Lopez Wants ROY, But Thinks Rose Deserves It

Point guards, and guards in general, seem to get more respect in the league these days. But those of us who have watched the game for more than a few years, know that Tim Duncan is the best player around, despite the fact that Lebron, DWade and Kobe get all the ink and the video highlights on ESPN. AND if JKidd was still our point guard, we wouldn’t have won any more games, probably a few less, but Lopez would have averaged 3-5 more points a game and VC would have been an ALL STAR. AND Brook would be leading Rose for ROY, instead of trailing him by 20%. But JKidd is going to be long gone, while Devin is playing in the All Star game, so I am still happy with the trade. Next year, LFrank, or whoever the coach is, has got to run more plays for Brook. He is a 20-10 talent, right now, in the right offensive scheme. GO BROOK! GO NETS!

Point guards deserve the respect because they are the floor generals plain and simple. So you say you would rather have Tim Duncan over Lebron? I think that’s crazy, Lebron is one of the most dominating players in the league, he has speed, strength, can shoot from anywhere, and is and has been a student of the game since he’s been in the league. If we had JKidd we would have won more games imo, Devin only got the allstar choice bc he was lighting up other point guards all over the league with his scoring, and we’ve seen that the Nets are playing better with passing and ball movement. I agree that we have underutilized Brook’s presence in the paint, and I believe with more fine tuning on his post game, and a mean streak he can be better than Duncan.

Better than Duncan? HILARIOUS. Tim Duncan is one of the greatest players in NBA history. The guy has multiple championship rings. Geez.

NATEDD: I CAN certainly see that your arguments have much merit. At least we agree on Brook being a wonderful young player!

Tim Duncan has four championship rings.

How many other active NBA players have four rings? One. Shaquille O’Neal.

Derrick Rose is also unlikely to win anything in Chicago without a dominant big man.

Plain and simple, dominant big men win championships.

I don’t equate having more championships as being the better player. My argument is that Lebron is the better player in terms of skill and everything he brings to the game. And please, neither Duncan or Shaq won those championships by themselves; Duncan has always had a great supporting cast and great coach, Shaq has always had great coaches and has had a superstar sidekick AND good supporting cast, so how do you all back up stating that Duncan brings more than Lebron? Is that you criteria of the best player, in how many championships they bring? Look at Stockton, Malone, Nique, Nash, Ewing, Barkley, Kidd etc etc, all examples of players that in some point of their career were said to be the best at their positions and bring a lot to the game but never won championships. Does Robert Horry’s 7 NBA championships automatically make him the better player than everyone you’ve all listed? I believe the championship is the epitome of one’s career and efforts, unfortunately they don’t always go to deserving players, and the deserving players will sometimes never be rewarded, but that doesn’t detract from their worth.

Nate, I don’t think Net Income is arguing that any dominant big man is automatically better than any guard/wing, but the common theme of any non-Jordan championship has been a dominant big man. Now, clearly each of these teams has had a decent supporting backcourt, but it is dominant big men who bring home championships.

Duncan ate the Nets alive back when Ginobili and Parker weren’t what they are today, Olajuwon didn’t have any dominant guards to help him when the Rockets won two titles. This isn’t to say that these guys are automatically better than LeBron, but it is easier for a dominant big man to affect the game more than a point guard or wing. I put LeBron right in that Michael Jordan class of player who can overcome not having a dominant big man (though Z, Wallace, and Varejao aren’t exactly chumps) but he’s most definitely the exception rather than the rule.

^ I’ve watched enough basketball to know that great big men are the backbone of most championship teams. That being said, my argument as directed towards the misconception that players with championships equal the better player as some people believe. I was not arguing the requirements and trend of championship teams, but that players like Lebron and others that I’ve mentioned should be considered as the best players for what they bring to the game regardless of championships. Kidd was the best player on this team in his better years, and though he didn’t get a championship, I will never forget his triple doubles and dominance and wizardry of the game.

In that respect, we definitely agree Nate. I don’t believe any player should be discounted for not having won a championship either.

@anthony

In the second houston championship Olajuwon did had the great clyde Drextler. Probably wouldn’t had won without him.

The first championship he did had the backcourt of Sam casell and vernon maxwell.

That is not a bad backcourt.

I don’t think anyone can argue that Tim Duncan isn’t one of the best ever.

This is a guy who put up 21.1 pts 11.9 rebs 2.7 ast 2.5 blocks in his rookie year. He was rookie of the month every single month of his rookie year. He was rookie of the year and all defensive 2nd team and led the NBA in double doubles. He was third in MVP voting, 1st team all-nba and 1st team all-defensive in his second year in the league and again led the league in double doubles.

Even LeBron wasn’t as good and as developed as Duncan was when Duncan first came into the L.

But at the end of the day, we’re looking at two different players with to different positions and skill sets so any argument is moot. SF to SF or PF to PF comparisons are valid, but cross them aaaand it becomes subjective