Results 31 to 40 of 42
-
06-25-2010, 08:37 AM #31
Look the bottom line is that most rookie cards from back in the day are not worth much anymore. It comes down to production. Then it comes down to popularity. You have to remember that most rookies even from the great players were mass produced and not set to a certain number like ?/35 or something like that. So there are a ton of them out there. I mean great example look at Kobe's topps chrome. Its worth 300$ or something like that and thats only because its his better rookie. But with that been said how many are on the market. This pretty much goes for all the great players from the 90's and early 2000's. Now days almost every single product out there has the rookies numbered out of something. Then you have in the fact that almost every rookie today has a few autograph cards. I dont even think Kobe had an auto in 96-97 in any of the major products. So most of the rookies even of the great players are worth a few dollars at best. Now I am not saying all of them because you do have products like EX that have some higher dollar rookies. But Like I said it comes down to one thing when trying to figure out the value and thats supply and demand. There is a TON of supply and no real demand.
-
-
06-26-2010, 03:20 AM #32
I stopped reading after "Suns Fans"
Sometimes you know when your time's going to be wasted LOL
Everyone knows RCs values are low. Grab a bunch of those chromes and get a high grade or find the refractor versions and figure out how this thing works....Last edited by cgb_orl; 06-26-2010 at 03:23 AM.
-
06-26-2010, 05:30 AM #33
Now that you mention it, a refractor is looking mighty tempting right about now
-
-
07-01-2010, 07:24 PM #34
I agree, I remember that season, the Spurs couldn't catch a break. Robinson was hurt as was Sean Elliot. Avery was the only constant starter, and I had a new found respect for him as a player, he gave it 110 percent game in and game out. To call Tim Duncan lucky is hilarious, the Spurs were lucky to get Tim. The cast of surrounding players in San Antonio has changed a lot, but the 1 constant in the winning years has been Tim Duncan.
-
07-01-2010, 08:42 PM #35
So its not lucky that the best Spurs players were injured the year before Duncan comes out, and they somehow get the 1st pick.
Thats luck.
Then the fact he gets to play with a now healthy D Robinson, Sean Elliott, Avery Johnsons etc with a HOF head coach, thats not luck???
Then the Spurs get one of the best SGs in the league, and Tony Parker both late in drafts. Lucky again.
Tim Donaghy and other small aspects make Tim Duncan lucky to be a NBA champion.
I never said he didnt have skill, just not in the Top 5 PF list in my book.
Again if Tim Duncan was drafted by the Warriors or struggling Bulls he wouldnt have been near as successful or collectible.
-
-
07-01-2010, 08:57 PM #36
Tony Parker and Ginobili were not stars when they came out. And what you are saying like other 29 teams are just not lucky to pick them, and Spurs end up with them?? This makes no sense if you keep on putting "luck" in everything. Might as well saying that you are lucky to survive up to today.
And to quote Tim Donaghy is totally pointless since he lost all of his credit of speaking the truth. He just wants to sell more books and get famous from it.
-
07-01-2010, 09:52 PM #37
Just like Jordan was all luck with his supporting cast and coach right? Any one who knows anything about basketball knows Duncan is EASILY the greatest PF in the history of the game.
-
-
07-01-2010, 10:20 PM #38
On the contrary Jordan wasnt as close to lucky as Duncan, he had to struggle for years before finally getting his ring.
EASILY the best PF - well :
Rodman won 7 consecutive rebounding titles, Bob Petit, Karl Malone, Elvin Hayes, and KG all have better career averages than Duncan.
Duncan is a horrible passer averaging 1+ assist per game less than the other PFs I listed.
Plus Duncan is a horrible free throw shooter at 68% for his career.
Again the only thing Duncan has over the other PFs is rings, thanks to where he got drafted.
I know you are a fan of the guy, but numbers dont lie
-
07-02-2010, 02:46 AM #39
You can not honestly claim that Dennis Rodman was better than Duncan.If that was the case, why didn't San Antonio win any championships with him(or at least have the privilege to lose to the Bulls in the Finals)?
Last edited by collector181; 07-02-2010 at 03:06 AM.
-
07-02-2010, 03:04 AM #40
I just threw that in there because it was a great personal accomplishment. Didnt mean to add him in the mix of guys I felt were as good as/better than Duncan.
Plus come on... its the WORM!
-
Originally Posted by BiGGs1220 
