Leaguewide, what is the deepest position in the NBA?

[Lex L.]

True, but if I were forced to label either Gasol or Duncan as a C in an offense (assuming they were on the court at the same time), I would refer to Duncan as the C because I believe that Duncan would typically play lower in the post and would more often look to be the guy battling for position to get offensive rebounds.

The same holds true defensively because I feel as though a smart coach would have Duncan under the rim at just about all times because he has better rebounding and shot-blocking ability than Pau to anchor a defense.

Here's the thing about this. If the Spurs have the following:

PG-
W-
W-
C- Tim Duncan
C-

and the other team runs a

1-
2-
3-
4-
5-

...Duncan or Gasol guarding a 4 doesnt make them a 4.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

I don't think Duncan can play both. I think when Duncan plays offense, he's closer to the basket. And so he's a tough guard for the other team's PF and C. He's better than both of them around the basket. Playing around the basket is higher percentage. It also draws more fouls. For this reason, his value stems from being a matchup problem. His ability around the basket outweighs his inability to play defense away from the basket. The Spurs have also relied on strong team defense, which allows some shortcomings to be hidden.

Duncan is a center. Nothing about his game has been PF.

i think he's more of an old school PF...he isnt a sufficient defender away the basket atleast anymore because of his age among other things

but he definitely has a face up game..duncan is one of the few guy who really utilizes the glass in the NBA(especially from long range..he doesnt shoot 3s but he isnt tied to the paint necessarily either)

for alot of his career he played PF with crappy centers like oberto and nesterovic...you would have to think that if he was better suited at center(during his prime)then they would have put him there back then

of course since the original argument concerns the present time, i think its justified to put duncan at center...i think now he's more of a center/forward...i think considering for such a long time he was adept at power forward..i think its justified to put duncan at power forward

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

I think part of the problem is that people are hardwired into thinking that an offense consists of a 1-5. It's not necessarily that way. It's possible to have a PG, two wings, and two posts.

this more hurts your duncan argument than helps it

thats partly why i think SOME guys like gasol and duncan are interchangable at center and pf....

 

[Lex L.]

i think he's more of an old school PF...he isnt a sufficient defender away the basket atleast anymore because of his age among other things

but he definitely has a face up game..duncan is one of the few guy who really utilizes the glass in the NBA(especially from long range..he doesnt shoot 3s but he isnt tied to the paint necessarily either)
for alot of his career he played PF with crappy centers like oberto and nesterovic...you would have to think that if he was better suited at center(during his prime)then they would have put him there back then

of course since the original argument concerns the present time, i think its justified to put duncan at center...i think now he's more of a center/forward...i think considering for such a long time he was adept at power forward..i think its justified to put duncan at power forward

Kareem had that. Kareem would hit shots around 10 feet from the basket too. This doesnt mean anything. Just because Duncan didn't play like Shaq, that doesnt mean he was/is a PF. Duncan never was a PF. He's been a post player his whole time.

Malone was a PF, Duncan was not.

 

[Lex L.]

this more hurts your duncan argument than helps it

thats partly why i think SOME guys like gasol and duncan are interchangable at center and pf....

No, it hurts your argument...in fact, it describes you.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Kareem had that. Kareem would hit shots around 10 feet from the basket too. This doesnt mean anything. Just because Duncan didn't play like Shaq, that doesnt mean he was/is a PF. Duncan never was a PF. He's been a post player his whole time.

Malone was a PF, Duncan was not.

you're changing the argument now....of course duncan is a post player but you're definition of a power forward seems to be different than mine

i think you're classifying power forwards by how the position has evolved...guys who have great mobility and ball control to get to the basket and have a shot...like amare and griffin

a power forward,imo, is a post player who is usually not as big and chained to the post as a center, and can stretch the defense...or the 4...

so basically you're saying duncan isnt a power forward because he's a post player...

just because the position has evolved doesnt mean there arent guys like duncan who play post and still are PFs...especially when PFs(or the 4) were originally meant to be in the post

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

No, it hurts your argument...in fact, it describes you.

i see what you're saying atleast..you're centering your argument around differentiating between a post player and a power forward...but there wasnt a differentiation until the position started to evolve(pointing to amare and griffin)

 

[Lex L.]

