Top 3 Players every season since 1999-2000

[ThaSwagg3r]

I know Gifted Mind has his own thread about his top 3 players every season since the NBA started. I made this thread to primarily focus on the 2000 decade.

These lists are combining both regular season and playoff performances. Playoffs weigh more to me.

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Malone

2000-2001
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

2002-2003
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Nash

2005-2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. Dirk

2006-2007
1. Duncan
2. Kobe
3. LeBron/Nash

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. CP3
3. KG

2008-2009
1. LeBron/Kobe
2. Kobe/LeBron
3. Wade

2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. Dwight

[Ghostfacethrill]

wtf is the point of this thread? some people have way too much time on their hands.

[Dave3]

wtf is the point of this thread? some people have way too much time on their hands.
To say that Kobe was the best in 2009 and 2010 (from a different angle than the other thread) and to say that LeBron isn't top 3 right now. Anything before then he did just to use this thread as a masquerade for that point.

[Draz]

I actually liked it.

[ShaqAttack3234]

2000
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Alonzo Mourning

2001
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2002
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2003
1.Duncan
2.Garnett
3.Shaq

2004
1.Garnett
2.Duncan
3.Shaq

2005
1.Duncan
2.Shaq
3.Garnett

2006
1.Kobe
2.Wade
3.Dirk

2007
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.Nash

2008
1.Kobe
2.Paul
3.Lebron

2009
1.Lebron
2.Wade
3.Kobe

2010
1.Lebron
2.Kobe
3.Wade

2011
1.Dirk
2.Dwight
3.Lebron

[ThaSwagg3r]

To say that Kobe was the best in 2009 and 2010 (from a different angle than the other thread) and to say that LeBron isn't top 3 right now. Anything before then he did just to use this thread as a masquerade for that point.
I actually have no problem saying LeBron was better in 2009. I usually reward the player that wins the title that season; depending on the context of course. Playoffs have much more weight to me than the regular season which is why LeBron wasn't top 3 last season and wasn't the best in 2010.

[Odinn]

2000
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.K. Malone

2001
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2002
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe or Garnett

2003
1.Duncan
2.Garnett
3.Shaq

2004
1.Garnett
2.Shaq
3.Duncan

2005
1.Duncan
2.Shaq
3.Nash

2006
1.Kobe
2.Wade
3.Dirk or Duncan

2007
1.Duncan
2.Kobe
3.LeBron

2008
1.Kobe
2.Paul
3.LeBron

2009
1.LeBron
2.Wade
3.Kobe

2010
1.LeBron
2.Kobe
3.Wade

2011
1.LeBron
2.Dirk
3.Wade

[NBAller]

wtf is the point of this thread? some people have way too much time on their hands.
:confusedshrug: afaik, we all share relatively the same amount of time on our hands. :violin:

[RazorBaLade]

wtf is the point of this thread? some people have way too much time on their hands.

we all just wasting time on these forums till the lockout is over brah

[Indian guy]

99-00
Shaq
Duncan
Mourning

00-01
Shaq
Kobe
Iverson

01-02
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

02-03
Duncan
Kobe
T-Mac

03-04
Garnett
Duncan
Shaq

04-05
Duncan
Garnett
Shaq

05-06
Kobe
Wade
LeBron

06-07
Kobe
Wade
LeBron

07-08
Kobe
CP3
LeBron

08-09
LeBron
Kobe
Wade

09-10
LeBron
Kobe
Wade

10-11
Howard
Rose
Dirk

[UtahJazzFan88]

wtf is the point of this thread? some people have way too much time on their hands.

It's a ****ing basketball DISCUSSION forum? :facepalm

[Gifted Mind]

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Malone

2000-2001
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

2002-2003
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Nash

2005-2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. Dirk

2006-2007
1. Duncan
2. Kobe
3. LeBron/Nash

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. CP3
3. KG

2008-2009
1. LeBron/Kobe
2. Kobe/LeBron
3. Wade

2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. Dwight

Obviously I disagree with some years but for the most part good selections. The most disagreeable thing I see on there is Nash over Garnett in 2005. I sometimes consider putting Garnett at #1 for 2005. He didn't lose much from 2004, but Nash especially has no case what so ever for being a better player than Kevin Garnett. More valuable? Sure. But a better basketball player? No way.

[Gifted Mind]

2000
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Alonzo Mourning

2001
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2002
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2003
1.Duncan
2.Garnett
3.Shaq

2004
1.Garnett
2.Duncan
3.Shaq

2005
1.Duncan
2.Shaq
3.Garnett

2006
1.Kobe
2.Wade
3.Dirk

2007
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.Nash

2008
1.Kobe
2.Paul
3.Lebron

2009
1.Lebron
2.Wade
3.Kobe

2010
1.Lebron
2.Kobe
3.Wade

2011
1.Dirk
2.Dwight
3.Lebron

Now this one is very similar to mine. So I really like it. No major disagreements, besides maybe Kobe over Duncan in '07. Duncan was every bit as good as he's ever been in 2007 and I would not take the 07 Kobe version over him.

[Gifted Mind]

2000
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.K. Malone

2001
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2002
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe or Garnett

2003
1.Duncan
2.Garnett
3.Shaq

2004
1.Garnett
2.Shaq
3.Duncan

2005
1.Duncan
2.Shaq
3.Nash

2006
1.Kobe
2.Wade
3.Dirk or Duncan

2007
1.Duncan
2.Kobe
3.LeBron

2008
1.Kobe
2.Paul
3.LeBron

2009
1.LeBron
2.Wade
3.Kobe

2010
1.LeBron
2.Kobe
3.Wade

2011
1.LeBron
2.Dirk
3.Wade

Really like this one also. Not much to disagree with, besides once again selecting Nash over KG in 2005. I understand Nash was more valuable to his team and all of this, however it's actually nonsensical suggesting Nash was a better player than KG in '05 when KG was still very much at his peak. From 04 to 05 KG did not drop very much if at all. And I'm sure you would never take the 05 Nash over the 04 KG.

[Gifted Mind]

99-00
Shaq
Duncan
Mourning

00-01
Shaq
Kobe
Iverson

01-02
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

02-03
Duncan
Kobe
T-Mac

03-04
Garnett
Duncan
Shaq

04-05
Duncan
Garnett
Shaq

05-06
Kobe
Wade
LeBron

06-07
Kobe
Wade
LeBron

07-08
Kobe
CP3
LeBron

08-09
LeBron
Kobe
Wade

09-10
LeBron
Kobe
Wade

10-11
Howard
Rose
Dirk

Love every year on this list besides 2007, which was just completely absurd. People forget that Duncan in 07 was as good as he was in 05 when people easily have him at the best player in the NBA. Injuries slowed him down in 06, but in 07 he bounced back to his old self. Not having him in even the top 3 is completely off.

