Player of the Decade?

[jlauber]

Since ginobli2311 brought it up in another thread...

who was the player of the decade of the 00's?

The criteria would encompass the ENTIRE decade, not isolated seasons (Shaq wins easily for best single seasons.)

[Court Vision]

It's between Kobe and Duncan. I'm going with Duncan.

[jlauber]

Incidently, I have no problem for those that might suggest Shaq. While his perfomance declined considerably after '05, he was so dominant in the early part of the decade, that perhaps it outweighs his overall performance enough to win the entire decade.

[imdaman99]

Kobe

Duncan

Shaq

Kobe kept it up the whole decade and is still playing at a high championship level.

Duncan has 3 championships without another superstar. He had at least 2 other very good players with him though. But he's no longer playing at a championship level.

Shaq was very dominant the first 5 years of the decade, but he's such a wash of himself and how he used to be now.

[Jacks3]

Kobe or Duncan. Shaq doesn't have a case. He's been irreverent since 2006.

[Carbine]

A better case can be made for Duncan than Kobe.

[game3524]

Duncan or Kobe.

[andrewj305]

Kobe

[game385]

It's between Kobe, Duncan, and Shaq. I have to go with Kobe since his game has seen relatively small decline in the decade and championships are pretty much equal. (I think, not sure if 2010 counts as the beginning of a new decade or the end of the last).

[jlauber]

I mentioned it in another thread, but Kobe was already among the best players in the league in the 00-01 season. He had an outstanding '03 season (30 ppg), and his '06 season was one for the ages, and he won the MVP in '08. Seven Finals, FIVE rings, two Finals MVPs, one scoring title, one game of 81 points and another in which he outscored the Mavs, a team that would go onto the Finals, in three quarters, by HIMSELF (62-61.)

Scoring streaks. Brilliant playoff performances (particularly against Duncan's Spurs), and even a dominant '08 Olympics (in which he CARRIED the USA in that last Gold Medal game.)

[jlauber]

It's between Kobe, Duncan, and Shaq. I have to go with Kobe since his game has seen relatively small decline in the decade and championships are pretty much equal. (I think, not sure if 2010 counts as the beginning of a new decade or the end of the last).

Good point. I would think that the decade would encompass 09-10, though.

[Quickz]

I'll say Kobe, Shaq only played good for half the decade so wouldn't be fair to count him.

I'd say Kove slightly over Duncan...I think KG has to be up there also

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
KG

[griffmoney2084]

kobe already won the sporting news player of the decade award

sorry


but if you need any more convincing just look at the ring and finals count



forget that kobe was the face of the league or won more rings


just the fact that from 2000-2009 kobe bryant spent 70% of the time in the nba finals should tell you who was more dominant

2000
2001
2002
2004
2008
2009


if we could count 2010 thats like 80% of the finals represented by KOBE


no contest

kobe was at the finish line twice as much




then you factor in duncan hasnt been a top 5 player in 5 years

and during the last couple years maybe not even top 10

kobe has been either #1 or #2 for the last 10 years

[ginobli2311]

keep in mind that the decade is from 00 to 09. the player of the decade is easily duncan.

2 mvps.
3 titles.
2 finals mvps.
10 straight years of 50 or more wins for his franchise.

factor in simply that duncan was a better player than kobe and it becomes a wider margin.

its debatable between shaq and kobe. but duncan was clearly the best player of the decade.

[jlauber]

keep in mind that the decade is from 00 to 09. the player of the decade is easily duncan.

2 mvps.
3 titles.
2 finals mvps.
10 straight years of 50 or more wins for his franchise.

factor in simply that duncan was a better player than kobe and it becomes a wider margin.

its debatable between shaq and kobe. but duncan was clearly the best player of the decade.


Even discounting 09-10, so Kobe with four season over 30 ppg, six Finals, FOUR rings, one MVP, one Finals MVP, one scoring title, and some statistical MONSTER games...

and Duncan was CLEARLY the best player in the decade?

And of course, if you INCLUDE 09-10, then what?

[griffmoney2084]

keep in mind that the decade is from 00 to 09. the player of the decade is easily duncan.

2 mvps.
3 titles.
2 finals mvps.
10 straight years of 50 or more wins for his franchise.

factor in simply that duncan was a better player than kobe and it becomes a wider margin.

its debatable between shaq and kobe. but duncan was clearly the best player of the decade.

duncans 2002-2003 was a better peak individually due to winning a title and a back2back mvp

but as a whole

kobe was more consistantly at the top of the league in player rankings and in the finals twice as long

winning more rings too

no contest

which is why kobe was named tnt and sporting news POTD

[griffmoney2084]

do a league wide player/ coach vote on whos the player of the decade


see who they pick
:lol

this thread and question is a joke

[ginobli2311]

duncans 2002-2003 was a better peak individually due to winning a title and a back2back mvp

but as a whole

kobe was more consistantly at the top of the league in player rankings and in the finals twice as long

winning more rings too

no contest

which is why kobe was named tnt and sporting news POTD

3 of kobe's 4 rings came as the 2nd best player on his team. sorry. all rings are not equal.

its duncan. mainly because duncan is just a better player. his regular season success is unmatched. he has a much greater impact defensively and is a much better teammate and team player.

you can't sweep all of kobe's failures under the rug.

[ginobli2311]

do a league wide player/ coach vote on whos the player of the decade


see who they pick
:lol

this thread and question is a joke

barkley and kenny laughed at the idea that kobe was the player of the decade. LOL. i love it. kobe stans will go so far to hype him up.

he's not duncan or shaq. sorry. deal with it. 3 of his 4 titles in the decade came as a 2nd fiddle. LOL. player of the decade? maybe most over-rated player of the decade.

[jlauber]

I'll let someone else do the research...

How did Kobe and Duncan fare H2H in their POST-SEASONs against one another in the 00's? Statistically, and in terms of W-L team record?

I suspect that Kobe did ok even as a "second fiddle."

[Heilige]

1. Kobe Bryant

2. Tim Duncan

3. Shaquille O'Neal

[necya]

I mentioned it in another thread, but Kobe was already among the best players in the league in the 00-01 season. He had an outstanding '03 season (30 ppg), and his '06 season was one for the ages, and he won the MVP in '08. Seven Finals, FIVE rings, two Finals MVPs, one scoring title, one game of 81 points and another in which he outscored the Mavs, a team that would go onto the Finals, in three quarters, by HIMSELF (62-61.)

Scoring streaks. Brilliant playoff performances (particularly against Duncan's Spurs), and even a dominant '08 Olympics (in which he CARRIED the USA in that last Gold Medal game.)

05-06 was for the ages for his fans, cause taking 30 shots every night with this kind of abused shots with a laughable % is ridiculous. and his 02-03 season was a good one as a ball hog whereas he had near him a guy who average 30pts at 60%, that's why they didn't make the 4th. thx kobe.

i think i will remember longer when he missed 30 shots in a single game, just crazy.

duncan or o'neal for me.

[ginobli2311]

1. Kobe Bryant

2. Tim Duncan

3. Shaquille O'Neal

kobe was better than duncan for 2 years.....maybe 3 years of the decade. duncan has more mvps. more titles as the best player. a higher PER. a better defensive rating. much better wins shares per 48 minutes. duncan won with less overall talent. duncan never came up big time short in the nba finals like kobe did in 04 and 08.

what more do you want? its not even ****ing close.

[jlauber]

3 of kobe's 4 rings came as the 2nd best player on his team. sorry. all rings are not equal.

its duncan. mainly because duncan is just a better player. his regular season success is unmatched. he has a much greater impact defensively and is a much better teammate and team player.

you can't sweep all of kobe's failures under the rug.

So when Kobe is averaging 30 ppg as the second best player on the team, his ring doesn't count?

[imdaman99]

I'm pretty sure Kobe was the MVP every year in the Spurs vs Lakers playoff series, outside of that debacle 26 point loss at home.

[jlauber]

I'm pretty sure Kobe was the MVP every year in the Spurs vs Lakers playoff series, outside of that debacle 26 point loss at home.

I would be inclined to agree. Four H2H matchups, and Kobe's Lakers went 3-1. Once again, I'll let someone else research the stats of those H2H playoff series, but I would be willing to be that Kobe held his own (even as the "second best player" on a couple of those teams.)

[ginobli2311]

So when Kobe is averaging 30 ppg as the second best player on the team, his ring doesn't count?

why is everything black and white with you people? there are varying degrees to everything.

let me make this clear. kobe's rings as 2nd fiddle to shaq count.....they just simply do not count as much as shaq's rings as the main guy. just like pippen's 6 rings do not count as much as jordan's. but kobe's count more than pippen's.......do you see the logic and path there?

its pretty obvious. so no......kobe's rings as 2nd fiddle are not as impressive as duncan's rings as the man winning with less talent. its that simple.

duncan was the best player of the decade by and standard or measure.

-more mvps and higher mvp awards shares
- better PER
- better win shares per 48 minutes
- much better regular season success and consistency
- no breakdowns when it mattered most in the nba finals like kobe
- no off the court problems that impacted on the court play
- much better defensive impact
- much better teammate

i could go on and on. and each individually duncan was better than kobe in at least 7 years. LOL....again. owned. now close this thread.

[griffmoney2084]

barkley and kenny laughed at the idea that kobe was the player of the decade. LOL. i love it. kobe stans will go so far to hype him up.

he's not duncan or shaq. sorry. deal with it. 3 of his 4 titles in the decade came as a 2nd fiddle. LOL. player of the decade? maybe most over-rated player of the decade.


lol barkley is the worlds biggest kobe hater and lebron rider

and kenny is his side kick

tim duncans own coach never even thought duncan was the best player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liIYL7YcePI


:roll: :roll: :roll:

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

3 of kobe's 4 rings came as the 2nd best player on his team. sorry. all rings are not equal.

its duncan. mainly because duncan is just a better player. his regular season success is unmatched. he has a much greater impact defensively and is a much better teammate and team player.

you can't sweep all of kobe's failures under the rug.

Duncan stopped be the better player when? '04, '05?

[rmt]

I'll let someone else do the research...

How did Kobe and Duncan fare H2H in their POST-SEASONs against one another in the 00's? Statistically, and in terms of W-L team record?

So we're to totally forget the lost seasons in the middle of the decade when LA either didn't make it to the playoffs or would have gotten killed by SAS (2005 to the Gasol trade)? Head to head should not count when for a few years one team doesn't even get far enough to play another. One is kidding oneself if one thinks that Kobe is the real reason why LAL 3-peated. Shaq was unstoppable in those years and the real reason for the 3-peat. Put T-Mac or any other premier perimeter player on the LAL and the same result would have happened.

From 00-09,

1. Duncan

2 MVPs
3 rings as the best player
Spurs are contenders every year


2. Shaq

1 MVP
3 rings as the best player
1 ring as second banana


3. Kobe

1 MVP
1 ring as the best player
3 rings as second banana
LAL - nowhere near contenders for 05, 06, 07

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Oh, and it seemed like Kobe kicked ass on the Spurs every time they played.
Even when they had a "Kobe stopper".
Kobe owns the Spurs. If Duncan was the better player, he should not allow his team to get "owned" by anyone.

[ginobli2311]

Duncan stopped be the better player when? '04, '05?
LOL

in 05 the spurs won the title. duncan's numbers for playoffs:

24 points 12 boards 3 assists

in 06:

26 points 11 boards 3 assists with a PER of 30.4

in 07:

22 points 12 boards 3 assists with a PER of 27.4

LOL. duncan was still the best player in the league all the way up to 07. look at his numbers. now remember that he is one of the 10 best defenders of ALL TIME.

my god you people give duncan no respect at all. its just such a joke.

[StacksOnDeck]

Obviously Kobe. What kind of thread is this? It's not even a debate.

[ginobli2311]

So we're to totally forget the lost seasons in the middle of the decade when LA either didn't make it to the playoffs or would have gotten killed by SAS (2005 to the Gasol trade)? Head to head should not count when for a few years one team doesn't even get far enough to play another. One is kidding oneself if one thinks that Kobe is the real reason why LAL 3-peated. Shaq was unstoppable in those years and the real reason for the 3-peat. Put T-Mac or any other premier perimeter player on the LAL and the same result would have happened.

From 00-09,

1. Duncan

2 MVPs
3 rings as the best player
Spurs are contenders every year


2. Shaq

1 MVP
3 rings as the best player
1 ring as second banana


3. Kobe

1 MVP
1 ring as the best player
3 rings as second banana
LAL - nowhere near contenders for 05, 06, 07

this. i just hate kobe stans. i can't take them anymore. trying to now look at head to head comparisons. its laughable. how about looking at the entire body of work....not just one detail. ****ing morons. god damn you people are the worst.

[Carbine]

Duncan:

2X MVP
3 titles as the inarguable best player on the team
2 Finals MVP's
7 All NBA First team
3 All NBA Second team
7 All NBA First Team Defense
3 All NBA Second Team Defense
68% winning percentage over decade as best player on team


Kobe:

1 MVP
1 championship as inarguable best player
3 championships as second banana
1 Finals MVP
7 All NBA Defense
2 All NBA Defense
7 All NBA First Team
2 All NBA Second Team
1 All NBA Third Team
70% Winning percentage as second banana.
59% Winning percentage as main man.


When you factor in Kobe didn't have a greater prime than Duncan.... everything points to Duncan being slightly more accomplished than Kobe during the 00's.

[jlauber]

I forgot...Kobe's Lakers actually went 4-1 against Duncan's Spurs in the 00's post-seasons. They also went 14-6 in their H2H games.

Anyone want to post their individual stats?

[ginobli2311]

Duncan:

2X MVP
3 titles as the inarguable best player on the team
2 Finals MVP's
7 All NBA First team
3 All NBA Second team
7 All NBA First Team Defense
3 All NBA Second Team Defense
68% winning percentage over decade as best player on team


Kobe:

1 MVP
1 championship as inarguable best player
3 championships as second banana
1 Finals MVP
7 All NBA Defense
2 All NBA Defense
7 All NBA First Team
2 All NBA Second Team
1 All NBA Third Team
70% Winning percentage as second banana.
59% Winning percentage as main man.


When you factor in Kobe didn't have a greater prime than Duncan.... everything points to Duncan being slightly more accomplished than Kobe during the 00's.


great post. now lets play the kobe (luckiest player in the league game). kobe came in to the league and got to play with one of the 8 best players of all time at his peak in shaq for 8 years. kobe was simply not good enough or mature enough to lead a team to a title for his first 10 years in the league. yet he won 3 titles because of circumstances.

so to even things out. lets give tim duncan the same chance. duncan started to decline a bit after the 07 season. but he would still be the best 2nd option in the league. so lets put lebron james (the best player in the league over the last 3 years) on the spurs with duncan. so duncan would have at least another 2 titles over the last three years if he played with similar talent that kobe got to play with when kobe was the 2nd option. LOL.

****ing kobe stan morons. GTFO.

[ginobli2311]

I forgot...Kobe's Lakers actually went 4-1 against Duncan's Spurs in the 00's post-seasons. They also went 14-6 in their H2H games.

Anyone want to post their individual stats?

so you are really resorting to head to head games to determine the better player over an entire decade? really.....you are that pathetic an idiotic. wow.

you have been owned. as always. please stop posting your non sense. its easily duncan. ****ing kobe stan moron ****.

stop rewriting history on here. and top under rating duncan and shaq. they are both far greater players than kobe. deal with it. remember when paul pierce was the best player in the 08 finals? imagine if shaq had let the likes of rik smits win finals mvp over him? LOL......its absurd to even think about it.

kobe is a great player. but he's just not in the class of duncan or shaq. sorry. no matter how much you want him to be. he never will be.

[Disaprine]

player of the decade from 2000-2010?
shaq is easily still the best.

Shaq during the early and mid 2000s dominated the league and won in a way no one has seen since Michael Jordan. he might have fallen around the 2006 or 2007 but its still more than enough for him to be the best in the decade. Kobe and Tim are tied for number 2.

[StacksOnDeck]

So pretty much Duncan and Kobe have had similar team success yet Kobe's personal success > Duncan's. Get mad.

[ginobli2311]

So pretty much Duncan and Kobe have had similar team success yet Kobe's personal success > Duncan's. Get mad.

not at all. duncan won 50 plus games every year of the decade. duncan was the best player on his team every year of the decade. duncan has more mvps. better numbers. better defensive numbers. higher mvp awards shares. more finals mvps. more titles as the man. no off the court problems that impacted play on the court. duncan was the better teammate.

seriously? what are you people smoking?

[rmt]

player of the decade from 2000-2010?

Decades last for 10 years - usually referred to as the 80s, 90s, etc.
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
2010-2019

So Kobe's 2010 ring doesn't count for this decade - just as Duncan's 1999 ring doesn't count for this decade.

