Bill Simmons Had a Minor Meltdown Last Night on Twitter: Duncan/Bryant Related

[MaxFly]

Way to trumpet all things Kobe at Duncan's expense again. So disappointing. RT: STEIN_LINE_HQ 1 last decade retro. http://bit.ly/75BXND about 18 hours ago from web

BTW, LeBron's 25 straight vs. 2007 Pistons mattered 10X as much as Kobe's 81 vs. Eric Williams, Jalen Rose & Mo Peterson. Sorry, Steiny Mo. about 18 hours ago from web

LeBron (only 22) drops 48 (25 in a row) vs. best def. team of '00s to propel Cavs into Finals (and kills Pistons Era). That was a MOMENT. about 17 hours ago from web

David Thompson scored 53 in 1st half of a 1978 game on 20-for-22 shooting. Finished with 73. Sat most of the 4th. Kobe's 81 can suck it. about 17 hours ago from web

Hey Steiny Mo: Name me a day from 2000-08 where SA woulda traded Duncan straight up for Kobe. Good choice for "Player of Decade" though. about 17 hours ago from web

Steiny Mo's Player of the Decade almost got traded in 2007, but the other team refused to give up Luol Deng in the deal. And... checkmate. about 17 hours ago from web

Not wrong: First time, Chicago refused to include Deng. Second time, Kobe vetoed Deng being in. STEIN_LINE_HQ @sportsguy33 Wrong again. about 17 hours ago from web

Just realized I'm arguing with a guy who named Pau Gasol his First Trimester Western Conference MVP. I'm going to bed. about 17 hours ago from web


Entertaining...

[magnax1]

Thats confusing.

[crisoner]

Bill Simmons loves him some Kobe!

[1987_Lakers]

Ya, I saw that too. Simmons and Stein were going at it.

[Myth]

I can't even read that sh!t. Twitter is worthless.

[catch24]

Bills Simmons would fit right in with this board.

[mrpuente]

"Steiny Mo's Player of the Decade almost got traded in 2007, but the other team refused to give up Luol Deng in the deal. And... checkmate. about 17 hours ago from web"

:oldlol:

[Alhazred]

Simmons is starting to crack.

[Lakers13]

Kobe's buzzer beaters must be getting to Simmons

[Kevin_Garnett_5]

Just realized I'm arguing with a guy who named Pau Gasol his First Trimester Western Conference MVP. I'm going to bed.:oldlol:

[Clifton]

Steiny Mo's Player of the Decade almost got traded in 2007, but the other team refused to give up Luol Deng in the deal. And... checkmate.
:oldlol:

Simmons is the man. Even when he's wrong, which he isn't here.

[KenneBell]

Kobe's buzzer beaters must be getting to Simmons
Well he's been waiting for Kobe to fall off for the past 3 years. Not to mention that he just doesn't like the Lakers. He's been giving him too much praise lately so he just had to let it out. I bet he felt a lot better afterwards. :oldlol:

[Knuck the Ficks]

He's right though, isn't he?

Duncan IS the player of the decade. Then Shaq, then Kobe.

[Lakers13]

He's right though, isn't he?

Duncan IS the player of the decade. Then Shaq, then Kobe.


Its debatable

[JustinJDW]

He's right though, isn't he?

Duncan IS the player of the decade. Then Shaq, then Kobe.Yes, he is right. Either Shaq or Timmy is the Player of the Decade.


Its debatable:roll:


Just realized I'm arguing with a guy who named Pau Gasol his First Trimester Western Conference MVP. I'm going to bed.:roll:

[aznboy2k2]

Its debatable

Not really. Kobe has one ring as the leader of a team; while Shaq and Duncan both have four to go along with 3 NBA Finals MVP.

Pretty easy. Kobe is NOT the player of the decade.

[Lakers13]

:roll:

How is it not?

Depending on who you ask you'll be told Shaq, Timmy, or Kobe.

Dont act like Kobe isnt part of the discussion.

[aznboy2k2]

How is it not?

Depending on who you ask you'll be told Shaq, Timmy, or Kobe.

Dont act like Kobe isnt part of the discussion.

The only reason Kobe is part of the discussion is because people like Stein and most laker fans love to cuddle with Kobe's nuts. Competitions are held between Laker fans to see who can get up further in Kobe's *******.

[R.I.P.]

I can't even read that sh!t. Twitter is worthless.

Yeah it

[Lakers13]

Not really. Kobe has one ring as the leader of a team; while Shaq and Duncan both have four to go along with 3 NBA Finals MVP.

Pretty easy. Kobe is NOT the player of the decade.

Dude Im not even going to take your opinion serious, your a ****ing hater and a half


Shaq has been good for five years of this decade, dominant they may have been in. Kobe and Timmy have been stable through out this decade.

[vert48]

Simmons is as biased as they come.

[YAWN]

i remember when this guy wrote an article where he admitted kobe was the MVP, then at the end he said, okay now i need to go light myself on fire :oldlol:

[aznboy2k2]

Dude Im not even going to take your opinion serious, your a ****ing hater and a half


Shaq has been good for five years of this decade, dominant they may have been in. Kobe and Timmy have been stable through out this decade.

The fact that you are even arguing that Kobe Bryant should be in the discussion for player of the decade is ****ing ridiculous. He was the SECOND option in 3 of his 4 rings. No player should be considered player of the decade when for half the decade they weren't even the number one option on their OWN team.

****ing Laker fans. I bet you stuck 3/4 of your body in Kobe's ass, huh? Impressive.

[Allstar24]

Steiny Mo's Player of the Decade almost got traded in 2007, but the other team refused to give up Luol Deng in the deal. And... checkmate.
:oldlol: He says "checkmate" as if that's somehow going to offend Kobe. He's just mad that Stein picked Kobe's 81 point game as the best moment of the decade.

[dallaslonghorn]

Yes, he is right. Either Shaq or Timmy is the Player of the Decade.

:roll:

:roll:

:applause: I'd go with Duncan personally, but Kobe really isn't even in the discussion. Not that debatable.

Here's a debatable point: When the Lakers missed the playoffs in '05, the second best player on the Lakers (Odom) was better than anyone besides Duncan on the '03 Spurs title team (Robinson was old; Ginobili/Parker were too young; the crunch-time guards were Claxton/Stephen Jackson).

[oh the horror]

****ing Laker fans. I bet you stuck 3/4 of your body in Kobe's ass, huh? Impressive.


And if they're that far up there, then how far up Kobe's fan's asses are you?

[Lakers13]

The fact that you are even arguing that Kobe Bryant should be in the discussion for player of the decade is ****ing ridiculous. He was the SECOND option in 3 of his 4 rings. No player should be considered player of the decade when for half the decade they weren't even the number one option on their OWN team.

****ing Laker fans. I bet you stuck 3/4 of your body in Kobe's ass, huh? Impressive.

Yeah, Im the only one you ****

Grow up and quit hating so much, maybe you wont go bald as fast.

[aznboy2k2]

:applause: I'd go with Duncan personally, but Kobe really isn't even in the discussion. Not that debatable.

Here's a debatable point: When the Lakers missed the playoffs in '05, the second best player on the Lakers (Odom) was better than anyone besides Duncan on the '03 Spurs title team (Robinson was old; Ginobili/Parker were too young; the crunch-time guards were Claxton/Stephen Jackson).

+1

[oh the horror]

:oldlol: He says "checkmate" as if that's somehow going to offend Kobe. He's just mad that Stein picked Kobe's 81 point game as the best moment of the decade.



It IS the best moment of the decade. How is it even a discussion? That man is insane.

[aznboy2k2]

And if they're that far up there, then how far up Kobe's fan's asses are you?

.... uhh.

A for effort.

[aznboy2k2]

Yeah, Im the only one you ****

Grow up and quit hating so much, maybe you wont go bald as fast.

Quit eye****ing Kobe Bryant so much, maybe people won't think youre sucha ******.

[oh the horror]

:applause: I'd go with Duncan personally, but Kobe really isn't even in the discussion. Not that debatable.

Here's a debatable point: When the Lakers missed the playoffs in '05, the second best player on the Lakers (Odom) was better than anyone besides Duncan on the '03 Spurs title team (Robinson was old; Ginobili/Parker were too young; the crunch-time guards were Claxton/Stephen Jackson).



Manu and Tony were doing pretty well that season dude.

[Lakers13]

Quit eye****ing Kobe Bryant so much, maybe people won't think youre sucha ******.

Yes, because I love Lord Kobe and all that he does....

****ing troll

[catch24]

Longevity: Duncan
Peak dominance: Shaq
Skills: Kobe
Overall: Duncan > Shaq > Kobe

[All Net]

Yes, because I love Lord Kobe and all that he does....

****ing troll

I suggest you use the ignore feature...

[ShaqAttack3234]

Shaq has been good for five years of this decade, dominant they may have been in. Kobe and Timmy have been stable through out this decade.

And Shaq was better than Kobe for those 5 years straight. And he was good for more than 5. In his 6th year this decade he won a title and averaged 20/9/2/2 on 60% shooting. 2006 Shaq>2000 Kobe. Shaq was good for the entire decade, just not a superstar after 2006.

[aznboy2k2]

Manu and Tony were doing pretty well that season dude.

Uhhh not really.

Manu averaged 7.6 points PPG.
Parker averaged 15+.

And if you combined their field goal percentage for the NBA finals, they mightve shot 25 percent combined/

Please check your ****.

[dallaslonghorn]

Manu and Tony were doing pretty well that season dude.

Parker was a second-year player; Ginobili was a rookie who averaged 9.4 points a game in the playoffs that year.

[El Seano]

Bizarre seeing as in his book he seems to give Kobe some grudging respect.

[Maneva]

If there's anything more annoying than Laker fans it's Laker haters. Honestly, quit acting as though declaring Kobe the player of the decade is some sort of crime. The man won four rings, made SIX finals appearances, won MVP, scoring titles, gets compared to MJ, etc. There's a pretty damn good argument for him being the greatest of the last 10 years. Personally, I agree that Duncan's the man, but Kobe's a close second, and it could obviously go either way.

Also, Lebron's performance against the Pistons and Kobe's 81 were both incredible, why do people have to act like one was obviously better than the other?

[Jacks3]

lol at Snaq being better above Kobe.:oldlol: Dude hasn't even been an elite player since 2005. What a joke. Kobe is easily above Shaq.

[Knuck the Ficks]

OK, while Kobe is not the player of the decade he is definitely in the discussion.

Being in the finals for 6 of the ten years is pretty insane, but I'd still put him behind both Duncan and Shaq.

[Allstar24]

It IS the best moment of the decade. How is it even a discussion? That man is insane.
It is the best individual performance of the decade for sure. Simmons is just an ass who hates anything and everything related to the Lakers.

[fadeaway3]

Longevity: Duncan
Peak dominance: Shaq
Skills: Kobe
Overall: Duncan > Shaq > Kobe

/END THREAD. And give me Lebron's memorable performance in the playoffs than some regular season crap.

[Lakers13]

And Shaq was better than Kobe for those 5 years straight. And he was good for more than 5. In his 6th year this decade he won a title and averaged 20/9/2/2 on 60% shooting. 2006 Shaq>2000 Kobe. Shaq was good for the entire decade, just not a superstar after 2006.


You dont have to remind me sir, Im just as big of a Shaq fan as you are.

[ShaqAttack3234]

lol at Snaq being better above Kobe.:oldlol: Dude hasn't even been an elite player since 2005. What a joke. Kobe is easily above Shaq.

:oldlol: Right, so being better for 5 years straight doesn't count? :roll: O'Neal in 2006 was elite as well.