[EnoughSaid]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09? :facepalm

[ThaSwagg3r]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09? :facepalm
Yes, Wade was mediocre in the playoffs and had a first round exit while Kobe dominated all four series including the finals. It's hard not to have a guy who was 2nd in the MVP voting and the finals MVP as AT LEAST the 2nd best player in the league.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Obviously I disagree with some years but for the most part good selections. The most disagreeable thing I see on there is Nash over Garnett in 2005. I sometimes consider putting Garnett at #1 for 2005. He didn't lose much from 2004, but Nash especially has no case what so ever for being a better player than Kevin Garnett. More valuable? Sure. But a better basketball player? No way.
More talent is a different subject than better season. It's hard to call Garnett the best player in the league in 2005 when the guy didn't even make the playoffs that season. There aren't many players in NBA history who were still considered the best, top 3, or even top 5 when their team didn't even make the playoffs.

[Shep]

2000
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. tim duncan

2001
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. allen iverson

2002
1. shaquille o'neal
2. tim duncan
3. kobe bryant

2003
1. tim duncan
2. kevin garnett
3. shaquille o'neal

2004
1. kevin garnett
2. shaquille o'neal
3. tim duncan

2005
1. tim duncan
2. dwyane wade
3. kevin garnett

2006
1. dwyane wade
2. lebron james
3. dirk nowitzki

2007
1. tim duncan
2. lebron james
3. tracy mcgrady

2008
1. chris paul
2. lebron james
3. kevin garnett

2009
1. lebron james
2. dwight howard
3. kobe bryant

2010
1. lebron james
2. kobe bryant
3. pau gasol

2011
1. lebron james
2. dwyane wade
3. derrick rose

[ShaqAttack3234]

Now this one is very similar to mine. So I really like it. No major disagreements, besides maybe Kobe over Duncan in '07. Duncan was every bit as good as he's ever been in 2007 and I would not take the 07 Kobe version over him.

I disagree that Duncan was still every bit as good as he ever was. He had lost a noticeable amount of athleticism since his early 00's peak and his stamina wasn't the same. He was also near his low in free throw shooting that year.

I can see someone taking Duncan over Kobe and usually, I'd be hesitant to rank a player on a 42-40 team as the best in the league, but that wasn't a very talented team to begin with and they started off 26-15 with Kobe leading the team in a similar way to how he did in 2008. But when you have a cast that limited and almost every key player misses significant time, it's hard to expect much. Lamar Odom missed 26 games, Luke Walton missed 22 games and Kwame Brown missed 41 games. And the scoring streak he had was historically great and ended a losing streak.

I will say that Duncan still did pretty much everything you'd want a franchise big man to do. He was still probably the premier defensive player in the league, a very good rebounder, an excellent passer and one of the best post scorers.

But stamina and durability is also an advantage for Kobe. Not that Duncan had to play more minutes. But he had missed 13 games in 2004, 16 games in 2005(while playing 33 mpg) and he played 80 games and 35 mpg in 2006, but wasn't healthy that season. So I think limiting his minutes to 34 per game was probably necessary at that point.

[Ikill]

Yes, Wade was mediocre in the playoffs and had a first round exit while Kobe dominated all four series including the finals. It's hard not to have a guy who was 2nd in the MVP voting and the finals MVP as AT LEAST the 2nd best player in the league.
Wades 06 playoffs=Kobes 09 playoffs
Wades 09 season=Kobes 09 season
How can you have Kobe over Wade in both 06 and 09

[Gifted Mind]

More talent is a different subject than better season. It's hard to call Garnett the best player in the league in 2005 when the guy didn't even make the playoffs that season. There aren't many players in NBA history who were still considered the best, top 3, or even top 5 when their team didn't even make the playoffs.
You are confusing best player with best season. Overall, KG did not have as good of a season since as you said his team missed the playoffs. However, he was still nearly as good of a player as he was in 2004, with the only difference being his team got worse. Szczerbiak was their 2nd leading scorer. As a basketball player, Kevin Garnett was as good as he has ever been. Do you really think the decline from 58-24 (2004) to 44-38 (2005) was KG dropping as a player at age 27 (even though his stats didn't show any decline). Or may the 14 wins be explained by his 2 best players from the season before struggling with injuries and age.

Furthermore, though very unlikely, it's possible the best player may have missed the playoffs. Look at Kareem in the 70s, one year he missed the playoffs but no one would dare suggest he wasn't even Top 3.


It's not just about talent, even leading that team to 44 wins was commendable. The drop in the wins can be explained by his team being much worse. Garnett himself played as well as he had in all the years you ranked him Top 3.

[Gifted Mind]

I disagree that Duncan was still every bit as good as he ever was. He had lost a noticeable amount of athleticism since his early 00's peak and his stamina wasn't the same. He was also near his low in free throw shooting that year.

I can see someone taking Duncan over Kobe and usually, I'd be hesitant to rank a player on a 42-40 team as the best in the league, but that wasn't a very talented team to begin with and they started off 26-15 with Kobe leading the team in a similar way to how he did in 2008. But when you have a cast that limited and almost every key player misses significant time, it's hard to expect much. Lamar Odom missed 26 games, Luke Walton missed 22 games and Kwame Brown missed 41 games. And the scoring streak he had was historically great and ended a losing streak.

I will say that Duncan still did pretty much everything you'd want a franchise big man to do. He was still probably the premier defensive player in the league, a very good rebounder, an excellent passer and one of the best post scorers.

But stamina and durability is also an advantage for Kobe. Not that Duncan had to play more minutes. But he had missed 13 games in 2004, 16 games in 2005(while playing 33 mpg) and he played 80 games and 35 mpg in 2006, but wasn't healthy that season. So I think limiting his minutes to 34 per game was probably necessary at that point.

I may have exaggerated a little saying he was as good as he's ever been, but there wasn't a great difference. Duncan was still Duncan in 2007. And I would trust a prime Duncan over Kobe to lead my team to more wins. As you said, he was still a dominant low-post scorer (55% FG), arguably the best defender in the NBA, excellent passing skills for a bigman, still had all the intangibles, and the championship run is really the cherry on top. A complete package. To me the best player in the NBA is the player who will lead given teams to the most wins on average or get them closest to contending for the championship. And in 2007, with Duncan playing nearly as well as he ever has, I would choose Duncan as the best player in the NBA. I would choose him if I had to pick 1 player in the NBA to build around, him playing like he always has gives any decent team a chance to contend.


Let me ask you this, would you take 07 Kobe over 05 Duncan too? Because there wasn't any difference between 05 Duncan and 07 Duncan, you could make a case either way for which version of Duncan was better.

