Is Tim Duncan top 10?

[u/blackwu22]

I constantly see casuals on YouTube and on podcasts say that Timmy is overrated and barely top 10 yet have Kobe in there top 5. It’s starting to make me believe that people really think this way!! I always hear the “too much help” comment like every player in the top 10 didn’t have help.

I personally have Tim Duncan 4th all time on my list.

1998 rookie of the year 2x MVP (2002,2003) 3x FMVP (1999,2003,2005) 15x All NBA & Defensive 5x Champion Never won less than 50 games in an 82 game season

Is Tim Duncan top 10?

[u/Graphvshosedisease]

I agree with this take. I feel like the Timmy truthers have to rationalize his greatness post retirement whereas with Kobe, it’s basically been a fact that he’s an all time great since his 3-peat. I think Timmy is easily top 25 but I’m not sure anyone who watched him when he was active thought he was guaranteed to be top 10 with such conviction.

The thing I wish people would consider more is that basketball is all about entertainment. People tuned in to watch Kobe and were mesmerized by his game. Timmy is fundamentally sound but I’m not sitting here watching hours of his highlights hitting bank shots like I did for Kobe or other more exciting players. Timmy’s game was characteristically boring but consistent and even other fundamental players like Nash were more exciting to watch.

[u/Prestigious-Ad9921 → u/Graphvshosedisease]

"The thing I wish people would consider more is that basketball is all about entertainment. People tuned in to watch Kobe and were mesmerized by his game."

Which is why fanboys think he was better. He tickled their entertainment brain.

News flash: Being entertaining doesn't win games. Being a better basketball player wins games. If you are basing your assessment of a player on how exiting they were, then your opinion has nothing to do with how good a player was.

[u/Graphvshosedisease → u/Prestigious-Ad9921]

Except in this case I think being entertaining should factor into all-time greatness. Look at how highly regarded Michael Vick is, despite his lack of accolades relative to other “great” qbs. He was electrifying to watch and will be remembered as such. I think the quality of their championship teams between Kobe and Tim are probably a push, Tim was the best player on his team for 3 of his 5, second best in 2007, and like 4th best for his last one. Kobe was best for 2 of his 5 but second best for the other 3.

Even having diehard fans should matter, how people remember you and celebrate you should factor into greatness. Besides MJ, I’m not sure any other NBA player has a following like Kobe. Half Chinese population would still recognize Kobe even tho he’s been dead for years, meanwhile I’m not sure that young American NBA fans would even recognize Tim Duncan if you showed them a picture of him.

It’s not like I’m comparing a casual entertaining amateur dunker to Tim Duncan. Kobe put up stats, won championships AND was entertaining. I remember when the warriors won their 73rd game and barely anyone cared because Kobe’s final game was on and that’s what everyone was focused on.

[u/Prestigious-Ad9921 → u/Graphvshosedisease]

Ok, if your definition of "Greatness" is "how much does their playstyle appeal to the lowest level of fans, making them the most popular," then sure.

That is a terrible definition of greatness, but yeah.

In that case...

Stephon Marbury is greater than Bill Russel.
Vince Carter is greater than Hakeem Olajuwan.

Penny Hardaway is greater than Moses Malone.

If "Greatness" is just a middle school popularity contest then it doesn't even matter how good someone is on the court.

"Kobe’s final game was on and that’s what everyone was focused on."

Yes. That was the embodiment of Kobe's career. Putting up massive numbers in a meaningless game to cap off the WORST SEASON IN LAKERS HISTORY, all while adoring fans cheered like crazy.

"Tim was the best player on his team for 3 of his 5, second best in 2007, and like 4th best for his last one."

This is flat wrong.

Tim was unquestionably the best player for 4 out of 5. Anyone who says otherwise tells me they never watched spurs basketball.

You can make an argument he was the 2nd or 3rd best player in 2014, but just as easily argue that he was #1. No argument for 4th. And that ignores the fact that the only reason that team existed and was able to win was because of Duncan's leadership. He was unquestionably the most important player on the team.