Beat this starting five.

[Chin Diesel]

Shaq and Artis Gilmore are equally good players. Lolz

Nah, but 1970's Artis Gilmore would be fun to match up against Shaq. Them quadriceps indicate he wouldn't get backed down easily.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Shaq and Artis Gilmore are equally good players. Lolz

Artis was quite a bit better than you realize.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Artis was quite a bit better than you realize.

Artis was an easy choice to he an HoF. A notch below Shaq, but somewhere towards the back end of Top 10 centers and definitely a top-15.

Shaq is in the group after Wilt, Jabbar, Russell and Olajuwon. He's closer to top-5 all-time centers than #10.

 

[Huskyforlife]

As opposed to the modern methodology that placed Duncan at the four in the post that we were challenged to beat.

Wow, just wow.

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

 

[Lafayette]

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

Duncan was...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Duncan is 50x the offensive player that Russell was.

I don't believe that is true. Putting aside that Russell was an immensely superior defensive player than Duncan, if the need was for Russell to score (that did happen on rare occasions), he could score (scored 25 points in game seven against the Lakers in 1966; averaged~23pts per game for the entire playoffs in either 62 or 63).

Can I take it that you're withdrawing your insult on my placing Russell to face off with Duncan on my hypothetical team?

 

[superjohn]

I don't believe that is true. Putting aside that Russell was an immensely superior defensive player than Duncan, if the need was for Russell to score (that did happen on rare occasions), he could score (scored 25 points in game seven against the Lakers in 1966; averaged~23pts per game for the entire playoffs in either 62 or 63).

Can I take it that you're withdrawing your insult on my placing Russell to face off with Duncan on my hypothetical team?

Russell could score, every player in the NBA can score he just wasn't very good at it and was way worse than Duncan at it. He didn't just choose to average 12.8 ppg per 36 minutes on 44% fg and 56% ft's for the hell of it.

 

[borninansonia]

Russell could score, every player in the NBA can score he just wasn't very good at it and was way worse than Duncan at it. He didn't just choose to average 12.8 ppg per 36 minutes on 44% fg and 56% ft's for the hell of it.

Russell chose to win, not score. He won 11 championships! He is the greatest winner in NBA history

 

[Deepster]

Russell chose to win, not score. He won 11 championships! He is the greatest winner in NBA history

Ehhhhh, he also had no range and limited post moves on offense. More than made up for it with defense and rebounding but it’s not like he chose to not score.

 

[superjohn]

Russell chose to win, not score. He won 11 championships! He is the greatest winner in NBA history

Yes, who always played with a starting 5 of Hall of Famers and 11 Hall of Famers.

None of this or his defense and leadership has to do with his scoring which was mediocre and inefficient.

 

[Huskyforlife]

I don't believe that is true. Putting aside that Russell was an immensely superior defensive player than Duncan, if the need was for Russell to score (that did happen on rare occasions), he could score (scored 25 points in game seven against the Lakers in 1966; averaged~23pts per game for the entire playoffs in either 62 or 63).

Can I take it that you're withdrawing your insult on my placing Russell to face off with Duncan on my hypothetical team?

Duncan was one of the greatest defensive players of all time, and he played real competition.

 

[Hoops91]

If I had to win a game I want dogs

Iverson
Jordan
Rodman
Garnett
Shaq

 

[CardiacAndre7]

If I had to win a game I want dogs

Iverson
Jordan
Rodman
Garnett
Shaq

No shooting or spacing.

 

[Hoops91]

No shooting or spacing.

You don’t think those guys can score? I’m thinking defense too. If you’re trying to win a game you need both sides.

 

[CardiacAndre7]

You don’t think those guys can score? I’m thinking defense too. If you’re trying to win a game you need both sides.

I know they can score obviously. There is more nuance to the game. Spacing/shooting are two of the most important aspects of modern basketball. Two guys who can’t extend past 5 feet doesn’t bode well in a hypothetical game.

 

[Dove]

Saw a reel where they asked Shaq to assemble his unbeatable five.

PG Curry
SG Kobe
SF Jordan
PF Duncan
C Shaq

Beat that five in a one game playoff.

PG Bruce Lee
SG Chuck Norris
SF Rambo
PF Arnold!!
C Kane

 

[Lafayette]

PG Bruce Lee
SG Chuck Norris
SF Rambo
PF Arnold!!
C Kane

Tough when normally you fear the backcourt can guard you well, but that backcourt can kill you!

Reminds me of a quote from Reggie Jackson on Nolan Ryan: "Ryan is the only guy who puts fear in me. Not because he can get you out but because he can kill you"

 

[Deepster]

PG Bruce Lee
SG Chuck Norris
SF Rambo
PF Arnold!!
C Kane

Bruce Lee is 5'8", 141
Chuck Norris is 5'10", 154
Stallone is 5'8", 150
Arnold is 5'11", 210
Kane is 7'0", 323

None of them have any basketball experience.
Any type of hand to hand combat would be a foul.
Soft estimate, not knowing the bench players, this team would lose 450-12.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Russell could score, every player in the NBA can score he just wasn't very good at it and was way worse than Duncan at it. He didn't just choose to average 12.8 ppg per 36 minutes on 44% fg and 56% ft's for the hell of it.

Duncan wasn't 50 times the offensive player that Russell was. That may be the most ridiculous take on this thread.

Why is it so difficult for some to admit that matching up Russell against Duncan is not an unreasonable idea?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Duncan was one of the greatest defensive players of all time, and he played real competition.

I stand corrected.

I now have seen the most ridiculous post in the history of the Boneyard.

 

[Lafayette]

Bruce Lee is 5'8", 141
Chuck Norris is 5'10", 154
Stallone is 5'8", 150
Arnold is 5'11", 210
Kane is 7'0", 323

None of them have any basketball experience.
Any type of hand to hand combat would be a foul.
Soft estimate, not knowing the bench players, this team would lose 450-12.

But the fight after the game would be popcorn worthy!

 

[Lafayette]

I stand corrected.

I now have seen the most ridiculous post in the history of the Boneyard.

But... "and being named to the All-Defensive Team 15 times" takes a bit of ridiculousness off the table.

 

[CardiacAndre7]

I stand corrected.

I now have seen the most ridiculous post in the history of the Boneyard.

Duncan is one of the best defenders of all time. That’s just a known thing.

 

[Huskyforlife]

I stand corrected.

I now have seen the most ridiculous post in the history of the Boneyard.

Really telling on yourself with this one.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Really telling on yourself with this one.

As are you.

Believe it or not there was basketball played before 1985.

 

[superjohn]

Duncan wasn't 50 times the offensive player that Russell was. That may be the most ridiculous take on this thread.

Why is it so difficult for some to admit that matching up Russell against Duncan is not an unreasonable idea?

I didn't say he was. I gave Russell's scoring numbers and said Duncan was a lot better at scoring the basketball than Russell was.

 

[Deepster]

As are you.

Believe it or not there was basketball played before 1985.

So, if someone disagrees with you, the standard is they just never watched basketball before 1985?

 

[Lafayette]

Well Russell had a pretty good Celtics squad to help; Duncan a good one. Can we bury this discussion of Russell vs Duncan and say 25 years or so apart they are pretty equal?