[RazorBaLade]

2000
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. tim duncan

2001
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. allen iverson

2002
1. shaquille o'neal
2. tim duncan
3. kobe bryant

2003
1. tim duncan
2. kevin garnett
3. shaquille o'neal

2004
1. kevin garnett
2. shaquille o'neal
3. tim duncan

2005
1. tim duncan
2. dwyane wade
3. kevin garnett

2006
1. dwyane wade
2. lebron james
3. dirk nowitzki

2007
1. tim duncan
2. lebron james
3. tracy mcgrady

2008
1. chris paul
2. lebron james
3. kevin garnett

2009
1. lebron james
2. dwight howard
3. kobe bryant

2010
1. lebron james
2. kobe bryant
3. pau gasol

2011
1. lebron james
2. dwyane wade
3. derrick rose

4/10 you almost trolled me

[ShaqAttack3234]

I may have exaggerated a little saying he was as good as he's ever been, but there wasn't a great difference. Duncan was still Duncan in 2007. And I would trust a prime Duncan over Kobe to lead my team to more wins. As you said, he was still a dominant low-post scorer (55% FG), arguably the best defender in the NBA, excellent passing skills for a bigman, still had all the intangibles, and the championship run is really the cherry on top. A complete package. To me the best player in the NBA is the player who will lead given teams to the most wins on average or get them closest to contending for the championship. And in 2007, with Duncan playing nearly as well as he ever has, I would choose Duncan as the best player in the NBA. I would choose him if I had to pick 1 player in the NBA to build around, him playing like he always has gives any decent team a chance to contend.


Let me ask you this, would you take 07 Kobe over 05 Duncan too? Because there wasn't any difference between 05 Duncan and 07 Duncan, you could make a case either way for which version of Duncan was better.

I probably would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 Duncan. 2007 was near Kobe's peak and in the middle of his 3 best years, while 2005 and 2007 were part of what I'd call Duncan's late prime years.

I think Kobe was capable of leading a team in 2007, the very next season he won 57 games to finish with the best record in a Western Conference that had eight teams with 50+ wins and a team that missed the playoffs with 48 wins and he got that team to the finals while beating Duncan's Spurs. In 2009, he led the Lakers to 65 wins and a title.

With Kobe's 2007 cast, I don't think you could expect much more. As I said, his second best player was Lamar Odom who never made an all-star team and missed 26 games that year, and Odom was far ahead of the Lakers 3rd best player. In fact, no other Lakers aside from Kobe and Odom could you call legitimate NBA starters. And when you consider these 2 things, that Luke Walton and Kwame Brown were key players and starters on that team, and that those 2 missed a combined 63 games, it's pretty amazing that he got the Lakers to the playoffs.

You saw Kobe excel in 2 styles that year. By leading the team early and playing a more team-oriented style to help them overachieve early, and carrying the team on his back later in the season.

[Shep]

4/10 you almost trolled me
actually its 10/10, and 36/36

[All Net]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09? :facepalm
Well he was

[Bigsmoke]

Duncan ISNT the 2nd best in 2000. If so then that just tells how horrible that year was when a guys that didn't play a single game in the playoffs are the 2nd best for season and playoffs.

i have Malone as 2nd... him, KG, and Iverson were all great though. i dont know

[Bigsmoke]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09? :facepalm

Kobe by far played better in the playoffs while playing better teams and he WON the championship while being the Finals MVP

all Wade had was regular season statistics :confusedshrug: How do u shoot like 43% vs the Hawks from all teams?

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan ISNT the 2nd best in 2000. If so then that just tells how horrible that year was when a guys that didn't play a single game in the playoffs are the 2nd best for season and playoffs.

i have Malone as 2nd... him, KG, and Iverson were all great though. i dont know

The 74 games Duncan did play that year were enough to tell us that he was a better player than anyone not named Shaq. All of the qualities I mentioned about 2007 Duncan such as elite defense, great passing, great post scoring plus more athleticism, stamina, a better face up game and a solid 76% from the line that year.

23/12/3/2/1, 49 FG%, 56 TS% with elite defense.

[Bigsmoke]

The 74 games Duncan did play that year were enough to tell us that he was a better player than anyone not named Shaq. All of the qualities I mentioned about 2007 Duncan such as elite defense, great passing, great post scoring plus more athleticism, stamina, a better face up game and a solid 76% from the line that year.

23/12/3/2/1, 49 FG%, 56 TS% with elite defense.

Duncan did well in the the regular season, but that should mean Dirk is #1 or 2 in 2007 from how great he was in the regular season.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan did well in the the regular season, but that should mean Dirk is #1 or 2 in 2007 from how great he was in the regular season.

No, there's a big difference in the situations. Dirk played well below his usual level and lost to an 8th seed. Duncan missed the playoffs due to an injury. And regardless, even with Dirk's playoff series hurting his ranking, he was still clearly in the top 3-5 range in 2007.

Duncan certainly didn't do anything that would make you think he was a lesser player, and it's not like any of the other elite players who you could argue were even comparable to Duncan did anything to raise their rankings in the playoffs aside from Shaq.

Garnett played a total of 4 playoff games losing to the Blazers while shooting 39% in the first round.

Malone had the 50 point game vs Seattle and beat them in the first round, but that's a team they were expected to beat. He didn't play particularly well vs Portland in the semifinals and lost in 5 games.

Mourning swept a Pistons team with Grant Hill injured and played well vs the Knicks, but lost.

[Odinn]

Really like this one also. Not much to disagree with, besides once again selecting Nash over KG in 2005. I understand Nash was more valuable to his team and all of this, however it's actually nonsensical suggesting Nash was a better player than KG in '05 when KG was still very much at his peak. From 04 to 05 KG did not drop very much if at all. And I'm sure you would never take the 05 Nash over the 04 KG.
Yeah. You're right. But the major reason why I rank Nash over KG, Garnett missed the playoffs.

[Gifted Mind]

Yeah. You're right. But the major reason why I rank Nash over KG, Garnett missed the playoffs.
But once again that would be accounted for if we were discussing best seasons (factoring in accomplishments) but as an individual he was as good or nearly as good as he was in 2004. The only difference between the 2004 T'Wolves (58-24) and the 2005 T'Wolves (44-38) was the play, injuries, and aging of KG's teammates. Kevin Garnett himself, still strong at 27, played as well as he ever had.

So my question is how exactly does he fall off when discussing top basketball players , when as a player he was as good or nearly as good as he was from the year before where you ranked him #1. Ultimately, KG did not become a significantly worse basketball player from 04 to 05 thus there is no coherent reason to drop him if we are ranking best basketball players (rather than seasons or years)

[Gifted Mind]

I probably would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 Duncan. 2007 was near Kobe's peak and in the middle of his 3 best years, while 2005 and 2007 were part of what I'd call Duncan's late prime years.

I think Kobe was capable of leading a team in 2007, the very next season he won 57 games to finish with the best record in a Western Conference that had eight teams with 50+ wins and a team that missed the playoffs with 48 wins and he got that team to the finals while beating Duncan's Spurs. In 2009, he led the Lakers to 65 wins and a title.

With Kobe's 2007 cast, I don't think you could expect much more. As I said, his second best player was Lamar Odom who never made an all-star team and missed 26 games that year, and Odom was far ahead of the Lakers 3rd best player. In fact, no other Lakers aside from Kobe and Odom could you call legitimate NBA starters. And when you consider these 2 things, that Luke Walton and Kwame Brown were key players and starters on that team, and that those 2 missed a combined 63 games, it's pretty amazing that he got the Lakers to the playoffs.

You saw Kobe excel in 2 styles that year. By leading the team early and playing a more team-oriented style to help them overachieve early, and carrying the team on his back later in the season.

