ozballer23
#1 J.R. Smith Collector
With 4 championships each, which big man would you choose if putting together a team?
Shaq or Duncan?
- Thread starter ozballer23
- Start date
Pierce34
Paul Pierce Collector
now. duncan easy. start of their careers shaq
ducky_poo
Ultimate Hawks Collector
id go duncan. big fundamentals
ace e
OzCardTrader
duncan is at the peak of his game, shaq is on his way out.
white_chocolate_55
WhiteBoy
are you talking about as of now, or in their prime?
cos duncan would be the obvious answer now, shaqs just another center these days..
couldnt their be a broader range of big men to choose from?
spose, i wouldnt be choosing popovich as coach, so it wouldnt matter
cos duncan would be the obvious answer now, shaqs just another center these days..
couldnt their be a broader range of big men to choose from?
spose, i wouldnt be choosing popovich as coach, so it wouldnt matter
jimboiitmac
miami pride
If you knew how they would play, and you had to take one out of the two based say of them, just coming into the league I'd take Shaq easy.
Tim Duncan is the big fundamental, the greatest power forward of all-time, he can score, rebound, shoot, shot-block and pass and he's up the top on both ends of the floor, he rarely gets phased and he's probably one of the most consistent to ever play the game.
However he's getting rings now that Shaq's in the end phases of his career. Don't forget people that when Shaq won his 3 rings with the LA Lakers, Tim Duncan was there with his Spurs too, but they weren't good enough to beat the Lakers.
Shaq in his prime was unstoppable, the only person who would be harder to guard, his names the Jordan.
Tim Duncan is the big fundamental, the greatest power forward of all-time, he can score, rebound, shoot, shot-block and pass and he's up the top on both ends of the floor, he rarely gets phased and he's probably one of the most consistent to ever play the game.
However he's getting rings now that Shaq's in the end phases of his career. Don't forget people that when Shaq won his 3 rings with the LA Lakers, Tim Duncan was there with his Spurs too, but they weren't good enough to beat the Lakers.
Shaq in his prime was unstoppable, the only person who would be harder to guard, his names the Jordan.
ducky_poo
Ultimate Hawks Collector
but duncan didnt have parker or ginobli back then 2. shaq had his side man, kobe 
ducky_poo
Ultimate Hawks Collector
if you were putting a new team together and you has a choice between a guy who can do everything and a guy who can do everything but shot a ball. you'd go with the first. thats duncan.
mattyj
Multi-Player Collector
Shaq was the most dominant center ever (in his prime) apart from Wilt...If he had worked on his game and wasnt a lazy bum he woulda been close to the GOAT...as good as Duncan is, this goes to Shaq
Dr. Curlytek
PhD in "Things and Stuff"
Putting together a team, it is a hard call, Duncan or Shaq? I love Duncan, and as mentioned he is probably the greatest PF to play the game, is a great leader and brings improvement to the whole team.
But in terms of dominance of the paint, intimidation, ticket and jersey sales, endorsements etc Shaq wins hands down. Whether you can "Hack-a-Shaq" well enough to win against a team built around him is an important consideration.
But in terms of dominance of the paint, intimidation, ticket and jersey sales, endorsements etc Shaq wins hands down. Whether you can "Hack-a-Shaq" well enough to win against a team built around him is an important consideration.
white_chocolate_55
WhiteBoy
I'm sorry mate, I stopped reading when you said this..
what grounds are you basing TD to being the greatest PF of all time? I don't think that's true one bit.. Your forgetting Barkley/Malone/McHale and need I get more into the players before their time? Maybe you should say he's one of the greatest, not THEE greatest
Barkley & Malone never won rings. McHale was a role player on a team full of superstars. TD has them all covered already, and he's got at least 5 years of superstardom left. Malone has better individual numbers more than likely, but Timmy brings a lot more to his team.
white_chocolate_55
WhiteBoy
still dont agree he's the greatest PF of all time.. your talking ALL TIME.. 50+ years
from what you guys are saying, wouldnt robert horry be the greatest PF of all time?
bargey i think your wrong about malone, he was more of a team player than your man TD..
TD never had Barkley/Drexler/Olajuwon/MJohnson/Kemp standing in his way now did he? And don't give me Amare Stoudemire, or the depleted Lakers team of 2003, or Dirk Nowitzki.. If TD was truly one of the greatest PFs ever, the spurs;
* would have gone back to back in 2000 instead of bowing out in the first round 3-1 to the suns
* wouldnt have been swept in the WCF in 2001 by the lakers
* wouldnt have lost 4 - 1 in the WCF against the lakers in 2002
* would have gone back to back in 2004 rather than lose 4-2 against the lakers in WCSF
* wouldnt have lost 4-3 against the mavs in 2006, and would have gone back to back
I'd like to see him take his team back to back.. then I'll rank him up there..
3 of those above teams had D Rob on them.. one of the greatest centers of all time (see how i said one of?) Not saying Duncan isnt great, but I dont think he's the best ever PF..he's done alot , and I recognise that
Rings dont always make you great.. ask steve kerr/robert horry/andrew gaze (spurs edition)..
Reggie Miller/Ewing/Barkley/Malone dont need to have 1 to be great.. do they? or does it make them failures, escpecially coming up against MJ in their time?
from what you guys are saying, wouldnt robert horry be the greatest PF of all time?
bargey i think your wrong about malone, he was more of a team player than your man TD..