[griffmoney2084]

guys this is a pointless thread



KOBE

WON

PLAYER

OF

THE

DECADE


-----> sporting news player of the decade - Kobe Bryant <-----





/thread

[griffmoney2084]

http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/article/2009-09-24/sporting-news-nba-athlete-decade-kobe-bryant-sg-lakers

[Bigsmoke]

Even discounting 09-10, so Kobe with four season over 30 ppg, six Finals, FOUR rings, one MVP, one Finals MVP, one scoring title, and some statistical MONSTER games...

and Duncan was CLEARLY the best player in the decade?

And of course, if you INCLUDE 09-10, then what?

I still think Tim Duncan at his best was better than Kobe at his.

[StacksOnDeck]

Kobe won player of the decade. Why is this a debate when it's already been settled? Lol @ you guys debating over something so stupid when it's settled.

[griffmoney2084]

Decades last for 10 years - usually referred to as the 80s, 90s, etc.
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
2010-2019

So Kobe's 2010 ring doesn't count for this decade - just as Duncan's 1999 ring doesn't count for this decade.


who cares

the only people who say kobe isnt potd is haters on a message board and charles barkley lol

[griffmoney2084]

http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/article/2009-09-24/sporting-news-nba-athlete-decade-kobe-bryant-sg-lakers

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Bigsmoke]

Duncan stopped be the better player when? '04, '05?

Kobe has only been better than Duncan in 06,08, and 09.

u could say 07 if u like

[Th3ShowMVP]

Lebron James














































































:lol

[Disaprine]

Decades last for 10 years - usually referred to as the 80s, 90s, etc.
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
2010-2019

So Kobe's 2010 ring doesn't count for this decade - just as Duncan's 1999 ring doesn't count for this decade.
i still pick shaq.

[jlauber]

so you are really resorting to head to head games to determine the better player over an entire decade? really.....you are that pathetic an idiotic. wow.

you have been owned. as always. please stop posting your non sense. its easily duncan. ****ing kobe stan moron ****.

stop rewriting history on here. and top under rating duncan and shaq. they are both far greater players than kobe. deal with it. remember when paul pierce was the best player in the 08 finals? imagine if shaq had let the likes of rik smits win finals mvp over him? LOL......its absurd to even think about it.

kobe is a great player. but he's just not in the class of duncan or shaq. sorry. no matter how much you want him to be. he never will be.

Ooops...Kobe's Lakers went 4-1 against Duncan's Spurs in the post-season during the 00's...and 18-8 against them in W-L's.

I don't have time right now, but if no one beats me to it, I'll post the series averages later on. In any case, Kobe more than "held his own" even as a "second banana."

[jlauber]

By the way...in terms of Career success, which obviously includes the decade before the 00's...I have both Shaq and Duncan ranked ahead of Kobe...

either Duncan or Shaq at #'s 6 or 7, and Kobe 8th. BUT, does ANYONE honestly believe that Kobe won't surpass them both by the time he retires?

The decade of the 00's...Kobe. No question.

[ImmortalD24]

1. Kobe Bryant

2. Tim Duncan

3. Shaquille O'Neal



Don't like it? Well.. too bad *****.

[Mr. Jabbar]

Kobe #1 of the decade, anyone else at #1 is disrespecting the game of basketball. /Thread

[rmt]

So pretty much Duncan and Kobe have had similar team success yet Kobe's personal success > Duncan's. Get mad.

What personal success are you referring to? Here are the career stats (since I can't filter out 00-09):

Duncan
2 MVPs
3 Finals MVPs
25.02 PER (#8 all-time)
21.1 pts
11.6 rebs
3.2 asst
50.8% FG
9 All NBA First team
3 All NBA Second team
1 All NBA Third team
8 All NBA First Team Defense
5 All NBA Second Team Defense
Rookie of the year

Kobe
1 MVPs
2 Finals MVPs
23.50 PER (#18 all-time)
25.3 pts
5.3 rebs
4.7 asst
.455% FG
8 All NBA First Team
2 All NBA Second Team
2 All NBA Third Team
8 All NBA Defense First Team
2 All NBA Defense Second Team

[jlauber]

One more thing...

Let's quit bragging up Duncan over Kobe in term's of Finals' performances. Duncan faced the Nets, Cavs, and Pistons in his three finals. The only quality team of that group was the Pistons. I'll post hi series numbers later, along with his H2H post-season series against Kobe. In any case, Duncan was hardly dominant against the Pistons...and while some here jump on Kobe's 6-24, 23 pt and 15 rebound performance against Boston in game seven...how about Duncan's game seven against the Pistons that year? 10-27, 25 pts, and 11 rebounds.

[lacasner]

Does this really matter? None of you are Kobe, you're just random dudes sitting in front of a computer.

Waste of time and energy tbh.

[BlueandGold]

shaq is nowhere near the discussion. Even in 2006 you could tell that he was rapidly declining. A player of the decade has to have been consistent throughout the entire decade.

The player of the decade is obviously kobe and it's not really even close. Sure Duncan has a few more MVPs but Kobe, even in his off years, has done things that have broken perceptions of what a NBA guard can do. Outscoring the entire Mavs team that eventually went on to the Finals in 2006 after 3 quarters and his legendary 81 point guard. All of this is on top of him winning the most titles and being in the Finals the most amount of times.

Kobe has been to the Finals 7 out of the last 10 years, that is truly a ridiculous %

Shaq has been to the Finals 5 times while constantly changing teams that all have been contenders. Every team that he leaves ends up having to rebuild and restructure because. Orlando, LA, Miami and now even Phoenix and Cleveland have all had to rebuild after shaq. This is not even mentioning all of the reports that say shaq has been driving a 'wedge" between the team the entire year.

Sad how a dominant player like that can now almost be labeled as a cancer.

yea and duncan has only been to the finals 4 times in the past 10 years and have always had to wait a year before getting a chance to win it all again.

Kobe has three-peated once and just now won back to back wins as well as MVPs.

lol @ ginobli no life

[Carbine]

By the way...in terms of Career success, which obviously includes the decade before the 00's...I have both Shaq and Duncan ranked ahead of Kobe...

either Duncan or Shaq at #'s 6 or 7, and Kobe 8th. BUT, does ANYONE honestly believe that Kobe won't surpass them both by the time he retires?

The decade of the 00's...Kobe. No question.

Please refer to my post in this thread. If you still come to the conclusion that Kobe was the best player of 00's no question.... you're not very bright or logical.

[StacksOnDeck]

Please refer to my post in this thread. If you still come to the conclusion that Kobe was the best player of 00's no question.... you're not very bright or logical.

You're a Colts fan. Bright or logical is not really up your alley.

[elementally morale]

Guys, listen.

As there was no year #0 the decade started on 1st Jan., 2001 and ends at the end of this year. Every decade starts with the year xyz1 with 1 at the end. There was no year zero, ever. So the first decade was from 1 to 10 and not from 0 to 9. Therefore, this decade is from 2001 to 2010 and the next decade starts on the first of January 2011.

Just saying.

The player of the decade is Kobe Bryant by the way. I don't want to argue if he was the best or he wasn't but player of the decade is not only about level of play but about superstardom as well. There was always something happening around Bryant. Not always something good... but something is still something. He will be remembred as the best player of this era 20 years from now, and it won't even be close. Yes, in a way it won't tell the whole story.... but that's just the way life goes.

[Carbine]

Guys, listen.

As there was no year #0 the decade started on 1st Jan., 2001 and ends at the end of this year. Every decade starts with the year xyz1 with 1 at the end. There was no year zero, ever. So the first decade was from 1 to 10 and not from 0 to 9. Therefore, this decade is from 2001 to 2010 and the next decade starts on the first of January 2011.

Just saying.

The player of the decade is Kobe Bryant by the way. I don't want to argue if he was the best or he wasn't but player of the decade is not only about level of play but about superstardom as well. There was always something happening around Bryant. Not always something good... but something is still something. He will be remembred as the best player of this era 20 years from now, and it won't even be close. Yes, in a way it won't tell the whole story.... but that's just the way life goes.

Superstardom and your level of popularity has nothing to do with how you should be gauged as a basketball player - the playing happens on the court, not off it. So that premise, while it may be true - shows the lack of "brains" for lack of a better word that fans have and I don't think we should take these fans opinions as truth, though I fear that will be the case 20 years down the road.

[ImmortalD24]

Again..

1. Kobe Bryant

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif

http://i30.tinypic.com/2yod0no.gif



2. Tim Duncan


3. Shaquille O'Neal

/thread :lol

[rmt]

i still pick shaq.

I have no problem with anyone who thinks that Shaq had a better decade than Duncan. He was so dominant/unstoppable in the first part of the decade that it evens out the decline in the second part. Hard to argue with 4 rings and 3 Finals MVPs.

Duncan did not have the peak that Shaq had but was more consistent throughout the decade. Duncan's peak was definitely higher than Kobe's. So if one goes by peak - Shaq but by accomplishments, I'd go with Duncan.

[rmt]

One more thing...

Let's quit bragging up Duncan over Kobe in term's of Finals' performances. Duncan faced the Nets, Cavs, and Pistons in his three finals. The only quality team of that group was the Pistons. I'll post hi series numbers later, along with his H2H post-season series against Kobe. In any case, Duncan was hardly dominant against the Pistons...and while some here jump on Kobe's 6-24, 23 pt and 15 rebound performance against Boston in game seven...how about Duncan's game seven against the Pistons that year? 10-27, 25 pts, and 11 rebounds.

This is a case of going by stats and not watching the game. How one can compare Kobe's game 7 to Duncan's game 7 is beyond me. Here's the recap from nba.com

http://www.nba.com/games/20050623/DETSAS/recap.html

In his first Game 7, Tim Duncan was second to none and gave the San Antonio Spurs their third NBA title.

Reaffirming his status as the best player on the planet, Duncan came up big in the biggest game of his career as the Spurs found the resolve to dethrone the Detroit Pistons, 81-74, and win the championship.

With his unique multidimensional talent, Duncan depleted and dissected the Pistons, collecting 25 points and 11 rebounds. He was the fulcrum of virtually every key play down the stretch.

"His complete game is so sound, so fundamnetal, so unnoticed at times, because if he didn't score, people think, 'Well, he didn't do anything,'" Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said. "But he was incredible and he was the force that got it done for us."

Shaky showings in Games 5 and 6 had many questioning Duncan's determination. Playing an all-or-nothing game for the first time, he did it all, rescuing the Spurs in the third quarter and controlling the game in the final period.

"It wasn't the greatest of games but there was a stretch where I felt really good and I just wanted to be assertive at that point," Duncan said.

"You follow your leader," Spurs guard Tony Parker said. "Timmy is the leader of the team, and he just carried us tonight."

Duncan scored when the Spurs needed it, then turned his teammates into stars. He even dove for a pair of loose balls, showing the Pistons he wanted the championship as badly as they did.

"They just kept coming to me and kept giving me the opportunities and I got one to fall in and two to fall in and things started happening," said Duncan, who made 10-of-27 shots. "Then I was able to draw some double-teams and got some guys some open shots."

"He put his team on his shoulders and carried them to a championship," Pistons center Ben Wallace said. "That's what the great players do."

Thriving off Duncan were Manu Ginobili, who scored 11 of his 23 points in the last 10 minutes, and wily veteran Robert Horry, who scored 15 points off the bench and collected his sixth championship.

Averaging 20 points and 14 rebounds in the series, Duncan captured his third Finals MVP award. He also powered the Spurs to titles in 1999 and 2003 and has put down the roots of possibly the league's next dynasty.

"In years past, we've lost six, seven, eight, nine guys in a year and rebuilt," Duncan said. "I think we've really got a core here that we're in love with, that obviously is a pretty decent core and we're going to have it together for a couple of years."

It also was the third title for Popovich, who was in a tough spot coaching against good friend and Pistons coach Larry Brown, who may have coached his last game and came up just short of going out on top.

"He made me feel real comfortable and he was congratulatory and is just classy beyond belief," said Popovich, who got his start in the NBA from Brown. "It felt weird."

"You want to win badly, but I also recognize the fact that another team deserved it," Brown said.

Detroit showed determination throughout the entire series, fighting back to erase a 2-0 deficit and showing amazing resiliency to win Game 6 on the road after losing Game 5 at home on an Horry 3-pointer in the closing seconds.

However, the Pistons did not get what they needed from several key players. Chauncey Billups, the 2004 Finals MVP, was held to 13 points on 3-of-8 shooting. Rasheed Wallace was hampered by foul trouble and held to 11.

Duncan opened the fourth quarter with a dunk to snap a 57-57 tie, and the Spurs never trailed again. A dunk by Ginobili and a 3-pointer by Horry made it 64-59 with 8:23 to go.

On one possession, Duncan passed out of a double-team to Horry, tracked down his missed 3-pointer, drew another double-team and found Bruce Bowen for a 3-pointer and a 67-61 advantage.

"You could tell when he caught the ball, how much more physical he was, getting in position and bumping and grinding and getting shots and making sure he got toward the rim, so that when people came at him he was in good position to open up a teammate," Popovich said.

Two minutes later, Duncan ran down a loose ball and called timeout, then drilled a 20-footer to keep the lead at 69-63 with 3:38 to play. After a basket by Billups, Duncan again burned a double-team with a pass to Ginobili for a 3-pointer.

"I think it was in that moment that we started changing the game and feeling more confident," Ginobili said.

"A lot of the shots they made, open shots, came as a result of us having a hard time guarding him," Brown said. "That's why he's such a great player."

The Pistons kept coming as a free throw and hoop by Billups made it 72-68 with 1:20 left. Duncan stalled the charge with a free throw, and Bowen stopped it cold by blocking Billups' 3-pointer. Ginobili sealed it with a layup at the other end.

"Once he went up in the air and I saw he was committed, it was a chance for me to react," Bowen said.

The Spurs shot better, held a 38-34 advantage on the glass and weathered 13 turnovers, which had a been a problem throughout the series. Parker scored eight points.

Richard Hamilton scored 15 points on just 6-of-18 shooting for the Pistons. Teammate Ben Wallace was unrelenting with 12 points, 11 rebounds, two steals and two blocks.

With the game on the verge of getting away from the Spurs in the third quarter, Duncan reeled it back in with 12 points in the last six-plus minutes, decimating Detroit's foul-depleted defense.

He powered for a pair of three-point plays and sank a pair of bankers as San Antonio turned a nine-point deficit into a 57-55 lead.

"There was a point there I got on a roll for a little while," Duncan said. "My shot felt good and things started going down for me and I just tried to be aggressive."

As expected with two defensive-minded teams in a winner-take-all game, it was the lowest-scoring first half in Finals Game 7 history.

Parker took a brief early seat with jitters leading to overpenetration and the Pistons grabbed a 12-6 lead. However, they also showed some nerves by missing six straight shots while the Spurs ran off 10 consecutive points, six by Horry.

The entire second quarter was a one-possession game, with both teams scoreless for a stretch of over three minutes. After Rasheed Wallace sat down with his third foul at the 5:21 mark, Ben Wallace had dunks on three straight possessions to help Detroit seize a 39-38 halftime lead.

Rasheed Wallace sat again with his fourth foul in the first minute of the third quarter. Undaunted, the Pistons rattled off nine points in a row, taking their largest lead at 48-39 on a spinning banker by Antonio McDyess, who came on for Rasheed Wallace.

"Rasheed was strapped all game," Brown said. "If you don't have your big people with the ability to play aggressively on Duncan, you've got no shot."

[Carbine]

Yeah, I have that game on DVD - he was much better than his final numbers suggest he was.

[jlauber]

This is a case of going by stats and not watching the game. How one can compare Kobe's game 7 to Duncan's game 7 is beyond me. Here's the recap from nba.com

http://www.nba.com/games/20050623/DETSAS/recap.html

In his first Game 7, Tim Duncan was second to none and gave the San Antonio Spurs their third NBA title.

Reaffirming his status as the best player on the planet, Duncan came up big in the biggest game of his career as the Spurs found the resolve to dethrone the Detroit Pistons, 81-74, and win the championship.

With his unique multidimensional talent, Duncan depleted and dissected the Pistons, collecting 25 points and 11 rebounds. He was the fulcrum of virtually every key play down the stretch.

"His complete game is so sound, so fundamnetal, so unnoticed at times, because if he didn't score, people think, 'Well, he didn't do anything,'" Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said. "But he was incredible and he was the force that got it done for us."

Shaky showings in Games 5 and 6 had many questioning Duncan's determination. Playing an all-or-nothing game for the first time, he did it all, rescuing the Spurs in the third quarter and controlling the game in the final period.

"It wasn't the greatest of games but there was a stretch where I felt really good and I just wanted to be assertive at that point," Duncan said.

"You follow your leader," Spurs guard Tony Parker said. "Timmy is the leader of the team, and he just carried us tonight."

Duncan scored when the Spurs needed it, then turned his teammates into stars. He even dove for a pair of loose balls, showing the Pistons he wanted the championship as badly as they did.

"They just kept coming to me and kept giving me the opportunities and I got one to fall in and two to fall in and things started happening," said Duncan, who made 10-of-27 shots. "Then I was able to draw some double-teams and got some guys some open shots."