So let me ask you this, would you clearly take 07 Kobe over 05 Garnett? I would say their starcasts are pretty similar, both awful. Garnett's 2nd best player (Cassell) also was injured often, and overall played worse and impacted less than Odom did for the Lakers. After that it doesn't get much better for Garnett either, though it was still moderately better than what Kobe had to work with. But overall, I would say their starcasts are quite comparable. Kobe led his team to a 42-40 record while Garnett led his team to a 44-38 record.

When comparing their individual plays for the season, I would have a tough time choosing 07 Kobe over 05 KG. Besides for being a better scorer, there was not much else Kobe did better. Garnett led the league in rebounding that season, averaged more assists than Kobe, and did a good job scoring as well. His led the league in PER (almost 4 points higher than Kobe's) and we haven't even factored in defense yet (which Garnett played better).

I agree though what Kobe did in 2007 was also spectacular, and without carefully analysis I would call it a wash. Though Garnett's individual all-around play in 2005 was truly remarkable. But what I'm getting at here is you ranked Duncan 2 spots ahead of 2005 Garnett yet would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 Duncan, implying you think Kobe had quite a better season than 2005 Garnett, which I think is simply untrue.

[Ikill]

Well he was
than Wade was better in 06

[ThaSwagg3r]

than Wade was better in 06
The logic doesn't make sense because Kobe was every bit as good if not better than Wade was in the 09 regular season and Wade was not even close to being as good as Kobe was in the regular season in 06. If you think the gap between 09 Wade vs. 09 Kobe and 06 Kobe vs. 06 Wade was close, then I suggest you either re-watch that season or watch a different sport.

[ShaqAttack3234]

So let me ask you this, would you clearly take 07 Kobe over 05 Garnett? I would say their starcasts are pretty similar, both awful. Garnett's 2nd best player (Cassell) also was injured often, and overall played worse and impacted less than Odom did for the Lakers. After that it doesn't get much better for Garnett either, though it was still moderately better than what Kobe had to work with. But overall, I would say their starcasts are quite comparable. Kobe led his team to a 42-40 record while Garnett led his team to a 44-38 record.

When comparing their individual plays for the season, I would have a tough time choosing 07 Kobe over 05 KG. Besides for being a better scorer, there was not much else Kobe did better. Garnett led the league in rebounding that season, averaged more assists than Kobe, and did a good job scoring as well. His led the league in PER (almost 4 points higher than Kobe's) and we haven't even factored in defense yet (which Garnett played better).

I agree though what Kobe did in 2007 was also spectacular, and without carefully analysis I would call it a wash. Though Garnett's individual all-around play in 2005 was truly remarkable. But what I'm getting at here is you ranked Duncan 2 spots ahead of 2005 Garnett yet would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 Duncan, implying you think Kobe had quite a better season than 2005 Garnett, which I think is simply untrue.

Well, I would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 KG. But I'm actually torn on where to rank KG in 2005. A while back when I did my top 25 rankings, I had KG at number 1 in 2005 for a while.

After Cassell, KG still had Sprewell and Wally who weren't great, but better than any of Kobe's teammates besides Odom. And as I mentioned, 3 of the 4 starters on Kobe's teams missed 20+ games while Sprewell and Wally missed 3 games combined.

And in general, I've ranked Kobe over KG most seasons after 2000, aside from the 3 year stretch from 2003-2005(though 2003 is tough to rank the top 2-5 players)..

[disel]

TMAC was averaging 32-7-7 in 02-03 and some had him as the best player in the league.

[magnax1]

00
1-Shaq
2-KG
3-Duncan
01-
1-Shaq
2-Duncan
3-KG
02-
1-Duncan
2-Shaq
3-KG
03-
1-KG
2-Duncan
3-Shaq
04-
1-KG
2-Duncan
3-Hard to say. There really weren't a lot of fantastic players that year. I think if you ignore Kobe's really poor first half, it's him, but if not probably Jermaine O'Neal.
05
1-Duncan
2-KG
3-Another tough year. Kobe Shaq and TMac are all pretty close.
06
1-Kobe
2-Wade
3-Duncan
07
1-Kobe
2-Duncan
3-Lebron
08
1-Kobe
2-Lebron
3-Duncan
09
1-Wade
2-Kobe and Lebron were awfully close
10
1-Lebron
2-Wade
3-Kobe
11
1-Wade
2-Lebron
3-Dwight

[TheMarkMadsen]

Anyone witout Iverson on their 01' list should be banned.

[Odinn]

But once again that would be accounted for if we were discussing best seasons (factoring in accomplishments) but as an individual he was as good or nearly as good as he was in 2004. The only difference between the 2004 T'Wolves (58-24) and the 2005 T'Wolves (44-38) was the play, injuries, and aging of KG's teammates. Kevin Garnett himself, still strong at 27, played as well as he ever had.

So my question is how exactly does he fall off when discussing top basketball players , when as a player he was as good or nearly as good as he was from the year before where you ranked him #1. Ultimately, KG did not become a significantly worse basketball player from 04 to 05 thus there is no coherent reason to drop him if we are ranking best basketball players (rather than seasons or years)
Individual stats matters. Performance matters. Also success matters.

I have KG in 4th place for 04-05 season.
Nash improved Suns record by 33 wins and led Suns to WCF. Also won MVP and he deserved it*.
Injuries also matters but KG led his team to WCF previous year and then missed the playoffs. That hurts. Injuries can make a case but this is a failure in the end.

*: I think Shaq deserved more but I can't say Nash didn't deserve it.

[Ikill]

05
Duncan
Wade
Dirk

06
Kobe
Wade
Lebron

07
Kobe
Duncan
Dirk/Lebron

08
Lebron
Kobe
Paul

09
Lebron
Wade
Kobe

10
lebron
Kobe
Wade

11
Lebron
Wade
Howard

[AlphaWolf24]

The REAL List -.....

2000
1.Shaq
2.Kobe
3.Duncan

2001
1.Kobe
2.Shaq
3.A.I.

2002
1.Kobe
2.TMAC
3.Shaq

2003
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.TMAC

2004.
1.Garnett
2.TMAC
3.Kobe

2005
1.Duncan
2.Nash
3.Dirk

2006
1.Kobe
2.Dirk
3.Wade

2007
1.Kobe
2.Dirk
3.Duncan

2008
1.Kobe
2.LBJ
3.Paul

2009
1.Kobe
2.Howard
3.LBJ

2010
1.Kobe
2.LBJ
3.Wade

2011
1.LBJ
2.Wade
3.Dirk

[Big#50]

The REAL List -.....

2000
1.Shaq
2.Kobe
3.Duncan

2001
1.Kobe
2.Shaq
3.A.I.

2002
1.Kobe
2.TMAC
3.Shaq

2003
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.TMAC

2004.
1.Garnett
2.TMAC
3.Kobe

2005
1.Duncan
2.Nash
3.Dirk

2006
1.Kobe
2.Dirk
3.Wade

2007
1.Kobe
2.Dirk
3.Duncan

2008
1.Kobe
2.LBJ
3.Paul

2009
1.Kobe
2.Howard
3.LBJ

2010
1.Kobe
2.LBJ
3.Wade

2011
1.LBJ
2.Wade
3.Dirk
You're kind of creepy. Are you Asian?