[Maneva]

/END THREAD. And give me Lebron's memorable performance in the playoffs than some regular season crap.

:rolleyes: Give me a break.

[YAWN]

And Shaq was better than Kobe for those 5 years straight. And he was good for more than 5. In his 6th year this decade he won a title and averaged 20/9/2/2 on 60% shooting. 2006 Shaq>2000 Kobe. Shaq was good for the entire decade, just not a superstar after 2006.

Shaq shouldn't even be mentioned when you go by the actual definition of a decade. Yes shaq was better than kobe for the first 3 or 4 years, but kobe was also a top 5 player and in some years top 3 in the league during that time. He then went on to remain in the top 3 for the rest of the decade with some burn at #1. Its either Duncan or Kobe, no one else needs mentioning.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Shaq shouldn't even be mentioned when you go by the actual definition of a decade. Yes shaq was better than kobe for the first 3 or 4 years, but kobe was also a top 5 player and in some years top 3 in the league during that time. He then went on to remain in the top 3 for the rest of the decade with some burn at #1. Its either Duncan or Kobe, no one else needs mentioning.

:oldlol: Shaq was better than Kobe for 5 straight years. Kobe was better than Shaq for 4 straight years. At one point(3peat) Shaq was better than Kobe by a wide margin in his own right, particularly in 2000.

Kobe wasn't top 3 until 2006.

[aznboy2k2]

It is the best individual performance of the decade for sure. Simmons is just an ass who hates anything and everything related to the Lakers.

Not really.

[aznboy2k2]

:rolleyes: Give me a break.

Another Kobe nut snuggling ***.
How many points did Lebron score for the cavs at the end? What was it? 30 of 32 or some ****?

The SAME ****ing Pistons team that your precious all-star lakers could not beat in the finals.

And to cap it off, look at the ****ing roster Lebron had to work with. LOL, probably the WORST supporting cast I have ever seen. For sure, a ****ing top 5 lottery team without Lebron.

[D-Rose]

Another Kobe nut snuggling ***.
How many points did Lebron score for the cavs at the end? What was it? 30 of 32 or some ****?

The SAME ****ing Pistons team that your precious all-star lakers could not beat in the finals.

And to cap it off, look at the ****ing roster Lebron had to work with. LOL, probably the WORST supporting cast I have ever seen. For sure, a ****ing top 5 lottery team without Lebron.
No, it's not THE SAME team. The Detroit team LBJ beat had C-Webb not prime Ben Wallace. Not as good of a defensive team.

[Scribbles]

You cannot be considered player of the decade if Shaq wasn't a top player for 40% of the decade. Same with Duncan where has he been the last 2 years

[YAWN]

:oldlol: Shaq was better than Kobe for 5 straight years. Kobe was better than Shaq for 4 straight years. At one point(3peat) Shaq was better than Kobe by a wide margin in his own right, particularly in 2000.

Kobe wasn't top 3 until 2006.
:oldlol: kobe was top 3 in 2001. i know you like to remember 3 peat kobe as just a role player to your almighty shaq, but the truth is he was a top 3 player.

29/6/5/2 in the regular season and 29/7/6/2 in the title run.. how quickly some forget.

My point was that kobe never really fell off from the top 5 throughout the whole decade, duncan only fell off near the end but still remained in the top 10. where shaq dipped down to barely being top 20 during the last third.

[che guevara]

You cannot be considered player of the decade if Shaq wasn't a top player for 40% of the decade. Same with Duncan where has he been the last 2 years
Jordan didn't even play for 30% of the 90s. Is he not the player of the decade?

[amfirst]

Shaq dropped off too fast to be considered a player of the decade.

It's between Duncan and Kobe.

Plus, Duncan would be more dominating than Shaq if he had Kobe.

[OneMoreSucka]

Simmons > *

[YAWN]

Jordan didn't even play for 30% of the 90s. Is he not the player of the decade?
6 titles, 4 mvps, 6 finals mvps.. not comparable.

[Bond007]

Shaq dropped off too fast to be considered a player of the decade.

It's between Duncan and Kobe.

Plus, Duncan would be more dominating than Shaq if he had Kobe.


This:applause:

[aznboy2k2]

No, it's not THE SAME team. The Detroit team LBJ beat had C-Webb not prime Ben Wallace. Not as good of a defensive team.

The main principle team was still intact.
Billups, Hamilton, Tayshaun, Wallace, with Webber.

That's essentially the same team. Don't sit here and tell me that Ben Wallace was the difference maker in that team.

You make me LMAO. dumass Laker fans.

[ShaqAttack3234]

:oldlol: kobe was top 3 in 2001. i know you like to remember 3 peat kobe as just a role player to your almighty shaq, but the truth is he was a top 3 player.

29/6/5/2 in the regular season and 29/7/6/2 in the title run.. how quickly some forget.

:roll: Obviously Kobe was a superstar in the 2001 season and beyond, but probably not top 3. Shaq and Duncan were easily 1 and 2 then guys like Iverson(in his best year), C-Webb, KG, T-Mac and VC were also in the league. Top 3 is a stretch. Probably top 5.


My point was that kobe never really fell off from the top 5 throughout the whole decade, duncan only fell off near the end but still remained in the top 10. where shaq dipped down to barely being top 20 during the last third.

First of all, Kobe was not top 5 in 2000 and more importantly...what's your point? Shaq was still better than Kobe 5 years to 4 and he easily had the better peak.

[itsGameTime]

Jordan didn't even play for 30% of the 90s. Is he not the player of the decade?

Way to twist the facts. Jordan missed two seasons for baseball, and the lockout season that the NBA shut off doesn't count, the 90's decade is really only 9 years long, so Jordan played in 7/9 which is about 78% of the decade. He only missed 22%.

[Maneva]

Another Kobe nut snuggling ***.
How many points did Lebron score for the cavs at the end? What was it? 30 of 32 or some ****?

The SAME ****ing Pistons team that your precious all-star lakers could not beat in the finals.

And to cap it off, look at the ****ing roster Lebron had to work with. LOL, probably the WORST supporting cast I have ever seen. For sure, a ****ing top 5 lottery team without Lebron.

Chill. First of all, I'm not a Laker fan, let alone a "Kobe nut snuggling ***." Plus, I've already stated, in this thread, that I think Duncan is the player of the decade. So, with that in mind, are you seriously unable to wrap your head around the fact that some people who aren't Laker fans can sill consider an 81 point performance the best of the decade? Lebron's performance was amazing for all the reasons you mentioned and more, but to freak out because someone thinks Kobe's was better is pretty stupid. It's a toss up, if anything. It's not like one performance was SO much better that anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly in the wrong.

[YAWN]

:roll: Obviously Kobe was a superstar in the 2001 season and beyond, but probably not top 3. Shaq and Duncan were easily 1 and 2 then guys like Iverson(in his best year), C-Webb, KG, T-Mac and VC were also in the league. Top 3 is a stretch. Probably top 5.



First of all, Kobe was not top 5 in 2000 and more importantly...what's your point? Shaq was still better than Kobe 5 years to 4 and he easily had the better peak.

how can you not see my point... this guy was top 5 the whole decade. shaq was top 5 for half the decade. then fell off to a serviceable role player that might crack a top 20. Shaq has a slight edge in an all time list due to his dominance, however that is not the question at hand. We are speaking about only and entirely a 10 year block of time..

[ShaqAttack3234]

how can you not see my point... this guy was top 5 the whole decade. shaq was top 5 for half the decade. then fell off to a serviceable role player that might crack a top 20. Shaq has a slight edge in an all time list due to his dominance, however that is not the question at hand. We are speaking about only and entirely a 10 year block of time..

Kobe was not top 5 for the entire decade. Stop being a fanboy. He was nowhere close in 2000, debatable each year from 2001-2004 and no way in 2005.

Slight edge on the all time list? :roll:

[Allstar24]

BTW, LeBron's 25 straight vs. 2007 Pistons mattered 10X as much as Kobe's 81 vs. Eric Williams, Jalen Rose & Mo Peterson. Sorry, Steiny Mo. about 18 hours ago from web

LeBron (only 22) drops 48 (25 in a row) vs. best def. team of '00s to propel Cavs into Finals (and kills Pistons Era). That was a MOMENT. about 17 hours ago from web

David Thompson scored 53 in 1st half of a 1978 game on 20-for-22 shooting. Finished with 73. Sat most of the 4th. Kobe's 81 can suck it. about 17 hours ago from web

This guy is on drugs. Is he seriously trying to imply that Kobe's 81 point game wasn't the best performance of the decade? :oldlol: The last time someone put up that many points in a single game was over 40 years ago. Nobody cares if it was a regular season game or if it was against a bad team, bottom line is that it was a historic moment. Stein got it right.

[Maneva]

Kobe was not top 5 for the entire decade. Stop being a fanboy. He was nowhere close in 2000, debatable each year from 2001-2004 and no way in 2005.

Slight edge on the all time list? :roll:

Just have to point out that in a Shaq/Kobe debate someone named "Shaq attack" is telling Kobe supporters to stop being fanboys. Hypocritical much?

[YAWN]

Kobe was not top 5 for the entire decade. Stop being a fanboy. He was nowhere close in 2000, debatable each year from 2001-2004 and no way in 2005.

Slight edge on the all time list? :roll:

it still applies even going by your rankings. Kobe at worst spent only two years not in the top 5 and was always right behind there; i disagree, but at worst ill go with your eyes. Shaq at best spent his worst 3 years at top 15 if the guy doing the ranking was a big Shaq homer..

The player of the decade is Duncan with Kobe right behind. Shaq is a distant 3rd due to the totality of a decade.

[Bond007]

Kobe was not top 5 for the entire decade. Stop being a fanboy. He was nowhere close in 2000, debatable each year from 2001-2004 and no way in 2005.

Slight edge on the all time list? :roll:


sorry shaqattack looks like u will be a minority with your line of thinking but everyone is entitled to their own opinion wrong or right

[Mor'Fiyah]

Chill. First of all, I'm not a Laker fan, let alone a "Kobe nut snuggling ***." Plus, I've already stated, in this thread, that I think Duncan is the player of the decade. So, with that in mind, are you seriously unable to wrap your head around the fact that some people who aren't Laker fans can sill consider an 81 point performance the best of the decade? Lebron's performance was amazing for all the reasons you mentioned and more, but to freak out because someone thinks Kobe's was better is pretty stupid. It's a toss up, if anything. It's not like one performance was SO much better that anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly in the wrong.

I would actually go the other way on that one and say that anyone who thinks Lebron's 50 was better than Kobe's 80 regular season or playoffs is fooling themselves. Yes, the playoffs are more important than the regular season and everything becomes harder in the playoffs. But at some point a certain number of points in the regular season trumps a certain number of points in the playoffs. For instance... are 20 points in the playoffs worth more than 40 points in the regular season? What about 50 points? At some point a certain number of points trump a certain number of points in the playoffs... I am willing to hang my hat on 81 points on 65% shooting. Regular season or not. Raptors or Detroit. Doesn't matter. We WILL see someone else score 50 points in the playoffs against a good team and we WILL see someone else score multiple points in a row in a winning effort in an important play off game. Can we honestly say we will see 81 points again under any circumstance at this level?

[Maneva]

I would actually go the other way on that one and say that anyone who thinks Lebron's 50 was better than Kobe's 80 regular season or playoffs is fooling themselves. Yes, the playoffs are more important than the regular season and everything becomes harder in the playoffs. But at some point a certain number of points in the regular season trumps a certain number of points in the playoffs. For instance... are 20 points in the playoffs worth more than 40 points in the regular season? What about 50 points? At some point a certain number of points trump a certain number of points in the playoffs... I am willing to hang my hat on 81 points on 65% shooting. Regular season or not. Raptors or Detroit. Doesn't matter. We WILL see someone else score 50 points in the playoffs against a good team and we WILL see someone else score multiple points in a row in a winning effort in an important play off game. Can we honestly say we will see 81 points again under any circumstance at this level?