"He put his team on his shoulders and carried them to a championship," Pistons center Ben Wallace said. "That's what the great players do."

Thriving off Duncan were Manu Ginobili, who scored 11 of his 23 points in the last 10 minutes, and wily veteran Robert Horry, who scored 15 points off the bench and collected his sixth championship.

Averaging 20 points and 14 rebounds in the series, Duncan captured his third Finals MVP award. He also powered the Spurs to titles in 1999 and 2003 and has put down the roots of possibly the league's next dynasty.

"In years past, we've lost six, seven, eight, nine guys in a year and rebuilt," Duncan said. "I think we've really got a core here that we're in love with, that obviously is a pretty decent core and we're going to have it together for a couple of years."

It also was the third title for Popovich, who was in a tough spot coaching against good friend and Pistons coach Larry Brown, who may have coached his last game and came up just short of going out on top.

"He made me feel real comfortable and he was congratulatory and is just classy beyond belief," said Popovich, who got his start in the NBA from Brown. "It felt weird."

"You want to win badly, but I also recognize the fact that another team deserved it," Brown said.

Detroit showed determination throughout the entire series, fighting back to erase a 2-0 deficit and showing amazing resiliency to win Game 6 on the road after losing Game 5 at home on an Horry 3-pointer in the closing seconds.

However, the Pistons did not get what they needed from several key players. Chauncey Billups, the 2004 Finals MVP, was held to 13 points on 3-of-8 shooting. Rasheed Wallace was hampered by foul trouble and held to 11.

Duncan opened the fourth quarter with a dunk to snap a 57-57 tie, and the Spurs never trailed again. A dunk by Ginobili and a 3-pointer by Horry made it 64-59 with 8:23 to go.

On one possession, Duncan passed out of a double-team to Horry, tracked down his missed 3-pointer, drew another double-team and found Bruce Bowen for a 3-pointer and a 67-61 advantage.

"You could tell when he caught the ball, how much more physical he was, getting in position and bumping and grinding and getting shots and making sure he got toward the rim, so that when people came at him he was in good position to open up a teammate," Popovich said.

Two minutes later, Duncan ran down a loose ball and called timeout, then drilled a 20-footer to keep the lead at 69-63 with 3:38 to play. After a basket by Billups, Duncan again burned a double-team with a pass to Ginobili for a 3-pointer.

"I think it was in that moment that we started changing the game and feeling more confident," Ginobili said.

"A lot of the shots they made, open shots, came as a result of us having a hard time guarding him," Brown said. "That's why he's such a great player."

The Pistons kept coming as a free throw and hoop by Billups made it 72-68 with 1:20 left. Duncan stalled the charge with a free throw, and Bowen stopped it cold by blocking Billups' 3-pointer. Ginobili sealed it with a layup at the other end.

"Once he went up in the air and I saw he was committed, it was a chance for me to react," Bowen said.

The Spurs shot better, held a 38-34 advantage on the glass and weathered 13 turnovers, which had a been a problem throughout the series. Parker scored eight points.

Richard Hamilton scored 15 points on just 6-of-18 shooting for the Pistons. Teammate Ben Wallace was unrelenting with 12 points, 11 rebounds, two steals and two blocks.

With the game on the verge of getting away from the Spurs in the third quarter, Duncan reeled it back in with 12 points in the last six-plus minutes, decimating Detroit's foul-depleted defense.

He powered for a pair of three-point plays and sank a pair of bankers as San Antonio turned a nine-point deficit into a 57-55 lead.

"There was a point there I got on a roll for a little while," Duncan said. "My shot felt good and things started going down for me and I just tried to be aggressive."

As expected with two defensive-minded teams in a winner-take-all game, it was the lowest-scoring first half in Finals Game 7 history.

Parker took a brief early seat with jitters leading to overpenetration and the Pistons grabbed a 12-6 lead. However, they also showed some nerves by missing six straight shots while the Spurs ran off 10 consecutive points, six by Horry.

The entire second quarter was a one-possession game, with both teams scoreless for a stretch of over three minutes. After Rasheed Wallace sat down with his third foul at the 5:21 mark, Ben Wallace had dunks on three straight possessions to help Detroit seize a 39-38 halftime lead.

Rasheed Wallace sat again with his fourth foul in the first minute of the third quarter. Undaunted, the Pistons rattled off nine points in a row, taking their largest lead at 48-39 on a spinning banker by Antonio McDyess, who came on for Rasheed Wallace.

"Rasheed was strapped all game," Brown said. "If you don't have your big people with the ability to play aggressively on Duncan, you've got no shot."

I'll post Duncan's complete numbers later, but I believe he shot .418 from the field in that series. And, if someone is going to rip Kobe for his 2004 Finals against the Pistons, then please mention Shaq's numbers against the Pistons, as well. If Duncan were a better player than Kobe in 2004 or 2005, Shaq obviously was a better player than Duncan.

And, I won't argue with Duncan getting a SLIGHT nod over Kobe for the first half of the decade. But the last half belonged to Kobe, and he was clearly better in the last 4-5 years. Duncan didn't even get a Finals MVP in 2007 against the Cavs.

As for a comment that Pierce beating Kobe in 2008 would have been like Smits beating Shaq...just completely ridiculous. Pierce will be a HOFer, while Smits was among the many 7-3+ centers who couldn't rebound a lick, and who will only be a able to visit the HOF. Incidently, Pierce winning the Finals in 2008 was certainly not a dominant MVP performance, either.

[Andrei89]

Duncan> Kobe

kobe could never win a ring on his own

in before kobe stans flippin out

[Jacks3]

Kobe outplayed Duncan in their 2001,2002, and 2008 series. He's lead his team to two championships in a row, which Duncan has never done, and 3 straight Finals. Duncan hasn't even made two straight Finals. Plus, he's simply the better player.This is easily Kobe.

[Carbine]

There is some real funky logic and revisionist history going on in this thread.

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

kobe could never win a ring on his own




what does that mean? please explain.
are you saying that Duncan won his "on his own"?

[TheLogo]

There is no debate.

Kobe is and was already named Player of the Decade.

[ginobli2311]

I'll post Duncan's complete numbers later, but I believe he shot .418 from the field in that series. And, if someone is going to rip Kobe for his 2004 Finals against the Pistons, then please mention Shaq's numbers against the Pistons, as well. If Duncan were a better player than Kobe in 2004 or 2005, Shaq obviously was a better player than Duncan.

And, I won't argue with Duncan getting a SLIGHT nod over Kobe for the first half of the decade. But the last half belonged to Kobe, and he was clearly better in the last 4-5 years. Duncan didn't even get a Finals MVP in 2007 against the Cavs.

As for a comment that Pierce beating Kobe in 2008 would have been like Smits beating Shaq...just completely ridiculous. Pierce will be a HOFer, while Smits was among the many 7-3+ centers who couldn't rebound a lick, and who will only be a able to visit the HOF. Incidently, Pierce winning the Finals in 2008 was certainly not a dominant MVP performance, either.

kobe didn't do anything in 05, 06, or 07. kobe has beaten in the 2nd round by duncan in 03 and kobe played the worst finals ever by an elite player in 04.

how does kobe own anything? kobe was better in 08 and 09. the rest belong to duncan.

so that is 8 years as the better player for duncan. more mvps. more mvp awards shares. 3 titles as the best player vs 1 title as the best player. duncan never flopped in the finals like kobe did in 04 and 08. duncan never quit on his team in a game 7. duncan made the playoffs every year and won over 50 every year. duncan's PER was better. duncan's win shares were better. duncan was a far better teammate both on and off the court. duncan was a far superior defender/rebounder. duncan is now easily the most under-rated player of the last 30 years if people aren't willing to put him over kobe with ease. it should not be a debate.

and the kicker. kobe played with a lot more talent. LOL.

seriously people. just give up. in no way was kobe better than duncan over the last decade. in no way.

[ginobli2311]

I'll post Duncan's complete numbers later, but I believe he shot .418 from the field in that series. And, if someone is going to rip Kobe for his 2004 Finals against the Pistons, then please mention Shaq's numbers against the Pistons, as well. If Duncan were a better player than Kobe in 2004 or 2005, Shaq obviously was a better player than Duncan.

And, I won't argue with Duncan getting a SLIGHT nod over Kobe for the first half of the decade. But the last half belonged to Kobe, and he was clearly better in the last 4-5 years. Duncan didn't even get a Finals MVP in 2007 against the Cavs.

As for a comment that Pierce beating Kobe in 2008 would have been like Smits beating Shaq...just completely ridiculous. Pierce will be a HOFer, while Smits was among the many 7-3+ centers who couldn't rebound a lick, and who will only be a able to visit the HOF. Incidently, Pierce winning the Finals in 2008 was certainly not a dominant MVP performance, either.

you want to know the flaw in your logic? shooting percentage does not matter as much to a player like duncan. why? because duncan's greatest quality is his defense.

why do you morons not factor in defense. duncan is arguably one of the 5 best defenders of all time. he can show on the high pick and roll and recover to protect the rim. he can guard both centers and power forwards. he protects the rim as well as anyone off the ball.

you can't just put up numbers for a guy like duncan. his impact on defense trumps anything he does on offense every night.

[Carbine]

There is no debate.

Kobe is and was already named Player of the Decade.

By some of the same type of people who voted Nash an a back to back MVP winner. Real legit source there.

[Meticode]

Kobe Bryant
Tim Duncan

[DatDudeD]

Its either Duncan or kobe, even though shaq was so dominant the first 5 years its still a award for the WHOLE DECADE. I am leaning a little towards kobe but with duncans consistency Team and individual its really hard to say. I mean kobe has been there 7 out of 10 years which is crazy and dont give me that whole 2nd fiddle thing that is circumstantial ANYBODY would have been 2nd fiddle to a prime shaq, even then he contributed heavily to those 3 titles. Duncans teams have never won less than 50 games and never missed the playoffs through the whole decade. I think the fact that kobe is still as good has he is or even better in certain areas and is winning this late in his career gives him a slight edge over duncan.

[Big#50]

Duncan took over playoffs with his D. Kobe took over playoffs by having Pau Gasol.
Duncan is the best player of this generation.

[DKLaker]

duncans 2002-2003 was a better peak individually due to winning a title and a back2back mvp

but as a whole

kobe was more consistantly at the top of the league in player rankings and in the finals twice as long

winning more rings too

no contest

which is why kobe was named tnt and sporting news POTD

Yes, clearly Kobe, no doubt, no question....not boring azz Duncan, not tired, half a decade Shaq.

[Jr Llaban]

Duncan and Kobe tie in this if you really think about it.

[SinJackal]

Why is it people always seem to think a player who scores more points is always better? Duncan destroys Kobe in rebounds and defense.

Duncan's winning % throughout the regular season is much better. He has 3 titles (and a title just before the decade too) as the main guy on his team. He has more MVPs, and he's always been a better defensive player. He's also rated higher on the "best players ever" list.

Kobe has 2 titles as the main guy, 3 titles on Shaq's team. Some even say Gasol was better than Kobe one of those TWO years he won without Shaq too. Less MVPs, lower rank on all time list. Worse winning %.

You cannot give Kobe full credit, or even half of the credit for the success of the Lakers when Shaq was on that team. Period. I count that stuff, but I don't count it as "his team", because it obviously wasn't. Kobe fans need to stop riding Shaq's success and claiming Kobe did it all himself. . .just like you newbs try to claim about the current Lakers' teams. Hilariously bogus.



I would be inclined to agree. Four H2H matchups, and Kobe's Lakers went 3-1. Once again, I'll let someone else research the stats of those H2H playoff series, but I would be willing to be that Kobe held his own (even as the "second best player" on a couple of those teams.)

Shaq's Lakers had all the wins. "Kobe's Lakers" has only one.

This has nothing to do with each player, and everything to do with the TEAMS. Teams win series, players don't. Invalid stat both ways.



Duncan stopped be the better player when? '04, '05?

rofl? After which Kobe's success completely dropped off. So you're going to claim Duncan sucked every year even though he won two titles since '04 as the best player on his team? While Kobe was barely making the playoffs and getting knocked out in the 1st round? gtfo.



I forgot...Kobe's Lakers actually went 4-1 against Duncan's Spurs in the 00's post-seasons. They also went 14-6 in their H2H games.

Anyone want to post their individual stats?

SHAQ'S Lakers are who were beating them. NOT "Kobe's". "Kobe's" Lakers only beat them once. Stop spamming the same garbage posts.

[raptorfan_dr07]

There is some real funky logic and revisionist history going on in this thread.

That ALWAYS happens when you deal with Kobe trolls like the ones in this thread(Stacksondeck, TheLogo, Immortal24, etc.)

Here are some things to look at:

-From the years 2000-2007, with the exception of 2004, the team that won the championship had either Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal. And even in 2004, the West team in the finals had Shaq.

-From the years 2000-2008, neither Shaquille O'Neal, nor Tim Duncan, missed the playoffs.

-Shaquille O'Neal was the cornerstone of three championship teams, and played a large supporting role in another.

-Tim Duncan was the cornerstone of three championship teams.(his other was in 99, just outside the decade)

-Kobe Bryant was the cornerstone of ONE championship team.(2010 is outside the decade).

-Kobe Bryant DID miss the playoffs in 2005.

-Kobe Bryant lost in the first round TWICE(06 and 07). The same number as Shaq(07 and 08) this decade and one more than Duncan(09).

-Kobe Bryant was a malcontent and team cancer during the years 2002-2004. The same couldn't be said about Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal.

-Kobe Bryant's finals stats pale in comparison to Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan.

****Shaq and Duncan are the only players with a legit claim to Player of the Decade, Kobe is a distant 3rd. Don't see what's wrong with that, there's no shame in being 3rd behind two guys who are unarguably top 10 players of all time. :confusedshrug: :confusedshrug: Shaq and Duncan dominated the years between 2000-2007. The decade ended in 2009. Sure Duncan and Shaq weren't dominating like before in 2008 and 2009, but their body of work those first seven years is enough. Unless people think those two years are enough to completely invalidate the entire rest of the decade. Which may be true for some people considering the past two years of Kobe's career has all his trolls and n*thuggers thinking he's better than Jordan. :rolleyes:

[raptorfan_dr07]

SHAQ'S Lakers are who were beating them. NOT "Kobe's". "Kobe's" Lakers only beat them once. Stop spamming the same garbage posts.

Also, "Kobe's" Lakers weren't even good enough to get to face the Spurs those years. They continually got owned by the Phoenix Suns, a team who the Spurs continually owned.

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Why is it people always seem to think a player who scores more points is always better? Duncan destroys Kobe in rebounds and defense.


Duncan is a better rebounder than Kobe? Really? What are you, freakin' Sherlock Holmes? I should hope a PF/C is better.

As for defense, how does Duncan "destroy" a multi-time ALL-D player?

[AirJordan23]

Legacy is based on perception, not reality so 20 years from now Kobe Bryant will easily be considered the best player of this decade as much as I hate to say it. I don't think he's the best player at all. It's between Shaq and Duncan to me.

If we're talking primes throug the decade, then its Shaq quite easily, actually. What Shaq did from about 00-02 was quite insane. Dominating the league. Man was truly unguardable and better than Duncan ever was.

As for their games, Duncan is obviously the better defender. Anchored historic defenses. Altered shots, held ground well and was a presence in the paint. Though Shaq's an intimidating presence in the paint and a pretty good shot blocker. He struggles with centers who can spread the floor and hit the mid range J since he doesn't contest a lot of shots and isn't willing to guard them. He'd rather stay and man the paint. Also not a good pick-and-roll defender especially in his Miami, Phoenix and Cleveland days. Defense has to go to Duncan. On offense, Shaq's better. More efficient and a better scorer. Amazing in the low post. Averaged a lot more points, has a huge advantage over defenders and his arsenal is underrated. His dropstep is one of the most unstoppable moves I've seen. Jumphook, use of the glass, baby hook, footwork, baseline spins are all a part of his arsenal. Also had a turnaround J in his Orlando days. Only negative is his free throw shooting. Though, its not like Duncan was an amazing FT shooter. I've seen him miss FTs in the clutch several times. Shaq on the other hand makes them when it counts. Duncan is more versatile offensively with his post moves, bankshot with range up to 15 feet, great passer out of the post and read doubles really well. Also a go-to-scorer in the clutch unlike Shaq. But, Duncan was never the scorer Shaq was so on offense its Shaq. To break down, who was better in what year, (taking in account both season and playoffs):

2000: Shaq
2001: Shaq
2002: Shaq
2003: Duncan
2004: Duncan
2005: Duncan
2006: Duncan
2007: Duncan
2008: Duncan
2009: Duncan

Duncan wins the year-to-year battle, but that had a lot to do with Shaq getting up there in age. If Shaq came into the league, around the same time as Duncan, there's no doubt in my mind he'd be better for a longer time. But, that doesn't really matter when talking about the decade. Just taking into account the 00s, Duncan has had the better career. But, Duncan in the 00s was never better than Shaq from 00-02. Shaq's finals performances are one of the greatest ever as is Duncan's in '03. And for the idiot who brought up Duncan's game 7 in the '05 finals, you should watch the game and see how his presence opened up the lane and the attention he drew made the team better. Ginobili, Parker etc benefitted from this. And Duncan was the MVP of the '07 finals. Parker had like as many assists as turnovers and the only reason he was given finals MVP was his higher scoring numbers. That had a lot to do with the trash defenders in Hughes, Snow and Gibson along with Duncan drawing all the attention which cleared the lane for him to penetrate. And this isn't taking into account Duncan's rebounding and defense. It's your choice whether you wanna pick the better player or the one with the better resume.