[AlphaWolf24]

You're kind of creepy. Are you Asian?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lews787vLI1qbidv9.gif

[Bigsmoke]

2003
1.Kobe
2.Duncan3.TMAC


I really don't know how someone could win both the MVP and Finals MVP and not be the best player for that season.

[Big#50]

I really don't know how someone could win both the MVP and Finals MVP and not be the best player for that season.
He is a troll. Ignore him.

[All Net]

He is a troll. Ignore him.
:oldlol: Wow now that is ironic

[ShaqAttack3234]

00
1-Shaq
2-KG
3-Duncan
01-
1-Shaq
2-Duncan
3-KG
02-
1-Duncan
2-Shaq
3-KG
03-
1-KG
2-Duncan
3-Shaq
04-
1-KG
2-Duncan
3-Hard to say. There really weren't a lot of fantastic players that year. I think if you ignore Kobe's really poor first half, it's him, but if not probably Jermaine O'Neal.
05
1-Duncan
2-KG
3-Another tough year. Kobe Shaq and TMac are all pretty close.
06
1-Kobe
2-Wade
3-Duncan
07
1-Kobe
2-Duncan
3-Lebron
08
1-Kobe
2-Lebron
3-Duncan
09
1-Wade
2-Kobe and Lebron were awfully close
10
1-Lebron
2-Wade
3-Kobe
11
1-Wade
2-Lebron
3-Dwight

This doesn't really add up.

Why KG in front of Duncan in 2000, but behind him in 2001? Nothing really changed in their games/performances those 2 seasons.

You have Duncan as the best player in 2002, but not in 2003 when he was at his peak? Doesn't really add up when you have KG over 2003 Duncan who was better than 2002 Duncan. Yet you have 2002 Duncan ahead of 2002 Shaq who was clearly better than 2003 KG?

2004 is really puzzling as well, I agree with your top 2, but Kobe and especially Jermaine O'Neal ahead of Shaq? If you're going to rank Kobe ahead of Shaq in any season that they played together, a MUCH better argument can be made for 2003.

Kobe in the top 3 discussion for 2005?

Duncan above Chris Paul in 2008?

And finally, are you including the playoffs? If so, I can't see the consistency, the only way Wade could be ranked above Lebron in 2011 is if you are including the playoffs, and the only way Wade could be ranked above Lebron in 2009 is if you're not including the playoffs(and even that's a stretch).

[guy]

00
1. Shaq
2. Zo
3. Malone

01
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. KG

02
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. KG

03
1. Duncan
2. KG
3. Shaq

04
1. KG
2. Duncan
3. Shaq

05
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. KG

06
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. Lebron

07
1. Kobe
2. Duncan
3. Lebron

08
1. Kobe
2. Lebron
3. CP3

09
1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Wade

10
1. Lebron
2. Kobe
3. Wade

11
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. Dwight

[magnax1]

This doesn't really add up.

Why KG in front of Duncan in 2000, but behind him in 2001? Nothing really changed in their games/performances those 2 seasons.
KG playing a tiny bit better in 00 then 01, and Duncan's injury in 00 puts him behind. They're close enough that you have to take into account the really small stuff.


You have Duncan as the best player in 2002, but not in 2003 when he was at his peak? Doesn't really add up when you have KG over 2003 Duncan who was better than 2002 Duncan. Yet you have 2002 Duncan ahead of 2002 Shaq who was clearly better than 2003 KG?
Duncan in 03 just wasn't as good as Duncan in 02. 02 was the year his jumper was best, he was shooting FTs better then any year, and it shows up in the numbers. 02 is the only year that really sticks out in Duncans prime from 00-05 a lot better then the rest. He really wasn't as good in 03 as 02, and there really isn't any argument for it unless you just want to say his team went farther.


2004 is really puzzling as well, I agree with your top 2, but Kobe and especially Jermaine O'Neal ahead of Shaq? If you're going to rank Kobe ahead of Shaq in any season that they played together, a MUCH better argument can be made for 2003.
Shaq was quite pathetic in 04. Had a much better season in 05. He didn't play D, and being out of shape really caught up to him and affected his play badly. Next year he came back in shape and picked up his level of play quite a lot.
JO and Shaq are sort of close. JO was a lot better defender though and made a bigger impact on those Indiana teams considering he was the focal point of both the defense and the offense.
As for Kobe, like I said it just depends on how you look at it, but at his best that season he was far and away the best player on that team.

Kobe in the top 3 discussion for 2005?
Why not? He definitely wasn't as great as other years, but even then he was pretty close to TMac and Shaq, neither of whom were that close to their best either.

Duncan above Chris Paul in 2008?
I don't see a case for Duncan not being higher then Chris Paul.

And finally, are you including the playoffs? If so, I can't see the consistency, the only way Wade could be ranked above Lebron in 2011 is if you are including the playoffs, and the only way Wade could be ranked above Lebron in 2009 is if you're not including the playoffs(and even that's a stretch).
I'm just taking into account overall level of play, playoffs included in the sense that a lot of players don't play at their regular season level in the playoffs and some players do the opposite, so you have to take that into account. I try not to reward players for going off against weak teams unless they consistently play at another level in the playoffs throughout their career.
And Lebron Wade this year is pretty obvious to me. They basically played equal in the regular seaon, but Wade definitely came through on another level in every round of the playoffs but Chicago.
09 is pretty obvious too. Wade was just better to me. Better scorer, and Defender, pretty equal in other departments except Lebron brought down more rebounds (though I think his rebounding stats are inflated, I'll still give it to him) Lebron did have a great playoffs, but against teams that weren't exactly great, and against a team that was notorious for letting perimeter starrs go off against them.

[DMAVS41]

KG playing a tiny bit better in 00 then 01, and Duncan's injury in 00 puts him behind. They're close enough that you have to take into account the really small stuff.


Duncan in 03 just wasn't as good as Duncan in 02. 02 was the year his jumper was best, he was shooting FTs better then any year, and it shows up in the numbers. 02 is the only year that really sticks out in Duncans prime from 00-05 a lot better then the rest. He really wasn't as good in 03 as 02, and there really isn't any argument for it unless you just want to say his team went farther.


Shaq was quite pathetic in 04. Had a much better season in 05. He didn't play D, and being out of shape really caught up to him and affected his play badly. Next year he came back in shape and picked up his level of play quite a lot.
JO and Shaq are sort of close. JO was a lot better defender though and made a bigger impact on those Indiana teams considering he was the focal point of both the defense and the offense.
As for Kobe, like I said it just depends on how you look at it, but at his best that season he was far and away the best player on that team.

Why not? He definitely wasn't as great as other years, but even then he was pretty close to TMac and Shaq, neither of whom were that close to their best either.

I don't see a case for Duncan not being higher then Chris Paul.

