# Duncan named best power forward of all-time by espn



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2074360


I find it interesting that Dirk made #10 and Amare missed the top 10(all time) by two votes. Much love for Amare, but him being consider one of the top 10 4 men ever THIS early...come on.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

I think they got a little excited


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

I believe Duncan is the best PF of all time, but Dirk top ten.. I don't know about that.


----------



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

TD is no question the best PF ever, but Ill give them credit for Karl coming in a very close 2nd. But they got a little too overanxious by putting Dirk on there


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

im glad duncan is finaly getting some respect, now on the dirk thing.... hes good but he hasnt even started an allstar gm has he? and this is his first yr on all nbateam. mybe


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

hirschmanz said:


> I think they got a little excited




Why? 




I was trying to find this link after ESPN took it off their home page, and I couldn't find it. Anyway, these are the same guys we (We as in all people on BBB.net) all bad mouth for being bad commentators and what not, but you know what, Duncan is still the best PF of all time, and this isn't just about getting "excited" like suggested above.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was referring to putting dirk in there, sure he's one of the best forwards in the game now, but all time? And amare missing by 2 votes is ridiculous, he shouldn't have even been on the ballot. Best all-time pf is duncan, no doubt, polished and talented, with malone a close second. After that I think some thought was lacking in the way the list came out.


----------



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

Karl missing by 2 or 3 votes is about right, but after that its not even close(vote wise)after that. I think the gap between Sir Charles and the Mailman should have been just a little closer


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

hirschmanz said:


> I was referring to putting dirk in there, sure he's one of the best forwards in the game now, but all time? And amare missing by 2 votes is ridiculous, he shouldn't have even been on the ballot. Best all-time pf is duncan, no doubt, polished and talented, with malone a close second. After that I think some thought was lacking in the way the list came out.




My bad. Misunderstanding on my part.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Shawn Kemp should have been in the top 10. This poll shows just how stupid ESPN analysts are. Nowitzki in the top 10? Kemp and Rodman not in the top 10? I still cannot believe Shawn Kemp only garnered two votes. Before his weight/alcohol problems, he was the premier power player in the game. He was the 90's version of Amare with better defense and definitley a top 10 PF.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> My bad. Misunderstanding on my part.


No problem, I should have been clearer.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

I think Stoudemire finishing 11th is even more ridiculous than Nowitzki making the top ten. Is the NBA PF position history so thin that a third year player with averages of 20/9 and totals of one all-star appearence and one all-NBA selection is already about to crack into the top ten of all time? Also, is that really Horace Grant brining in two and a half times more votes than Shawn Kemp?

I love Tim Duncan and would personally put him atop my list if I were picking out all-time PFs. However, being named at this list's top pick just isn't all that meaningful.


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

TheRoc5 said:


> im glad duncan is finaly getting some respect, now on the dirk thing.... hes good but he hasnt even started an allstar gm has he? and this is his first yr on all nbateam. mybe


Such lists arent that important, but how come starting on allstar team means something? If you're allstar starter that means you are the most popular not exactly the best. And overall allstar teams are made subjectively, so determ how good player is depending on that isnt the most accurate thing. Well, if theres at all accuracy in such rankings...


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

Zalgirinis said:


> Such lists arent that important, but how come starting on allstar team means something? If you're allstar starter that means you are the most popular not exactly the best. And overall allstar teams are made subjectively, so determ how good player is depending on that isnt the most accurate thing. Well, if theres at all accuracy in such rankings...


this is true, but irrelevant. Dirk has not yet been an all-nba caliber player, whatever that means. He can dominate a gam eoffensively most nights, but other than being a great shooter, he is not a great powerforward. He rebounds only adequately for a 7 footer, and looks lost on defense.


----------



## UD40 (May 12, 2005)

Basically after the first 4, it kind of goes down hill. And Ben Wallace only 3 votes behind Dennis!?! Come on, get Dirk out, and Dennis in


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

I'm still baffled Shawn Kemp isn't in the top 10. He is no HOFer because of the end of his career(last 3 years in POR and ORL), but his 7 prime seasons in Seattle are some of the best I've ever seen from a PF. He was one of the most athletically gifted players ever to grace this position and was a stud on offense and defense. If he hadn't of had weight/alcoholism issues, I am convinced he would have gone down as one of the top 4 or 5 PF's in the history of the game.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

I'm still thinking about whether Timmy is really better than Karl.

