Utah Jazz at San Antonio Spurs

[MHSL82]

This is after the fact, but wanted to make a thread for it.

Yes!!! I hate losing by a bucket or two - I'd rather lose by 8 than 1 and winning by any margin obviously beats all.

On ESPN's broadcast, Chris Mullin was saying that Duncan should/could be MVP this year because he's bounced back from a few years ago. I was confused because he's averaging 18 points, 10 rebounds, 2.5 assists, and 2.6 blocks. I get that he has intangibles and all, but that's not MVP!

The rest I'm going to say is biased, obviously, but I'll say it regardless. It always bugged me that Duncan has never had great stats and yet was talked about being the best PF ever - fine, but now people ignore Malone in that sentence. People are removing the "possibly" or the "one of" from their statements. I'm fine with him being in the conversation, but I think people forget about Malone's reliability throughout his career in doing what PFs are supposed to do. Malone would never dip to 13.4 points, 8.9 rebounds, 2.7 assists, and 1.9 blocks in Utah. He did better, older with Kobe Bryant and Shaq getting most of the touches.

Stats are not everything, obviously. Winning matters and his team with the Coach of the Decade won a lot (not that Sloan was a slouch or anything). But I feel, the Spurs peaked at the right time, when Michael Jordan wasn't there. True, the Jazz were missing in the Rockets years and only got to the Finals twice, but I think the Spurs would have a few losses if it happened a few years earlier, when the Jazz peaked. Or the Jazz would have a few titles if they peaked after Jordan. If Duncan had been drafted in say 1988, we'd be looking at him differently. Damn Jordan!

I think Duncan is a great guy, better guy by far than Malone was. He's a family man, modest, quiet, respectful, shy, and he wins. I think that's also contributed to this belief that he's a great leader, which I sure he is on the court. Malone too lead by example and teammates worked hard because they saw that he gave his effort and performed night in and night out.

I'm fine with people thinking Duncan was better, despite his team helping more than Malone's did (Jazz did have a superstar in Stockton and after Robinson, there was no big guy in SA - but overall, I feel the Spurs teammates helped more, complimentary). I just get tired that no one mentions Malone anymore when talking about Duncan as the best PF ever. News to you: it's not like how Jordan is consensus #1.

While I am biased for Stockton, I totally understand and respect the consensus that Magic was better - due to his scoring abilities and titles - against big stars (and with them, too). So I'm not so biased that I can't see. I just want Stockton and Malone to perpetually be given their due.

 

[nuraman00]

I would rather lose by 2 than by 8 or 30.

 

[nuraman00]

Between 1989 - 2003, the Jazz lost in the first round 7 times. 7/15 times.

The Spurs, with Duncan, have lost twice.

That makes a huge difference in perception, IMO. Malone with the Jazz lost earlier more often.

This is how I'm relating to your analysis / criteria of winning.

 

[nuraman00]

Duncan is also one of the best defensive players of all time.

Malone was a good defender too, but Duncan was better.

 

[nuraman00]

Duncan was a better rebounder than Malone. Rebounding % confirms this.

 

[MHSL82]

I would rather lose by 2 than by 8 or 30.

That wasn't one of the choices. It was lose by 8 or 1, not 8 or 2! Just kidding, winning or losing specific games isn't important in the regular season - it's how you win or how you lose. Is it that you can't defend? Is it that you can't score? Can't rebound? Can't make free-throws? Too soft? Can't matchup to this team?

Losing by eight suggests that you are missing out on more than when you lose by 1, but if you played well but just played a better team, that 1 point stings more than the 8 points. That's my perspective, as a fan. If I were coach, I'd rather lose by 1. See that I was close, played well enough to be in it at the end.

 

[nuraman00]

BTW, I wish I hadn't missed the game, but I did. But I'm also not that surprised that the Jazz won at home vs. the Spurs. Do it on the road.

 

[MHSL82]

Just as usual, Nuraman brings this stupid "objectivity" and "facts" thing. This is a Jazz board, we have no room for such unbiased perspectives. We must dump on the gentleman, Duncan! Fair or not!

 

[MHSL82]

BTW, I wish I hadn't missed the game, but I did. But I'm also not that surprised that the Jazz won at home vs. the Spurs. Do it on the road.

 

[nuraman00]

That wasn't one of the choices. It was lose by 8 or 1, not 8 or 2! Just kidding, winning or losing specific games isn't important in the regular season - it's how you win or how you lose. Is it that you can't defend? Is it that you can't score? Can't rebound? Can't make free-throws? Too soft? Can't matchup to this team?

Losing by eight suggests that you are missing out on more than when you lose by 1, but if you played well but just played a better team, that 1 point stings more than the 8 points. That's my perspective, as a fan. If I were coach, I'd rather lose by 1. See that I was close, played well enough to be in it at the end.

I'm a fan too. I think when you lose by a larger amount, whether it's 8 or whatever, it means you were that much worse.

And when you lose by 30, it's like you don't even belong, and have 6 different things to work on.

I also think if you lose by 1, then there's more hope for future meetings. Ok, it was a 1 point regular season loss, but for future meetings, or even the playoffs, it's pretty much even.

 

[nuraman00]

I won't be here for Friday or Saturday's game either.

 

[nuraman00]

I really want to see the Brooklyn game on Tuesday, but predict it will be too early for me.