I'm just taking into account overall level of play, playoffs included in the sense that a lot of players don't play at their regular season level in the playoffs and some players do the opposite, so you have to take that into account. I try not to reward players for going off against weak teams unless they consistently play at another level in the playoffs throughout their career.
And Lebron Wade this year is pretty obvious to me. They basically played equal in the regular seaon, but Wade definitely came through on another level in every round of the playoffs but Chicago.
09 is pretty obvious too. Wade was just better to me. Better scorer, and Defender, pretty equal in other departments except Lebron brought down more rebounds (though I think his rebounding stats are inflated, I'll still give it to him) Lebron did have a great playoffs, but against teams that weren't exactly great, and against a team that was notorious for letting perimeter starrs go off against them.

:facepalm

Really? Wade was a better player than Kobe in 05. Along with many other players. Kobe missed the playoffs along with 16 regular season games. And he shot 43% from the field.

Top 3? Might not have even been top 10.

[magnax1]

:facepalm

Really? Wade was a better player than Kobe in 05. Along with many other players. Kobe missed the playoffs along with 16 regular season games. And he shot 43% from the field.

Top 3? Might not have even been top 10.
You aren't serious are you? Wade had 24-5-7 on 56 TS% Kobe had 28-6-6 on 56 TS%, and that's with Kobe being injured and having much more defensive pressure on him.

[Lucifer]

Kobe.

[DMAVS41]

You aren't serious are you? Wade had 24-5-7 on 56 TS% Kobe had 28-6-6 on 56 TS%, and that's with Kobe being injured and having much more defensive pressure on him.

Do the playoffs count for anything?

Does defense count for anything?

And only TS? LOL...how about also listing that Wade shot nearly 5% better from the field.

Oh, and the playoffs:

Wade - 27/6/7 on 48% fg 56% TS

So Wade puts up better stats than Kobe in the playoffs (playing the same team that destroyed Kobe the year before as well) and makes the ECF and you rank Kobe over Wade???????????????????????

Sorry, doesn't work.


Kobe top 3 is a ****ing joke.

Nash, Shaq, Duncan, Dirk, KG and Wade all were better.....and so were other players.

LOL

[magnax1]

Do the playoffs count for anything?

Does defense count for anything?

And only TS? LOL...how about also listing that Wade shot nearly 5% better from the field.

Oh, and the playoffs:

Wade - 27/6/7 on 48% fg 56% TS

So Wade puts up better stats than Kobe in the playoffs (playing the same team that destroyed Kobe the year before as well) and makes the ECF and you rank Kobe over Wade???????????????????????

Sorry, doesn't work.


Kobe top 3 is a ****ing joke.

Nash, Shaq, Duncan, Dirk, and Wade all were better.....and so were other players.

LOL
What I will give Wade is that he picked up his level of play in the playoffs, as he always does, but even then there isn't much of a case for him, and just saying he made the playoffs doesn't change that (Kobe might have too if not for he and Odom's injury) Making the playoffs doesn't make you a better player.
If I was going to rank wade, it'd be probably right behind Duncan KG TMac Shaq and Kobe with Nash.

[DMAVS41]

What I will give Wade is that he picked up his level of play in the playoffs, as he always does, but even then there isn't much of a case for him, and just saying he made the playoffs doesn't change that (Kobe might have too if not for he and Odom's injury) Making the playoffs doesn't make you a better player.
If I was going to rank wade, it'd be probably right behind Duncan KG TMac Shaq and Kobe with Nash.

Its not making the playoffs, its how he played when it matters most. And the Lakers might have made the playoffs if Kobe had played better when he did play.

The stats look a lot better (especially when you only look at TS...LOL) than how Kobe actually played. Anyone watching 2005 knows Kobe was not a top 3 player.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Reg. Season + Post Season

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Malone
3. Iverson

2000-2001
1. Iverson
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Iverson
3. Kidd

2002-2003
1. McGrady
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Duncan
3. Wallace

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Nash
3. Wade

2005-2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. LeBron

2006-2007
1. Nash
2. Kobe
3. Ginobili

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. CP3
3. KG

2008-2009
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Rose
2. Wade
3. LeBron

Anyone not mentioning Iverson in the top three 2000, 2001, and 2002 is a clear as day HATER.

Anyone mentioning Shaq in the top three in 2005 needs to get smacked.

Anyone not mentioning Kidd in top three in 2002 needs to be punched in the mouth.

Anyone not mentioning Rose in 2011 needs to get tea bagged for their stupidity.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan in 03 just wasn't as good as Duncan in 02. 02 was the year his jumper was best, he was shooting FTs better then any year, and it shows up in the numbers. 02 is the only year that really sticks out in Duncans prime from 00-05 a lot better then the rest. He really wasn't as good in 03 as 02, and there really isn't any argument for it unless you just want to say his team went farther.

No, Duncan was clearly better in 2003. His defense was at it's absolute peak, his passing and rebounding were as good, if not better and he was MUCH better in the 2003 playoffs than 2002 playoffs.



Shaq was quite pathetic in 04. Had a much better season in 05. He didn't play D, and being out of shape really caught up to him and affected his play badly. Next year he came back in shape and picked up his level of play quite a lot.

Shaq played much better defense in 2004 than 2003, yet you ranked him top 3 in 2003. He was also in worse shape in 2003(arguably the worst shape of his prime). He wore down late in the regular season in 2005 and couldn't contribute anywhere near the way he did in the 2004 playoffs.


JO and Shaq are sort of close. JO was a lot better defender though and made a bigger impact on those Indiana teams considering he was the focal point of both the defense and the offense.
As for Kobe, like I said it just depends on how you look at it, but at his best that season he was far and away the best player on that team.

No, Jermaine was clearly not as good as Shaq. The gap between them offensively was massive. And Shaq was also the focal point offensively and defensively in 2004 for the Lakers.


Why not? He definitely wasn't as great as other years, but even then he was pretty close to TMac and Shaq, neither of whom were that close to their best either.

Kobe played that season injured and the Lakers finished at 34-48 and out of the playoffs. Just 28-38 with Kobe and he had arguably the worst defensive season of his prime.



And Lebron Wade this year is pretty obvious to me. They basically played equal in the regular seaon, but Wade definitely came through on another level in every round of the playoffs but Chicago.

Lebron was clearly better in the regular season, Philadelphia Series and Chicago series. Wade was clearly better in the Boston series and Finals.


09 is pretty obvious too. Wade was just better to me. Better scorer, and Defender, pretty equal in other departments except Lebron brought down more rebounds (though I think his rebounding stats are inflated, I'll still give it to him) Lebron did have a great playoffs, but against teams that weren't exactly great, and against a team that was notorious for letting perimeter starrs go off against them.

Lebron did everything as well as Wade in 2009 except mid-rang shooting and did certain things better(passing/playmaking).

That same weak team(Atlanta) that Lebron toyed with in the playoffs, Wade failed to dominate.

And regardless of competition, 35/9/7/51 FG%/61 TS% is ****ing ridiculous for a playoff run of 3 rounds, I'm not sure there was anyone else in the league capable of that.