I'd go with Duncan first, Shaq second and Kobe third. But, like I said before, Kobe will be considered the best of the decade 10 or 20 years from now and that's what will matter to most people.

[Jacks3]

Kobe is a better player. Offensively, it's not even close. Kobe gives significantly higher scoring on better efficiency while being a much better passer and play-maker. Then, he's much more explosive, better at taking over games, and gives you way better clutch play. :pimp:

[Court Vision]

Duncan took over playoffs with his D. Kobe took over playoffs by having Pau Gasol.
Duncan is the best player of this generation.

Please. Duncan had David Robinson and Avery Johnson, two great leaders, in his first championship run. Then, he had Ginobili and Parker, two great players.

Neither player did it on his own. That is purely idiotic to think otherwise.

Kobe was great this past postseason also.

Both players make a great case, but I lean towards Duncan.

[ginobli2311]

Duncan is a better rebounder than Kobe? Really? What are you, freakin' Sherlock Holmes? I should hope a PF/C is better.

As for defense, how does Duncan "destroy" a multi-time ALL-D player?

lets take a look:

defensive rating: (if you don't know....its points allowed per 100 possessions)
regular season:
duncan 95
kobe 105

playoffs:
duncan 98
kobe 106

think about that.

now lets look at defensive win shares (if you don't know....its the number of wins contributed by a player based on defense):
regular season:
duncan 81.7 in 977 games played
kobe 41.4 in 1021 games played

LOL. duncan has doubled kobe in almost 50 less games played. not even close.

playoffs:
duncan 13 in 170 games played
kobe 7.1 in 198 games played

LOL. again....not even close.

now lets talk about how important protecting the rim is and how important duncan was to the great spurs defense. as i said before. duncan's best quality was/is his defense. his impact on the game defensively/rebounding is about twice as much as kobe's.

now. is kobe's 2.5 more points per game in the playoffs (what really matters) on much worse efficiency enough to trump duncan's huge advantage defensively/rebounding? hardly......give me the player that scores 23 a game on 50% and plays team ball and operates within the offense over a guy that scores 25.5 points on 45% and routinely refuses to run the offense and "shot jacks" his team out of games in the nba finals.

****ing owned. its not close. just please save yourselves more embarrassment and stop with the kobe ******ging. it gets old seeing you kobe stans under-rate duncan and shaq so much.

[Court Vision]

Kobe is a better player. Offensively, it's not even close. Kobe gives significantly higher scoring on better efficiency while being a much better passer and play-maker. Then, he's much more explosive, better at taking over games, and gives you way better clutch play. :pimp:

What? MORE efficient?!

Being more explosive means you are the better player?

:wtf:

[ginobli2311]

What? MORE efficient?!

Being more explosive means you are the better player?

:wtf:

LOL>

duncan ppg in playoffs 23.0 on 50%
kobe ppg in playoffs 25.5 on 45%

LOL.....all this crap for a lousy 2.5 more points per game on 5% less efficiency. i love it.

duncan ****ing owns kobe guys. you can't compare the two in terms of impact on the court.

[Court Vision]

Some even say Gasol was better than Kobe one of those TWO years he won without Shaq too.

Saying Gasol was the better player on the past 2 finals runs is a bit of a reach. Whoever says this is searching for ways to discredit Kobe.

[Jacks3]

What? MORE efficient?!

Being more explosive means you are the better player?

:wtf:
Yeah, more efficient.

Career TS%--
Duncan--55.3%
Kobe--55.7%

Peak
Duncan--57.9%
Kobe--58.0%

Now consider that Kobe gives you significantly better volume. That's a huge difference.

[ginobli2311]

Yeah, more efficient.

Career TS%--
Duncan--55.3%
Kobe--55.7%

Peak
Duncan--57.9%
Kobe--58.0%

Now consider that Kobe gives you significantly better volume. That's a huge difference.

he gives you 2.5 more points per game in the playoffs. thats not significant. and once again....ts% is such a flawed stat. we are talking about made shots. if you want to talk about efg% fine....but ts% is the worst ****ing stat.

[tpols]

Why is everyone trying to use individual defensive ratings and efficiency measures to compare two players who play opposite positions? Like a low post center is really going to shoot worse than a long range shooting guard? Seriously?

Look at what they did with their teams and how much success they had as individuals. Kobe put up 25+ a game with shaq during their runs. If Duncan was on this team instead of kobe and put up 25 a game (like he normally did) then he'd be the second best player on that team too. Kobe haters can be real dumbasses.



so you are really resorting to head to head games to determine the better player over an entire decade?
So first he admits that individuals shouldn't be judged on how many games their team wins...

not at all. duncan won 50 plus games every year of the decade.
and then he brags about how many games the spurs, oh I'm sorry, Duncan, won.
:applause:

Can someone ban this retard ginobli already?

[tpols]

he gives you 2.5 more points per game in the playoffs. thats not significant. and once again....ts% is such a flawed stat. we are talking about made shots. if you want to talk about efg% fine....but ts% is the worst ****ing stat.
Wait wait wait hold up. So when we use a legit formal stat that benefits the player we think is better it's wrong because it goes against your player and your argument?

ITS THE WORST F!CKING STAT MAN! IT DOESN'T COUNT! STOP IT YOU CANT USE THAT CUZ THATS WRONG MAN!:roll:

[ginobli2311]

Why is everyone trying to use individual defensive ratings and efficiency measures to compare two players who play opposite positions? Like a low post center is really going to shoot worse than a long range shooting guard? Seriously?

Look at what they did with their teams and how much success they had as individuals. Kobe put up 25+ a game with shaq during their runs. If Duncan was on this team instead of kobe and put up 25 a game (like he normally did) then he'd be the second best player on that team too. Kobe haters can be real dumbasses.



So first he admits that individuals shouldn't be judged on how many games their team wins...

and then he brags about how many games the spurs, oh I'm sorry, Duncan, won.
:applause:

Can someone ban this retard ginobli already?


moron retard. its all about context. its impressive for duncan simply because his teams have not been as talented as kobe's. kobe played with shaq you moron ****. stop ****ing posting. i never said its a black and white issue.

learn to use logic and context. why is everything either black or white...or love or hate with you morons?

seriously. you are all ****ing retarded and need to take a logic and comprehension class and come back on here and look at how dumb you are.

****ing owned. moron fuktard. you should be banned for being a mother ****ing retard.

[Jacks3]

No, TS% is the best stat to measure efficiency. Also, 2.5 PPG more is a significant difference. You also have to consider that Bryant played as the #2 behind Shaq from 96-04 while Duncan was also #1. If you look at their numbers from just their absolute primes( 00-05 for Duncan,05-10 for Bryant), the differences become much more pronounced. Plus, Kobe is giving you much better assist numbers while turning the ball over less. That's huge.

[Jacks3]

So first he admits that individuals shouldn't be judged on how many games their team wins...

and then he brags about how many games the spurs, oh I'm sorry, Duncan, won.
:applause:

Can someone ban this retard ginobli already?
:oldlol:

[ginobli2311]

Wait wait wait hold up. So when we use a legit formal stat that benefits the player we think is better it's wrong because it goes against your player and your argument?

ITS THE WORST F!CKING STAT MAN! IT DOESN'T COUNT! STOP IT YOU CANT USE THAT CUZ THATS WRONG MAN!:roll:

ts% is flawed. i have said this a number of times. the reason fg% and efg% are better is because they account for made baskets. made baskets are very very important to the flow of the game and many other different things. i'm not going to debate this with you.

if you want to use ts% fine. it still doesnt come close to making up for kobe's lack of team play and much worse rebounding and defense.

use whatever stat you want. duncan still owns kobe just like i own your sorry ass in every debate.

[ginobli2311]

No, TS% is the best stat to measure efficiency. Also, 2.5 PPG more is a significant difference. You also have to consider that Bryant played as the #2 behind Shaq from 96-04 while Duncan was also #1. If you look at their numbers from just their absolute primes( 00-05 for Duncan,05-10 for Bryant), the differences become much more pronounced. Plus, Kobe is giving you much better assist numbers while turning the ball over less. That's huge.


HERE WE GO. THIS IS GOING TO BE SO AWESOME.

CAREER TS% IN THE PLAYOFFS:

DUNCAN 55.1%

KOBE 54.3%

GET THE **** OUT MORONS. YOU HAVE BEEN OWNED. BY ANY STANDARD OR MEASURE DUNCAN IS A MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN KOBE. SORRY. DEAL WITH IT MORON KOBE FUKTARD.

IF TS% IS THE END ALL BE ALL LIKE YOU JUST SAID.....THEN THATS JUST ANOTHER NAIL IN KOBE'S COFFIN.

****ING OWNED. DAMN THAT FELT GOOD.

[StacksOnDeck]

and then he brags about how many games the spurs, oh I'm sorry, Duncan, won.


Can someone ban this retard ginobli already?

He did it in another thread too. He said Wade had a better season than Kobe in 05 and 06 because his team went further in the playoffs then I say so Kobe had better seasons than Wade the past 3 years and he said no because Wade's numbers were better. :oldlol:

Little boy can't follow his own criteria.

[tpols]

ts% is flawed. i have said this a number of times. the reason fg% and efg% are better is because they account for made baskets. made baskets are very very important to the flow of the game and many other different things. i'm not going to debate this with you.

if you want to use ts% fine. it still doesnt come close to making up for kobe's lack of team play and much worse rebounding and defense.

use whatever stat you want. duncan still owns kobe just like i own your sorry ass in every debate.
ts% is flawed because it doesn't support your argument. simple as that.

And lol at defense and rebounding!

HMM a center beat a SG in rebounding? That must mean he's better!

By your logic dwight howard should have a case over kobe:lol

[Jacks3]

He did it in another thread too. He said Wade had a better season than Kobe in 05 and 06 because his team went further in the playoffs then I say so Kobe had better seasons than Wade the past 3 years and he said no because Wade's numbers were better. :oldlol:

Little boy can't follow his own criteria.
:oldlol:

[ginobli2311]

No, TS% is the best stat to measure efficiency. Also, 2.5 PPG more is a significant difference. You also have to consider that Bryant played as the #2 behind Shaq from 96-04 while Duncan was also #1. If you look at their numbers from just their absolute primes( 00-05 for Duncan,05-10 for Bryant), the differences become much more pronounced. Plus, Kobe is giving you much better assist numbers while turning the ball over less. That's huge.


this is such a great day. kobe fans now running to small variations in stats....but wait a minute. i thought stats were meaningless. so i guess lebron's stats now hold more weight when we compare kobe to lebron.

****ing owned again.

and sorry. duncan averages 1.3 less assists per game. hardly enough of a difference to make your claim. also....duncan requires a double much more often than kobe ever did. so in reality duncan is creating much more for his teammates just by being on the court.

****ing owned again.

damn this feels good.

[ginobli2311]

ts% is flawed because it doesn't support your argument. simple as that.

And lol at defense and rebounding!

HMM a center beat a SG in rebounding? That must mean he's better!

By your logic dwight howard should have a case over kobe:lol

i guess you missed this. it actually does support my argument. what can you say now????? moron fuktard.

HERE WE GO. THIS IS GOING TO BE SO AWESOME.

CAREER TS% IN THE PLAYOFFS:

DUNCAN 55.1%

KOBE 54.3%

GET THE **** OUT MORONS. YOU HAVE BEEN OWNED. BY ANY STANDARD OR MEASURE DUNCAN IS A MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN KOBE. SORRY. DEAL WITH IT MORON KOBE FUKTARD.

IF TS% IS THE END ALL BE ALL LIKE YOU JUST SAID.....THEN THATS JUST ANOTHER NAIL IN KOBE'S COFFIN.

****ING OWNED. DAMN THAT FELT GOOD.

[ginobli2311]

He did it in another thread too. He said Wade had a better season than Kobe in 05 and 06 because his team went further in the playoffs then I say so Kobe had better seasons than Wade the past 3 years and he said no because Wade's numbers were better. :oldlol:

Little boy can't follow his own criteria.

all about context and logic moron. i know you can't grasp either one. so i guess kobe should get credit for going 28-38 with the likes of butler and odom on his team?

yea...that sounds about right.

[Court Vision]

You also have to consider that Bryant played as the #2 behind Shaq from 96-04 while Duncan was also #1.

Shouldn't this be in an argument for Duncan, not Kobe.

[Jacks3]

Yeah, Duncan has the higher career playoff TS%, but Kobe has the higher career TS%, higher peak TS%, and has consistently outperformed Duncan in playoff TS% the last 5 or so years. Kobe is more efficient.

[tpols]

i guess you missed this. it actually does support my argument. what can you say now????? moron fuktard.

HERE WE GO. THIS IS GOING TO BE SO AWESOME.

CAREER TS% IN THE PLAYOFFS:

DUNCAN 55.1%

KOBE 54.3%

GET THE **** OUT MORONS. YOU HAVE BEEN OWNED. BY ANY STANDARD OR MEASURE DUNCAN IS A MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN KOBE. SORRY. DEAL WITH IT MORON KOBE FUKTARD.

IF TS% IS THE END ALL BE ALL LIKE YOU JUST SAID.....THEN THATS JUST ANOTHER NAIL IN KOBE'S COFFIN.

****ING OWNED. DAMN THAT FELT GOOD.
Not gonna lie brah you sound like youre jerking off:lol But for real kobe's lakers have owned this decade and he led his team to back to back rings the past two years to validate his status as the man.

In before pau gasol is labeled another superstar.:roll:

[Jacks3]

Shouldn't this be in an argument for Duncan, not Kobe.
Not if we're determining who the better player is. Context matters. In terms of player of the decade...

00-09---Clearly Duncan
01--10---Clearly Kobe.

[ginobli2311]

Yeah, Duncan has the higher career playoff TS%, but Kobe has the higher career TS%, higher peak TS%, and has consistently outperformed Duncan in playoff TS% the last 5 or so years. Kobe is more efficient.

nope. playoff level of play trumps all that when you get this large of a sample size.

we are talking about the entire body of work. sorry dude. not going to win this one.

so again. duncan is more efficient offensively and only scores 2.5 less points per game. LOL.

in reality. the only thing kobe does better than duncan is shoot more shots per game. LOL

[ginobli2311]

Not gonna lie brah you sound like youre jerking off:lol But for real kobe's lakers have owned this decade and he led his team to back to back rings the past two years to validate his status as the man.

In before pau gasol is labeled another superstar.:roll:

kobe's ring this year falls outside the decade. so it has no place here. do you really want to get into comparing the title teams of the spurs compared to the title teams of kobe?

i would hope note. kobe has played with a ton more talent than duncan.

[StacksOnDeck]

nope. playoff level of play trumps all that when you get this large of a sample size.

we are talking about the entire body of work. sorry dude. not going to win this one.

so again. duncan is more efficient offensively and only scores 2.5 less points per game. LOL.

in reality. the only thing kobe does better than duncan is shoot more shots per game. LOL

is Duncan better than Kobe right now?

[ginobli2311]

is Duncan better than Kobe right now?

of course not. kobe is clealry better right now and has been since 08.

[Jacks3]

Actually, regular season counts more because the sample size is much, much bigger, especially considering Duncan's TS% advantage in the PS is only 0.8% on much lower volume. Plus, Kobe's TS% in his prime are higher than Duncan's anyway.

[Court Vision]

Not gonna lie brah you sound like youre jerking off:lol But for real kobe's lakers have owned this decade and he led his team to back to back rings the past two years to validate his status as the man.

In before pau gasol is labeled another superstar.:roll:

When it comes to the 00-09 decade, Kobe has 4, Duncan has 3.

Kobe won 1 as the main option, Duncan won all 3 as the leader.

Hard to say either won completely dominated the decade.

[Court Vision]

Actually, regular season counts more because the sample size is much, much bigger, especially considering Duncan's TS% advantage in the PS is only 0.8% on much lower volume. Plus, Kobe's TS% in his prime are higher than Duncan's anyway.

I hope you consider LeBron a much better player at this point than Kobe if you use this logic.

[ginobli2311]

Actually, regular season counts more because the sample size is much, much bigger, especially considering Duncan's TS% advantage in the PS is only 0.8% on much lower volume. Plus, Kobe's TS% in his prime are higher than Duncan's anyway.

so .8% means nothing.

yet kobe's ts% in the regular season is only .4% better than duncan's.....yet that is a big difference.

and again. you are factoring in free throw shooting way too much in this comparison. efg% is a much better value. and once again duncan's is better than kobe's.

your points hold no water whatsoever. you are attacking duncan's offense with kobe's offense. and even still....kobe's offense overall barely wins when you factor in efficiency and ball domination.

[Jacks3]

I hope you consider LeBron a much better player at this point than Kobe if you use this logic.
Last two years? Hell yeah. LeBron scores better volume on much better efficiency. I've always had LBJ #1 the last two years. He's been at the GOAT level.

[tpols]

kobe's ring this year falls outside the decade. so it has no place here. do you really want to get into comparing the title teams of the spurs compared to the title teams of kobe?

i would hope note. kobe has played with a ton more talent than duncan.
ok lol

because ginobli, parker, bowen, and a slew of fundamental players and 3pt shooters really comprise a terrible team...

It's pathetic how you think Duncan's teams have been terrible over the decade. Duncan's been playing along two proven 20ppg scorers and great backup for years... Parker during their playoff runs as averaged as high as 28 for a whole run and was the best penetrating and finishing PG in the league. Kobe has had significantly less talent than duncan since shaq left overall. This past year is when the team really filled out.

[Court Vision]

Last two years? Hell yeah. LeBron scores better volume on much better efficiency. I've always had LBJ #1 the last two years. He's been at the GOAT level.

Just clarifying.

[Jacks3]

No, I said the 0.8% doesn't matter much because 1) Duncan's volume is worse 2) The sample size is much lower than in the reg season. I never said that Kobe's TS% advantage in the regular season is a huge difference. I said Kobe's ability to give much better volume on better( if only slightly) efficiency is a huge difference. And it is. Plus, 1) The sample size is much bigger 2) Prime Kobe(05-10) is more efficient in the playoffs anyway( if you consider Duncan's Prime to be 00-05 like I do)

[rmt]

Kobe is a better player. Offensively, it's not even close. Kobe gives significantly higher scoring on better efficiency while being a much better passer and play-maker. Then, he's much more explosive, better at taking over games, and gives you way better clutch play. :pimp:

I'm not seeing better efficiency

Duncan
25.02 PER (#8 all-time)
21.1 pts
11.6 rebs
3.2 asst
50.8% FG

Kobe
23.50 PER (#18 all-time)
25.3 pts
5.3 rebs
4.7 asst
45.5% FG

Defensively, (the other half of the court), Duncan has anchored one of the greatest defensive teams of all-time. He has also had more dominant post-season/Finals performances than Kobe. I will give you explosive though (as if that's important).

[Jacks3]

*shrug* When I mean efficiency I'm talking about TS%, which is the best measure of it. Kobe wins there. Plus, PER isn't a measure of efficiency, but productivity. Now, if you want to argue for Duncan using PER, that's fine, but then consider the fact that Kobe's Peak PER is higher than Duncan's Peak PER. Personally, I think PER is a crap stat for a variety of reasons.

[Jacks3]

I'm not seeing better efficiency


I will give you explosive though (as if that's important).
Oh, it is. Kobe's ability to explode for quarters/half's is one of his greatest strengths.

[chips93]

duncan edges kobe

duncan is better in my opinion because his defensive efficiency is much higher than kobe's, and kobe isnt as good a teammate

[SinJackal]

Duncan is a better rebounder than Kobe? Really? What are you, freakin' Sherlock Holmes? I should hope a PF/C is better.

As for defense, how does Duncan "destroy" a multi-time ALL-D player?

Duncan has been on the all-D team every year he's been in the NBA. Kobe has not. Also, there's far more competition for that spot at PF than SG. Duncan also has more all NBA first D teams than Kobe too.

And everybody knows the Guard position in general is not always given to the best defensive players. You rarely don't see superstar scorer names on those lines on at least one of the all-d teams, even when low scoring players who play hard D' were obviously better. Go look at the recent history. The guard position is littered with scorers who have good but not great D'. There's never 2 really good defenders at once, they always throw in a big name regardless of how deserving they are. Kobe does not shut down star players.

Duncan's position is also more important than Kobe's as far as defense goes, and he does a better job comparatively. As someone already pointed out, Duncan not only has more defensive win shares than Kobe, but he's had more than Kobe every single year. Kobe has never been better.

That's how Duncan obviously, without question, destroys Kobe defensively. He is far better. There is no argument.



Saying Gasol was the better player on the past 2 finals runs is a bit of a reach. Whoever says this is searching for ways to discredit Kobe.

I didn't say he was. I didn't even say anybody else claimed that. Some believe Gasol was more important to the Laker's success last season than Kobe was. Personally, I have seen Gasol's performances help put the Lakers over the top for wins more than Kobe has last season, but I didn't watch every Lakers game, so I can't personally say he was better definitively. Several others feel that way though.



Kobe is a better player. Offensively, it's not even close. Kobe gives significantly higher scoring on better efficiency while being a much better passer and play-maker. Then, he's much more explosive, better at taking over games, and gives you way better clutch play. :pimp:

I don't think you understand what "efficient" means. Significantly? rofl? Are you kidding me? He's WORSE, not better. How the hell could you have possibly thought he was more efficient, much less "significantly" moreso? Duncan is a career 51% scorer. Kobe is 45.5% career. Even if you're using EFG% which gives you 50% more credit for threes, Kobe is a 49% EFG%, vs Duncan's 51%. Still worse. Less efficient no matter how you look at is.

Also, Kobe is not better at taking over games than Duncan was in his prime. Duncan has several of the best playoff performances of all time. Does Kobe have any?

Duncan has been a far better overall player. Kobe has just been a better scorer. And scoring is not the only aspect of basketball.

Kobe scores 4 more PPG and 1 1/2 more assists, Duncan gets 6 more boards, scores more efficiently, turns the ball over less, fouls less, defends far better.

Sorry but 4 PPG and 1.5 assists isn't better than 6 boards 6% better FG%, less fouls/turnovers, and far better defense. Duncan's also more clutch. Simply compare playoff stats with eachother, and playoff defense.

[Jacks3]

duncan edges kobe


At least you know it's close. People in this thread acting like we're comparing Duncan to some scrub instead a guy who is arguably top 10 ever.:lol It's close either way.

[Court Vision]

If we want to throw out a bunch of over-analyzed statistics, here are some.

Win Shares
Duncan - 162.3 in 13 seasons
Kobe - 145.9 in 14 seasons

Win Shares in Playoffs
Duncan - 28.6
Kobe - 26.1

Win Shares per 48 minutes (wins per 48 minutes) (average is .100)
Duncan - .219 (peak .257)
Kobe - .187 (peak .224)

Win Shares per 48 Minutes Playoffs
Duncan - .204 (peak .279)
Kobe - .161 (peak .260)

Defensive Rating (points allowed per 100 possessions)
Duncan - 95
Kobe - 105

Defensive Rating Playoffs
Duncan - 98
Kobe - 106

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Duncan has been on the all-D team every year he's been in the NBA. Kobe has not. Also, there's far more competition for that spot at PF than SG. Duncan also has more all NBA first D teams than Kobe too.


does not constitute "destroy".

[SinJackal]

*shrug* When I mean efficiency I'm talking about TS%, which is the best measure of it. Kobe wins there. Plus, PER isn't a measure of efficiency, but productivity. Now, if you want to argue for Duncan using PER, that's fine, but then consider the fact that Kobe's Peak PER is higher than Duncan's Peak PER. Personally, I think PER is a crap stat for a variety of reasons.

TS% is the worst measure of a player's efficiency, actually. So is EFG%. It doesn't take into account that bricking a 3 usually results in a change of possession. Bricking a three is worse than bricking a layup or mid range jumpshot since you at least have a higher chance at getting the ball back. TS% is what fans of players who jack up a lot of shots try to use to claim their player is better. Sorry, but if someone is putting in 60% of their shots, it's better than someone who misses 55% of them. That's 15% more bricks and chances of possession changes with nothing to show for it.

Also, when someone missed their first free throw (when taking two), there's no chance of a turnover. So it matters less to miss that than a second. TS% also doesn't take that into account.

TS% is an even worse stat than PER is.

[SinJackal]

does not constitute "destroy".

Read the post before yours. It clearly points out how Duncan is better than Kobe defensively., and has been every year.

On average, Kobe on the floor allows 10 more PPG than Duncan does.

Destroyed. Bigtime.

[Jacks3]

Peak PER
Kobe--28.1
Duncan--27.1

Offensive Rating Career
Kobe--112
Duncan--110

Peak Offensive Rating
Kobe--115
Duncan--114

Career TS%
Kobe--55.7%
Duncan--55.3%

:banana:

[Jacks3]

Kobe gives you much better volume at better efficiency levels. That's significant. Kobe has a bunch of great playoff games and, yes, is better at taking games over. Watch Game 6 of the WCF. Or Game 3 of the 2009 WCF. Or Game 1 of the 2010 WCSF. Nobody in the league takes games over with the regularity Bryant does. Kobe is the better player.

[Jacks3]

No, TS% is the best stat. eFG% doesn't take FT's into account, FG% doesn't take into account FT's or threes, which makes it a horrible indicator of efficiency.You don't really lose any information by using a combined shooting stat. No one has thrown out the old FG%, FT%, and 3FG%.


But unless you want to look at 3 different accuracies, and then also look at 3 different frequency-of-attempt rates, even the shooting% don't tell you how effective a player was at getting points.

I can't look at six columns of % and tell how players rank in their overall shooting%. That's what TS% does.

[Jacks3]

Anyway, having ts%, fg%, 3p% and ft% you can basically say how a player plays on offense in terms of scoring. I used an example for this. Let me compare the 2007/08 JR Smith and Jason Kapono here.

Smith had 46/40/72 in that season, Kapono had 49/48/86. Now the non-advanced stats numbers will give you the impression that Kapono was more efficient as a scorer, in fact he had the higher fg%, 3p% and ft%. But a look at ts% reveals something here. JR Smith had 60.3 ts%, Kapono had 56.1 ts%. How is that possible? Well, rather easy, Smith used his ability to drive to the hoop (or cutting, slashing) and his range to either get a close shot, 3pt shot or a free throw. All of those are rather efficient ways to score. Kapono on the other end took a lot of long 2pt shots, had a lot of uncontested shots and didn't create a lot of of FTA. Thus overall his higher shooting percentages didn't translate in a more efficient scoring game.

With just having those 4 numbers fg%, 3p%, ft% and ts% you can approximately say how a player scores on offense. Not only how efficient, but you can also get a good impression about the way he is scoring. And that is the reason I'm a big fan of ts%.

[jlauber]

H2H in the 00's post-season...

Kobe's Lakers 4-1 edge in series wins, and 18-8 in games.

And before some IDIOT jumps in and claims that it was Shaq's team...yes, Shaq was the leader. BUT, take a loo at how well "second banana" Kobe performed...

2000-2001: LA 4-0 over SA

Duncan: 23.0 ppg, .478 FG%, 12.2 rpg, 3.0 apg
Kobe: 33.3 ppg, .514 FG%, 7.3 rpg, 7.0 apg


2001-2002: LA 4-1 over SA

Duncan: 29.0 ppg, .425 FG%, 17.2 rpg, and 4.7 apg
Kobe: 26.2 ppg, .455 FG%, 4.7 rpg, and 4.8 apg


2002-2003: SA 4-2 over LA

Duncan: 28.0 ppg, .529 FG%, 11.8 rpg, 4.8 apg
Kobe: 32.3 ppg, .431 FG%, 5.0 rpg, 3.7 apg


2003-2004: LA 4-2 over SA

Duncan: 20.7 ppg, .473 FG%, 13.5 rpg, 3.7 apg
Kobe: 26.3 ppg, .462 FG%, 6.3 rpg, 5.3 apg


2007-2008: LA 4-1 over SA

Duncan: 22.4 ppg, .426 FG%, 17.6 rpg, 4.8 apg
Kobe: 29.2 ppg, .533 FG%, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg


The "second banana" didn't fare too badly in those four seasons, and he was considerably better in his season as THE man.

That 4-1 series edge, and 18-8 record are a pretty strong reflection of KOBE's play.

BTW, Duncan won the '05 Finals MVP with these numbers:

20.6 ppg, .419 FG%,. 14.1 rpg, and 2.0 apg

[rmt]

ok lol

because ginobli, parker, bowen, and a slew of fundamental players and 3pt shooters really comprise a terrible team...

It's pathetic how you think Duncan's teams have been terrible over the decade. Duncan's been playing along two proven 20ppg scorers and great backup for years... Parker during their playoff runs as averaged as high as 28 for a whole run and was the best penetrating and finishing PG in the league. Kobe has had significantly less talent than duncan since shaq left overall. This past year is when the team really filled out.

Parker (career playoffs)
18.7 pts 46.1%fg

Parker averaged 28 points in 5 games (2009) against the MAVs because Manu did not play at all.

Manu (career playoffs)
16.3 pts 44.0%fg

Gasol (LAL playoffs)
18.3 pts 55.0%fg

Duncan's cast in 2003 was (together with Hakeem's cast) one of the weakest of any all-time great. Rookie Manu, 2nd year Parker benched for Speedy Claxton, streaky Stephen Jackson. Parker had 14.7 pts on 40.3% and Manu had 9.4 pts on 38.4% during the 2003 playoffs.

[Jacks3]

Duncan in 2003 also played pathetic competition.

[rmt]

Duncan in 2003 also played pathetic competition.

Well, I guess the 3-time defending champions LAL must have been pathetic competition then. Duncan had 37 points 16 rebs. in game 6 against them.

[jlauber]

Shaq was the best player, by far, up until about 2004. Duncan was a distant second, and Kobe was certainly in the conversation. From 2005 on Kobe has slowly pulled away. I'll concede Lebron in the last two years, although Kobe has willed his teams to titles, unlike Lebron who basically threw in the towel with his cast of clowns.

Over the course of the entire decade (and I count 09-10 BTW...I don't see how you can't)...Kobe has been an elite player EVERY year (my god, he averaged 30 ppg in 00-01 for cryingoutloud.) Shaq was dominant for half of it. Duncan was among the best for a little over half of it, and has dropped considerably over the course of the last 3-4 years.

In any case, Kobe has been a top-3 player EVERY year in the decade. Neither Shaq, nor Duncan can make that claim.

[Big#50]

Duncan in 2003 also played pathetic competition.
You know damn well you started watching the NBA in 06.

[Quotable]

Gonna go with Kobe by a hair over Duncan, and here's why:

More often than not in the 00's, it was Kobe's team knocking Duncan's out in the playoffs.

This happened in 01, 02, 04 and 08.

Only once did Duncan knock Kobe's team out of the playoffs (03)

That's the tiebreaker.

[Jacks3]

You know damn well you started watching the NBA in 06.
:facepalm

[jlauber]

Gonna go with Kobe by a hair over Duncan, and here's why:

More often than not in the 00's, it was Kobe's team knocking Duncan's out in the playoffs.

This happened in 01, 02, 04 and 08.

Only once did Duncan knock Kobe's team out of the playoffs (03)

That's the tiebreaker.

Not only that, but Kobe was probably the best player on the floor for most of those series. Shaq dominated most of the playoff games from 00-02, but Kobe was probably the key player in those SA series (and BTW, I don't count 99-00 in this discussion...but even if I did...they did not face each other in the post-season that year.)

[Carbine]

Gonna go with Kobe by a hair over Duncan, and here's why:

More often than not in the 00's, it was Kobe's team knocking Duncan's out in the playoffs.

This happened in 01, 02, 04 and 08.

Only once did Duncan knock Kobe's team out of the playoffs (03)

That's the tiebreaker.

"Kobes team" beat "Duncans team" in 08, that's it.

"Shaqs team," however beat Duncans team in 01, 02 and 04

[Big#50]

Please. Duncan had David Robinson and Avery Johnson, two great leaders, in his first championship run. Then, he had Ginobili and Parker, two great players.

Neither player did it on his own. That is purely idiotic to think otherwise.

Kobe was great this past postseason also.

Both players make a great case, but I lean towards Duncan.
All the arguments are close until we look at 2003. Tim Duncan by himself led a team of has beens and young inexperienced players. Kobe didn't make the playoffs the year he needed to be the man. See the difference? Duncan doesn't score as much but he plays some of the best D the NBA has ever seen. Game 7 for Kobe against the Celtics shot like shit, looked shaky and had to be saved by the reffs, Gasol and Artest. Duncan in game 7 against the Psitons shot like shit but willed the team to victory by taking over late in the game. See the difference? Duncan can rebound and play D. Kobe can only score. People need to stop bringing up 15 boards for Kobe in game 7 because he was alone in about 90 percent of them. Duncan went up against Wallacex2 and McDyess. Shits is not close. Kobe needs to shoot 30 times to take over a game. Duncan just needs to be in the game.

[Gifted Mind]

If I had to rank them 1-3 (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe) each year...