Any spurs fans want to help me out?


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

hirschmanz said:


> I'm still thinking about whether Timmy is really better than Karl.
> 
> Any spurs fans want to help me out?


nope. duncan has a possibilty to win 3 rings, malone had none even with the lakers couldnt finish it. Duncan brings more to the defensive floor and is less selfish in my opinion


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

hirschmanz said:


> I'm still thinking about whether Timmy is really better than Karl.
> 
> Any spurs fans want to help me out?


IMO, its actually still debatable. Malone was one of the best low-post scorer's ever to grace the game plus he had a deadly 15 foot jumper. He was truly one of the greatest scorers of all-time. TD is a great scorer but not quite as good as Malone. Duncan is a better rebounder, both on the offensive and defensive glass, plus he dominates on the defensive end like Malone couldn't. Malone was a strong defensive player(especially man to man), but TD's presence on defense is just overwhelming. He is a great man to man defender and a great helpside defender. Also the intimidation factor comes in. Many players don't drive the lane vs the Spurs b/c they don't want to confront/get blocked by Duncan. So, basically, Malone is the better offensive player whereas TD is a better defensive player. I think Duncan has more of an impact on his teammates play and has 2 rings to Karl's 0. I say Duncan is the best(slightly) but anyone can make a very compelling argument for Karl.

That being said, by the end of TD's career, I think he'll be the undisputed best PF of all time. He has 5 or 6 prime years left in him and will be able to continue his great play b/c his game doesn't rely on athleticism. I wouldn't be suprised to see him putting up 20/10(an All-NBA) until he is 38 and continue his defensive dominance. Plus add in the additional championships he is bound to win and that puts him over the top. I say he ends up with 5 rings for his career.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

TheRoc5 said:


> nope. duncan has a possibilty to win 3 rings, malone had none even with the lakers couldnt finish it. Duncan brings more to the defensive floor and is less selfish in my opinion



The defensive argument is valid, but how many rings would duncan have had if he had played in the jordan era? Also, Malone was injured for last years finals. Malone is still IMO the best scoring PF of all time, while Timmy is the most complete. Each brings something different to the table, and I'm not sure which I would want on my team in their primes.


----------



## clien (Jun 2, 2005)

I think espn screwed up that whole article


----------



## Darth Bryant (Feb 1, 2005)

Go DJ! said:


> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2074360
> 
> 
> I find it interesting that Dirk made #10 and Amare missed the top 10(all time) by two votes. Much love for Amare, but him being consider one of the top 10 4 men ever THIS early...come on.



Interesting.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

You just have to look at some of the guys who voted in this thing. Greg Anthony alone makes the whole damn thing worthless.


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> You just have to look at some of the guys who voted in this thing. Greg Anthony alone makes the whole damn thing worthless.


hahah :biggrin:


----------



## white360 (Apr 24, 2004)

There are some i don't agree with.
Karl Malone should be 1st and not TD, just because Malone is a better scorer, and he played in the days of MJ and Hakeem.
Garnett and Nowitzki shouldn't be in the top 10 yet, theay haven't done anything.
Elvoin hayes should be 3rd because of his dominance and productivity.
Mchale should be ahead of Barkley, Kevin got the rings.
I thing Buck Williams should be a couple of places up and Bob Mcadoo should have got more recognition, he won rings and averaged over 30 pts for 4 consecutive seasons.


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

white360 said:


> There are some i don't agree with.
> Karl Malone should be 1st and not TD, just because Malone is a better scorer, and he played in the days of MJ and Hakeem.
> Garnett and Nowitzki shouldn't be in the top 10 yet, theay haven't done anything.
> Elvoin hayes should be 3rd because of his dominance and productivity.
> ...


Barkley was the dominating player on his team. McHale, buck, bob were not.


----------



## white360 (Apr 24, 2004)

Bob McAdoo wasn't his team dominating player?
He played for Buffalo Braves from 72-77 right.
73-74 season he averaged 30.6 pts and 15.1 reb, next on his team was Jim Mcmillan with an 18.6 pt average.
74-75 season he averaged 34.5 pts a game and 14.1 reb. Next on that team was Randy Smith with an 17.8 average.
75-76 season he averaged 31.1 pts a game and 12.4 reb. Next on team was Randy Smith with 21.8 reb.
Was 74-75 Season MVP. In that season he had most rebounds in the league, IN those 3 yars he led the league in scoring.










I call that dominating


----------

