bajaden
Hall of Famer
Sooooo, Which do you prefer?
Sooooo, Which do you prefer?
K
KingMilz
Guest
Depends who we replaced him with or drafted instead and even than it's impossible to know.
More "movable pieces."
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
No. Duncan is one of the greatest players, but its not because of his offense. He was a very good to great offensive player, but not one of the true greatest. There have probably been at least a dozen better offensive players during his time in the league (Shaq, Kobe, Dirk, Mailman, A.I., TMac, LeBron, Durant, Curry, Wade, Nash and a variety of possible 12th guys from Amare to Yao to CP3 to Blake to Cuz himself). His legend is based on defense and being part of a dynasty. Offensively he was great as an anchor, but not unassailable.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Actually, during Duncan's prime years, the only years when he was even in the conversation with Cousins as an offensive force, the Spurs very much ran a one man Duncan featured offense.
The second leading scorer from Duncan's prime years of 00-04 was:
2000-01 -- Derek Anderson 15.5
2001-02 -- David Robinson 12.2
2002-03 -- Tony Parker 15.5
2003-04 -- Tony Parker 14.7
The second leading scorer from Duncan's prime years of 00-04 was:
2000-01 -- Derek Anderson 15.5
2001-02 -- David Robinson 12.2
2002-03 -- Tony Parker 15.5
2003-04 -- Tony Parker 14.7
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
The gap is enormous.
The gap actually might be larger than the gap of the Spurs with and without Duncan back then, although I would have to check.
We are 7-35 the past 3 years without Cousins. That's a 14 win pace., and its more than half a season for sample size.
With Cousins we win at a 33 win pace. Cousins alone adds +19 wins. Very few can say as much. Only the very greatest stars, and only if they are on teams where they are not teamed up with other superstars able to carry the load.
In 1999-00 the Spurs went 48-26 (.649) with Duncan they went 5-3 (.625) without Duncan
he only missed 1 game in the next 3 years
In 2003-04 the Spurs went 51-18 (.739) w/ Duncan, 6-7 (.462) without Duncan
In 2004-05 the Spurs went 50-16 (.758) w/ Duncan, 9-7 (.563) without Duncan
149-60 = .713 = 58.5 game pace with Duncan
20-17 = .540 = 44.3 game pace without Duncan
so a +14 game difference
People don't get it because they are blinded by our final records.
Sac.1989
Starter
Demarcus > Duncan.
Even Pop would pick demarcus to build an offense around over Duncan.
Hell swap Karl for Pop and our team last season minus rondo, Koufas and bello makes the playoffs
Exactly. People will throw out the "how many games have we won without Cousins line" but it's not exactly a valid comparison because most superstars have been on good teams. The very nature of them being multiple time champions suggests that their teams have to be good enough to win even with guys out. The closest you would get are cases of stars just single-handedly carrying their teams to the playoffs. Such lines of argument might be reasonable for a debate on most valuable player (to their specific team and circumstance), but certainly not for who's the better player.
Showtime
Starter
No. Boogie is what? In his 6th season? Timmy was a fundamental, mentally sound player off the bat. Yeah, he got too mouthy at times and has always complained about calls, but he hasn't let his emotions control his actions. He's played hard on both sides of the ball. He's played smart, efficient basketball his entire career. Boogie is none of that.
I
Im Still Ballin
Guest
" Cousins has that potential"
We've seen it. Understand what potential is. I'm not calling him Tim Duncan. Potential is nothing without action and result.
Showtime
Starter
Yeah, I've heard the "potential" talk from guys a decade in the Association. Over it. DMC is who he is, and we have to accept that sooner or later.
I
Im Still Ballin
Guest
He has come a long way since his early years. His impact has grown over the years, hit potholes and bumps along the way. Did you ever think Curry would achieve this level of greatness? Cousins is as talented as any before him. This isn't whispering hope potential. It's very real and I won't rule him out just yet. The best is yet to come.
Showtime
Starter
Except that he's never addressed the major holes in his game which are his biggest hurdles to the next level, and doesn't show any sign of addressing them currently. Those issues are mental: mindset, patience, bball IQ, decision-making, efficiency, etc. It isn't physical, it isn't a skill, it isn't talent. It's upstairs.
Hoovtrain
All-Star
Riiight
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Don't know what to say -- people have to know how to watch the game. And then back it up with numbers. I can do both with that comparison.
Most casual fans just get a fanboy boner over the name "Duncan" and then gush about how he was the best at everything. Except he wasn't. May even be minorly overrated overall as that "best defensive PF of all time" thing was true, but only because he was a center being called PF. But that's where the rep came from. If he had defended like Al Jefferson nobody would have run around clamoring about his all time great offense. If he'd come into the league a decade earlier, and been drafted by a team that didn't already have David Robinson, his rep would likely have been just as one of the great group of centers of the era, and not even necessarily the best one. Certainly not the best offensive one.