Good points. Changed my mind, no longer a toss up for me. 81 is the best of the decade.

[phoenix18]

:oldlol: kobe was top 3 in 2001. i know you like to remember 3 peat kobe as just a role player to your almighty shaq, but the truth is he was a top 3 player.

29/6/5/2 in the regular season and 29/7/6/2 in the title run.. how quickly some forget.

My point was that kobe never really fell off from the top 5 throughout the whole decade, duncan only fell off near the end but still remained in the top 10. where shaq dipped down to barely being top 20 during the last third.

No.
No.
No.
Edit that.

[Abraham Lincoln]

:oldlol: kobe was top 3 in 2001. i know you like to remember 3 peat kobe as just a role player to your almighty shaq, but the truth is he was a top 3 player.

29/6/5/2 in the regular season and 29/7/6/2 in the title run.. how quickly some forget.
He was top 3 during the playoffs, but not the regular season. Top 5 yes.

[ShaqAttack3234]

it still applies even going by your rankings. Kobe at worst spent only two years not in the top 5 and was always right behind there; i disagree, but at worst ill go with your eyes. Shaq at best spent his worst 3 years at top 15 if the guy doing the ranking was a big Shaq homer..

The player of the decade is Duncan with Kobe right behind. Shaq is a distant 3rd due to the totality of a decade.

And throughout the decade Shaq was better than Kobe 5 years while Kobe was better 4th and while the margin between the 2 has been big in Kobe's favor the last 4, the margin between O'Neal and Bryant was enormous in 2000 and considerable in 2001, 2002 and 2005. Then, once again you have O'Neal's peak stacked up against Bryant's.

And no, Kobe was not "right behind" top 5 in 2000 and no, it was not 2 years at worst that he wasn't top 5. I probably agree he was top 5 in 2001 and 2003. 2002? It isn't exactly easy to make a case for him being top 5 with the level Shaq, Duncan, Kidd, C-Webb, Garnett, T-Mac and Pierce were at that season. 2004? Again, debatable.

That's a bid difference between the 2 in those years. Shaq was hands down the best in the league for a few years and still hands down top 3 for a few more. Kobe was never even hands down top 5. It was always debatable.


Just have to point out that in a Shaq/Kobe debate someone named "Shaq attack" is telling Kobe supporters to stop being fanboys. Hypocritical much?

Being a fan of a player doesn't make me an irrational fanboy. An irrational fanboy ranks Kobe as top 5 in 2000 and says Shaq is only slightly ahead on the all time list.

[KenneBell]

Can we honestly say we will see 81 points again under any circumstance at this level?
Interesting point...

[phoenix18]

Interesting point...
We will see another 70-80 point game. Its obvious that we will.

[All Net]

We will see another 70-80 point game. Its obvious that we will.

We won't, maybe our kids will.

[G-train]

Simmons is right on this one. He owned him on every point.

Stein is way off.

[Mor'Fiyah]

We will see another 70-80 point game. Its obvious that we will.

While you are alive? How many years do you think it will take to see something like that again? 20... 30... 60?! In fact if someone told you that a player would have scored 81 points in a single game from the perimeter would you have believed it before it actually happened?

Contrast that to what Lebron did. Incredible stuff from 'Bron no doubt. But its doable and I have no problems believing that he or some other special player will do it again. 81 points, on the other hand, I have my doubts on.

[G-train]

Does 60 or 70 or 80 points in a meaningless game against pathetic defence really matter? Is that really the moment of a decade? Its a great achievement, but.... the moment of the decade?

Personally I believe the Duncan/Fisher buzzer beater combo was a far bigger moment. And the Lebron 48.

[phoenix18]

We won't, maybe our kids will.
If I recall correctly, there has been a 60+ game in every decade and there has been a 70+ in each of the last two. Its not as improbable as you think. I am pretty sure we will see a scoring outburst in the neighborhood of Kobe's.

[Jacks3]

:oldlol: Right, so being better for 5 years straight doesn't count? :roll: O'Neal in 2006 was elite as well.
We're not talking about about a 5 yr stretch. We're talking about a 10 year stretch. And Kobe was better than Shaq in 02-03. As for O'neal being a elite player in 2006, that is laughable.:roll: Very good? Yes, but the elite tier is reserved for the 5-10 best players, which 2006 O'neal was not.

[ShaqAttack3234]

We're not talking about about a 5 yr stretch. We're talking about a 10 year stretch. And Kobe was better than Shaq in 02-03. As for O'neal being a elite player in 2006, that is laughable.:roll: Very good? Yes, but the elite tier is reserved for the 5-10 best players, which 2006 O'neal was not.

Once again 2006 Shaq>2000 Kobe. And as far as 2003? The Lakers were 5-10 without Shaq, he was still the key to the Lakers team. Kobe's numbers looked like nice, but he couldn't lead a team like Shaq could. He couldn't impact games to the same degree.

[Mor'Fiyah]

If I recall correctly, there has been a 60+ game in every decade and there has been a 70+ in each of the last two. Its not as improbable as you think. I am pretty sure we will see a scoring outburst in the neighborhood of Kobe's.

Cool. So how many years between were the last two 80 point games? Not 70... not 60... 80+ points. Oh, and while you are it, figure out when was the last time someone scored more than 80 points from the perimeter then contrast it to the highest points a big man has scored over the last 10 years.

[itsGameTime]

Don't mind Phoenix18, he's just looking for ways to downplay that 81pt game. He doesn't even care whether or not Lebron's should have been picked over Kobe's :oldlol:

[AirJordan&Magic]

Does 60 or 70 or 80 points in a meaningless game against pathetic defence really matter? Is that really the moment of a decade? Its a great achievement, but.... the moment of the decade?

Personally I believe the Duncan/Fisher buzzer beater combo was a far bigger moment. And the Lebron 48.

:oldlol: Stop lying to yourself.

[Jacks3]

Once again 2006 Shaq>2000 Kobe. And as far as 2003? The Lakers were 5-10 without Shaq, he was still the key to the Lakers team. Kobe's numbers looked like nice, but he couldn't lead a team like Shaq could. He couldn't impact games to the same degree.
It doesn't matter if 2006 Shaq was better than 2000 Kobe. Kobe still had the greater decade. The only way Shaq wins is if you think a decade is 5 years.:roll:
The Lakers went 5-10 without Shaq because the had absolutely no backups for him. The supporting cast during those 15 games was horrific. But Kobe clearly had the better year individually.

[Bond007]

[QUOTE=Mor'Fiyah]Cool. So how many years between were the last two 80 point games? Not 70... not 60... 80+ points. Oh, and while you are it, figure out when was the last time someone scored more than 80 points from the perimeter then contrast it to the highest points a big man has scored over the last 10 years.[/QUOT
This. 60-70 plus is not 80 plus sorry

[Mor'Fiyah]

This. 60-70 plus is not 80 plus sorry

It saddens me that we may likely never see an offensive display of that magnitude EVER again and yet people still downplay it.

[Artillery]

Player of the Decade is Shaq and Duncan imo. Can't really fault Simmons here either. Some of the ESPN guys(including Simmons himself, at times) pass off some really bad takes as "sports journalism".

[RoTM]

meh player of the decade isn't really fair to the big diesel. He was over 30 for almost all of it.

[iggy>]

kobe's 81 against the pathetic raptors=the moment of the decade?:roll: kobes 4 point play in the olympics>>>>>>

[G-train]

:oldlol: Stop lying to yourself.
I honestly forget the 81 point game happened all the time. And I'm a Kobe fan.
I remember him crossing up Pip then throwing the lob to Shaq against Portland, and I remember him toying with an elite defender (Pietrus) in last years finals.
I guess I remember things that really matter.:confusedshrug:

[itsGameTime]

I honestly forget the 81 point game happened all the time. And I'm a Kobe fan.
I remember him throwing the lob to Shaq against Portland for the lead, and I remember him toying with an elite defender (Pietrus) in last years finals.
I guess I remember things that really matter.:confusedshrug:

If we're going by what matters, then that Lebron performance against the Pistons in the playoffs didn't matter either, since he went on to get swept by the Spurs 0-4 after that series. :confusedshrug:

Oh and 81 matters, the 2nd greatest scoring performance ever in the history of the NBA.

[ShaqAttack3234]

It doesn't matter if 2006 Shaq was better than 2000 Kobe. Kobe still had the greater decade. The only way Shaq wins is if you think a decade is 5 years.:roll:
The Lakers went 5-10 without Shaq because the had absolutely no backups for him. The supporting cast during those 15 games was horrific. But Kobe clearly had the better year individually.

No he didn't. O'Neal was better in 2003.

O'Neal still drew more double teams, controlled tempo with his FTA and quality shots around the basket, made a bigger defensive impact with his shot blocking, rebounding and intimidation.

Statistically, O'Neal also wipes the floor with Bryant. He was much more efficient regardless of what formula you use(FG%, TS%, eFG%), that easily makes up for scoring 2.5 fewer ppg. He also averaged 11.1 rebounds per game, 3.1 asssists per game and 2.4 blocks per game while also turning the ball over considerably less.

[phoenix18]

Don't mind Phoenix18, he's just looking for ways to downplay that 81pt game. He doesn't even care whether or not Lebron's should have been picked over Kobe's :oldlol:

What are you talking about?

I didnt downplay anything. I said that we will see another scoring outburst like his in some time.

[itsGameTime]

What are you talking about?

I didnt downplay anything. I said that we will see another scoring outburst like his in some time.

That's easy for you to say. Keywords = "will", "in some time". Who knows how long that'll be :oldlol:

[phoenix18]

That's easy for you to say. Keywords = "will", "in some time". Who knows how long that'll be :oldlol:

Which is why I used indefinite terms, you fool.

[itsGameTime]

Which is why I used indefinite terms, you fool.

If you're going to use indefinite terms, why bother posting at all? It's like the last time you posted "There were questionable calls in the Lakers/Kings series". Seriously dude? Is there anything that you have said that actually goes anywhere? I could do what you do, and show up in every thread posting these weak statements that can't be said to be false, because they're technically true. It doesn't get anyone anywhere though. :confusedshrug:

[phoenix18]

If you're going to use indefinite terms, why bother posting at all? It's like the last time you posted "There were questionable calls in the Lakers/Kings series". Seriously dude? Is there anything that you have said that actually goes anywhere? I could do what you do, and show up in every thread posting these weak statements that can't be said to be false. It doesn't get anyone anywhere though. :confusedshrug:

I think you have missed some of my better posts.

[G-train]

If we're going by what matters, then that Lebron performance against the Pistons in the playoffs didn't matter either, since he went on to get swept by the Spurs 0-4 after that series. :confusedshrug:

Oh and 81 matters, the 2nd greatest scoring performance ever in the history of the NBA.
So the ECF don't matter?

Ok.

Like I said, 81 is a great achievement. But does 70 or 80 or 69 points really matter? Is it the moment of the decade? Is 81 points in the regular season against appalling defence greater than 48 points and 25 straight against the best defence and propelling your team to the champioship round?

Posters here have their priorities mixed. Sure 81 is a top 5 moment, its a big achievement. But thats not why they be ballin, that doesnt define the decade, thats not the moment of the decade.

[itsGameTime]

I think you have missed some of my better posts.