you're changing the argument now....of course duncan is a post player but you're definition of a power forward seems to be different than mine

i think you're classifying power forwards by how the position has evolved...guys who have great mobility and ball control to get to the basket and have a shot...like amare and griffin
a power forward,imo, is a post player who is usually not as big and chained to the post as a center, and can stretch the defense...or the 4...

so basically you're saying duncan isnt a power forward because he's a post player...
just because the position has evolved doesnt mean there arent guys like duncan who play post and still are PFs...especially when PFs(or the 4) were originally meant to be in the post

Karl Malone pre-dates Duncan and he was more mobile than Duncan. I'm not sure where you're coming up with this evolution noise. It's always been that way. Duncan was never a PF. The fact that people were erroneously classifying him as a PF, doesn't mean that there was an evolution when Amare came later. He was too plodding to be a PF and guard guys man to man away from the basket. This was hidden because the Spurs played good team defense and Duncan knew where his help was. It's not like he was on an island typically.

Larry Nance, Karl Malone, Horace Grant, etc... were all examples of PFs. These guys had more mobility and could play defense on an island further away from the basket.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

Karl Malone pre-dates Duncan and he was more mobile than Duncan. I'm not sure where you're coming up with this evolution noise. It's always been that way. Duncan was never a PF. The fact that people were erroneously classifying him as a PF, doesn't mean that there was an evolution when Amare came later. He was too plodding to be a PF and guard guys man to man away from the basket. This was hidden because the Spurs played good team defense and Duncan knew where his help was. It's not like he was on an island typically.

Larry Nance, Karl Malone, Horace Grant, etc... were all examples of PFs. These guys had more mobility and could play defense on an island further away from the basket.

duncan wasnt on an island but that doesnt mean he didnt defend outside of the paint...the face up game is important whether you admit it or not..there's a difference between having a 10 foot and having a face up game

a power forward doesnt have to be extremely mobile...couple that come to mind are mchale, paul millsap,jermaine o neal,etc.

what i mean by evolution is there alot more big men that can take you off the dribble..they have the ability to play perimeter on offense..you didnt see that much of that in the past

lamar odom is one example

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Duncan, in his prime, could do basically anything a C or PF could do in terms of offense, defense, and rebounding.

There is no question that he used to be able to play PF as well as anybody in the NBA.

 

[BNB]

yeah, Duncan is known by most as the greatest or one of the greatest PF's of all time. Because that's what he was in the prime of his career.

over the last few seasons, he's been forced to play C because the Spurs have really had no one else who could.

 

[Lex L.]

Duncan, in his prime, could do basically anything a C or PF could do in terms of offense, defense, and rebounding.

There is no question that he used to be able to play PF as well as anybody in the NBA.

Not really. He didnt have the mobility. He was never a 4. He may have guarded 4s but they also had to guard him near the basket. So he was at a greater advantage.

 

[Lex L.]

yeah, Duncan is known by most as the greatest or one of the greatest PF's of all time. Because that's what he was in the prime of his career.

over the last few seasons, he's been forced to play C because the Spurs have really had no one else who could.

He was a C.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

i'm not going to argue that duncan isnt a center....i'm arguing that he also is a power forward

he's a forward-center like gasol..which basically means a more post oriented power forward

al jefferson would also fit in this category

you talk about how lineups are not simply PG,SG,SF,PF, and C

which i think is true....

you can have a lineup with two post guys..basically the 4 and 5 are at each side end of the paint...in that case the center and power forward positions are relatively interchangable(usually the taller more back to the basket guy plays the 5)...

hence why a guy like duncan can do both

duncan hasnt been playing out of position his whole career...that doesnt make any sense...why wouldnt he just play center then(this is after robinson retired when i mentioned san antonio had crappy centers)

duncan plays more center now because of blair and plus he has slowed down and NOW cant defend outside the paint

 

[Lex L.]

i'm not going to argue that duncan isnt a center....i'm arguing that he also is a power forward
he's a forward-center like gasol..which basically means a more post oriented power forward

al jefferson would also fit in this category

you talk about how lineups are not simply PG,SG,SF,PF, and C

which i think is true....

you can have a lineup with two post guys..basically the 4 and 5 are at each side end of the paint...in that case the center and power forward positions are relatively interchangable(usually the taller more back to the basket guy plays the 5)...