Showtime
Starter
Pop deserves a LOT of credit for his team's defensive performance, but whomever is plugged into that team, the constant has been Duncan. I don't think Duncan is superior to KG defensively, but the fact is that he has been a stalwart on that end of the floor for the most winning club in sports.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Sure, he's been a great defender. He's also played center for over half his career, which his size and game screamed from the beginning anyway. The point wouldn't be he's not a great defnesive center, it would be:
1) well, he was a center. Him being called "PF" was an accident of history. If he's drafted to any team without a HOF center already in residence he is called a center from Day 1.
2) His legend is much more centered around that defense than his offense. He was a very good offensive center, good enough to anchor a great defensive team, but he was never overwhelming there. Never as good as Shaq, or Hakeem, or Kareem etc. he was great, but not special on that side of the ball.
3) great of a defensive center as he has been, if he had played in the era of Hakeem, Ewing, Admiral, Mourning, Deke, you would have had a very hard time separating him out and saying he was the best of the bunch. And hence, if he had played in that era his overall legend wouldn't be the same because he wouldn't have clearly stood out from his peers.
This thread is hilarious. I mean, really, we are trying to compare DMC to Duncan? Why? We are talking about a guy who has won multiple championships and wins 50-60 games every year versus a guy who has yet to win 30 games. Maybe DMC will get to that level someday but what's the point of debating this? You can post stats and shot charts all you want but if you know the game well enough you can just use the old "eye test" to see who has been a superior player and winner in this league.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Its rather a ravening argument against the 'eye test", one that I prefer not to make.
The thing about the 'eye test" is its only as good as the eyes making it. Mine have about 30 years of great centers on them.
Also of course, for all the fudging gong on, this has been principally a discussion of offense. Not a sloppy leftovers in the blender discussion of everything up to and including coaches, systems, teammates, and rings.
Hoovtrain
All-Star
Cool. good to know it's just a case of myself and others not knowing how to watch the game
Not really. Just Brick going off the deep-end, trying to pump up Cousins to a level he's not close to yet. Some of his Duncan "analysis" has been straight up bonkers
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Care to try to challenge it?
Please believe me when I say these are old lines of debate I have hashed out any number of times vs. statheads. Its doubtful you are going to come up with anything I have not seen, but the twists and turns are always interesting. Normally the end result is "but...longetivity!" or "but...rings!" neither of which are terribly relevant to my general point here.
Let me give you a a couple of Duncan tests:
1) Rank these 10 Big Men By Their Offense
Shaq
Kareem
Hakeem
Duncan
Admiral
Ewing
Mailman
Moses
Wilt
Dirk
2) Rank these 10 Centers By Their Defense
Hakeem
Duncan
Admiral
Ewing
Mourning
Mutombo
Russel
Howard
Walton
Wallace
What am I challenging? Duncan vs Cousins offensively? Whether Duncan=PF or C?
As far as rankings, Here's a quick eyeball look from some past research I've done. Might change a bit when I look closer when you answer above question.
Offense:
Shaq---- 1
Kareem--- 2
Hakeem----- 4
Duncan------ 6
Admiral---- 5
Ewing---- 8
Mourning---- 9
Moses----- 7
Wilt--- 3
Defense:
Hakeem- 1
Duncan- 2
Here's where it gets confusing for me. All very similar impacts as anchors for great defenses. Also a little tough for me to judge defense as I basically only got to see Howard, Wallace and the back-end of Mutombo's career actually play. Walton's a guy I've always struggled to accurately place with his short peak.
Confident in my 1-2 though as I've heard some great arguments from Spurs/Rockets writer friends of mine who covered them and laid out the extended impact they had defensively.
Ewing- 3
Russell- 4
Wallace-5
Mutombo- 6
Admiral- 7
Howard- 8
Mourning- 9
Walton- 10
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Start wherever you like, although I don't know there is much meat to the PF or C debate.
CelticsFan
Bench
Maybe this is the problems with the Kings organization. People putting Cousins on the same playing field as one of the greatest players to play. Cousins has never won more than 29 games in a season. Basketball is a team game Cousins putting up good stats on bad teams doesn't necessarily translate into the the greatest player of all time. Would Cousins stats be better or worse if he was on a contending team?
Cousins is a great talent no doubt but until he sniffs a .500 record in his career let keep the comparison to a minimum.
Cousins is a great talent no doubt but until he sniffs a .500 record in his career let keep the comparison to a minimum.
Last edited:
KingsFanGER
Starter
How is it even possible to compare two players without taking the team they are surrounded by into account?