I guess so :confusedshrug:

[Pharcyde]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHS_Y4BSaXQ

[oh the horror]

Oh how the youth of today is spoiled.


I really dont think people realize just how hard it is to drop 81 points in an NBA game. Regardless of whatever team you do it against.


Its IRRELEVANT that others have dropped 60+, or 70+ etc....


Its NOT 81.



People downplay it because given the new rules, and how easy it is to score in general, people BELIEVE its some easy feat. They're used to seeing 40+ games blow on by.....but fail to realize how hard it is to overcome the hurdle of getting something like 81....its one of those things where people are close...but not quite.



Its the same concept of how people think another team will come along soon, like tomorrow, and win 70+ games. Its HARDER than people think.

[Dizzle-2k7]

Bill Simmons acts like a highschool girl when it comes to discussing anything Kobe-Bryant related... its kinda sad :oldlol: .. i really like him as an analyst too.. i enjoy his articles and views of the game.. but still...

Reminds me of Loki or Knoeitawl....

[Mor'Fiyah]

So the ECF don't matter?

Ok.

Like I said, 81 is a great achievement. But does 70 or 80 or 69 points really matter? Is it the moment of the decade? Is 81 points in the regular season against appalling defence greater than 48 points and 25 straight against the best defence and propelling your team to the champioship round?


Yes it is. People other than Lebron will do it again. Soon. We will have similar performances to come in the coming decades. 81 points might never happen in our lifetimes again. Case closed.



Posters here have their priorities mixed. Sure 81 is a top 5 moment, its a big achievement. But thats not why they be ballin, that doesnt define the decade, thats not the moment of the decade.

For you maybe. But 25 -40 years from now the 81 point game will be remembered in much the same way people remember Wilt's 100 point game. Lebron's 25 straight points won't be remembered in the same way if at all 40 years from now. Kobe's point total also stands a far greater shot at not being eclipsed in that time span.

[godofgods]

I think Kobe averting jail time is a bigger accomplishment than his 81 points.

[oh the horror]

I think Kobe averting jail time is a bigger accomplishment than his 81 points.



You're such a bore. Its almost comical at this point.

[EricForman]

Entertaining...


not a meltdown when its the truth.

[oh the horror]

not a meltdown when its the truth.



Opinion doesnt equal truth. Some of you need to kick back with the nonsense.

[Scribbles]

Honestly ShaqAttack what does it matter that Shaq was better than Kobe the first 5 years? They won the same amount of championships at the same time. Don't give me that crap about Kobe being 2nd option because that's ludicrous. How many 2nd options in the history of NBA gets 30 ppg?

[Lakers13]

I think Kobe averting jail time is a bigger accomplishment than his 81 points.


Wow, another rape joke....

[Samurai Swoosh]

Wow, another rape joke....
That was played out by late 2004.

:oldlol:

[Lakers13]

That was played out by late 2004.

:oldlol:


It's all they can hang their hat on these days, very sad.

[crisoner]

Bills Simmons would fit right in with this board.


I think he is a ghost poster on this board.

Maybe he is Knoebe?

[Samurai Swoosh]

It's all they can hang their hat on these days, very sad.
Yeah I know, right? And it was relevant ... 7 years ago?

LMAO

[JustinJDW]

lol at Snaq being better above Kobe.:oldlol: Dude hasn't even been an elite player since 2005. What a joke. Kobe is easily above Shaq.:oldlol:

I guess people just act like Shaq didn't matter once he left the Lakers huh? Are people really this biased. Shaq and Timmy combined have won 8 out of the last 11 Championships! And in 6 of those 8 Championships, Shaq and Timmy have the Finals MVP's. The other two go to D-Wade and Tony Parker.

How in the blue hell, does the Player of the Decade end up being Kobe? For Christ's sake, after Shaq left, Kobe didn't make it out the First Round to ****ing 2008!

6 out of the 10 Finals MVP's this Decade go to either Shaq or Timmy! 6 out of 10! 3 each! Kobe has 1! JUST ****ING 1!

Shaq won 3 Championships in a ****ing row! He won the Finals MVP's for all of them! He won 4 Championships in 7 Seasons!

Tim Duncan, won 3 Championship in 5 Seasons! Tim Duncan, NEVER HAD A SEASON BELOW 52 WINS! EVERY SINGLE SEASON OF HIS CAREER, INCLUDING THIS DECADE, HE HAS HAD OVER 50+ WINS!

TIMMY AND SHAQ DOMINATED THE ****ING DECADE!

I honestly don't know how else to put it! I don't understand how anyone can sit here and look at these facts, and say Kobe is the Player of the Decade! HOW CAN YOU IDIOTS SAY THAT! What can't you comprehend about this!

Seriously, is ShaqAttack the only other person on this Earth that can comprehend this?

[oh the horror]

Why do people act like Duncan carried a sh*tty team his entire career or something? Tim Duncan has NEVER been on a crappy team at any point of his career. This is why his teams have done so well.

[EricForman]

Opinion doesnt equal truth. Some of you need to kick back with the nonsense.

well the OP started this thread on the basis that he thinks Simmons is overreacting/denying the truth, right?

So there wouldnt be a thread at all if people all kicked back.

You guys think it's fact taht Kobe's player of decade and 81 is the greatest accomplishments. I do not. I think it's fact that Duncan is player of decade and I think Lebron doing what he did in the ECF is more impressive.

I think scoring is overrated. One of Duncan's usual 33 point 13 board game while anchoring the defense is more valuable to me than Arenas going off for 60 while not playing a lick of D and not making anyone else better. I bet Duncan's 30 and 12 was more crucial to a win than any of Iverson's 50 point games.

[crisoner]

How can Kobe be player of the decade? Take a look right here...

http://bestplayerontheplanet.com/an-inside-look-at-kobe-bryants-stats-this-decade/


And come on....who is the most talk about player this decade?
Timmy?...........nope
Shaq?.................nope
Bron?...................nope

Kobe Bryant is. Just look at the history of these boards the last 10 years...Kobe has always been the number one topic. Years from now when they look at this decade Kobe will be the first player you think about.

He has scored the most points this decade...6 out of the 10 Finals Kobe has been in it....as a 2 guard he scored 81 freaking points. That sh*t ain't normal.

SO stop acting like Kobe shouldn't even be at least mention when it comes to player of the decade...take the hater goggles off and wake up. This decade is defined by one player in the NBA over the rest...Kobe Jelly Bean aka The Black Mamba Bryant.

Stop hating.

[oh the horror]

People keep citing team accolades for these players, when we're discussing player of the decade.

[crisoner]

Decade is a TEN year span..........

How has Shaq been the past 3 or 4 years???
Timmy? Better then Shaq....

Now look at the Mamba.........and dude is still going strong.

Decade.....10 years yall.

If you want to talk about who had the most dominate year this decade...look no further then 2000 Shaq. Most dominant in the Finals...Timmy's perfect 3-0 record (his first championship was in the 90's). But from 2000 to 2009 (and 2010)...I'm taking the Bean......

[oh the horror]

i dont see how you count Shaq in the past 10 years.


Dude's "decade" started in the 90s.




If anything, this is between Duncan, and Bryant.

[EricForman]

People keep citing team accolades for these players, when we're discussing player of the decade.


:oldlol: so we should just dismiss team success completely then eh? yeah, the Spurs winning 50+ every season and three rings shouldn't be a factor in determining greatness :confusedshrug:

[crisoner]

:oldlol: so we should just dismiss team success completely then eh? yeah, the Spurs winning 50+ every season and three rings shouldn't be a factor in determining greatness :confusedshrug:

Put Duncan on a team with starters named Smush Parker and Kwame Brown and tell me if they would of had 50 plus wins.....

..............Thank you.



Duncan wide open in the lane....opps Parker throws it away.


Sweet dish to Kwame from Duncan.....opps old butterfingers loses the ball yet again.

[G-train]

For you maybe. But 25 -40 years from now the 81 point game will be remembered in much the same way people remember Wilt's 100 point game. Lebron's 25 straight points won't be remembered in the same way if at all 40 years from now. Kobe's point total also stands a far greater shot at not being eclipsed in that time span.

Oops, I thought we were talking about moment of the decade - not what people will remember in 40 years.

[EricForman]

Put Duncan on a team with starters named Smush Parker and Kwame Brown and tell me if they would of had 50 plus wins.....

..............Thank you.


they'd win more than whatver kobe won, and i bet everyone who doesnt have a Laker or Kobe logo on their avartar would agree with this.

You're welcome

[thejumpa]

Tim Duncan=Consistent....boring as hell....but consistent. Kobe has been cold for a while, but Duncan is the definition of consistent. Best PF ever and greatest of the decade. Even at his age now, he plays better than most at his position. Shaq and Kobe have been good, but most would agree that they aren't on Duncans level.

[oh the horror]

they'd win more than whatver kobe won, and i bet everyone who doesnt have a Laker or Kobe logo on their avartar would agree with this.

You're welcome


Pure speculation at this point. Like Ive said...Duncan has never had the misfortune of playing on a crappy team.

[crisoner]

they'd win more than whatver kobe won, and i bet everyone who doesnt have a Laker or Kobe logo on their avartar would agree with this.

You're welcome

Can you ever prove that? Nope...but Kobe took those teams to the playoffs because dude is that good and that's a fact. Missed the playoffs one year but that's when he was injured for a certain amount of time.

The PROVEN point is....Duncan never had to worry about that because he always had good teams. Hence the 50 plus argument you have doesn't hold much water as you think it does.

Danke Schoen

[YAWN]

Tim Duncan=Consistent....boring as hell....but consistent. Kobe has been cold for a while, but Duncan is the definition of consistent. Best PF ever and greatest of the decade. Even at his age now, he plays better than most at his position. Shaq and Kobe have been good, but most would agree that they aren't on Duncans level.
ugh what? duncan is still great but he hasn't been better than the bean over the last third of the decade. I already said earlier in this thread that, taking into account the totality of a decade then it is Duncan>Kobe>Shaq. But not sure where you are getting the whole kobe has been cold thing from :confusedshrug:

[okayabc123]

Player of the decade is about consistency... something Shaq just didn't do over the last 4-5 years.

Duncan to me gets the nod, but Kobe is a close second.

Kobe's consistency cannot be ignore. For a guard to put up the numbers for an entire decade is damn good...

45.5% FG
34.3% 3PT
84.5% FT
28.7 PPG
5.8 Reb
5.2 Assist
1.67 Steals

How many players can average 28-5-5 for a whole decade, while winning MVP, Finals MVP, 4 rings, olympic, countless 1st team Offensive and Defensive team honor.

[crisoner]

Tim Duncan=Consistent....boring as hell....but consistent. Kobe has been cold for a while, but Duncan is the definition of consistent. Best PF ever and greatest of the decade. Even at his age now, he plays better than most at his position. Shaq and Kobe have been good, but most would agree that they aren't on Duncans level.

Kobe as a player himself with his statistics has NEVER been cold this past decade. Look at his stats before you write BS.

[EricForman]

Can you ever prove that? Nope...but Kobe took those teams to the playoffs because dude is that good and that's a fact. Missed the playoffs one year but that's when he was injured for a certain amount of time.



So it's okay for you to come up with a hypothetical scenario (you saying that duncan wouldn't win 50 with the 06 Lakers rosters) but when I make my own hypothetical scenario you dismiss it because I can't prove it?

So it's okay for you to make up scenarios but I can't?


The PROVEN point is....Duncan never had to worry about that because he always had good teams. Hence the 50 plus argument you have doesn't hold much water as you think it does.

