let me explain. First MVP awards only determine who is more valuable to their team, not who is the best player of the year. Also MVP awards routinely ignore players from bad or average teams for reasons I don't understand (It's not the MVPCT, {Contending Team} its titled the MVP) The phenomon excludes a large group of players therefore I wouldn't use it to justify anything. You also advance that Duncan was the Rookie of the Year, that award is flawed when comparing these players because it isolates only one year, it usually is a popularity contest, both players their rookie year weren't the A-stars of their team, and Duncan was a four year college player and KG came from HS so it is simple and correct to assume that he'd be more raw and have more untapped potential. Now I'll argee that the first team award is a telling stat, because KG and TD play the same position they are directly compared so one being on the first team and one being on the second team is telling that one is better than another. Now the All-Star awards don't matter in determining who's better because its a popularity contest to get into the actual game and to get minutes anmd nobody plays at full intensity 99% of the time....

There are different ways to judge players. Who is better will always be a matter of ones opinion. Who is greater is defined by the accomplishments a players has acheived. Tim Duncan has done more in less time than Kevin Garnett. His stat sheet proves that he is a greater player than Kevin Garnett.
I bet if they both ended their careers today. Tim Duncan would be a lock for the hall of fame, KG would not.

Quote:

Ok so back where we started I'm not making a arguement for KG at all....I haven't decided myself....but I do know how to fairly determine who better....look how they player, take note of their personal attributes, talents, etc. and say who better. It aint about awards and wins when you wanna know who's better one on one.

You haven't said one way of the other, but you seem to favor KG in this argument. If you think he is better or greater becuase his personal attributes, talents, etc sway your decision, cool! But I say, personal attributes, talent, etc all add up to what Tim Duncan has accomplished over the last 6 years in the NBA. He is already undeniably one of the greatest players to ever play the game of basketball.

Quote:

Oh and no insults in this one

RocketFan85 · 06-20-2003, 10:47 AM

Because he is.

buduan · 06-20-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by IV!

I agree that a teams success doesn't determine how good a member of that team actually is. However, it will ultimately determine that players place in NBA history pertaining to greatness.

Agreed

There are different ways to judge players. Who is better will always be a matter of ones opinion. Who is greater is defined by the accomplishments a players has acheived. Tim Duncan has done more in less time than Kevin Garnett. His stat sheet proves that he is a greater player than Kevin Garnett.
I bet if they both ended their careers today. Tim Duncan would be a lock for the hall of fame, KG would not.

You haven't said one way of the other, but you seem to favor KG in this argument. If you think he is better or greater becuase his personal attributes, talents, etc sway your decision, cool! But I say, personal attributes, talent, etc all add up to what Tim Duncan has accomplished over the last 6 years in the NBA. He is already undeniably one of the greatest players to ever play the game of basketball.

Here's a question for you IV.

In 1988, who did you consider the better player? Nique or MJ?

Nique led his team to a game 7 in the ECF's against one of the greatest franchises in the history of sports and got into one of the most memorable duels of all time.

While MJ was bounced out of the playoffs.

Now Nique was on a better team and went deeper into the playoffs, and by your logic was the better player because of it.

MJ was on a inferior team and didn't advance as far. He hadn't advanced really at all in the previous....oh....4 years.

What do you say? Nique was better because his team advanced further?

Or was MJ better despite being bounced constantly out of the playoffs on a inferior team.

I eagerly await your response.

IV · 06-20-2003, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by buduan!

Here's a question for you IV.

In 1988, who did you consider the better player? Nique or MJ?

Nique led his team to a game 7 in the ECF's against one of the greatest franchises in the history of sports and got into one of the most memorable duels of all time.

While MJ was bounced out of the playoffs.

Now Nique was on a better team and went deeper into the playoffs, and by your logic was the better player because of it.

MJ was on a inferior team and didn't advance as far. He hadn't advanced really at all in the previous....oh....4 years.

What do you say? Nique was better because his team advanced further?

Or was MJ better despite being bounced constantly out of the playoffs on a inferior team.

I eagerly await your response.

Okay Eagerboy, this wont take long.

What do you mean, "by my logic?"
You are confused. I dont believe you read this thread carefully.

MJ was better in 1988. And no that is not my position in this debate. Tim Duncan is not better than KG because his team has won two titles, and KG gets bounced in the first round ever year for the last 7 years. Tim Duncan is a better/greater player than KG because he has accomplished more not only team wise, but individually than KG in less time.

Maybe your just a fan on the opposite side of the argument and you read what you want to see instead of what I wrote.

Duncan is better because he's been a All NBA first teamer on both sides of the ball every year since his rookie season when he was also rookie of the year, and he's a 2 time MVP. This years MVP.

Why is it that unsuccessful players fans think they can compare these players to those who are not only great, but they stand above all with their success, individually or otherwise?

You can not make a respectable argument to why KG is better than Tim Duncan. At least, I have yet to hear it. "KG fan" has done nothing in this thread but argue why Tim Duncan is not as good as his fans and the rest of the league they he is.

buduan · 06-21-2003, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by IV!

Okay Eagerboy, this wont take long.

What do you mean, "by my logic?"
You are confused. I dont believe you read this thread carefully.

MJ was better in 1988. And no that is not my position in this debate. Tim Duncan is not better than KG because his team has won two titles, and KG gets bounced in the first round ever year for the last 7 years. Tim Duncan is a better/greater player than KG because he has accomplished more not only team wise, but individually than KG in less time.

Maybe your just a fan on the opposite side of the argument and you read what you want to see instead of what I wrote.

Duncan is better because he's been a All NBA first teamer on both sides of the ball every year since his rookie season when he was also rookie of the year, and he's a 2 time MVP. This years MVP.