And how about elevating your team? Wade didn't have as good of a cast and did a good job carrying them. But Lebron making his team the best team of the regular season and pretty historically great during the regular season(could have tied the '86 Celtics 40-1 home record had they not rested their starters on the last game) is far more notable.

[magnax1]

No, Duncan was clearly better in 2003. His defense was at it's absolute peak, his passing and rebounding were as good, if not better and he was MUCH better in the 2003 playoffs than 2002 playoffs.
That's 100% bullshit. If Duncan was better defensively, it was ever so slightly, and didn't even come close to the scoring gap. He just did not play any better in the 03 playoffs. He in fact played worse averaging 28-14.5-5 on 55 TS% vs 25-15-5 on 58 TS% The only reason people ever say that is because he had such a shitty team in 02 that despite tearing LA a new one, he lost.




Shaq played much better defense in 2004 than 2003, yet you ranked him top 3 in 2003. He was also in worse shape in 2003(arguably the worst shape of his prime). He wore down late in the regular season in 2005 and couldn't contribute anywhere near the way he did in the 2004 playoffs.
He might've been in worse shape in 03, but he did not play even close to the same level of basketball. He averaged 27 points in 03 vs 21 in 04 while dropping his TS% from 60 to 58, and he really did not play better defense, or do anything better in 04. The team around him was much better defensively, but he gave 0 effort on that side that year, probably mostly because he just was not capable of it because being out of shape caught up to him.
And in 05, he did not play well in the playoffs, but that was mostly because of an injury if I remember correctly. However you can see how his play jumped from 04-05 when he got in shape. Despite playing on a slower paced system, his scoring rose 3 ppg per 36 on the same TS% and he also played the role of a physical rim protector much better.

.


No, Jermaine was clearly not as good as Shaq. The gap between them offensively was massive. And Shaq was also the focal point offensively and defensively in 2004 for the Lakers.
Shaq was not the focal point of the defense for the 04 Lakers. He played poorly defensively that year, and there is no denying it. Jermaine was one of the best defenders in the league and scored nearly as much as Shaq, even if on a much lower %. The gap on offense is moderately large, but so is the gap on defense.



Kobe played that season injured and the Lakers finished at 34-48 and out of the playoffs. Just 28-38 with Kobe and he had arguably the worst defensive season of his prime.
So? He had a shitty team, what would you expect? I never said he was playing at the same level as any year from 06-10, but he definitely was around the top of the league still.




Lebron was clearly better in the regular season,
More complete bullshit. Even if you're going by stats, the difference is almost non existent. Per 36 the only difference at all is Lebron averaged 2 more assists, everything else is almost exactly the same. There was nothing that made Lebron "clearly better" at all.



Philadelphia Series and Chicago series. Wade was clearly better in the Boston series and Finals.
I honestly did not watch much of the philly series. However, Wade was just clearly better in the playoffs. Despite playing nearly 5 minutes less a game, he posted extremely similar stats to Lebron.



Lebron did everything as well as Wade in 2009 except mid-rang shooting and did certain things better(passing/playmaking).
Lebron was not the scorer that Wade was. He did not get to the rim as much as Wade despite having a pretty large athleticism advantage, and was also more skilled in general. A better shooter, ball handler, or basically anything, and was also a much better defender at that point.


And regardless of competition, 35/9/7/51 FG%/61 TS% is ****ing ridiculous for a playoff run of 3 rounds, I'm not sure there was anyone else in the league capable of that.
I'm not denying it's amazing, but does he do it again if you match him up with the same teams? That's the only year he hasn't faltered against at least one good defense so I don't know if it actually means much other then his jumpshot was on fire, which it definitely was. I've always said Lebron is much better then anyone at his best, but his problem has always been that his jumper disappears and he ends up having extremely poor series.


And how about elevating your team? Wade didn't have as good of a cast and did a good job carrying them. But Lebron making his team the best team of the regular season and pretty historically great during the regular season(could have tied the '86 Celtics 40-1 home record had they not rested their starters on the last game) is far more notable.
Their teams aren't even close to comparable, so trying to compare them is pointless.

[D.J.]

1999-00
Shaq
AI
Malone


2000-01
Shaq
AI
KG/Duncan


2001-02
Shaq
Kidd
Duncan/KG


2002-03
McGrady
Duncan
Garnett/Kobe


2003-04
Garnett
Duncan
Jermaine


2004-05
Nash
Duncan
Wade


2005-06
Kobe
Wade
LeBron


2006-07
Duncan
Kobe
LeBron


2007-08
Kobe
CP3
LeBron


2008-09
Wade
LeBron
Kobe


2009-10
LeBron
Kobe
Wade


2010-11
Rose
Wade
LeBron

[ShaqAttack3234]

That's 100% bullshit. If Duncan was better defensively, it was ever so slightly, and didn't even come close to the scoring gap. He just did not play any better in the 03 playoffs. He in fact played worse averaging 28-14.5-5 on 55 TS% vs 25-15-5 on 58 TS% The only reason people ever say that is because he had such a shitty team in 02 that despite tearing LA a new one, he lost.

Wow, you actually think Duncan played worse in the 2003 playoffs? That's proof that you didn't watch those runs. He didn't even have a particularly good series vs LA. He was a turnover machine, had long cold stretches and was pretty inefficient and he played poorly in the 4th quarter.



He might've been in worse shape in 03, but he did not play even close to the same level of basketball. He averaged 27 points in 03 vs 21 in 04 while dropping his TS% from 60 to 58, and he really did not play better defense, or do anything better in 04. The team around him was much better defensively, but he gave 0 effort on that side that year, probably mostly because he just was not capable of it because being out of shape caught up to him.

Pure ignorance once again. Yes, 28/11/3/2, 57 FG%, 60 TS% is more impressive statistically than 22/12/3/3, 58 FG%, 58 TS%, but his shots per game dropped from 18 to 14 due to the additions of Malone and Payton and the the other parts of the decline in scoring can be explained by his huge free throw decline from 62% to 49%, not due to him being in worse shape.

And finally, everyone's scoring was down n 2004, compare the top 5 scorers from 2003 to 2004.

2003
1.T-Mac- 32.1 ppg
2.Kobe- 30 ppg
3.Iverson- 27.6 ppg
4.Shaq- 27.5 ppg
5.Pierce- 25.9 ppg

2004
1.T-Mac- 28 ppg
2.Peja- 24.2 ppg
3.Garnett- 24.2 ppg
4.Kobe- 24 ppg
5.Pierce- 22.9 ppg

I wouldn't argue with Shaq being a better player in 2003 than 2004, but he sure as hell wasn't in better shape and he definitely wasn't better defensively.

And again, Kobe's level of play fell off much more from 2003 to 2004 for obvious reasons than Shaq's did, so I don't see how you could rank Kobe behind Shaq in 2003 and then ahead of him in 2004, if anything, it should be the other way around.


And in 05, he did not play well in the playoffs, but that was mostly because of an injury if I remember correctly. However you can see how his play jumped from 04-05 when he got in shape. Despite playing on a slower paced system, his scoring rose 3 ppg per 36 on the same TS% and he also played the role of a physical rim protector much better.