Actually, Duncan's never had a cast as good as what Kobe had in 2000, 2001, 2004, 2008 and 2009. Kobe fans trying to pull the "Duncan's had stacked cast" line is the biggest ongoing joke on ISH.

[crisoner]

How old are you? So it's okay for you to come up with a hypothetical scenario (you saying that duncan wouldn't win 50 with the 06 Lakers rosters) but I can't?


Did I ever say that? Look back at my posts...........

I'm just pointing out the facts...
We are talking about Best player of the decade are we not?
So saying Duncan playing on good teams leading them to 50 plus wins every season is not a fair assessment to judge individual honors. Dude had the luxury of playing on real good teams his whole career so far. That was the point...now what can you say about that?

[thejumpa]

Kobe as a player himself with his statistics has NEVER been cold this past decade. Look at his stats before you write BS.

Nah, I'm good. I watched dude play his whole career. No need to go look back on stats on a website. I know what happened and what didn't.

[thejumpa]

ugh what? duncan is still great but he hasn't been better than the bean over the last third of the decade. I already said earlier in this thread that, taking into account the totality of a decade then it is Duncan>Kobe>Shaq. But not sure where you are getting the whole kobe has been cold thing from :confusedshrug:

Ok so you agree with me? I'm a Duncan fan and realize his greatness, hence why I said all that other stuff....

BTW......Cold=Cold blooded, w/ a mean game. I don't **** with Kobe but he has been COLD for a long time now. See what I mean?

[YAWN]

Ok so you agree with me? I'm a Duncan fan and realize his greatness, hence why I said all that other stuff....

BTW......Cold=Cold blooded, w/ a mean game. I don't **** with Kobe but he has been COLD for a long time now. See what I mean?

my bad, i thought you meant cold like he fell off :lol

[DJ Leon Smith]

Put Duncan on a team with starters named Smush Parker and Kwame Brown and tell me if they would of had 50 plus wins.....

That Laker team was essentially the same supporting cast Wade had in Miami the year before and he took them to the second round of the playoffs.

[crisoner]

Actually, Duncan's never had a cast as good as what Kobe had in 2000, 2001, 2004, 2008 and 2009. Kobe fans trying to pull the "Duncan's had stacked cast" line is the biggest ongoing joke on ISH.


Now you are switching up the argument to who had the better teammates certain years etc? We are talking about consistency...Duncan never had teams like the Kobe 2005-2007 years....stay on topic.

[crisoner]

That Laker team was essentially the same supporting cast Wade had in Miami the year before and he took them to the second round of the playoffs.


First of all NO...and second of all Miami was in the East where teams under .500 make the playoffs as the 5th or 6th seed no less. And remember Wade had a bad team once and lead them to the worst record in the NBA.


Maimi Heat record 07-08
15–67 (.183)

Lakers record 04-05
34-48 (.415)

When Bryant goes out the Lakers finish the season off 2-19..........

[oh the horror]

That Laker team was essentially the same supporting cast Wade had in Miami the year before and he took them to the second round of the playoffs.



A bit...but also take into account that some players have adjustment periods when they hit new areas, and a new team. Wade had been playing with the same set of guys for a good minute. Kobe, not so much.

[Positive]

[QUOTE=crisoner]First of all NO...and second of all Miami was in the East where teams under .500 make the playoffs as the 5th or 6th seed no less. And remember Wade had a bad team once and lead them to the worst record in the NBA.


Maimi Heat record 07-08
15

[Jacks3]

No he didn't. O'Neal was better in 2003.

O'Neal still drew more double teams, controlled tempo with his FTA and quality shots around the basket, made a bigger defensive impact with his shot blocking, rebounding and intimidation.

Statistically, O'Neal also wipes the floor with Bryant. He was much more efficient regardless of what formula you use(FG%, TS%, eFG%), that easily makes up for scoring 2.5 fewer ppg. He also averaged 11.1 rebounds per game, 3.1 asssists per game and 2.4 blocks per game while also turning the ball over considerably less.
No. O'neal missed 16 games in 02-03 and was out of shape the whole year. Kobe played all 82 games. That alone gives Kobe the huge edge. Kobe was easily the better defender. He made All-NBA 1st Team Defense while O'neal didn't make any All-Defense team. Kobe scored considerably more PPG--2.5 more ppg at only 2% less TS%--and that doesn't come close to wiping out the significant 2.5 PPG. Kobe averaged considerably more APG. . Kobe as a guard averaged 7 RPG! That is phenomenal. Better than O'neal, a big man, averaging 11 RPG. Kobe also shot considerably higher from the FT line and got considerably more SPG. Kobe was easily better in 02-03.

[Jacks3]

:oldlol:

I guess people just act like Shaq didn't matter once he left the Lakers huh? Are people really this biased. Shaq and Timmy combined have won 8 out of the last 11 Championships! And in 6 of those 8 Championships, Shaq and Timmy have the Finals MVP's. The other two go to D-Wade and Tony Parker.

How in the blue hell, does the Player of the Decade end up being Kobe? For Christ's sake, after Shaq left, Kobe didn't make it out the First Round to ****ing 2008!

6 out of the 10 Finals MVP's this Decade go to either Shaq or Timmy! 6 out of 10! 3 each! Kobe has 1! JUST ****ING 1!

Shaq won 3 Championships in a ****ing row! He won the Finals MVP's for all of them! He won 4 Championships in 7 Seasons!

Tim Duncan, won 3 Championship in 5 Seasons! Tim Duncan, NEVER HAD A SEASON BELOW 52 WINS! EVERY SINGLE SEASON OF HIS CAREER, INCLUDING THIS DECADE, HE HAS HAD OVER 50+ WINS!

TIMMY AND SHAQ DOMINATED THE ****ING DECADE!

I honestly don't know how else to put it! I don't understand how anyone can sit here and look at these facts, and say Kobe is the Player of the Decade! HOW CAN YOU IDIOTS SAY THAT! What can't you comprehend about this!

Seriously, is ShaqAttack the only other person on this Earth that can comprehend this?
I never said Kobe was the player of the decade. I think that's Duncan, however, Kobe is definitely above Shaq when discussing the entire decade.

[Jacks3]

Player of the decade is about consistency... something Shaq just didn't do over the last 4-5 years.

Duncan to me gets the nod, but Kobe is a close second.

Kobe's consistency cannot be ignore. For a guard to put up the numbers for an entire decade is damn good...

45.5% FG
34.3% 3PT
84.5% FT
28.7 PPG
5.8 Reb
5.2 Assist
1.67 Steals

How many players can average 28-5-5 for a whole decade, while winning MVP, Finals MVP, 4 rings, olympic, countless 1st team Offensive and Defensive team honor.
This. 29/6/5/1+ on very good efficiency over a entire decade is incredible. His consistency gets him the nod over Shaq.:pimp:

[crisoner]

you do realize he was out for almost all of that season with the shoulder injury...

Both players missed a huge amount of games...

[Artillery]

Why do people act like Duncan carried a sh*tty team his entire career or something? Tim Duncan has NEVER been on a crappy team at any point of his career. This is why his teams have done so well.

Huh?

2001 Spurs:

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7572/2001spurs.jpg

2002 Spurs:

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/5576/2002spurs.jpg

Plus, he won a ship with a group of role players in '03(not a single all-star teammate). The only other player that can make that claim in the past 10 or 20 years is Hakeem.

[crisoner]

^^^^^

So are you saying those are crappy teams?
They might not have been marquee names etc. but there are a whole lot of great role players there.

And let's see....

in 01...Derek Anderson...The Admiral...AD...Malik Rose...Avery Johnson...

in 02

We can add a young Tony Parker, Bruce Bowen, Stephen Jackson to that list....not bad.

Oh yeah...coached by Pop = great team.

[DJ Leon Smith]

Plus, he won a ship with a group of role players in '03(not a single all-star teammate). The only other player that can make that claim in the past 10 or 20 years is Hakeem.

http://i34.tinypic.com/11jcgvc.gif

[thejumpa]

If you when a championship, or win 50+ games in the west and contend for a championship....then your team aint crappy. They may not be the most athletic or exciting, but they are role players who played their role perfectly. Nothing about that is crappy.

[Artillery]

Did I ever say that? Look back at my posts...........

I'm just pointing out the facts...
We are talking about Best player of the decade are we not?
So saying Duncan playing on good teams leading them to 50 plus wins every season is not a fair assessment to judge individual honors. Dude had the luxury of playing on real good teams his whole career so far. That was the point...now what can you say about that?

Kobe always had a legit All-NBA teammate during every one of his championship runs. Duncan can't say the same though.

2000 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 2nd team
2001 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 2nd team
2002 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 1st team
2009 Lakers - Kobe 1st team, Gasol 3rd team

1999 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2003 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2005 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2007 Spurs - Duncan 1st team

[EricForman]

If you when a championship, or win 50+ games in the west and contend for a championship....then your team aint crappy. They may not be the most athletic or exciting, but they are role players who played their role perfectly. Nothing about that is crappy.


Almost no one, except the most diehard Duncan homers would say Duncan has played with crap cast. But not crap doesn't mean it's great either. And it's almost general consensus that Duncan's 2003 cast is one of the weakest for title teams.

The bottom line is Duncan's cast has never been as good as what Kobe has had for every year this decade except for a 2 year stretch. So for Kobe fans to bring up the supporting cast argument is a f*cking joke. I can take KG fans bringing this up. But Kobe fans trying to dismiss Duncan's accomplishments due to him being on good teams? PUL-LEASE.

[crisoner]

Kobe always had a legit All-NBA teammate during every one of his championship runs. Duncan can't say the same though.

2000 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 2nd team
2001 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 2nd team
2002 Lakers - Shaq 1st team, Kobe 1st team
2009 Lakers - Kobe 1st team, Gasol 3rd team

1999 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2003 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2005 Spurs - Duncan 1st team
2007 Spurs - Duncan 1st team

That wasn't what the argument was about brah.

I was responding to Duncan's 50 plus win seasons this decade and stated he always had good players surrounding him unlike Kobe in 05-07. Not about who they exactly played with etc.

[EricForman]

That wasn't what the argument was about brah.

I was responding to Duncan's 50 plus win seasons this decade and stated he always had good players surrounding him unlike Kobe in 05-07. Not about who they exactly played with etc.

Jesus christ... but the fact remains Kobe's had a better cast than Duncan at least SIX years out of this decade (I'd say more but the other two are arguable). So what ist he point of bringing up supporting casts in defense of Kobe when it's almost inarguable that Kobe has had more help throughout this decade?

[crisoner]

Almost no one, except the most diehard Duncan homers would say Duncan has played with crap cast. But not crap doesn't mean it's great either. And it's almost general consensus that Duncan's 2003 cast is one of the weakest for title teams.

The bottom line is Duncan's cast has never been as good as what Kobe has had for every year this decade except for a 2 year stretch. So for Kobe fans to bring up the supporting cast argument is a f*cking joke. I can take KG fans bringing this up. But Kobe fans trying to dismiss Duncan's accomplishments due to him being on good teams? PUL-LEASE.

You're pointing out consistent 50 plus win seasons right?
And Duncan through out that period of time had a great supporting cast and coaches which help him achieve just that.

He never had to compete on a horrid team like Kobe...like Wade....etc. had to deal with.

For you not to understand that is a joke.

[EricForman]

You're pointing out consistent 50 plus win seasons right?
And Duncan through out that period of time had a great supporting cast and coaches which help him achieve just that.

He never had to compete on a horrid team like Kobe...like Wade....etc. had to deal with.

For you not to understand that is a joke.

LOL, okay, fine, take away the consitent 50 win seasons then. Duncan still won three rings this decade despite having inferior cast to Kobe 6-7 years of the decade.