Why is it that unsuccessful players fans think they can compare these players to those who are not only great, but they stand above all with their success, individually or otherwise?

You can not make a respectable argument to why KG is better than Tim Duncan. At least, I have yet to hear it. "KG fan" has done nothing in this thread but argue why Tim Duncan is not as good as his fans and the rest of the league they he is.

O.K. big ego, why don't you check yourself. First of all do you even know what my argument IS in this thread? Or do you just like to read your own words?

Do you know who my team is? How about my favorite player? Didn't think so, so quit talking out of your.....well you know.

Who cares what Duncan did every year leading up to this year. The fact is KG proved that THIS year he is at Duncan's level. Yeah that's right anal boy, my argument isn't that KG is better. It's that he is at his level and if he had similar talent around him like TD he would have been as successful if not more THIS season.

Judging by your avatar, we root for the same team. How embarassing.

So let me get this straight, MJ was better than Nique. But TD is better than KG?

Might I suggest you change your name to III BTW. We didn't get the 4peat this year in case you didn't notice.

Effin bandwagoners.

tenkev · 06-21-2003, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by buduan!

So let me get this straight, MJ was better than Nique. But TD is better than KG?

Might I suggest you change your name to III BTW. We didn't get the 4peat this year in case you didn't notice.

Effin bandwagoners.

Side note: I can remember IV saying how much he admired Tim Duncan's game long before the playoffs and long before anyone thought the Spurs had a chance to win the title.

socco · 06-21-2003, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PauloCatarino!
If KG's failure in leading the team is due to his lack of supporting cast, he should accept a pay cut, so the Wolves could bring some quality players.
Yeah, right. Like it's bound to happen!

To start, KG has no failures in leading his team. He's the probly greatest leader of any in the whole league. There's no way to measure that, but I truly believe he is. And he likely will take a pay cut. I just saw his house for the first time on Thursday, and believe me, he don't need any more money. Why would he demand top money again? Watching him, I can see it in his actions that all he wants to do is win. Guys that are inot money are usually guys running around and having fun. Kg, especiallly in the playoffs this year, was all about business. Instead of jumping around and pumping up the crowd, he contained himself and focused on the game. There was a nice article in Slam that talked about a little incident where he let his emotions out, and his game suffered. To sum up my poit, KG has a HUGE desire to win, and it would surprise me more than anything if he didn't take a cut in his salary.

Quote:

Originally posted by IV!
There are different ways to judge players. Who is better will always be a matter of ones opinion. Who is greater is defined by the accomplishments a players has acheived. Tim Duncan has done more in less time than Kevin Garnett. His stat sheet proves that he is a greater player than Kevin Garnett.
I bet if they both ended their careers today. Tim Duncan would be a lock for the hall of fame, KG would not.

We are talking about who the better basketball player is. Not who has had a greater impact on the history of the game so far. Of course Duncan has had a greater impact, that doesn't mean he's a better player though. If I could have Duncan's or KG's career, I would have Duncan's. If I could have Duncan's or Kg's game, I would have KG's. Duncan has had a more successful career, but Mark Madsen has also had a more successful career than KG. That's no argument for him being better though, and being better is what this argument was intended to be about.

IV · 06-23-2003, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by buduan!
O.K. big ego, why don't you check yourself. First of all do you even know what my argument IS in this thread? Or do you just like to read your own words?

Do you know who my team is? How about my favorite player? Didn't think so, so quit talking out of your.....well you know.

All of that is irrelavant.

Quote:

Who cares what Duncan did every year leading up to this year. The fact is KG proved that THIS year he is at Duncan's level. Yeah that's right anal boy, my argument isn't that KG is better. It's that he is at his level and if he had similar talent around him like TD he would have been as successful if not more THIS season.

If that's your arguement make it, instead of counter arguing an argument that I never made.

Quote:

Judging by your avatar, we root for the same team. How embarassing.

Yes, that is embarassing.

Quote:

So let me get this straight, MJ was better than Nique. But TD is better than KG?

Very good.

Quote:

Might I suggest you change your name to III BTW. We didn't get the 4peat this year in case you didn't notice.

Suggestion noted, but my name has nothing to do with a Laker 4 peat.

Quote:

Effin bandwagoners.

Tell me about it.

IV · 06-23-2003, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tenkev!

Side note: I can remember IV saying how much he admired Tim Duncan's game long before the playoffs and long before anyone thought the Spurs had a chance to win the title.

IV · 06-23-2003, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by q!
We are talking about who the better basketball player is. Not who has had a greater impact on the history of the game so far. Of course Duncan has had a greater impact, that doesn't mean he's a better player though.

I believe better players do have a greater impact on the game and that's why I feel TD is better. KG is a great player and he's easily in Duncan's league, but TD is the best big man in the game right now. He's not the MVP for nothing. And no being MVP doesn't mean best player in the league, IMO, Kobe is the best player in the league. But Tim is the better of these two. I dont think there are many GM's in the league that would take KG over Duncan.

Quote:

If I could have Duncan's or KG's career, I would have Duncan's. If I could have Duncan's or Kg's game, I would have KG's. Duncan has had a more successful career, but Mark Madsen has also had a more successful career than KG. That's no argument for him being better though, and being better is what this argument was intended to be about.

That's an analogy to the extreme. And No Mark Madsen has not had a better career than KG. You are the main one who says players who win titles are not better due to the fact, so how has Madsen had a better career than KG?
You are kidding, right?

socco · 06-24-2003, 10:40 AM

Madsen had a better career. He has the rings to prove it. But KG is a better player. It's the same in the Duncan-KG case, not to that much of an extreme but that's the case. The only reason you guys have for Duncan being better is that he has championships, which is because he has a way better team. It just doesn't make sense.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes