Kobe or Timmy...Best Player of their Generation?

[tlance]

The problem with that is that Del Harris had Shaq and Kobe and couldn't do any better than getting swept in the Conference finals. I think Pop likely figures out a way to do better than that.

To be fair to your point though. It's also possible that Pop may not have been able to handle Shaq and Kobe's ego's like Phil could which likely leads to him performing a lot like Del Harris.

Today? For sure. As a rookie coach? Shaq and Kobe had some awfully big egos. I am sure Pop would have done better than Harris, but I am not so sure that Shaq and Kibe listen to a rookie Popovich.

 

[tlance]

Are you saying Timmy would still have 5 titles if he didn't have Pop? Generational players are judged by their championships. Karl Malone for instance would undoubtedly be known as the greatest PF of all time if he had won 3 or 4 titles.

Kobe has had 10 different head coaches (four of them as interim coaches). Which means different playing styles and rotations. Tim has had one.

Overall, the Spurs have also been the better team in the last 10 years. Take Kobe and Tim away from those respective teams and the Spurs would still be the better team - Tim basically had the luck of being surrounded by better players in the last decade.

No, not necessarily, but I am positive that Kobe would not have 5 rings without Phil. Kobe and Shaq did not get along. Very few coaches could have guided that ship as well as Phil Jackson did. Getting egos to work together was his single greatest talent as a coach.

 

[Nosferatu]

Surround Tim Duncan with the Smush parkers and kwame Browns of the world and then what. He's had Parker, ginobli among many other solid players his whole career. He's still a great player I just give nod to Kobe with talent and system Duncan has had around him his entire career.

Read this again will ya? Especially that first line, if you don't get he's saying that Kobe didn't have the same talent around him I honestly don't know what else to tell ya, he then goes on to say Timmy had Manu and Tony.

Let's remember that he also said Kobe was better, let's just move on shall we you obviously have had some sort of traumatic brain injury since the last time we talked.

 

[trojanfan12]

Today? For sure. As a rookie coach? Shaq and Kobe had some awfully big egos. I am sure Pop would have done better than Harris, but I am not so sure that Shaq and Kibe listen to a rookie Popovich.

Yeah, the one thing Phil had (besides 6 rings and coaching Kobe's hero) was that he had an even bigger ego than Shaq and Kobe. So in the battles of ego's, Phil usually won. Heck, Pop is such a curmudgeon, he may have dealt with Shaq and Kobe's ego's for a season or 2 and then said "Not dealing with this shit, I'm out." lol

 

[Arizona_Sting]

I'm very pleased with this poll and somewhat surprised. Hooplans are smarter than I thought.

It's not a huge difference, but there is a gap between the two players. Timmy's run is historical, to be the best player on a team that's been good for this long will NEVER be done again. Kobe is top 10 good, probably #9 or #10 all-time, but I think once Duncan retires maybe the rest of the world will catch up and realize he's had a top 5 all-time career.

 

[trojanfan12]

Read this again will ya? Especially that first line, if you don't get he's saying that Kobe didn't have the same talent around him I honestly don't know what else to tell ya, he then goes on to say Timmy had Manu and Tony.

You really need to brush up on your comprehension. Yes, he said that Kobe didn't have the same talent around him. What he didn't say was that is why Timmy is better. It's why Timmy has won more consistently. Really not that difficult to grasp.

Let's remember that he also said Kobe was better, let's just move on shall we you obviously have had some sort of traumatic brain injury since the last time we talked.

A case can be made that Kobe is better. It's not like there's a huge difference between the 2 players. I happen to think that Timmy is better, but that doesn't mean that a convincing argument can't be made on Kobe's behalf.

And you say I've had a serious brain injury.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

The LAKERS would have won every title from 1999-2004 with Shaq and Duncan
Duncan would have gladly been a rebounder and primary defender. He was unselfish.
He could have played seamlessly alongside Shaq, because Timmy was built to be a great teammate.

Shaq's unstoppable offensive force at his best
The rim protected by a young Duncan at his defensive and rebounding best

Kobe and the Spurs would not be able to get out of the first/second round from 1999-2004.
Ginobili and Parker would have been rendered useless with Kobe's style.
David Robinson would have been overwhelmed even in his prime....approaching 40, he would have no chance versus Duncan/Shaq.

Again these are all hypothetical situations. If we hadn't actually seen them in action you would have thought a team with Barkley, Olajuwon and Drexler would win multiple titles. Or a team with Shaq, Kobe, Malone and Payton too.

Substitute Kobe with Duncan and you have probably the best front court in history, but you lose a phenomenal two way player in the backcourt.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

No, not necessarily, but I am positive that Kobe would not have 5 rings without Phil. Kobe and Shaq did not get along. Very few coaches could have guided that ship as well as Phil Jackson did. Getting egos to work together was his single greatest talent as a coach.

I'm also positive Duncan would never have 5 rings if you had Del Harris or Mike Brown coach him. Sometimes things have to go just right.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm very pleased with this poll and somewhat surprised. Hooplans are smarter than I thought.

It's not a huge difference, but there is a gap between the two players. Timmy's run is historical, to be the best player on a team that's been good for this long will NEVER be done again. Kobe is top 10 good, probably #9 or #10 all-time, but I think once Duncan retires maybe the rest of the world will catch up and realize he's had a top 5 all-time career.

They've had remarkably similar careers in many ways and very different careers in others. Both fanbases and NBA fans in general are lucky to have been able to watch them and watch them go head to head a lot, often with very high stakes.

Both franchises have had some incredible accomplishments and I'm sure each looks at the other and see's accomplishments that they wish their team had. As a Lakers fan, I would love to be able to say that the Lakers have had the string of 50 win seasons that the Spurs have put together. I'm sure Spurs fans would love to be able to say that the Spurs had been able to repeat as champs, let alone 3-peat.

End of the day, both are great players who have played for great franchises and provided some amazing moments.

 

[Arizona_Sting]

Again these are all hypothetical situations. If we hadn't actually seen them in action you would have thought a team with Barkley, Olajuwon and Drexler would win multiple titles. Or a team with Shaq, Kobe, Malone and Payton too.

Substitute Kobe with Duncan and you have probably the best front court in history, but you lose a phenomenal two way player in the backcourt.

Weren't you the one bashing @The Derski in that Morris thread about hypotethical situations yet you're blurting them out in this thread like they've gone out of style?

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Weren't you the one bashing @The Derski in that Morris thread about hypotethical situations yet you're blurting them out in this thread like they've gone out of style?

Yes, because a 'What if Duncan was on the championship Lakers' is pretty much the same as 'What if Morris was on the current Lakers' type of discussion isn't it?

Plus, derski was stating it as a fact!

suns fans!

 

[Nosferatu]

You really need to brush up on your comprehension. Yes, he said that Kobe didn't have the same talent around him. What he didn't say was that is why Timmy is better. It's why Timmy has won more consistently. Really not that difficult to grasp.



A case can be made that Kobe is better. It's not like there's a huge difference between the 2 players. I happen to think that Timmy is better, but that doesn't mean that a convincing argument can't be made on Kobe's behalf.

And you say I've had a serious brain injury.

Ok, a few things. He DID say Timmy had better players around him insinuating that if he would have had to play with the likes of Parker and Brown he wouldn't have been as good. You sir are the one who needs to brush up if you will on your reading comprehension, i'm flabbergasted that you felt the need to even start this conversation if you didn't understand what my post was in response to.

Of course a case can be made for Kobe, he's a phenomenal player, I have not said I disagreed with anyone who would choose Kobe, I just didn't agree with saying well Kobe had to play with Parker and Brown and Timmy had a better team around him, I simply made the point the players around Duncan were better because of him, Kobe didn't really make the players around him better, not in my opinion anyhow.

Lastly, you really need to understand i'm just messing with you, no need to be so serious, oh and you need to come back to the drafts!

 

[Arizona_Sting]

Yes, because a 'What if Duncan was on the championship Lakers' is pretty much the same as 'What if Morris was on the current Lakers' type of discussion isn't it?

Plus, derski was stating it as a fact!

suns fans!

Just pointing out that you're being hypocritical… again.

I'm not even going to say "Lakers fans "

I'll just say Shaqdaddy

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Just pointing out that you're being hypocritical… again.

I'm not even going to say "Lakers fans "

I'll just say Shaqdaddy

So you're saying stating a hypothetical situation as a fact is right?

 

[Clayton]

Kobe didnt always have the same talent around him as Duncan but its much easier to build around Duncan. I get why a lot of players think Kobe was better. He could shoot anywhere on the court and get his shot anywhere on the court. He probably was more talented than Duncan.

But he wasn't the greatest basketball IQ guy in the clutch at all because he always felt like being double and triple teamed didnt matter. Duncan was rock solid on both sides of the ball and you could have him at the 4 or 5. Duncan had some series' and years where he dominated but he didnt always needed to dominate. Thats basketball. MJ was the exception. Kobe wasn't MJ. He had all of his moves and a better jumpshot but he wasn't as physically gifted.

So Duncan is the easy choice here. You could build a quality team around Duncan, a star and role players. Thats not hard to do in the NBA. Kobe specially needed a top 5 big man and role players. A harder feat.

 

[trojanfan12]

Lastly, you really need to understand i'm just messing with you, no need to be so serious, oh and you need to come back to the drafts!

Let me know when you're having the next one. I may have a little more time.

 

[Malibu]

Can't compare the two. Play different positions. Both have had great careers. That's all I'm saying. Peace.

 

[Gooch1034]

The point that some are making is that Duncan has always had a playoff level lineup around him. We don't know if Timmy could drag the likes of Smush Parker and Kwame Brown to the playoffs because he never had to.

We do know that Kobe could drag the likes of Smush Parker and Kwame Brown to the playoffs because he did so twice.

Could Timmy have done that? Probably. Could he have done what Kobe couldn't and get that same lineup past the 1st round? Maybe. But we'll never know, because he never had to. That's not a knock on Timmy, but more praise for how well the Spurs have done in keeping a playoff caliber lineup together.

My point in my last post was to show speculation can go both ways but all we have is speculation when comparing these 2 since personal and team stats are basically a push. I like both players and don't have an issue at all if people choose Kobe.

 

[Gooch1034]

Can't compare the two. Play different positions. Both have had great careers. That's all I'm saying. Peace.

Being difficult to compare them is the point.

 

[Robotech]

Clearly Duncan. Ever since the Spurs picked him number 1, they've been the best team in the NBA. He's just so rock solid. His intelligence and fundamentals are so good that he could probably be an effective player into his mid forties if he were to choose to continue playing.