You happy?

[crisoner]

Jesus christ... but the fact remains Kobe's had a better cast than Duncan at least SIX years out of this decade (I'd say more but the other two are arguable). So what ist he point of bringing up supporting casts in defense of Kobe when it's almost inarguable that Kobe has had more help throughout this decade?

Dude...once again.

We where arguing about the 50 plus wins for the Spurs every year this decade. Not about who had the better supporting cast blah blah blah in general. Stop flipping the script on what we where talking about.

[thejumpa]

Almost no one, except the most diehard Duncan homers would say Duncan has played with crap cast. But not crap doesn't mean it's great either. And it's almost general consensus that Duncan's 2003 cast is one of the weakest for title teams.

The bottom line is Duncan's cast has never been as good as what Kobe has had for every year this decade except for a 2 year stretch. So for Kobe fans to bring up the supporting cast argument is a f*cking joke. I can take KG fans bringing this up. But Kobe fans trying to dismiss Duncan's accomplishments due to him being on good teams? PUL-LEASE.

Agreed. I was just trying to say that the teams weren't crappy. They weren't all-star packed or anything, but handled business when it came down to it. He did more with less IMO (not to take anything away from Kobe).

[crisoner]

LOL, okay, fine, take away the consitent 50 win seasons then. Duncan still won three rings this decade despite having inferior cast to Kobe 6-7 years of the decade.

You happy?

NO...lol

The whole part of inferior cast for 6-7 years had nothing to do on what we was talking about in the first place. I'm tired...gunna finally get some rest. Peace yall!

[JustinJDW]

- Kobe had a better supporting cast throughout the decade.
- Timmy had a worse supporting cast throughout the decade.
- Timmy did more than Kobe, with less of a supporting cast throughout the decade.

What is so hard to understand about that?

[Anaximandro1]

TIMMY AND SHAQ DOMINATED THE ****ING DECADE!

I honestly don't know how else to put it! I don't understand how anyone can sit here and look at these facts, and say Kobe is the Player of the Decade! HOW CAN YOU IDIOTS SAY THAT! What can't you comprehend about this!

Seriously, is ShaqAttack the only other person on this Earth that can comprehend this?

:applause: :applause:

Kobe is not part of the discussion.


Leadership


Shaq/Duncan got 3 rings as the main man

Kobe got 1
MVP




Duncan 2

Shaq 1

Kobe 1


Finals MVP



Shaq 3

Duncan 2

Kobe 1

All-NBA Team (First team)


Duncan 7

Shaq 7

Kobe 7



Duncan is the better defender.



All-Defensive (First team)

Duncan 7

Shaq 0


Tim Duncan is the player of the decade.


According to Sports Illustrated



PLAYER OF THE DECADE: Tim Duncan, San Antonio Spurs
The greatest power forward in NBA history, Duncan was the reason San Antonio became the only team to make the playoffs every year of the decade. He was the most valuable team player of his era, an active defender who chased pick-and-rolls out to the three-point line and yet hustled back to protect the rim and control the boards. Offensively, the Spurs played through him as a passer in the post, and his dependable mid-range jumper off the backboard will be part of his highlight reel when he checks into Springfield.



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/magazine/specials/2000s/12/03/nba.highlights.lowlights/index.html

:applause:

[raptorfan_dr07]

:oldlol:

I guess people just act like Shaq didn't matter once he left the Lakers huh? Are people really this biased. Shaq and Timmy combined have won 8 out of the last 11 Championships! And in 6 of those 8 Championships, Shaq and Timmy have the Finals MVP's. The other two go to D-Wade and Tony Parker.

How in the blue hell, does the Player of the Decade end up being Kobe? For Christ's sake, after Shaq left, Kobe didn't make it out the First Round to ****ing 2008!

6 out of the 10 Finals MVP's this Decade go to either Shaq or Timmy! 6 out of 10! 3 each! Kobe has 1! JUST ****ING 1!

Shaq won 3 Championships in a ****ing row! He won the Finals MVP's for all of them! He won 4 Championships in 7 Seasons!

Tim Duncan, won 3 Championship in 5 Seasons! Tim Duncan, NEVER HAD A SEASON BELOW 52 WINS! EVERY SINGLE SEASON OF HIS CAREER, INCLUDING THIS DECADE, HE HAS HAD OVER 50+ WINS!

TIMMY AND SHAQ DOMINATED THE ****ING DECADE!

I honestly don't know how else to put it! I don't understand how anyone can sit here and look at these facts, and say Kobe is the Player of the Decade! HOW CAN YOU IDIOTS SAY THAT! What can't you comprehend about this!

Seriously, is ShaqAttack the only other person on this Earth that can comprehend this?

I hear you. :cheers: :cheers: Best post in this entire thread. Nobody's saying Kobe isn't one of the best players of this decade. What we're saying is Shaq and Tim Duncan were better and have the accolades to prove it. Kobe just BARELY did last year what Shaq and Duncan have done MULTIPLE TIMES this decade. That's lead their teams to the title, the ultimate goal, the championship. Kobe was leading his team to the lottery and first round exits. The majority of these Kobe fans are basing their arguments on Kobe's individual statistics. I seriously wonder sometimes if these guys would rather see Kobe score 50 points a game and get knocked out in the first round then see him score 20 and the Lakers win the title. I thought winning was the number one goal in the NBA and it's definitely the argument all these Kobe fans use against Lebron. Suddenly when Kobe's on the not so pretty end of things, that argument doesn't hold weight. :rolleyes: :hammerhead: Fact remains, Tim Duncan and Shaquille O'Neal have been better winners throughout this decade than Kobe. The evidence is there. Plus Shaq and Duncan never played with such a stacked team like the one Kobe has had since last year.

[aznboy2k2]

That wasn't what the argument was about brah.

I was responding to Duncan's 50 plus win seasons this decade and stated he always had good players surrounding him unlike Kobe in 05-07. Not about who they exactly played with etc.

WTF. If you want to look at teams with no good players look at the teams Lebron has to have played with.

Laker fans need to stfu. You've seen what Kobe's done without a cast. He had Lamar Odom, player who STARTED for the USA team, yet the year after Shaq left and without Phil Jackson, he didn't even make the playoffs.

Kobe is NOT the most dominate player this decade. I don't give a **** if he scored 81 points. The game didn't mean ****. Lebrons playoff performance in which he scored what was it? 30 of 32 points or some ****, you'd figure a championship calibor team in the Pistons would be able to stop that after a while, but he just couldn't be stopped. I have YET to see Kobe do that in a meaningful game.

PLEASE. stop molesting Kobe. you grabbin his dick don't make you any more awesome.

[okayabc123]

WTF. If you want to look at teams with no good players look at the teams Lebron has to have played with.

Laker fans need to stfu. You've seen what Kobe's done without a cast. He had Lamar Odom, player who STARTED for the USA team, yet the year after Shaq left and without Phil Jackson, he didn't even make the playoffs.

Kobe is NOT the most dominate player this decade. I don't give a **** if he scored 81 points. The game didn't mean ****. Lebrons playoff performance in which he scored what was it? 30 of 32 points or some ****, you'd figure a championship calibor team in the Pistons would be able to stop that after a while, but he just couldn't be stopped. I have YET to see Kobe do that in a meaningful game.

PLEASE. stop molesting Kobe. you grabbin his dick don't make you any more awesome.

And what are you doing with Lebron? Raping his ass like he won something by beating the Pistons? Oh I forgot he went on and got swept by the Spurs... oops, that's so dominant.

I mean, people have short term memory about Kobe's playoff performances.. did he have bad series, sure! Everybody does!!! No one is fuking perfect unless your name is MJ. Kobe had 25/11/7 + 4 blocks in the 7th game against the Blazers in the WCF. He also had a 45/10 performance against the SAS that year.

Actually everyone keeps saying Kobe was the 2nd fiddle to Shaq, and indeed he was the 2nd option. But which 2nd fiddle player did this in the playoff and was thought as just another player that rode someone else's tail:

2000-01 29/7/6
2001-02 26/5/4
2002-03 32/5/5

I mean, even the last two year, where Kobe has made it to the finals twice,
he only did this:

2007-08 30/5/5
2008-09 30/5/5

It's remarkable how consistent Kobe is. And if only you can get Lebron and his one incredible game against the Pistons out of your a$$, you would see why Kobe is one of the most dominating player this past decade.

And you can't even argue Shaq is better because Shaq has falter over the past 3-4 years. Only player is Duncan, and I already said, Duncan is ahead of Kobe.

[spree43]

Some stats to contribute to the arguement

MVP shares for the decade

99/00 - KB 12th, TD 5th, SO 1st
00/01 - KB 9th, TD 2nd, SO 3rd
01/02 - KB 5th, TD 1st, SO 3rd
02/03 - KB 3rd, TD 1st, SO 5th
03/04 - KB 5th, TD 2nd, SO 6th
04/05 - KB -, TD 4th, SO 2nd
05/06 - KB 4th, TD 8th, SO -
06/07 - KB 3rd, TD 4th, SO 12th
07/08 - KB 1st, TD 7th, SO -
08/09 - KB 2th, TD 11th, SO -

Average position
Kobe - 5.9
Duncan - 4.5
Shaq - 7.7

(I called non appearances 15th just for averages sake)

1st team appearnces
Shaq 7, Duncan 7, Kobe 7

2nd team appearances
Shaq 0, Duncan 3, Kobe 2

3rd team appearances
Shaq 1, Duncan 0, Kobe 1

MVP
Shaq 1, Duncan 2, Kobe 1

Finals MVP
Shaq 3, Duncan 3, Kobe 1

All Defensive team
1st
Shaq 0, Duncan 7, Kobe 7

2nd
Shaq 2, Duncan 3, Kobe 2

Its close

Personally I've got to give it to Duncan, but its is close to the point where its not worth argueing because its just opinion

[Maneva]

Some stats to contribute to the arguement

MVP shares for the decade

99/00 - KB 12th, TD 5th, SO 1st
00/01 - KB 9th, TD 2nd, SO 3rd
01/02 - KB 5th, TD 1st, SO 3rd
02/03 - KB 3rd, TD 1st, SO 5th
03/04 - KB 5th, TD 2nd, SO 6th
04/05 - KB -, TD 4th, SO 2nd
05/06 - KB 4th, TD 8th, SO -
06/07 - KB 3rd, TD 4th, SO 12th
07/08 - KB 1st, TD 7th, SO -
08/09 - KB 2th, TD 11th, SO -

Average position
Kobe - 5.9
Duncan - 4.5
Shaq - 7.7

(I called non appearances 15th just for averages sake)

1st team appearnces
Shaq 7, Duncan 7, Kobe 7

2nd team appearances
Shaq 0, Duncan 3, Kobe 2

3rd team appearances
Shaq 1, Duncan 0, Kobe 1

MVP
Shaq 1, Duncan 2, Kobe 1

Finals MVP
Shaq 3, Duncan 3, Kobe 1

All Defensive team
1st
Shaq 0, Duncan 7, Kobe 7

2nd
Shaq 2, Duncan 3, Kobe 2

Its close

Personally I've got to give it to Duncan, but its is close to the point where its not worth argueing because its just opinion

Great post, thanks. Looking at those numbers I'd agree it's almost too close to call, but to me Duncan and Bryant are definitely the top 2.

[dallaslonghorn]

Great post, thanks. Looking at those numbers I'd agree it's almost too close to call, but to me Duncan and Bryant are definitely the top 2.

The difference is that what Tim Duncan does (controlling the paint) is inherently more valuable than what Kobe does (controlling the perimeter). A great post player will score more efficiently than a wing and have more of an impact on defense.

So while the argument could be made that Kobe is better at being a 2 guard than Duncan is at being a 4, 99% of the time PF>SG.

Kinda like comparing a great safety with a great QB in football; two totally different roles on the team.

[Maniak]

There is no argument. Tim Duncan is the best player of the 00's.

[crisoner]

If Timmy played with the Knicks there would be no debate who the best player of this decade is.

But because he played in SA...because he has no flash to his game...he is not the first player you think about when people WILL look back to this decade.

But numbers don't lie so yes I would give it to Duncan as well.

And I want to say this...anybody saying that Kobe does not belong in the conversation is full of sh*t. Look at dudes stats..........they don't lie.



And to all the idiots attacking me on a argument I was having with another poster about a certain issue........please READ the posts before you respond with bullsh*t that has nothing to do with what we were talking about in the first place.

Thanks..................

[Disaprine]

:roll: butthurt bill simmons :roll:

[LA_Showtime]

I guess the whole Kobe Bryant is awesome charade is over. We knew you were BSing, Bill.

[catch24]

lol @ being more celebrated/popular having any correlation with a dude's production from the floor.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Honestly ShaqAttack what does it matter that Shaq was better than Kobe the first 5 years? They won the same amount of championships at the same time. Don't give me that crap about Kobe being 2nd option because that's ludicrous. How many 2nd options in the history of NBA gets 30 ppg?

Kobe wasn't averaging 30 ppg. The closest he came was 28.5 ppg and after that his next best season during those years was 25.2 ppg.

And yes Kobe WAS a second option. He was EASILY less important to the team than O'Neal and EASILY inferior as a player.

Shaq scored more EVERY regular season, playoffs and finals during the 3peat and that's WITH all of the double teams he drew, rebounds he grabbed and shots he blocked.

Kobe himself admitted he was a sidekick and Phil Jackson has called Shaq the number 1 option.

When you have another player clearly better than you, you're the number 2 guy, regardless of how good you are.



But from 2000 to 2009 (and 2010)...I'm taking the Bean......

2010 doesn't count, just like the 1999 season doesn't count. 2010 will count towards the next decade just like 2000 counted towards the last.

And Kobe was behind BOTH of them and usually by a large margin for the first FIVE seasons of this decade. That can't be ignored. Particularly in the Duncan vs Kobe debate.


No. O'neal missed 16 games in 02-03 and was out of shape the whole year. Kobe played all 82 games. That alone gives Kobe the huge edge. Kobe was easily the better defender. He made All-NBA 1st Team Defense while O'neal didn't make any All-Defense team. Kobe scored considerably more PPG--2.5 more ppg at only 2% less TS%--and that doesn't come close to wiping out the significant 2.5 PPG. Kobe averaged considerably more APG. . Kobe as a guard averaged 7 RPG! That is phenomenal. Better than O'neal, a big man, averaging 11 RPG. Kobe also shot considerably higher from the FT line and got considerably more SPG. Kobe was easily better in 02-03.

BPG>>>SPG

Ask any coach what they'd rather have. Shot blocking or someone who can steal the ball.

I don't care if Kobe was a "better" defender. He's a guard, he didn't make the impact Shaq did defensively. And Kobe in his high scoring years was not nearly as good defensively as his fans make him out to be. He wasn't shutting down players.

Who cares if he shot a better FT%? It doesn't come close to making up for Shaq's enormous edge in FG%

And 27.5 ppg on Shaq's efficiency with the amount of double teams he drew is better than Kobe's 30 ppg. Especially since that was boosted by a stretch where Kobe averaged 27 shots per game and his team went 5-10).

Once again, you lose.

[Big#50]

Manu and Tony were doing pretty well that season dude.
LOL WOW

[Big#50]

You cannot be considered player of the decade if Shaq wasn't a top player for 40% of the decade. Same with Duncan where has he been the last 2 years
Making ALL NBA teams.

[Big#50]

This guy is on drugs. Is he seriously trying to imply that Kobe's 81 point game wasn't the best performance of the decade? :oldlol: The last time someone put up that many points in a single game was over 40 years ago. Nobody cares if it was a regular season game or if it was against a bad team, bottom line is that it was a historic moment. Stein got it right.
No. The way he did it wasn't that impressive.

[crisoner]

2010 doesn't count, just like the 1999 season doesn't count. 2010 will count towards the next decade just like 2000 counted towards the last.



Dude I know that's why 2010 is in ( ).....
Just put that in there cause Kobe is still dominating now.

[hawksdogsbraves]

I love how the only people who don't like Bill Simmons are Lakers fans. BTW Bill Simmons is my idol.

[godofgods]

Simmons is by far the best NBA writer ever.

The worst? That has to be Adande.

[hawksdogsbraves]

Simmons is by far the best NBA writer ever.

The worst? That has to be Adande.

Agreed, except the worst is Chad Forde for sure.

Wouldn't it suck if you were a Lakers fan and had to hate Simmons out of principle and could never read his articles?

Are there any Lakers fans who can fight through the pain and admit that Simmons is the GOAT NBA writer?

[Alhazred]

Agreed, except the worst is Chad Forde for sure.

Wouldn't it suck if you were a Lakers fan and had to hate Simmons out of principle and could never read his articles?

Are there any Lakers fans who can fight through the pain and admit that Simmons is the GOAT NBA writer?

Well, I don't know about GOAT, but I think he's alright. He has his biases, but then most writers do.

[AAckley1]

I love Kobe's individual performances as much as the next guy, and I even hate the Spurs and their entire style of player.

But when it comes down to it, who would you rather have in the huddle with you in the Finals?

I don't know about you, but I'm taking the guy that people have un-bashfully labeled as the BEST Power Forward of all time. The guy 10 teams openly admitted to tanking their season to get. Tim Duncan has been on an All-NBA team every season he's been in the league. He has won 1/3 of the available championships since he's been in the league. All while being "The Guy" for his team.

As good as Kobe is, is he even a Top 5 Guard of all time? Because honestly, I don't think so. Kobe isn't going to supplant Jordan barring some "Jordanian" extended prime. He isn't better than Magic. Is he any better than the Big O? Is he any better than a cocaine free David Thompson? George Gervin?

Once again, not hating on Kobe, but how can someone who isn't a top 3 player at his position be the player of the decade over someone who is essentially the best ever at his position?

[D-Rose]

I love Kobe's individual performances as much as the next guy, and I even hate the Spurs and their entire style of player.

But when it comes down to it, who would you rather have in the huddle with you in the Finals?

I don't know about you, but I'm taking the guy that people have un-bashfully labeled as the BEST Power Forward of all time. The guy 10 teams openly admitted to tanking their season to get. Tim Duncan has been on an All-NBA team every season he's been in the league. He has won 1/3 of the available championships since he's been in the league. All while being "The Guy" for his team.

As good as Kobe is, is he even a Top 5 Guard of all time? Because honestly, I don't think so. Kobe isn't going to supplant Jordan barring some "Jordanian" extended prime. He isn't better than Magic. Is he any better than the Big O? Is he any better than a cocaine free David Thompson? George Gervin?

Once again, not hating on Kobe, but how can someone who isn't a top 3 player at his position be the player of the decade over someone who is essentially the best ever at his position?

Kobe is accepted as the #2 SG all time by most even his haters.

[1987_Lakers]

As good as Kobe is, is he even a Top 5 Guard of all time? Because honestly, I don't think so. Kobe isn't going to supplant Jordan barring some "Jordanian" extended prime. He isn't better than Magic. Is he any better than the Big O? Is he any better than a cocaine free David Thompson? George Gervin?

Kobe is a top 3 guard of all time, behind MJ & Magic. Lol @ David Thompson & George Gervin even being compared with Kobe.:oldlol:

[AAckley1]

Kobe is a top 3 guard of all time, behind MJ & Magic. Lol @ David Thompson & George Gervin even being compared with Kobe.:oldlol:

Sooo....Oscar Robertson doesn't exist?

Also, I'd love for you to prove to me how Kobe wins those first 3 titles without Shaq.

Put Kareem on San Antonio from 75' to 84' and your gonna tell me Gervin doesn't eek out at least 3 Titles? Gervin's career average's are near Kobe's, Kobe has four titles, three of which he played second fiddle. I love how much "value" people put on titles, yet devalue titles won by "team" players.

I also love how no one mentions that every title Kobe has won, he has done it with basically the best low post player in the league at the time. Trade Kobe for Duncan the day of the 97' draft (see: never would ****ing happen) and how many titles do the Laker's win with Duncan and Shaq? I'd venture to say at least 5. How many titles do the Spurs win with Kobe and Co.? 1? None?

[1987_Lakers]

Sooo....Oscar Robertson doesn't exist?

Also, I'd love for you to prove to me how Kobe wins those first 3 titles without Shaq.

Put Kareem on San Antonio from 75' to 84' and your gonna tell me Gervin doesn't eek out at least 3 Titles? Gervin's career average's are near Kobe's, Kobe has four titles, three of which he played second fiddle. I love how much "value" people put on titles, yet devalue titles won by "team" players.

I also love how no one mentions that every title Kobe has won, he has done it with basically the best low post player in the league at the time. Trade Kobe for Duncan the day of the 97' draft (see: never would ****ing happen) and how many titles do the Laker's win with Duncan and Shaq? I'd venture to say at least 5. How many titles do the Spurs win with Kobe and Co.? 1? None?

Please don't get started with that "what if" crap, it is what it is. Oscar Robertson is just below Kobe, the Big O never won a title as the number #1 guy, his teams underachieved every year dispute playing with some hall of fame players like Jerry Lucas and he was never liked by his teammates. Seriously, as the #1 guy he only led his team to one 50 win game season. Team success is a big reason why I rank Kobe ahead of Oscar Robertson. And George Gervin isn't in Kobe's league, Gervin was nothing more than a dominant scorer, he couldn't pass or play defense, he was a one-dimensional player, Gervin is more in Allen Iverson's league, not Kobe's.

[dallaslonghorn]

Sooo....Oscar Robertson doesn't exist?

Also, I'd love for you to prove to me how Kobe wins those first 3 titles without Shaq.

Put Kareem on San Antonio from 75' to 84' and your gonna tell me Gervin doesn't eek out at least 3 Titles? Gervin's career average's are near Kobe's, Kobe has four titles, three of which he played second fiddle. I love how much "value" people put on titles, yet devalue titles won by "team" players.

I also love how no one mentions that every title Kobe has won, he has done it with basically the best low post player in the league at the time. Trade Kobe for Duncan the day of the 97' draft (see: never would ****ing happen) and how many titles do the Laker's win with Duncan and Shaq? I'd venture to say at least 5. How many titles do the Spurs win with Kobe and Co.? 1? None?

:applause:

Great point. Duncan and Shaq on the same team? :eek:

This is not even a knock on Kobe really; unless you are MJ you can't build a title team around a dominant 2-guard. See: 2005 Lakers.

[godofgods]

Wouldn't it suck if you were a Lakers fan and had to hate Simmons out of principle and could never read his articles?


It would suck being a Laker fan because that means I'm a retard.

[Dresta]

I rate Big O over Kobe tbh.

[MaxFly]

Kobe wasn't averaging 30 ppg. The closest he came was 28.5 ppg and after that his next best season during those years was 25.2 ppg.

Bryant averaged 30 points in the 02-03 season. He had 30.0/6.9/5.9 with 2.2 steals.

[MaxFly]

:applause:

Great point. Duncan and Shaq on the same team? :eek:

This is not even a knock on Kobe really; unless you are MJ you can't build a title team around a dominant 2-guard. See: 2005 Lakers.

So... um... what happened last year? Or in 2006 for that matter.