TD never had Barkley/Drexler/Olajuwon/MJohnson/Kemp standing in his way now did he? And don't give me Amare Stoudemire, or the depleted Lakers team of 2003, or Dirk Nowitzki.. If TD was truly one of the greatest PFs ever, the spurs;
* would have gone back to back in 2000 instead of bowing out in the first round 3-1 to the suns
* wouldnt have been swept in the WCF in 2001 by the lakers
* wouldnt have lost 4 - 1 in the WCF against the lakers in 2002
* would have gone back to back in 2004 rather than lose 4-2 against the lakers in WCSF
* wouldnt have lost 4-3 against the mavs in 2006, and would have gone back to back
I'd like to see him take his team back to back.. then I'll rank him up there..
3 of those above teams had D Rob on them.. one of the greatest centers of all time (see how i said one of?) Not saying Duncan isnt great, but I dont think he's the best ever PF..he's done alot , and I recognise that
Rings dont always make you great.. ask steve kerr/robert horry/andrew gaze (spurs edition)..
Reggie Miller/Ewing/Barkley/Malone dont need to have 1 to be great.. do they? or does it make them failures, escpecially coming up against MJ in their time?
gemini0928
Basketball Addict
I chose Shaq coz he will bring more money for the franchise than Duncan... 
More people will watch the games if Shaq is playing coz people want to watch a player who dominates. Thats just reality... :v:
More people will watch the games if Shaq is playing coz people want to watch a player who dominates. Thats just reality... :v:
It's about time I join this debate. First of all, I like to say even though I am a huge Shaq fan, I am not biased in what I am going to say.
Shaq obviously came into the league with a lot more noise than Duncan. He was the most destructive force in the paint ever. He made coaches change their defense, wreck havoc down low and he is a good passer out of double team, giving his teammates easy shots. He plays with flair, lost of emotions and exclamation on those dunks. He is a crowd pleaser, a superstar who sometimes seems arrogant.
Duncan came across to me as a great team player, he works hard and he is the kind of player any coach would love to have on their team. He likes to stay under the radar, he is calm and down to earth. No rants about his minutes, no complaints about his supporting cast, no shit on nobody basically...
Assuming they are both starting their careers again, any NBA franchise would pick Shaq since he is a guy who would bring more than just his game, along comes the fans, season tickets, sponsors, broadcast rights etc.
From the coaches point of view, I think they would still pick Shaq due to his upside. If you have a choice to pick a great role player or a superstar, you would pick a superstar just because you have no idea how great he can be. Shaq has that X factor that makes the entire team a contender even though he can't shoot. But obviously no superstar can single handedly bring home a championship without a great supporting cast. So Duncan or Shaq, its pretty much the same when coaches have to choose. Shaq will be more suitable to the old games where zone defense was disallowed. Duncan will be suitable for the modern game where speed and range are major factors.
Personally, I pick Shaq for the entertainment factor. You should see how high he used to jump to dunk, and when he's done, all the defenders are on the floor.
Shaq obviously came into the league with a lot more noise than Duncan. He was the most destructive force in the paint ever. He made coaches change their defense, wreck havoc down low and he is a good passer out of double team, giving his teammates easy shots. He plays with flair, lost of emotions and exclamation on those dunks. He is a crowd pleaser, a superstar who sometimes seems arrogant.
Duncan came across to me as a great team player, he works hard and he is the kind of player any coach would love to have on their team. He likes to stay under the radar, he is calm and down to earth. No rants about his minutes, no complaints about his supporting cast, no shit on nobody basically...
Assuming they are both starting their careers again, any NBA franchise would pick Shaq since he is a guy who would bring more than just his game, along comes the fans, season tickets, sponsors, broadcast rights etc.
From the coaches point of view, I think they would still pick Shaq due to his upside. If you have a choice to pick a great role player or a superstar, you would pick a superstar just because you have no idea how great he can be. Shaq has that X factor that makes the entire team a contender even though he can't shoot. But obviously no superstar can single handedly bring home a championship without a great supporting cast. So Duncan or Shaq, its pretty much the same when coaches have to choose. Shaq will be more suitable to the old games where zone defense was disallowed. Duncan will be suitable for the modern game where speed and range are major factors.
Personally, I pick Shaq for the entertainment factor. You should see how high he used to jump to dunk, and when he's done, all the defenders are on the floor.
jimboiitmac
miami pride
thanks Barge, i was going to say this myself till i saw you had replied for me.
Tim Duncan - 4 championships.
Malone + Barkley combined - 0 championships
Winning a championship is the ultimate in basketball, enough said. That being said though, I'm not saying Tim Duncan is the greatest only because he won rings, but he is easily comparable on an individual and team standpoint as a great player to Malone and Barkley, but when you add in the ring factor, he has to be the best.
But anyway, it's just my opinion, we can rant and rave about different scenarios, playoff series, situations etc but the bottom line is that statistics and facts speak for themselves, as a pose to the "what if's?" and "but this?" etc's which we make when trying to compare different era's, decades and time periods.
Gotta disagree jimbo, circumstances play a huge role in winning a ring. Malone and Barkley had MJ to compete with, and when MJ had gone they were no where near the top of their games to win a ring. Just coz he has 4 championships doesn't make him the greatest, its way too debateable.
jimboiitmac
miami pride
but duncan didnt have parker or ginobli back then 2. shaq had his side man, kobe
And Tim Duncan had Avery Johnson, Sean Elliot, David Robinson etc etc.
jimboiitmac
miami pride
Yeahh sorry, edited my post, that's not what i meant completely. It's not the rings just making him better, but the fact that he's just a good player as the others mentioned, but he could win too.
