I'm sorry, I'm trying to put this nicely.
But Skip Bayless putting that Teacher's Pet Tim Duncan above Wilt Chamberlain on his basketball top 10 list- and above Oscar Robertson, who isn't even on the list- is an outrage.
I'm sorry to Spurs fans, he's a fine player, and I don't want to hate on anyone, God knows that's what they did to me and it hurt, so don't take this as hate but only comparison, but compared to the other great Hall of Famers, what did Tim Duncan do other than be favored by the media, the officials, and the leadership of the NBA? There are probably at least 3 or 4 other stars from his era that put up his numbers, and he only earned two of those vaunted championships.
The 03 Mavericks were playing hurt when he beat them, the Spurs did not have to play D-Wade and the Heat in 05 because Wade was hurt, after 99 before 2014 they only won the championship when the best team was taken out by injuries, or in 2007's case, the officials, and every game they played the officials favored them.
The 03 Mavericks beat my Kings when my 03 Kings were hurt, before they got hurt themselves against Tim Duncan. He didn't have to face a healthy Kings either in 03.
He didn't cause any drama because he had life set for him, with everyone favoring him. You don't cause drama when you don't face adversity and pain.
His numbers are no better than 4 or 5 other guys from his era, probably.
Wilt Chamberlain? He scored 100 points in a game. 100 points.
He averaged 50 points a game for an entire year. He averaged more than 40 points a game for a fair number of straight seasons.
His rebounds statistics are as astonishing as his scoring stats, only ever approached, as far as I know, by Kareem's rebounding stats early in his career.
He spent most of his peak years in a team that did not have one other good player, that would have been a losing team without him, and one year he took them to the NBA Finals.
Tim Duncan had two other Hall of Fame level players on those 03-07 teams, and he still needed the help of injuries to opponents to win those championships.
What could Wilt Chamberlain have done with two other Hall of Famers on his team? Check out the absolutely rediculous success of the 65-66 to 67-68 Philadelphia 76ers, the team that ended the greatest run of success in basketball history and beat the greatest team, along with his own and the Warriors, that has ever lost a NBA Finals in their multi-year championship run while their core was intact, the only thing that stopped him from winning the championship every year- the greatest basketball team of all time, the Bill Russell Celtics. Argue for someone else, they are certainly both in the top 4 or 5 teams of all time.
In three years Wilt's 76ers won 204 games and lost 72, including the playoffs; in two years they won 148 games and lost 43; and five of those 43 (and 9 of those 72) losses were to the greatest basketball team of all time, in the Playoffs where they were at their best. In two consecutive regular seasons they won 130 games and lost 33. In three consecutive they won 185 games and lost 48. That's averaging a 62-16 record over a three year period. That's just absolutely insane. In the weakest of the three regular seasons in that stretch they were 55-25. The only team that beat them in a playoff series in that stretch was the Bill Russell Celtics, probably the greatest team of all time, and this was the team that ended the Celtics championship streak- by beating them head to head in the playoffs, five games to one.
And Oscar Robertson? He played his entire career for a team that had no other top players, just like Wilt before the 76ers. He Averaged a Triple-double for an entire year while averaging over 30 points a game.
Basically, he was LeBron James while also being Jason Kidd, and then some, because even Jason Kidd never averaged a triple-double for an entire season.
He came close to repeating that feat for every season of the peak of his career.
He never got a chance to play for a championship, because like Wilt before the 76ers, he never played with another all-star-candidate player his entire career. At least not while he was anywhere close to his prime. His teams would have been losing teams without him.
Well, I guess, according to Skip Bayless, the legendary pitcher Walter Johnson was just a loser, for he too spent most of his career on a bad team, he both won and lost more 1-0 games than any pitcher in all history.
Every great athlete who ever spent their entire career on bad teams is a loser to Skip Bayless.
Including, I would assume, Nolan Ryan.
Every bold lone warrior, who, shunned by society, placed in the sere surroundings of a losing team, soldiers on, carrying the team in valient effort, shunned in favor of the Teacher's Pet favored by the sneering haters of the early-2000s NBA, innocent and a fine player, but just a very good Hall of Famer and no bold champion who put up 50 points per game for an entire season, while whole teams barely made it above a hundred. But so much for lone warriors, your worth is determined by whether you are shunned by the almighty Establishment or are the Establishment's favored son.
But I will continue writing anyway, a lone warrior myself, who has deliberately set myself as a corrective to the almighty Establishment.
I'm sorry for the rant. God I hated hearing over and over again that Tim Duncan and his precious Spurs were better people than me, just because they could play basketball well without starting a riot, while being the Teacher's pets of the NBA
I was a worthless loser from Sacramento, the city that according to Tim Duncan's NBA and Big Media patrons (and the almighty Lakers) did not deserve to have the favored glory of having a basketball team, in a world where having a basketball team was everything.
I don't think that I am a loser, and I am so very sorry for the rant. Being a Kings fan in the early 2000s hurt. Really bad.
Not winning the championships was a minor hurt. It was the taunting by the media and those precious Lakers fans that hurt. At least the Spurs fans did not taunt- except for the ones in the media, and that was the one that hurt most of all.
Yeah, the early 2000s hurt as a sports fan. I was a 49er fan too, so I felt Bill Belichick's wrath. He hated all of us who didn't root for the Patriots! Even though my 49ers were nowhere close to being traditional rivals of the Patriots.
God, it hurt. You know now why I am not a big sports watcher anymore, even though I adore Simone Biles, and would have loved to see her perform! But the hate was just not worth it anymore, I have not watched sports since LeBron was college-age. I follow it on Wikipedia instead. That way, no taunting media hating on me.
I'm sorry for the rant. But Teacher's Pet is not better than Wilt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson, and yes, Tim Duncan's Spurs were not better people than me and Mister Rogers and John Lennon and everybody.
God loves you! I'm so sorry for the rant! I forgive you, Skip Bayless!
Sincerely,
David S. Annderson
P.S. Yes, I do consider Tim Duncan one of the all-time greats. I would not argue against a place on the top 10 list, though I am not sure I would place him there, there are an awful lot of overlooked legends in the 60s and 70s in the NBA and the ABA. There are an awful lot of legendary players who would not be in the top 10, basketball has had more talent than we think. I damn sure would not place only two players from before Magic and Bird's era. There are two Lakers from the 60s, for one, that would be in consideration, one of them challenging Michael's place in the list, and a Laker from Minnesota that would be in consideration as well. To mention just one franchise. Not to mention Julius Irving, who didn't get as much big-media glory in the Magic-Bird years as Kareem did. Bill Russell managed to make even Skip Bayless's list, he certainly would be assured of a place on mine.
I'm not sure if LeBron would be in my All-time Top 10, as I said, there is far more talent in basketball history than we think. He certainly is among the legends. But he definitely is the greatest ever after the age of 35. This is absolutely no contest. Yes, even above Kareem, and Kareem was incredible in his later years. Kareem past the age of 35 was still in the top 5 or 6 players of a legendary all-time great era, in among the 27-year-olds. But LeBron was (or should I say, is) playing in almost a Michael Jordan level, almost as good as any player since Kareem's younger years ever has, at any age. Incredible!