[godofgods]

So... um... what happened last year? Or in 2006 for that matter.

David Stern happened dude.

[dallaslonghorn]

So... um... what happened last year? Or in 2006 for that matter.

Dominant post players obviously. If you have a great 2 guard and no good center (see Wade the last two years, Kobe after Shaq and before Pau) you're not going to be an elite team.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Bryant averaged 30 points in the 02-03 season. He had 30.0/6.9/5.9 with 2.2 steals.

I was referring to the 3peat.

[Allstar24]

This is not even a knock on Kobe really; unless you are MJ you can't build a title team around a dominant 2-guard. See: 2005 Lakers.
How do you say that with a straight face when it was proven as recently as last year that you CAN build a title team around a dominant 2-guard. Lakers won the title with Kobe as the #1 guy. Just STFU.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Simple question: Out of the three in their absolute peak prime, who would you build around?

The answer to this question closes the thread.

[Dizzle-2k7]

Simple question: Out of the three in their absolute peak prime, who would you build around?

The answer to this question closes the thread.

Absolute peak prime means jack shlt. Some guys' prime lasts only 3 years (shaq), some lasts 5-7 (kobe), some lasts an entire career (duncan) so youre answer doesnt close anything, kid.

[markymark]

Simmons is by far the best NBA writer ever.

The worst? That has to be Adande.

Hollinger. By far.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Absolute peak prime means jack shlt. Some guys' prime lasts only 3 years (shaq), some lasts 5-7 (kobe), some lasts an entire career (duncan) so youre answer doesnt close anything, kid.

Yeah, you're definitely a tool. Shaq's prime was from 1996-2004. That's 8 years. Duncan's prime was from '99-2008. Kobe's was from 2001-2007/2008 (give or take). It's between Duncan and Shaq, any one with a half working brain knows this.

[AirJordan&Magic]

Please don't get started with that "what if" crap, it is what it is. Oscar Robertson is just below Kobe, the Big O never won a title as the number #1 guy, his teams underachieved every year dispute playing with some hall of fame players like Jerry Lucas and he was never liked by his teammates. Seriously, as the #1 guy he only led his team to one 50 win game season. Team success is a big reason why I rank Kobe ahead of Oscar Robertson. And George Gervin isn't in Kobe's league, Gervin was nothing more than a dominant scorer, he couldn't pass or play defense, he was a one-dimensional player, Gervin is more in Allen Iverson's league, not Kobe's.

:applause: That kid needs his head examined. Anyone that honestly thinks tht Kobe is not the best sg after Jordan is a fool. The only sg that I can see being ranked at number 2 over Kobe is Jerry West.

Honestly, George Gervin???:roll: :roll: :roll:

With no disrespect, he might possibly be the most overrated player I've ever did research on. How anyone can compare him to Kobe Bryant is beyond me...

Anyway, I agree with your point about Oscar Robertson.

[Dizzle-2k7]

Yeah, you're definitely a tool. Shaq's prime was from 1996-2004. That's 8 years. Duncan's prime was from '99-2008. Kobe's was from 2001-2007/2008 (give or take). It's between Duncan and Shaq, any one with a half working brain knows this.

How can you possibly say 96 Shaq was prime Shaq?.. Shaqs prime started in 00, earliest 99.. before then dude was a BEAST physically but mentally he was not there (defense, full effort for complete games, etc)

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How can you possibly say 96 Shaq was prime Shaq?.. Shaqs prime started in 00, earliest 99.. before then dude was a BEAST physically but mentally he was not there (defense, full effort for complete games, etc)

Because of his age, production and his teams results. Shaq led Orlando, at the ages 21-24, to 50, 57 and 60 wins (93-94, 94-95, 95-96 season). At 23, Shaq averaged 28.0 ppg, 12.5 rpg, 6.3 apg, .3 spg, 2.5 bpg, 59.5% FG during the '95 NBA finals vs Hakeem. There goes your 'mentality' theory. Shaq was more dominant during 2000-2002 because of his weight gain. He was stronger, and faced far less competition those years than he did during the mid/late 90's. He averaged just as many blocked shots during the 2000 decade.

[AAckley1]

Please don't get started with that "what if" crap, it is what it is. Oscar Robertson is just below Kobe, the Big O never won a title as the number #1 guy, his teams underachieved every year dispute playing with some hall of fame players like Jerry Lucas and he was never liked by his teammates. Seriously, as the #1 guy he only led his team to one 50 win game season.

Exactly how many titles did you expect him to win against the Celtics?

If anything your further proving my point, A dominant 2 guard cannot win without a dominant post player.

Oscar's teams were constantly battered by Russel's Celtics. Once he got KAJ, they won a title.

I personally challenge anyone to find me a team (besides the Pistons teams that took advantage of porous defensive rules and MJ's Bulls) that won without a dominant low post player.

09' Lakers: Pau
08' Celts: KG
07', 05', 03', 99' Spurs: Duncan
00' - 02' Lakers, 06' Heat: Shaq
94' 95' Rockets: Hakeem
80's Lakers: Kareem
80's Celtics: McHale/ Parish
83' 76ers needed to sign Moses to make it over the Laker's hump

I can keep going if you like?

[AAckley1]

How do you say that with a straight face when it was proven as recently as last year that you CAN build a title team around a dominant 2-guard. Lakers won the title with Kobe as the #1 guy. Just STFU.

See my previous post

[MaxFly]

Dominant post players obviously. If you have a great 2 guard and no good center (see Wade the last two years, Kobe after Shaq and before Pau) you're not going to be an elite team.

So were those teams built around the post players, or where they built around the 2-guards.

Incidentally, in 2006, Shaq was anything but dominant in that finals series. He averaged 13.6/10.2/2.8 against the Mavericks.

Let's be honest here...

[MaxFly]

Yeah, you're definitely a tool. Shaq's prime was from 1996-2004. That's 8 years. Duncan's prime was from '99-2008. Kobe's was from 2001-2007/2008 (give or take). It's between Duncan and Shaq, any one with a half working brain knows this.

Lol, Bryant's averaging 30.2/5.6/4.6 right now, but his prime ended 2 years ago? Really?

[AAckley1]

So were those teams built around the post players, or where they built around the 2-guards.

Incidentally, in 2006, Shaq was anything but dominant in that finals series. He averaged 13.6/10.2/2.8 against the Mavericks.

Let's be honest here...

But there is no way they got to the Finals without Shaq's contributions in the rest of the Playoffs. Specifically the Eastern Conference Finals

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Lol, Bryant's averaging 30.2/5.6/4.6 right now, but his prime ended 2 years ago? Really?

Jordan averaged 29/6/3 during his final season as a Bull (13th year in the league). Was he in his prime?

[LA_Showtime]

I don't understand. Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace, two guys who dominated defensively, aren't considered to be a dominant big man committee but Bill Russell is?

[All Net]

Kobe is having as good a year as he has ever had maybe apart from 06. Across the board he has been nothing short of amazing. The way he has developed his overall game has been a surprise. When he was 25 who thought he could be this great without that amazing jumping abilty he used to have? i just hope Lebron develops his game when he turns 30..

[lakers87]

I honestly don't get where people compare Kobe's 81 game to Lebron's 48. Those were both incredible games, but where is the talk about Kobe's 2001 playoff run against the Kings/Spurs? Kobe's 48/16 where he looked like a man possessed to sweep the Kings and then following that up with a 45/10 game against the Spurs. That, I believe was Kobe's coming out party just like I realized Lebron was truly legit after he single-handedly destroyed the Pistons. From a historical perspective, Kobe's 81 was the talk around the water cooler for weeks, but from my POV, that game doesn't magnify Kobe's true impact for the Lakers from the macro side. This is coming from a huge Laker fan, btw.

My rankings for player of the decade are 1. Kobe 2. Duncan 3. Shaq 4. KG 5. Lebron

The top 3 can be discussed for hours and hours. All three have the rings, stats, longevity, dominance, but from an NBA perspective (where they are now into globalization of the game), the most discussed, whether it be ******ging or crucified. No player has had such a polarizing effect in the NBA in the past decade. No one player within this trio truly stands apart, so my deciding factor was the business aspect of the game, ratings, all star votes, jersey sales, most discussed to make my opinion. Reason I have Duncan over Shaq is he's declined at an alarming rate since Miami and I don't believe the best player for a decade can play for 4 teams, although AROD was close (I still think Pujols was the best, but that's for another time).
If Lebron had come in a couple years earlier, he would definitely be in the discussion for top 3, but including him over any of these four is doing a huge disservice to each of them. He'll have his time I'm sure over the next decade.

[KenneBell]

Jordan averaged 29/6/3 during his final season as a Bull (13th year in the league). Was he in his prime?
No but his numbers weren't rivaling and in some cases beating stats he posted from 3-7 years ago.

[1987_Lakers]

I personally challenge anyone to find me a team (besides the Pistons teams that took advantage of porous defensive rules and MJ's Bulls) that won without a dominant low post player.

'73 Knicks , '75 Warriors, '87 Lakers, '88 Lakers.

[KenneBell]

See my previous post
Your post still doesn't prove the guy's statement that a team can't be built around a dominant 2 guard. It's been proven. The current Lakers team was built around Kobe. Simple as that.

[aznboy2k2]

I think the real question is:

How many Kobe fans want Kobe to jizz all over their face?

[LA_Showtime]

I think the real question is:

How many Kobe fans want Kobe to jizz all over their face?
:lol How old are you? Ten?

[oh the horror]

:lol How old are you? Ten?


Im willing to bet no older than 15

[All Net]

^that ignore feature is a great feature...use it on that guy. All he wants is a reaction. It's obvious that his life is that sad that he gets off on pissing people off.

[LA_Showtime]

Im willing to bet no older than 15

I refuse to believe a 15 year old can act that way.

[branslowski]

Duncan>Kobe>Shaq this decade....I don't understand the logic of some to put Shaq above either of those guy's when he basically fell off in 05'...He was like a f*cking role player with the heat, not dominant and was not among the leagues best players...While Duncan and Kobe were...SMH.


Anyway, Simmons can suck a dick.

[KenneBell]

I refuse to believe a 15 year old can act that way.
I bet he's around 30. He's pretty mad the Lakers are doing well. I feel sorry for those type of people.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No but his numbers weren't rivaling and in some cases beating stats he posted from 3-7 years ago.

That's my point. He wasn't in his prime, but one can attribute those numbers to him attaining his supreme skill-set and being undoubtedly the most fundamental player in the game.

[Mikaiel]

I don't understand the logic of some to put Shaq above either of those guy's when he basically fell off in 05'...He was like a f*cking role player with the heat

Is that why he got robbed in the MVP voting in '05 ?

Some of Shaq's playoff games when the Heat won the title :

27 points, 11-16 FGs, 16 rebounds, 1 assist, 5 blocks.
30 points, 13-24 FGs, 20 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 blocks.
30 points, 7-16 FGs, 10 rebounds, 3 assists.
28 points, 12-14 FGs, 16 rebounds, 1 assist, 5 blocks.
27 points, 11-15 FGs, 12 rebounds.

Role player ? :hammerhead:

[aznboy2k2]

Im willing to bet no older than 15

I'll take that bet.

Lets bet avatars. :)
I got the perfect one for you.

[aznboy2k2]

I bet he's around 30. He's pretty mad the Lakers are doing well. I feel sorry for those type of people.

Don't feel bad for me. I love my life; I get to spoon you every night. Life couldn't get any better.

[aznboy2k2]

I refuse to believe a 15 year old can act that way.

Avatar bet me too. :)

I got a great one for you too. I know how you like Kobe and *****.