 

[nuraman00]

LOL, the Indiana game on Wednesday is even earlier!

 

[nuraman00]

All right, I'll try this. LP Broadband does archive their games, so I'll just watch the Brooklyn game on delay. And post in the respective thread as I'm watching it.

 

[nuraman00]

Or the Jazz would have a few titles if they peaked after Jordan. If Duncan had been drafted in say 1988, we'd be looking at him differently. Damn Jordan!

It wasn't all Jordan.

Pippen shut down Stockton in the 4th quarter, and forced turnovers.

 

[nuraman00]

While I am biased for Stockton, I totally understand and respect the consensus that Magic was better - due to his scoring abilities and titles - against big stars (and with them, too). So I'm not so biased that I can't see. I just want Stockton and Malone to perpetually be given their due.

Bird > Magic. Better, tougher defender.

Robertson > Magic.

Kidd > Magic.

Payton = Magic.

Kidd for his two-way play, and rebounding, and defense.

Payton for his low-turnover game, and defense.

With respect to great PGs, Payton has one of the lowest turnover rates among them.

 

[MHSL82]

That wasn't one of the choices. It was lose by 8 or 1, not 8 or 2! Just kidding, winning or losing specific games isn't important in the regular season - it's how you win or how you lose. Is it that you can't defend? Is it that you can't score? Can't rebound? Can't make free-throws? Too soft? Can't matchup to this team?

Losing by eight suggests that you are missing out on more than when you lose by 1, but if you played well but just played a better team, that 1 point stings more than the 8 points. That's my perspective, as a fan. If I were coach, I'd rather lose by 1. See that I was close, played well enough to be in it at the end.

I'm a fan too. I think when you lose by a larger amount, whether it's 8 or whatever, it means you were that much worse.

And when you lose by 30, it's like you don't even belong, and have 6 different things to work on.

I also think if you lose by 1, then there's more hope for future meetings. Ok, it was a 1 point regular season loss, but for future meetings, or even the playoffs, it's pretty much even.

But I said from my perspective. You weren't seeing it from my perspective! Everyone who sees it from my perspective agrees with me. Everyone who sees it from their perspective is inconsistent with mine. Consistency is a good thing.

Seriously though, I see your perspective too, but I feel I will already have hope or not, based upon who my team is, what their strengths and weaknesses are, etc. I don't need the game to tell me. The other 81 games shape my opinion overall. I understand head to head is important, but not being a real believer in momentum between games, I'd rather lose a game where I thought, this is what I need to work on (8 vs. 30) than what if I made one more shot? I hate the 1 point losses more than the 8 point losses(unless we make a buzzer beater three to cut the lead to 1. That's really a four point loss), because even with a 1 point loss you likely have a few things, not just one shot, to work on. Just like an 8 point loss. But this will add a loss that you thought you shouldn't have.

 

[MHSL82]

Bird > Magic. Better, tougher defender.

Robertson > Magic.

Kidd > Magic.

Payton = Magic.

Kidd for his two-way play, and rebounding, and defense.

Payton for his low-turnover game, and defense.

With respect to great PGs, Payton has one of the lowest turnover rates among them.

I see you left out Stockton. So DON'T CORRECT ME (!!!), but:

Stockton > Robertson/Kidd > Magic/Payton

Just kidding. I like Stockton best and would pick him because of my loyalties, but I don't argue about it with anyone. Because I don't like people tearing down Stockton to make someone else better, whatever they think, I just say, "ok". (And no, this is not how I would be in a courtroom. "Not guilty." "Ok, we're dropping the charges.")

 

[nuraman00]

The rest I'm going to say is biased, obviously, but I'll say it regardless. It always bugged me that Duncan has never had great stats and yet was talked about being the best PF ever -

You're not looking at the right stats then.

His FG%, great.

Rebounding, one of the best ever.

Blocked shots and assists, one of the greatest ever.


Duncan might be the best player ever (Hakeem, Jordan, Bird, Russell, throw in 2-3 of your other favorites) are in the mix.

The two best PFs are Duncan and Malone, depending on preference.

I don't know if Malone was the better scorer. He had a 1.7% higher usage rate, which could account for the higher points per game average. Both were great in the post, in different ways. Malone was more physical, Duncan with his variety.

Malone was a good rebounder, Duncan was a great rebounder. The Spurs pace hurt some of Duncan's per-game rebounding averages. But their defense provided for more misses overall.

The Jazz defense was more about steals or fouling than forcing misses, so Malone might have had less rebounding opportunities.

Malone had a better jumper.

Both had long careers.

Part of Duncan's MVP candidacy, in the early season, is because of his defense. It's really good right now. But I doubt he can sustain that.

Parker was an MVP candidate last year.

 

[nuraman00]

I see you left out Stockton. So DON'T CORRECT ME (!!!), but:

Stockton > Robertson/Kidd > Magic/Payton

Just kidding. I like Stockton best and would pick him because of my loyalties, but I don't argue about it with anyone. Because I don't like people tearing down Stockton to make someone else better, whatever they think, I just say, "ok". (And no, this is not how I would be in a courtroom. "Not guilty." "Ok, we're dropping the charges.")

I didn't leave out Stockton. It's just you brought up Magic. So I was showing where I ranked him.

I didn't rank Magic as one of the best ever. It had nothing to do with Stockton, I didn't even comment on him.