2000- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2001- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2002- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2003- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2004- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2005- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2006- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2007- Duncan/Kobe/Shaq
2008- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2009- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq


Duncan was the best payer out of the 3 most often, and was never the worst. Thus, Duncan is the best player of the decade for me.

[rmt]

Gonna go with Kobe by a hair over Duncan, and here's why:

More often than not in the 00's, it was Kobe's team knocking Duncan's out in the playoffs.

This happened in 01, 02, 04 and 08.

Only once did Duncan knock Kobe's team out of the playoffs (03)

That's the tiebreaker.

What about the missing years 05, 06 and 07 when LAL either didn't make the playoffs or got beat by the Suns (who routinely got beat by SAS)? Surely, you don't think that "Kobe's" team would have beaten Duncan's team in those years. Those were 2 championships years and a stupid Manu foul away from advancing to play the Suns and Heat. I would bet a lot of money on the Spurs beating the Suns and the Heat in 06.

Using head to head records that conveniently forget years in which LAL weren't even contenders is not logical (much less calling 00, 01 or 04 "Kobe's" team).

[tpols]

All the arguments are close until we look at 2003. Tim Duncan by himself led a team of has beens and young inexperienced players. Kobe didn't make the playoffs the year he needed to be the man. See the difference? Duncan doesn't score as much but he plays some of the best D the NBA has ever seen. Game 7 for Kobe against the Celtics shot like shit, looked shaky and had to be saved by the reffs, Gasol and Artest. Duncan in game 7 against the Psitons shot like shit but willed the team to victory by taking over late in the game. See the difference? Duncan can rebound and play D. Kobe can only score. People need to stop bringing up 15 boards for Kobe in game 7 because he was alone in about 90 percent of them. Duncan went up against Wallacex2 and McDyess. Shits is not close. Kobe needs to shoot 30 times to take over a game. Duncan just needs to be in the game.
lol can you be more biased? You mention Duncan having to go against mcdyess and the wallaces but kobe had to go up for boards all series against guys like Garnett, Perkins, Sheed guys all bigger than him and great rebounders (not to mention pierce and rondo are good rebounders as well).

But of course kobe's effort in a bad shooting game<duncan's effort in a bad shooting game:facepalm

[DatDudeD]

All this really is is a "who likes who more" contest, its a damn shame . I cant say i didnt see it coming.

[jlauber]

If I had to rank them 1-3 (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe) each year...


2000- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2001- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2002- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2003- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2004- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2005- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2006- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2007- Duncan/Kobe/Shaq
2008- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2009- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq


Duncan was the best payer out of the 3 most often, and was never the worst. Thus, Duncan is the best player of the decade for me.

The problem with this is the fact that Duncan and Shaq are no longer in the conversation from 08 and 09. Furthermore, I would add 09-10, in which Kobe clearly blows them both away.

Overall, Kobe has been an elite player the ENTIRE decade. Shaq and Duncan cannot make that claim.

[tpols]

If I had to rank them 1-3 (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe) each year...


2000- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2001- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2002- Shaq/Duncan/Kobe
2003- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2004- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2005- Duncan/Shaq/Kobe
2006- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2007- Duncan/Kobe/Shaq
2008- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq
2009- Kobe/Duncan/Shaq


Duncan was the best payer out of the 3 most often, and was never the worst. Thus, Duncan is the best player of the decade for me.
Uh that is a poor way of listing as of course shaq is going to be number 3 the past few years as he is an old man making duncans number 2 spot meaningless... Shaq wasn't a top fifteen player in the league for the past few years while kobe has had arguments for number one every year for the latter half of the decade. The same cannot be said for Duncan or Shaq. Kobe has had a SIGNIFICANT advantage over Duncan the past two years AT LEAST (I would say four) which comprises almost half the decade.

The way you made that list was faulty because for half the decade the three of them have not been competitive in terms of being top 2-3 best player in the league. kobe has been ahead of shaq by a landslide and ahead of duncan but the way you list it makes it seem like the differences between a 03 kobe and a 03 shaq are as big as the difference between a 08 kobe and a 08 shaq...

[rmt]

But of course kobe's effort in a bad shooting game<duncan's effort in a bad shooting game:facepalm

Yes, 25% < 37%. Again, I refer you to the following nba.com recap if you still think that Duncan's game 7 performance wasn't good in spite of the poor shooting percentage. Popovich, Parker, Ben Wallace and Larry Brown don't agree with you.

http://www.nba.com/games/20050623/DETSAS/recap.html

"His complete game is so sound, so fundamnetal, so unnoticed at times, because if he didn't score, people think, 'Well, he didn't do anything,'" Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said. "But he was incredible and he was the force that got it done for us."

"You follow your leader," Spurs guard Tony Parker said. "Timmy is the leader of the team, and he just carried us tonight."

"He put his team on his shoulders and carried them to a championship," Pistons center Ben Wallace said. "That's what the great players do."

"You could tell when he caught the ball, how much more physical he was, getting in position and bumping and grinding and getting shots and making sure he got toward the rim, so that when people came at him he was in good position to open up a teammate," Popovich said.

"A lot of the shots they made, open shots, came as a result of us having a hard time guarding him," Brown said. "That's why he's such a great player."

"Rasheed was strapped all game," Brown said. "If you don't have your big people with the ability to play aggressively on Duncan, you've got no shot."

[jlauber]

Uh that is a poor way of listing as of course shaq is going to be number 3 the past few years as he is an old man making duncans number 2 spot meaningless... Shaq wasn't a top fifteen player in the league for the past few years while kobe has had arguments for number one every year for the latter half of the decade. The same cannot be said for Duncan or Shaq. Kobe has had a SIGNIFICANT advantage over Duncan the past two years AT LEAST (I would say four) which comprises almost half the decade.

The way you made that list was faulty because for half the decade the three of them have not been competitive in terms of being top 2-3 best player in the league. kobe has been ahead of shaq by a landslide and ahead of duncan but the way you list it makes it seem like the differences between a 03 kobe and a 03 shaq are as big as the difference between a 08 kobe and a 08 shaq...

:cheers:

[ginobli2311]

No, TS% is the best stat. eFG% doesn't take FT's into account, FG% doesn't take into account FT's or threes, which makes it a horrible indicator of efficiency.You don't really lose any information by using a combined shooting stat. No one has thrown out the old FG%, FT%, and 3FG%.


But unless you want to look at 3 different accuracies, and then also look at 3 different frequency-of-attempt rates, even the shooting% don't tell you how effective a player was at getting points.

I can't look at six columns of % and tell how players rank in their overall shooting%. That's what TS% does.


its a good stat if you want to factor in free throw percentage. i don't like that because free throw percentage can be misleading at times. lets actually do an in depth analysis. lets try to determine points per possession....because that is by far the best way to determine offensive efficiency.

kobe scores 25.3 ppg for his career on 19.3 shots. so he is using 19.3 possessions to get up those shots. now....kobe averages 7.6 free throws per game. lets say he gets 1.5 "and 1s" per game and he shoots 1 technical free throw per game. so in order to get those 5 extra free throws kobe uses up another 2.5 possessions. so kobe is at 21.8 possessions per game used to get his points. its obviously not exact but its probably close and is most likely on the low side.

so 25.3 ppg on 21.8 possessions. that is 1.16 points per possession for kobe.

lets do the same think for duncan.

duncan scores 21.1 ppg for his career on 16 shots. he averages 7.1 free throws per game. so lets use the same for duncan and add 2.5 possessions per game.

so he is at 21.1 ppg on 18.5 possessions. that comes to 1.14 points per possession used.

now obviously kobe deserves credit for scoring 4 more points per game.

now lets look at the playoffs though.

kobe takes 20.3 shots per game and averages 25.5 points. he shoots 7.4 free throws per game. so kobe uses up 22.8 possession to get 25.5 points. that is 1.12 points per possession.

duncan takes 17.1 shots per game and averages 23 points. he shoots 8.5 free throws per game. so duncan uses up 20.1 possessions to score 23 points. that is 1.14 points per possession.

obviously those numbers are estimates.......but i think it shows exactly what we were saying. duncan is slightly more efficient as a scorer in the playoffs. so i don't think the 2.5 ppg gap is really that big of a difference. in the regular season its a different story. kobe has a clear advantage in both ppg and efficiency overall in the regular season.

i always prefer to look at playoff averages for great players. usually the sample size is large enough and its the best way to judge how these players play against the best competition in must win situations.

so in the playoffs. strictly talking about scoring. duncan scores 2.5 less points per game on slightly better efficiency. i'm sorry. that difference is just not close to enough to trump duncan's defense and rebounding (which are his best qualities as a player). its just not an apt comparison. it would be like saying kobe is better than bill russell because he scores more points per game. it does not make sense as an argument.

the mere fact that duncan is so close to kobe in terms of playoff scoring and efficiency make this debate a little absurd. simply because all the evidence and number point to duncan as having about twice the impact kobe does in terms of defense and rebounding. and we all know that defense/rebounding are probably the two most important criteria for winning in the nba playoffs.

now. as for the above numbers. i think they are useful....but i don't like them as an end all be all criteria. those number simply don't account for the fact that duncan had to be doubled far more often than kobe does. this opens up so much for the spurs and is a big reason why guys like bowen/elliot/manu/parker were able to be so effective. now of course kobe opens things up for the lakers.....but he doesn't force declared doubles at a rate even close to what duncan did. so that has to be a factor. the reason guys like duncan/shaq/hakeem only get up 16 or 17 shots per game is because they were doubled so frequently. its that simple. and they had to be doubled because they would score at too high and efficiency if they were let to go one on one. kobe simply is not efficient enough to demand a double. that is a huge difference and it should be mentioned as an important factor.

[Gifted Mind]

Uh that is a poor way of listing as of course shaq is going to be number 3 the past few years as he is an old man making duncans number 2 spot meaningless... Shaq wasn't a top fifteen player in the league for the past few years while kobe has had arguments for number one every year for the latter half of the decade. The same cannot be said for Duncan or Shaq. Kobe has had a SIGNIFICANT advantage over Duncan the past two years AT LEAST (I would say four) which comprises almost half the decade.

The way you made that list was faulty because for half the decade the three of them have not been competitive in terms of being top 2-3 best player in the league. kobe has been ahead of shaq by a landslide and ahead of duncan but the way you list it makes it seem like the differences between a 03 kobe and a 03 shaq are as big as the difference between a 08 kobe and a 08 shaq...

Nonetheless, even if you ignore Shaq, it's still Duncan all the way for me obviously. I understand what you are saying for O'Neal and how he was irrelevant, but I still felt Duncan was a better player than Kobe 7/10 years.

[Gifted Mind]

The problem with this is the fact that Duncan and Shaq are no longer in the conversation from 08 and 09. Furthermore, I would add 09-10, in which Kobe clearly blows them both away.

Overall, Kobe has been an elite player the ENTIRE decade. Shaq and Duncan cannot make that claim.
I already addressed the O'Neal being irrelevant claim. I still felt that Duncan was better than Kobe 7/10 years. I don't count '10. And the 00 Kobe was no more elite than the 09 Duncan.

[jlauber]

its a good stat if you want to factor in free throw percentage. i don't like that because free throw percentage can be misleading at times. lets actually do an in depth analysis. lets try to determine points per possession....because that is by far the best way to determine offensive efficiency.

kobe scores 25.3 ppg for his career on 19.3 shots. so he is using 19.3 possessions to get up those shots. now....kobe averages 7.6 free throws per game. lets say he gets 1.5 "and 1s" per game and he shoots 1 technical free throw per game. so in order to get those 5 extra free throws kobe uses up another 2.5 possessions. so kobe is at 21.8 possessions per game used to get his points. its obviously not exact but its probably close and is most likely on the low side.

so 25.3 ppg on 21.8 possessions. that is 1.16 points per possession for kobe.

lets do the same think for duncan.

duncan scores 21.1 ppg for his career on 16 shots. he averages 7.1 free throws per game. so lets use the same for duncan and add 2.5 possessions per game.

so he is at 21.1 ppg on 18.5 possessions. that comes to 1.14 points per possession used.

now obviously kobe deserves credit for scoring 4 more points per game.

now lets look at the playoffs though.

kobe takes 20.3 shots per game and averages 25.5 points. he shoots 7.4 free throws per game. so kobe uses up 22.8 possession to get 25.5 points. that is 1.12 points per possession.

duncan takes 17.1 shots per game and averages 23 points. he shoots 8.5 free throws per game. so duncan uses up 20.1 possessions to score 23 points. that is 1.14 points per possession.

obviously those numbers are estimates.......but i think it shows exactly what we were saying. duncan is slightly more efficient as a scorer in the playoffs. so i don't think the 2.5 ppg gap is really that big of a difference. in the regular season its a different story. kobe has a clear advantage in both ppg and efficiency overall in the regular season.

i always prefer to look at playoff averages for great players. usually the sample size is large enough and its the best way to judge how these players play against the best competition in must win situations.

so in the playoffs. strictly talking about scoring. duncan scores 2.5 less points per game on slightly better efficiency. i'm sorry. that difference is just not close to enough to trump duncan's defense and rebounding (which are his best qualities as a player). its just not an apt comparison. it would be like saying kobe is better than bill russell because he scores more points per game. it does not make sense as an argument.

the mere fact that duncan is so close to kobe in terms of playoff scoring and efficiency make this debate a little absurd. simply because all the evidence and number point to duncan as having about twice the impact kobe does in terms of defense and rebounding. and we all know that defense/rebounding are probably the two most important criteria for winning in the nba playoffs.

And we all KNOW that in the decade of the 00's, from 01-10, Kobe went to Seven Finals, and has five rings. Duncan went to three, and has three.

[chips93]

All this really is is a "who likes who more" contest, its a damn shame . I cant say i didnt see it coming.


couldnt agree more

so many people post on these boards to impose their views and 'educate' others, instead of sharing views, people refuse to admit when they are wrong, or even that someone has said something that they werent aware of. people are set in their ways and never consider other peoples arguements, its just ' kobe is the goat' or ' kobe sucks fat donkey dick ', like there cant be a middle ground

[ginobli2311]

And we all KNOW that in the decade of the 00's, from 01-10, Kobe went to Seven Finals, and has five rings. Duncan went to three, and has three.

so basically you arent willing to factor in circumstances. how many finals would lebron and duncan made over the last 3 years playing together? because that is still not as good as the luxury kobe had with playing for shaq for the first 5 years of the decade.

LOL. kobe made 4 of his 7 finals as the 2nd option. put duncan as the 2nd option on a team and they are making the finals each of the last three years.

[DKLaker]

And we all KNOW that in the decade of the 00's, from 01-10, Kobe went to Seven Finals, and has five rings. Duncan went to three, and has three.

And these idiots try to act like this is a legitimate debate :banghead:

The decade belonged to Kobe!!!!

[nycelt84]

If 1 player is better than another in 7/10 years, how can you possibly consider the lesser player who was better in only 3 years to be a superior player for the time period? That makes no sense at all. And since when was the 1st year of a new decade counting for the previous decade? 1990 was now part of the 80's and 1980 similarly for the 70's? That's a bunch of garbage and might be the stupidest thing I have ever seen on this board. Unless now we're going to count arbitrary time periods like 1955-1965 or some other sort of foolishness.

[ginobli2311]

And these idiots try to act like this is a legitimate debate :banghead:

The decade belonged to Kobe!!!!

5 years of the decade kobe was not even the best player on his team.

00
01
02
03
04

that is 5 years. half of the decade kobe spent as a 2nd option. then he missed the playoffs in 05. bounced in the first round in 06 and 07. came up small in the finals in 08. and won it in 09 as the best player on his team.

how did the decade belong to him. he spent 5 years as a 2nd option and 3 more years being irrelevant in terms of competing for titles. he only won 1 mvp and is 3rd in mvp awards shares behind both shaq and duncan.

its just laughable that you people can't see this.