A bad team will most likely boost the numbers a star player will get, while a good supporting cast will increase the amount of wins. One player can't win by himself.
And you also have to take into account how well the supporting cast fits together and how it fits the current playstyle of the league, while also asking the question how the game of the star player fits the current playstyle.
There are way too many variables to compare individual players to one another.
Both Duncan and Cousins are damn good in their own way.
And as a Celtics fan you should be well aware, how difficult it is to measure individual talent in a team game.
Celtics win more than the Kings. So does this mean Kelly or Sully are better than Cousins or that IT as the only fringe "Star" the Celtics have right now has more impact than him?
CelticsFan
Bench
So Towns is having a better rookie year than Cousins did stat wise. Does that mean that Towns will be better than both Duncan and Cousins? Cousins is in his 6th season and the Kings are about as good as when they drafted him. If you are going to be considered the best to ever play your position you have to make your team better. LBJ is one of the greats he took a crapty Cavs team and turned them into a real threat his first time around.
What kind of gaudy empty stats would Duncan have put up on a bad team? Aldridge is putting up his worst stats of his career on the Spurs, you have to sacrifice if you want to win. Duncan has dominated the NBA for over 15 years. Duncan is a 5 time champ, 2 time MVP, 3 time finals MVP, ROY, 15 time all star and selected to BOTH the all NBA team and all NBA defensive team every year consecutively for his first 13 seasons in the league. If Cousins never makes a playoff game but continues putting up gaudy stats would you still consider him one of the greatest to ever play?
What kind of gaudy empty stats would Duncan have put up on a bad team? Aldridge is putting up his worst stats of his career on the Spurs, you have to sacrifice if you want to win. Duncan has dominated the NBA for over 15 years. Duncan is a 5 time champ, 2 time MVP, 3 time finals MVP, ROY, 15 time all star and selected to BOTH the all NBA team and all NBA defensive team every year consecutively for his first 13 seasons in the league. If Cousins never makes a playoff game but continues putting up gaudy stats would you still consider him one of the greatest to ever play?
KingsFanGER
Starter
I don't consider anyone as the greatest to ever play - not Jordan, not Duncan, not Bird, not Russel or Lebron. Every player will achieve only so much as his team and the current playstyle of the NBA allows. And I'm certainly not a believer in all those giddy stats the NBA and certain websites use to measure the game. From my point of view you can always come up with some stat to back up your claims. But most of the time those stats will never show, what really happens in game.
All I do is to watch games and to determine what a player can and can't do. And from my perspective as a long term NBA fan I can say, that Cousins is able to do things no man his size was ever able to do. So I do in fact consider him a very special player.
Problem with Cousins will most likely always be, that he is so versatile and able to do so unusual things for a big man, that he will always struggle to do those things efficientely.
So it remains to be seen, if by the end of his career he was able to use those talents to win a championship or a lot of games in general.
But no matter how many W's he will achieve over his career. He will always be a extremely unique and special player.
Is Lebron superior, because he was able to carry a "not so weak as always mentioned" team to the finals? For me that's a simplistic question. Lebron is a SF with a unique all around skillset and the ability to turn role players into very solid players in todays NBA. How should I be able to compare him to a 270 lbs PF/C playing in a league, where post game is less effective and where teams play outside-inside for a reason? How should I be able to compare the 2006/7 East to the 2015/16 West?
This is as stupid as to try to compare Lebron to a ISO player like Kobe. It doesn't matter how you answer those kind of questions - you will always leave something out and make a simple but flawed statement.
You have to sacrifice to win. I like this statement. Problem is, that to be able to sacrifice, you need some teammates able to step up.
Duncan had those kind of teammates from the get go. Cousins not so much....
And we leave coaching out of the discussion completely, while it may be the biggest factor.
CelticsFan
Bench
I understand your point about how it's hard to compare players but this thread was about comparing Duncan and Cousins. Players in all of sports will be compared to the ones that came before them and the ones that come after them weather we like it or not. The fact is comparing a an NBA legend to a guy like Cousins is unfair, comparing the Brow and Cousins may be a little better comparison.
Is Cousins even a sure lock to be a HOFer now that we are about a 1/4 through his 6th season?
Is Cousins even a sure lock to be a HOFer now that we are about a 1/4 through his 6th season?
KingsFanGER
Starter
If he keeps up this kind of production for years to come, I think he will be in the HOF. But they are so many variables like health f.e. that come into play, that we don't know yet, if he will recieve such an individual honor.
About player comparisons in sports:
I know it's part of the way fans look at their sport. It also does create a lot of click baits for the media. But for me it doesn't make any sense.
Even comparing Davis to Cousins is way too difficult.
Similar threads
