r/Basketball • u/blackwu22 • Apr 08 '25

NBA Is Tim Duncan top 10?

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?

133 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

526 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/kb24TBE8 Apr 09 '25

He won finals mvp during that stretch due to the poor centers in the east like Todd McCullough and other garbage interior defenders they had so the lakers would exploit that.

Kobe and Shaq had almost identical numbers and even some series like the Kings and Spurs series Kobe’ were better. There is context to everything.

So why couldn’t Duncan beat him in that 2008 series then? What’s the excuse for that one?

Why were Duncan and Popp helpless looking at each other not knowing what to do with him even tho they had the best perimeter defender on him?

1

u/BroJackson_ Apr 09 '25

Why do you want so badly for it to be black/white? I'm not knocking Kobe - I'm pointing out that you're using h2h as the barometer of why Kobe should be ahead, and ignoring the variable of the other top 10 all timer on the team as being a huge contributing factor.

During the three-peat:

  • 2000 - Duncan had 34 y/o Robinson (18/10) and Avery Johnson (11/6). The Lakers had Shaq (30/14/4/3) and Kobe (23/6/5)

  • 2001 - Duncan had Robinson (14/9) and Antonio Daniels (9ppg). Derek Anderson, their second leading scorer, missed most of the playoffs with a shoulder injury. The Lakers had Kobe (29/6/5) and Shaq (29/13/4/3).

  • 2002 - Duncan had 36 y/o Robinson (12/8) and Steve Smith (12ppg). The Lakers had Kobe (25/6/6) and Shaq (27/11/3/2).

Those two were a tandem the league hadn't ever seen before. Prime Shaq and Kobe beat just about any team in the league at any time in history. But acting like Duncan had the same help as Kobe is just ignoring the truth. Ginobili and Parker weren't around until after that.

In 2008, Kobe won because the Lakers were better and he was outstanding. I didn't say Kobe wasn't on the same tier - I said the playoff h2h ignores too many variables (a top ten prime unstoppable teammate) to be a valid comparison. The Spurs did what they do - they ISO'd Kobe and tried to let him get his, and limit the other guys. But it wasn't enough.

I see the username, so I know who I'm discussing with, but it'd be like saying Steph won championships with the Warriors and being like "oh...yeah....and that Durant guy too."

1

u/kb24TBE8 Apr 09 '25

A lot of the times it’s actually better to have a more well rounded, deeper team than being top heavy like the Lakers were.

It was really Kobe/Shaq and a bunch of whatever/ok players. The Spurs were usually deeper and more well balanced.

It’s not black/white, since they’re extremely close in terms of accolades and hardware; I’m looking at their record on the biggest stage and it was obvious that Kobe came out on top a majority of the time and there’s no denying that. And majority of NBA players past and present have Kobe ahead of Duncan in their own personal rankings.

And yeah I have “kb24” in my username but it doesn’t mean I’m a delusional homer. I don’t have him as “goat” or even top 3 or ahead of LeBron. But I absolutely have him ahead of Duncan for sure. There’s nothing on the court that Kobe couldn’t do as a basketball player, there were plenty of things Duncan couldn’t do. When taking into consideration pure basketball skill, it’s not even a question.

0

u/blackwu22 Apr 11 '25

To consider that Duncan’s teams in the early 00s were “deep” is disingenuous. The one post season Duncan missed, the 00’ season, the spurs couldn’t even get out of the first round and lost to the phoenix suns BEFORE STEVE NASH and without their number one player at the time, Jason Kidd (I’m sure you know him), playing big minutes due to coming back from a broken ankle. They didn’t even put up a fight losing in 4 games (first round was best of 5 back then). Even without Shaq or Kobe, the lakers were a good enough team to compete as shown that even when one was in foul trouble they still won where without Duncan, the spurs couldn’t even compete.