[tpols]

its a good stat if you want to factor in free throw percentage. i don't like that because free throw percentage can be misleading at times. lets actually do an in depth analysis. lets try to determine points per possession....because that is by far the best way to determine offensive efficiency.

kobe scores 25.3 ppg for his career on 19.3 shots. so he is using 19.3 possessions to get up those shots. now....kobe averages 7.6 free throws per game. lets say he gets 1.5 "and 1s" per game and he shoots 1 technical free throw per game. so in order to get those 5 extra free throws kobe uses up another 2.5 possessions. so kobe is at 21.8 possessions per game used to get his points. its obviously not exact but its probably close and is most likely on the low side.

so 25.3 ppg on 21.8 possessions. that is 1.16 points per possession for kobe.

lets do the same think for duncan.

duncan scores 21.1 ppg for his career on 16 shots. he averages 7.1 free throws per game. so lets use the same for duncan and add 2.5 possessions per game.

so he is at 21.1 ppg on 18.5 possessions. that comes to 1.14 points per possession used.

now obviously kobe deserves credit for scoring 4 more points per game.

now lets look at the playoffs though.

kobe takes 20.3 shots per game and averages 25.5 points. he shoots 7.4 free throws per game. so kobe uses up 22.8 possession to get 25.5 points. that is 1.12 points per possession.

duncan takes 17.1 shots per game and averages 23 points. he shoots 8.5 free throws per game. so duncan uses up 20.1 possessions to score 23 points. that is 1.14 points per possession.

obviously those numbers are estimates.......but i think it shows exactly what we were saying. duncan is slightly more efficient as a scorer in the playoffs. so i don't think the 2.5 ppg gap is really that big of a difference. in the regular season its a different story. kobe has a clear advantage in both ppg and efficiency overall in the regular season.

i always prefer to look at playoff averages for great players. usually the sample size is large enough and its the best way to judge how these players play against the best competition in must win situations.

so in the playoffs. strictly talking about scoring. duncan scores 2.5 less points per game on slightly better efficiency. i'm sorry. that difference is just not close to enough to trump duncan's defense and rebounding (which are his best qualities as a player). its just not an apt comparison. it would be like saying kobe is better than bill russell because he scores more points per game. it does not make sense as an argument.

the mere fact that duncan is so close to kobe in terms of playoff scoring and efficiency make this debate a little absurd. simply because all the evidence and number point to duncan as having about twice the impact kobe does in terms of defense and rebounding. and we all know that defense/rebounding are probably the two most important criteria for winning in the nba playoffs.
I mean your numbers are all estimates and the differences are neglible so you cant really say who won the efficiency battle though the fact that kobe scores more points and takes longer range shots makes it slightly more difficult for him.

In terms of rebounding and defense of course a PF is going to have more impact in those categories. Being taller is an inherent trait that all big men have that allow them to block shots and anchor a team (much like bynum and gasol did during the past few years). Have you ever seen a shooting guard anchor a defense? Have you ever seen a shooting guard grab the most rebounds on his team consistently?

The fact of the matter is that it is close. Duncan and kobe both score a lot and are close in efficiency. Duncan and Kobe both play great defense for their given positions. If you want to say duncan is a better rebounder I'll tell you kobe has more assists...

Kobe, however, has had more of an impact on the league, has had just as many memorable clutch moments, and has won multiple rings as a 25+ppg second fiddle and as the man so I'll give him the title as best player of the decade.

[ginobli2311]

And these idiots try to act like this is a legitimate debate :banghead:

The decade belonged to Kobe!!!!

the real statement should be:

look at how many loaded teams kobe played on. he had the best or 2nd best talent in the league in 7 of the 10 years. lol. duncan never had the kind of talent kobe has had.

[chips93]

And these idiots try to act like this is a legitimate debate :banghead:

The decade belonged to Kobe!!!!


would you care to back that up ? why just make a statement without any evidence/reasoning ? i personally think duncan was the player of the decade

[DatDudeD]

the real statement should be:

look at how many loaded teams kobe played on. he had the best or 2nd best talent in the league in 7 of the 10 years. lol. duncan never had the kind of talent kobe has had.

Circumstantial..... u can also say that for the first 3 years in the league he didnt even start, kobe was also never the MAN from day 1 like duncan was...see how saying things like that work both ways. I think that its pretty much a toss up at the end of the day, duncan has kobe beat as far as team comsistency and peak, and kobe has duncan beat as far as individual accomplishments. I think anything after that is really is who do you like more, both have been dominant and won multiple rings and awards.

[Doranku]

I'd say at the very least it's arguable between Kobe and Duncan.

[ginobli2311]

I mean your numbers are all estimates and the differences are neglible so you cant really say who won the efficiency battle though the fact that kobe scores more points and takes longer range shots makes it slightly more difficult for him.

In terms of rebounding and defense of course a PF is going to have more impact in those categories. Being taller is an inherent trait that all big men have that allow them to block shots and anchor a team (much like bynum and gasol did during the past few years). Have you ever seen a shooting guard anchor a defense? Have you ever seen a shooting guard grab the most rebounds on his team consistently?

The fact of the matter is that it is close. Duncan and kobe both score a lot and are close in efficiency. Duncan and Kobe both play great defense for their given positions. If you want to say duncan is a better rebounder I'll tell you kobe has more assists...

Kobe, however, has had more of an impact on the league, has had just as many memorable clutch moments, and has won multiple rings as a 25+ppg second fiddle and as the man so I'll give him the title as best player of the decade.

what does position have do with impact? LOL. you could say that about any player. and again....you are making my point for me. kobe is a better scorer/passer by a very small margin. factor in kobe's lack of team play often and his shot jacking and that margin becomes even smaller.

so what is the big difference between the two players? defense/rebounding. duncan has close to twice the impact kobe does in these areas. kobe and jordan played the same position. and based on the simple "eye test" and numbers....jordan was close to twice as good defensively as kobe is. its not all about position like so many of you people claim.

if you did an analysis of lebron vs duncan or jordan vs duncan. duncan would have a much less advantage in terms of defense. and jordan/lebron would have a bigger advantage in terms of offensive scoring and efficiency.

we are talking about an entire body of work here. and kobe only scores 25.5 ppg on good but not great efficiency levels. its a whole different story when you plug in jordan or lebron with 33.4 ppg and 29.3 ppg at better efficiency levels.

so its not always by position. look at the following.

jordan - averaged .074 defensive win shares per playoff game
lebron - averages .077 defensive win shares per playoff game
kobe - averages .035 defensive win shares per playoff game
duncan - .076 defensive win shares per playoff game

LOL. sorry dude. not all about position. kobe's defense is just one of many things that is HIGHLY OVER-RATED. i could go on and on.

and just to add. defensive win shares is a great stat. is very telling. for example:

steve nash - averaged .002 defensive win shares per playoff game. that shows you just how awful he really is on defense. by the numbers.....jordan was about 37 times better than nash on defense. i think that is pretty accurate.

you see. while kobe is a good defender at times. overall he does not impact the game defensively in the same way that jordan or lebron or duncan did.

lets take another great defender

pippen - .07 defensive win shares per game

[Mr. Jabbar]

what does position have do with impact? LOL. you could say that about any player. and again....you are making my point for me. kobe is a better scorer/passer by a very small margin. factor in kobe's lack of team play often and his shot jacking and that margin becomes even smaller.

so what is the big difference between the two players? defense/rebounding. duncan has close to twice the impact kobe does in these areas. kobe and jordan played the same position. and based on the simple "eye test" and numbers....jordan was close to twice as good defensively as kobe is. its not all about position like so many of you people claim.

if you did an analysis of lebron vs duncan or jordan vs duncan. duncan would have a much less advantage in terms of defense. and jordan/lebron would have a bigger advantage in terms of offensive scoring and efficiency.

we are talking about an entire body of work here. and kobe only scores 25.5 ppg on good but not great efficiency levels. its a whole different story when you plug in jordan or lebron with 33.4 ppg and 29.3 ppg at better efficiency levels.

so its not always by position. look at the following.

jordan - averaged .074 defensive win shares per playoff game
lebron - averages .077 defensive win shares per playoff game
kobe - averages .035 defensive win shares per playoff game
duncan - .076 defensive win shares per playoff game

LOL. sorry dude. not all about position. kobe's defense is just one of many things that is HIGHLY OVER-RATED. i could go on and on.

Dude, kobe owns the past decade, let it go...

[DatDudeD]

I'd say at the very least it's arguable between Kobe and Duncan.

shortest yet most correct answer i have seen on this whole topic

[ginobli2311]

Circumstantial..... u can also say that for the first 3 years in the league he didnt even start, kobe was also never the MAN from day 1 like duncan was...see how saying things like that work both ways. I think that its pretty much a toss up at the end of the day, duncan has kobe beat as far as team comsistency and peak, and kobe has duncan beat as far as individual accomplishments. I think anything after that is really is who do you like more, both have been dominant and won multiple rings and awards.

kobe wasn't good enough to be the man on a title team in his first 10 years. let alone his first 3.

kobe does not have better individual accomplishments. duncan has more mvps and more finals mvps. duncan has more titles as the leader/best player on his team. LOL. this is getting out of control.

[DKLaker]

would you care to back that up ? why just make a statement without any evidence/reasoning ? i personally think duncan was the player of the decade

No need to explain the obvious, should I prove that water is wet? That the sky is blue on a clear summer day? That you had a mother and father? That the earth is round? That a car has wheels?
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no:

[tpols]

what does position have do with impact? LOL. you could say that about any player. and again....you are making my point for me. kobe is a better scorer/passer by a very small margin. factor in kobe's lack of team play often and his shot jacking and that margin becomes even smaller.

so what is the big difference between the two players? defense/rebounding. duncan has close to twice the impact kobe does in these areas. kobe and jordan played the same position. and based on the simple "eye test" and numbers....jordan was close to twice as good defensively as kobe is. its not all about position like so many of you people claim.

if you did an analysis of lebron vs duncan or jordan vs duncan. duncan would have a much less advantage in terms of defense. and jordan/lebron would have a bigger advantage in terms of offensive scoring and efficiency.

we are talking about an entire body of work here. and kobe only scores 25.5 ppg on good but not great efficiency levels. its a whole different story when you plug in jordan or lebron with 33.4 ppg and 29.3 ppg at better efficiency levels.

so its not always by position. look at the following.

jordan - averaged .074 defensive win shares per playoff game
lebron - averages .077 defensive win shares per playoff game
kobe - averages .035 defensive win shares per playoff game
duncan - .076 defensive win shares per playoff game

LOL. sorry dude. not all about position. kobe's defense is just one of many things that is HIGHLY OVER-RATED. i could go on and on.
Lol are you dense? Elite power forwards will ALWAYS have more impact on defense and rebounding than elite shooting guards. Kobe bryant has been every bit the defender lebron has over the past decade.

Lol at defensive win shares:roll: you might as well laid a piece of dog shit in front of me. There is no stat that will say how good a player's individual and help defense is. There are so many little intricate factors involved that CANNOT be recorded when playing defense. Please stop trying to bullshit your way through this argument.

[Doranku]

kobe wasn't good enough to be the man on a title team in his first 10 years. let alone his first 3.

kobe does not have better individual accomplishments. duncan has more mvps and more finals mvps. duncan has more titles as the leader/best player on his team. LOL. this is getting out of control.

Since Duncan failed in the playoffs during one of his MVP seasons, it doesn't count. Kobe's 05-07 years are regarded as complete failures because he failed in the playoffs despite winning two scoring titles, so naturally Duncan's MVP year is meaningless. Right? Is that how it works?

[chips93]

Dude, kobe owns the past decade, let it go...

why not back it up if its so obvious

any retard can say 'kobe/duncan is clearly the better player', it take someone with at least a minimal knowledge of the game to make a legitimate arguement

[DatDudeD]

kobe wasn't good enough to be the man on a title team in his first 10 years. let alone his first 3.

kobe does not have better individual accomplishments. duncan has more mvps and more finals mvps. duncan has more titles as the leader/best player on his team. LOL. this is getting out of control.

Good ol Ginobli.......lol. I concede that maybe he wasnt good enough, so i guess MJ wasnt his first 6 or 7 years in the league either..:confusedshrug:. duncan has 1 more finals MVP and 1 more NBA MVP the all NBA awards are damn near the same. I was just including some of kobes other achievements such as the 81 among a few other things which cant be forgotten in this debate. In my eyes its really a tossup. I realized a while ago that you dont actually HATE kobe but you damn sure seem like one sometimes...no hard feelings

[ginobli2311]

Lol are you dense? Elite power forwards will ALWAYS have more impact on defense and rebounding than elite shooting guards. Kobe bryant has been every bit the defender lebron has over the past decade.

Lol at defensive win shares:roll: you might as well laid a piece of dog shit in front of me. There is no stat that will say how good a player's individual and help defense is. There are so many little intricate factors involved that CANNOT be recorded when playing defense. Please stop trying to bullshit your way through this argument.

so all the elite defenders have much better defensive win shares averages per game than kobe....but its a flawed stat. LOL

lebron gives up less points per 100 possessions and impacts the game defensively about twice as much as kobe does. i see it with my own eyes and the numbers back me up.

****ing owned.

[jlauber]

IMHO, Kobe was at least the equal of Duncan in both 00-01 and 02-03. He was better from '05 on. And by HUGE margins from '08 thru '10.

[ginobli2311]

Good ol Ginobli.......lol. I concede that maybe he wasnt good enough, so i guess MJ wasnt his first 6 or 7 years in the league either..:confusedshrug:. duncan has 1 more finals MVP and 1 more NBA MVP the all NBA awards are damn near the same. I was just including some of kobes other achievements such as the 81 among a few other things which cant be forgotten in this debate. In my eyes its really a tossup. I realized a while ago that you dont actually HATE kobe but you damn sure seem like one sometimes...no hard feelings

huge difference between jordan and kobe. kobe had the team around him.

kobe was clearly not good enough his first 4 years to lead a team to a title. that is not even debatable. when kobe took on a larger role on the lakers in 03 and 04 they failed miserably. so if kobe couldnt win in 03/04 with a dominant shaq and phil jackson.....logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title without either of them. he missed the playoffs with butler/odom in 05. in 06/07 he really had no chance.....so lets give him a pass. but in 08 he had the 2nd most talented team in the league.....and he and his team got their asses handed to him in the finals. i'm pretty sure that 2nd most talented team in the league with the best coach of all time is good enough to win it all. kobe came up short. so if kobe came up short in 08......then logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title in 06 or 07 as well.

that takes us all the way to 09. sorry dude. between the 03 and 08 seasons....kobe had 3 teams that were in the top 2 in the league in terms of talent and coaching. he tried to be the number 1 guy and he fell short all three times. he simply was not ready. end of story. or are your going to say he didn't have enough help in 03/04/08? this should be good.

[tpols]

so all the elite defenders have much better defensive win shares averages per game than kobe....but its a flawed stat. LOL

lebron gives up less points per 100 possessions and impacts the game defensively about twice as much as kobe does. i see it with my own eyes and the numbers back me up.

****ing owned.
've seen kobe play some of the tightest man on man D. He's every bit as quick and smart as lebron and can lock down a man just as well. I think you've been watching too many lebron come-from-behind fastbreak top ten espn blocks. The fact that you don't acknowledge the fact that your defensive win shares don't calculate situations like when a player forces his man to pass it and it totally ignores help defense (HUGE part of the game) shows your lack of fundamental understanding of the game.

F!cking owned. AHHHH F!cking owned. AUUHHHH That felt SO GOOD!
:facepalm

[macpierce]

Since Duncan failed in the playoffs during one of his MVP seasons, it doesn't count. Kobe's 05-07 years are regarded as complete failures because he failed in the playoffs despite winning two scoring titles, so naturally Duncan's MVP year is meaningless. Right? Is that how it works?
OWNED GINOBBBLIIII
anyways duncan may be the better choice but kobe will have the better career and will rank higher than duncan in the top 10 greatest players of all time list when he retires with at least 7 rings.

[ginobli2311]

've seen kobe play some of the tightest man on man D. He's every bit as quick and smart as lebron and can lock down a man just as well. I think you've been watching too many lebron come-from-behind fastbreak top ten espn blocks. The fact that you don't acknowledge the fact that your defensive win shares don't calculate situations like when a player forces his man to pass it and it totally ignores help defense (HUGE part of the game) shows your lack of fundamental understanding of the game.

F!cking owned. AHHHH F!cking owned. AUUHHHH That felt SO GOOD!
:facepalm

no stat is perfect. but any stat that has guys like jordan/pippen/duncan in one category noticeably ahead of kobe with steve nash way way way behind has value.

i agree with your post though. kobe sometimes plays some of the best defense ever. that is my point. he does not do this consistently. its why he makes the 1st team all defense every year. when he tries on defense.....its some of the best on the ball defense i have ever seen. but he does this rarely....but coaches still vote him first team defense because they know if you could pick one player to guard a perimeter player for one play they would take kobe. and so would i.

but again....that is the point. and that is the main problem with kobe. he is great in flashes. he isn't the night in night out force that a lot of the all time greats were. that is why his numbers are always worse on these advanced stats.....they take the entire body of work into account. and that is the way it should be.

[ginobli2311]

OWNED GINOBBBLIIII
anyways duncan may be the better choice but kobe will have the better career and will rank higher than duncan in the top 10 greatest players of all time list when he retires with at least 7 rings.

i will bet you any number you want that kobe does not win more than 7 rings. any number you want.

and again. kobe has already had a better "CAREER" than duncan. but duncan is easily the better player.

huge difference.

[zizozain]

Originally Posted by tpols



So first he admits that individuals shouldn't be judged on how many games their team wins...

and then he brags about how many games the spurs, oh I'm sorry, Duncan, won.


Can someone ban this retard ginobli already?