hence why a guy like duncan can do both

duncan hasnt been playing out of position his whole career...that doesnt make any sense...why wouldnt he just play center then(this is after robinson retired when i mentioned san antonio had crappy centers)

duncan plays more center now because of blair and plus he has slowed down and NOW cant defend outside the paint

I've stopped caring. You're clearly a Spurs fan that's representing so he can go around saying "Duncan is the best PF ever". He's not even a PF...which is to say, he's not a 4. He never was. He moves and plays like a C. He never had the mobility to guard 4s like Malone and so on.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

I've stopped caring. You're clearly a Spurs fan that's representing so he can go around saying "Duncan is the best PF ever". He's not even a PF...which is to say, he's not a 4. He never was. He moves and plays like a C. He never had the mobility to guard 4s like Malone and so on.

then why did duncan play PF when they had nesterovic and oberto at center?

again...he plays more like a center than most forwards...but that doesnt mean he isnt a forward

he's a forward-center...a slightly less mobile,more post oriented power forward

he has a face up game and was mobile enough to step out and defend 4s and also play help....

this really has nothing to do with me being a fan of the spurs...i just disagree with the assessment...i would say the same thing if you were talking about gasol..and i hate the lakers and i hate gasol

 

[BNB]

 

[Lex L.]

then why did duncan play PF when they had nesterovic and oberto at center?

I've already addressed this.

again...he plays more like a center than most forwards...but that doesnt mean he isnt a forward


he's a forward-center...a slightly less mobile,more post oriented power forward

he has a face up game and was mobile enough to step out and defend 4s and also play help....
this really has nothing to do with me being a fan of the spurs...i just disagree with the assessment...i would say the same thing if you were talking about gasol..and i hate the lakers and i hate gasol

Not really. The Spurs compensated with team defense and, to Duncan's credit, he funneled his mark to where he would get help.

In red

 

[clonetrooper264]

This argument is getting ridiculous. Is Duncan a PF or a C? The answer is yes. Same with Gasol, same with Jefferson, and several other players as well. Heck, even Noah could be a PF (albeit one with no outside game to speak of) technically. These days the line between PF and C is getting thinner and thinner. You don't have the dominant centers like Ewing, Shaq, Olajuwon, and Robinson anymore. All we really have is Howard. Thus a lot of guys who really would be 4s have to play the 5 and as such the definition of a center has changed a bit.

Even wikipedia has changed it's definition of a center to reflect this.

There has been occasional controversy over what constitutes a "true center". For example, some would say that Tim Duncan, although listed throughout his career as a power forward, is actually a center, because of his size and style of play. Nonetheless, the judgement of whether a given player is a center or power forward is often highly subjective. Because there are currently so few people who meet the ideal size requirements of an NBA center, teams will sometimes find it necessary to play an individual at that position who would be more effective as a power forward.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

In red

because he was a matchup problem?(am i reading this right) he was a matchup problem regardless if he was at the 4 or 5

i think a key thing we're missing here is that tim duncan isnt/wasnt the most mobile big but he was great maneveuring with the ball and passing

and you still are severely underrating tim duncan's midrange game

the thing about tim was that he basically dared power forwards to create from the perimeter..he shut down the post area and you're right in some regard the team D compensated but he was mobile enough to stop a power forward from driving or making any move inside..he also compensated for his shorthand in mobility with his length

also tim duncan didnt always defend 4s...much like you said that people shouldnt be hardwired to think of a lineup by 1-5, we shouldnt think of players always matching up with their counterpart position ....duncan at times matched up defensively with the best post player(whether it be the 4 or 5..this was less true during the robinson days)

i'm not arguing that duncan isnt a center or doesnt have center qualities...i'm arguing against the idea that tim duncan has never been a power forward when that has been his essential position until the last couple of years

tim duncan was originally a PF because they had robinson at center...he stayed at PF partly because he had become adept to the position

you could make the argument that duncan may have originally been a center but adapted his game accordingly..by the time robinson had left he wasnt playing out of position

clone said it well....there's a certain line of opinion and subjectivity when it comes to this..and there's a certain interchangability with the 4 and 5 in some aspects....especially today

so is duncan a center? or is he a forward?

neither...he's both