LOL

NBASTATMAN at his best

sad kid

[Doranku]

huge difference between jordan and kobe. kobe had the team around him.

kobe was clearly not good enough his first 4 years to lead a team to a title. that is not even debatable. when kobe took on a larger role on the lakers in 03 and 04 they failed miserably. so if kobe couldnt win in 03/04 with a dominant shaq and phil jackson.....logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title without either of them. he missed the playoffs with butler/odom in 05. in 06/07 he really had no chance.....so lets give him a pass. but in 08 he had the 2nd most talented team in the league.....and he and his team got their asses handed to him in the finals. i'm pretty sure that 2nd most talented team in the league with the best coach of all time is good enough to win it all. kobe came up short. so if kobe came up short in 08......then logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title in 06 or 07 as well.

that takes us all the way to 09. sorry dude. between the 03 and 08 seasons....kobe had 3 teams that were in the top 2 in the league in terms of talent and coaching. he tried to be the number 1 guy and he fell short all three times. he simply was not ready. end of story. or are your going to say he didn't have enough help in 03/04/08? this should be good.

It's funny how you always allude to this magical transition period where Kobe "took on a bigger role" which so conveniently begins when LA starts losing. In both 00-01 and 01-02 Kobe was averaging over 22 shots a game in the playoffs. I'm pretty sure THAT'S when he began taking on a larger role. You like win shares a lot, so I'll just note that Kobe LED LA in Playoff win shares during one of those years (I forget which).

Another funny thing, Kobe averaged LESS shots per game (20) in the '04 playoffs than he did in either '01 or '02. But I thought '04 was when he took on the bigger role???

****ing owned omgggg omgggg owned owned owned

[tpols]

no stat is perfect. but any stat that has guys like jordan/pippen/duncan in one category noticeably ahead of kobe with steve nash way way way behind has value.

i agree with your post though. kobe sometimes plays some of the best defense ever. that is my point. he does not do this consistently. its why he makes the 1st team all defense every year. when he tries on defense.....its some of the best on the ball defense i have ever seen. but he does this rarely....but coaches still vote him first team defense because they know if you could pick one player to guard a perimeter player for one play they would take kobe. and so would i.

but again....that is the point. and that is the main problem with kobe. he is great in flashes. he isn't the night in night out force that a lot of the all time greats were. that is why his numbers are always worse on these advanced stats.....they take the entire body of work into account. and that is the way it should be.
I mean yeah kobe isn't consistent with it but neither is lebron. I really don't know of any superstar perimeter players that have played great consistent D in recent times. Big men seem to play better D because teams anchor their team D around their big men i.e. protecting the paint. In other words, kobe can slack off and let pau or bynum deter his man while duncan is the last resort. It's more of a position factor which is why there has been ONE guard to win DPOY in the past 20 YEARS! You can't knock the man on something that is heavily position dependant...

[zizozain]

tpols
are you familiar with the poster NBASTATMAN ?

[tpols]

tpols
are you familiar with the poster NBASTATMAN ?
no sir

[DatDudeD]

huge difference between jordan and kobe. kobe had the team around him.

kobe was clearly not good enough his first 4 years to lead a team to a title. that is not even debatable. when kobe took on a larger role on the lakers in 03 and 04 they failed miserably. so if kobe couldnt win in 03/04 with a dominant shaq and phil jackson.....logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title without either of them. he missed the playoffs with butler/odom in 05. in 06/07 he really had no chance.....so lets give him a pass. but in 08 he had the 2nd most talented team in the league.....and he and his team got their asses handed to him in the finals. i'm pretty sure that 2nd most talented team in the league with the best coach of all time is good enough to win it all. kobe came up short. so if kobe came up short in 08......then logic would say he wasn't ready to lead a team to a title in 06 or 07 as well.

that takes us all the way to 09. sorry dude. between the 03 and 08 seasons....kobe had 3 teams that were in the top 2 in the league in terms of talent and coaching. he tried to be the number 1 guy and he fell short all three times. he simply was not ready. end of story. or are your going to say he didn't have enough help in 03/04/08? this should be good.

Why are you writing a paragraph on something i actually AGREED with you on....:confusedshrug: . There isnt that much of a difference from when kobe got handed the reins then when jordan was struggling to make the playoffs..no matter how you spin it and in BOTH situations management made the right moves and POOF!!!! what do you know they start WINNING, sounds about right to me. I think you are acting like not being ready and not being good enough as the same thing, Lebron has the tools to be the GOAT but he hasnt won anything in 7 years, and had 2 years of 60 wins in a row and he fell short same case for being not ready, but having more than enough talent. Anyway this isnt about lebron, i would say that kobe had adequate enough help, but even you cant compare kobes cast to duncans as the #1 option up until 08.
As i said earlier its about a toss up imo, if you wanna debate that then fine but thats about as good as it gets.

[zizozain]

no sir
ok you're new here .. i will send you links to some lakers game threads
just read NBASTATMAN posts. and notice his way and howmuch he posts about kobe etc. etc.

then you'll know the truth about sad kid ginobli2311

[jlauber]

Once again, I have Duncan #6 or 7 (with Shaq), all-time, with Kobe at #8.

Having said though, for the ENTIRE decade of the 00's, I just don't see Duncan having a case over Kobe. Especially when you factor in post-season success...AND, post-season H2H's.

In any case, barring injury, Kobe will probably overtake both within the next few years.

[Gifted Mind]

Once again, I have Duncan #6 or 7 (with Shaq), all-time, with Kobe at #8.

Having said though, for the ENTIRE decade of the 00's, I just don't see Duncan having a case over Kobe. Especially when you factor in post-season success...AND, post-season H2H's.

In any case, barring injury, Kobe will probably overtake both within the next few years.

Do you consider 2010 part of this decade when you are stating your player of the decade?

[Doranku]

Oh ginobli, you seem to be on a defense kick lately. Well maybe if Shaq didn't let Duncan drop 37/16 on his ass in '03 LA might have won that series. But no, it's all Kobe's fault. God forbid a player on the opposing team has a monster series. It has to be Kobe's fault, though!!!

I can't even IMAGINE the shit you'd spew if Kobe let his man drop 37/16 on him, oh boy.

[jlauber]

Do you consider 2010 part of this decade when you are stating your player of the decade?

I consider it from 00-01 to 09-10.

[bdreason]

Duncan
Shaq
Kobe

[Gifted Mind]

I consider it from 00-01 to 09-10.
Well then I feel it is justified to put Kobe over Duncan. I might do so myself. Will have to think about it.

However, I and most others were arguing between 99-00 to 08-09. I don't include 09-10 as part of the 2000's decade because most of the games during that season were played in the 2010's not 2000's. Furthermore, the champion is called the "2010 NBA Champions Los Angeles Lakers". Once again implying the 2010's decade. While the 99-00 season, most of the games were played in the 2000's decade, and we know the championship team during that season the 2000 Lakers.

[jlauber]

Well then I feel it is justified to put Kobe over Duncan. I might do so myself. Will have to think about it.

However, I and most others were arguing between 99-00 to 08-09. I don't include 09-10 as part of the 2000's decade because most of the games during that season were played in the 2010's not 2000's. Furthermore, the champion is called the "2010 NBA Champions Los Angeles Lakers". Once again implying the 2010's decade. While the 99-00 season, most of the games were played in the 2000's decade, and we know the championship team during that season the 2000 Lakers.

Good point. Now that you mention it, I had Wilt as the dominant player of the 60's, from 59-60 to 68-69.

If we go from 99-00 to 08-09, I think it becomes very close. Probably a slight edge in seasons to Duncan, with Kobe holding a slight edge in differential in each season later on.

[rmt]

I consider it from 00-01 to 09-10.

So you see the
80s as 1981-1990
90s as 1991-2000?

Most people see the
80s as 1980-1989
90s at 1990-1999
etc.

Are you changing the conventional thinking of the decade to fit Kobe's 2010 championship into the decade?

[Gifted Mind]

Good point. Now that you mention it, I had Wilt as the dominant player of the 60's, from 59-60 to 68-69.

If we go from 99-00 to 08-09, I think it becomes very close. Probably a slight edge in seasons to Duncan, with Kobe holding a slight edge in differential in each season later on.

Well if you have Duncan higher All-Time, you probably want to put him higher in the 2000's decade (the way I've defined it). I mean, what are we missing, championships seasons from both Duncan and Kobe (99 and 10).

[jlauber]

So you see the
80s as 1981-1990
90s as 1991-2000?

Most people see the
80s as 1980-1989
90s at 1990-1999
etc.

Are you changing the conventional thinking of the decade to fit Kobe's 2010 championship into the decade?

See above.

[jlauber]

Well if you have Duncan higher All-Time, you probably want to put him higher in the 2000's decade (the way I've defined it). I mean, what are we missing, championships seasons from both Duncan and Kobe (99 and 10).

I concede.

Let's just say that Kobe really narrows the gap with his last title.

[jlauber]

How about we ALL agree here...

Duncan/Shaq/Kobe were the best players of the decade.

And they are all top-10- players, as well.

They certainly entertained us all over the course of the decade.

[tpols]

How about we ALL agree here...

Duncan/Shaq/Kobe were the best players of the decade.

And they are all top-10- players, as well.

They certainly entertained us all over the course of the decade.
agreed.:cheers:

[Big#50]

lol can you be more biased? You mention Duncan having to go against mcdyess and the wallaces but kobe had to go up for boards all series against guys like Garnett, Perkins, Sheed guys all bigger than him and great rebounders (not to mention pierce and rondo are good rebounders as well).

But of course kobe's effort in a bad shooting game<duncan's effort in a bad shooting game:facepalm
No shit. Did you watch both game 7's? Kobe played shaky and forced the issue. Tim carried the team on his back in the last quarter and a half. Kobe was carried. Do you see the difference? Of course you don't.

[Big#50]

Kobe will never surpass Shaq or Duncan. He has never taken a team to a championship by himself. He needed Gasol to get out of the first round. Has two of the poorest nba finals by an all time great. Kobe is a better scorer. Everything else Duncan owns Kobe.

[Doranku]

Kobe will never surpass Shaq or Duncan. He has never taken a team to a championship by himself. He needed Gasol to get out of the first round. Has two of the poorest nba finals by an all time great. Kobe is a better scorer. Everything else Duncan owns Kobe.

And Duncan/Shaq have? :roll:

The ONLY player who won by himself was Hakeem.

[Big#50]

And Duncan/Shaq have? :roll:

The ONLY player who won by himself was Hakeem.
Hakeem had a better team than Tim did in 03.
Old and injured DROB
Rookie Manu who was out of control and abused by POP
Second year TP whoo took over as a starter early kin the season and benched at times in favor of Claxton
Young Stephen Jackson who was a chucker and played good every other five games
I can keep going.
TP had like 14ppg
Manu 9ppg
Jackson 12 ppg
You're right he had a great team.

[macpierce]

shots fired!
kobe will retire with the more legendary career :banana:

[BlueandGold]

it's kobe by far rofl. People arguing for Duncan seriously sounds butthurt as hell

[AK47DR91]

2000-09 decade it's this:
1a- Duncan(2000-06)
1b- Shaq(2000-06)
3- Kobe(2006-09)

Since 2010 is a new decade, can't include Kobe's 2010 efforts.

Of the 21st century, then it's this:
1a: Kobe
1b: Duncan
3- Shaq

[DKLaker]

it's kobe by far rofl. People arguing for Duncan seriously sounds butthurt as hell

:applause: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: No Sh!t

[rmt]

And Duncan/Shaq have? :roll:

The ONLY player who won by himself was Hakeem.
FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG

2nd year Parker - repeatedly benched for Speedy Claxton
0.403 0.268 0.713 0.3 2.4 2.8 3.5 0.9 0.1 1.96 2.12 14.7

Rookie Manu - crazy & out-of-control
0.386 0.384 0.757 1.2 2.6 3.8 2.9 1.7 0.4 1.50 2.58 9.4

Streaky 3rd year Stephen Jackson
0.414 0.336 0.803 0.8 3.3 4.1 2.7 1.4 0.4 2.83 2.21 12.8

Duncan
0.529 0.000 0.677 4.0 11.4 15.4 5.3 0.6 3.3 3.17 3.25 24.7

Let's not pretend that any of Duncan's team mates in 2003 were at the level of the 7ft franchise big man in his prime that Gasol is:

Gasol (2009 & 2010 playoffs)
0.580 0.000 0.714 3.0 7.9 10.8 2.5 0.8 2.0 1.91 3.00 18.3
0.539 0.000 0.759 4.0 7.1 11.1 3.5 0.4 2.1 1.91 2.74 19.6

[magnax1]

I'd say that Duncan was better then Kobe from 00-05 and Kobe 06-10 but I'd rather have Kobe for the whole decade.
And anybody that says either Duncan OR Hakeem won with no one didn't watch those teams.

[Gifted Mind]

As I posted in the other thread....

I took some time to find threads from 2007 hoping to remind people how things were then

Here is a thread where everyone lists their Top 5

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47980


Most had Duncan at #1, and it wasn't really a big debate. Here is another one
http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33700

Not many at all disputed Duncan at #1










As I said earlier, revisionist history. Now most consider Kobe #1 for 2007, but in 2007 it was all Duncan. It's funny how a couple of Final MVPs can change history. But this approach is just fallacious and erroneous.

[magnax1]

But did people not agree that Kobe was best in 06? The difference was that Kobe was injured the first half of 07, and during the second half was obviously the best player.

[Gifted Mind]

But did people not agree that Kobe was best in 06? The difference was that Kobe was injured the first half of 07, and during the second half was obviously the best player.
I also agree Kobe was the best in 2006, because Duncan had a injury prone year in 2006 and wasn't himself. In 2007 he was just as good as he was in 2005.

That thread was made at the end of the year, and it was a general consensus that Duncan was the best player in the NBA. I find it very funny how history is now being altered because Kobe won 2 rings. :lol

[magnax1]

I also agree Kobe was the best in 2006, because Duncan had a injury prone year in 2006 and wasn't himself. In 2007 he was just as good as he was in 2005.

That thread was made at the end of the year, and it was a general consensus that Duncan was the best player in the NBA. I find it very funny how history is now being altered because Kobe won 2 rings. :lol
Well if thats true, wouldn't history have been just as altered if Duncan had just won a ring? People are affected by media exposure a huge amount, and it's probably affected Kobe and Duncan equally considering they were both contending in the playoffs most every year this decade.

[Crystallas]

Kobe, and nothing anyone says can change my mind. I don't like Kobe, but I'm not stupid enough to pull out the hateraid on this last decade.

Duncan is great, there is no shame for his name to be mentioned here, but I don't even see this as a close debate, unless you flat out hate Bryant.

[Gifted Mind]

Well if thats true, wouldn't history have been just as altered if Duncan had just won a ring? People are affected by media exposure a huge amount, and it's probably affected Kobe and Duncan equally considering they were both contending in the playoffs most every year this decade.
No that is completely different. Duncan won the ring in 2007 and was considered the best player in 2007. We are not changing what we said about Duncan in 2002 because of his ring in 2007. That would be revisionist. And that's what is being done with Kobe. In 2007 he was not the majority favorite on best player. Now 2 years later people are revising history and are starting to consider him the best.


In essence, history in 2007 is not altered because 2007 wasn't history in 2007. However, 2007 is now history, and it's fallacious to alter it now.

[Simple Jack]

Kobe, and nothing anyone says can change my mind. I don't like Kobe, but I'm not stupid enough to pull out the hateraid on this last decade.

Duncan is great, there is no shame for his name to be mentioned here, but I don't even see this as a close debate, unless you flat out hate Bryant.

Care to explain your logic?

[IcanzIIravor]

No that is completely different. Duncan won the ring in 2007 and was considered the best player in 2007. We are not changing what we said about Duncan in 2002 because of his ring in 2007. That would be revisionist. And that's what is being done with Kobe. In 2007 he was not the majority favorite on best player. Now 2 years later people are revising history and are starting to consider him the best.


In essence, history in 2007 is not altered because 2007 wasn't history in 2007. However, 2007 is now history, and it's fallacious to alter it now.

We're talking the entire decade though, so while in 2007 it could have been Duncan clear...2-3 years later when talking the entire decade another player (Kobe) could match or surpass Duncan given what has been done since then.

I think if Duncan had been the clear man the entire decade your point would definitely make sense, but given that Shaq dominated the first half it leaves room for the discussion.

[Big#50]

I'd say that Duncan was better then Kobe from 00-05 and Kobe 06-10 but I'd rather have Kobe for the whole decade.
And anybody that says either Duncan OR Hakeem won with no one didn't watch those teams.
Duncan was the best player in the NBa in 07. He should have won DPOY that season.

[AllenIverson3]

shots fired!
kobe will retire with the more legendary career :banana:
shut the **** up you have Justin ****ing Beiber in your avy smh

[AllenIverson3]

Tim Duncan and then Shaquille O'Neal

[Duncan21formvp]

Since ginobli2311 brought it up in another thread...

who was the player of the decade of the 00's?

The criteria would encompass the ENTIRE decade, not isolated seasons (Shaq wins easily for best single seasons.)

1. Duncan
1b. Shaq
1c. Kobe

[necya]

1. Duncan
1b. Shaq
1c. Kobe

perfect.