I wouldn't argue that he had a better regular season in 2005 than 2004, but how can you penalize Duncan for his injury in 2000 and not Shaq in 2005?


Shaq was not the focal point of the defense for the 04 Lakers. He played poorly defensively that year, and there is no denying it. Jermaine was one of the best defenders in the league and scored nearly as much as Shaq, even if on a much lower %. The gap on offense is moderately large, but so is the gap on defense.

No, Shaq still made a big impact defensively in 2004 and was the Lakers most important defender. And again, if you're going to penalize Duncan for his injury in 2000, then once again look at Jermaine. he was injured in the 2004 playoffs and the gap widened between Shaq and Jermaine.


So? He had a shitty team, what would you expect? I never said he was playing at the same level as any year from 06-10, but he definitely was around the top of the league still.

Not really. Kobe dropped down to borderline top 10 that year.


More complete bullshit. Even if you're going by stats, the difference is almost non existent. Per 36 the only difference at all is Lebron averaged 2 more assists, everything else is almost exactly the same. There was nothing that made Lebron "clearly better" at all.

Everyone who has watched them knows that Lebron is a better passer, regardless of numbers. He scored more on better efficiency than Wade during this regular season and he was clearly better defensively. Lebron had his best defensive season, while Wade was pretty lazy a lot of the time at that end.


I honestly did not watch much of the philly series. However, Wade was just clearly better in the playoffs. Despite playing nearly 5 minutes less a game, he posted extremely similar stats to Lebron.

Even if you want to argue that Wade was better in the playoffs, the gap between them in the 2011 playoffs definitely wasn't as big in Wade's favor as the gap between them in the 2009 playoffs in Lebron's favor.


Lebron was not the scorer that Wade was. He did not get to the rim as much as Wade despite having a pretty large athleticism advantage, and was also more skilled in general. A better shooter, ball handler, or basically anything, and was also a much better defender at that point.

Lebron was definitely right there with Wade as a scorer in 2009, and no way was Wade a much better defender.


Their teams aren't even close to comparable, so trying to compare them is pointless.

The teams were closer in talent outside of their stars than a 23 win edge and the difference between a first round exit and making a team championship contender. Lebron kept his team competitive against a very good Orlando team pretty much by himself.

I'd bet money that Wade wouldn't have won 60+ on the 2009 Cavs in Lebron's place, much less 66 wins.

[rmt]

Reg. Season + Post Season

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Malone
3. Iverson

2000-2001
1. Iverson
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Iverson
3. Kidd

2002-2003
1. McGrady
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Duncan
3. Wallace

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Nash
3. Wade

2005-2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. LeBron

2006-2007
1. Nash
2. Kobe
3. Ginobili

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. CP3
3. KG

2008-2009
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Rose
2. Wade
3. LeBron

Anyone not mentioning Iverson in the top three 2000, 2001, and 2002 is a clear as day HATER.

Anyone mentioning Shaq in the top three in 2005 needs to get smacked.

Anyone not mentioning Kidd in top three in 2002 needs to be punched in the mouth.

Anyone not mentioning Rose in 2011 needs to get tea bagged for their stupidity.

Really, Duncan not even listed in the top 3 in '02 but was league MVP?

Manu wasn't even the best player on the Spurs in '07 (16.6 pt (rs) 16.6 pts (playoffs), much less the 3rd best player in the league - c'mon - no all-nba team, no all-star?

[magnax1]

Wow, you actually think Duncan played worse in the 2003 playoffs? That's proof that you didn't watch those runs. He didn't even have a particularly good series vs LA. He was a turnover machine, had long cold stretches and was pretty inefficient and he played poorly in the 4th quarter.
The only reason you wouldn't think that is letting all the media Bullshit that it was going to be some epic 7 game series. His team was shit, he was great, that's what happened and it's just plain idiotic that you're arguing against it. He wasn't that efficient, but that's expected given his team.




Pure ignorance once again. Yes, 28/11/3/2, 57 FG%, 60 TS% is more impressive statistically than 22/12/3/3, 58 FG%, 58 TS%, but his shots per game dropped from 18 to 14 due to the additions of Malone and Payton and the the other parts of the decline in scoring can be explained by his huge free throw decline from 62% to 49%, not due to him being in worse shape.
I never said he was in worse shape. I said that it finally got to him, and it obviously did.
And your point about adding new team mates makes sense if he actually put more effort into other areas of his game, but he didn't. He scored less, played worse defense, and didn't do anything else better.


And finally, everyone's scoring was down n 2004, compare the top 5 scorers from 2003 to 2004.

2003
1.T-Mac- 32.1 ppg
2.Kobe- 30 ppg
3.Iverson- 27.6 ppg
4.Shaq- 27.5 ppg
5.Pierce- 25.9 ppg

2004
1.T-Mac- 28 ppg
2.Peja- 24.2 ppg
3.Garnett- 24.2 ppg
4.Kobe- 24 ppg
5.Pierce- 22.9 ppg
Really, I think that's just a coincidence. All of the guys that dropped off were injured that year.

I wouldn't argue with Shaq being a better player in 2003 than 2004, but he sure as hell wasn't in better shape and he definitely wasn't better defensively.
Maybe not a lot better, but he definitely was better.


And again, Kobe's level of play fell off much more from 2003 to 2004 for obvious reasons than Shaq's did, so I don't see how you could rank Kobe behind Shaq in 2003 and then ahead of him in 2004, if anything, it should be the other way around.
Kobe recovered. Shaq didn't. The second half of the season in 04 Kobe averaged 27-7-6. Like I already said, at his best that year he was far superior to Shaq.



I wouldn't argue that he had a better regular season in 2005 than 2004, but how can you penalize Duncan for his injury in 2000 and not Shaq in 2005?
Did I ever say I didn't? I don't really get what you're going for...



No, Shaq still made a big impact defensively in 2004 and was the Lakers most important defender. And again, if you're going to penalize Duncan for his injury in 2000, then once again look at Jermaine. he was injured in the 2004 playoffs and the gap widened between Shaq and Jermaine.
He averaged a point less and a rebound less. Its not like Duncan missing the playoffs or Shaq 4 less points and 3 fewer rebounds. I don't really remember him being injured though, so it probably wasn't very serious.






Everyone who has watched them knows that Lebron is a better passer, regardless of numbers.
I don't think I really disagree. The only part of passing wade is better at is that he gets inside more so he kicks it out more, but he's not very accurate.


He scored more on better efficiency than Wade during this regular season and he was clearly better defensively.
I agree that Lebron is better defensively, but you can't just throw the scoring out there like that. Wade just has been a better scorer through out most of his career. As I already said, he gets inside more and is much more skilled all around. Lebron sometimes struggles against the best defensive teams, where Wade has excelled against the best defensive teams with the only exclusion being the Bulls this year.




Even if you want to argue that Wade was better in the playoffs, the gap between them in the 2011 playoffs definitely wasn't as big in Wade's favor as the gap between them in the 2009 playoffs in Lebron's favor.
True I guess.



Lebron was definitely right there with Wade as a scorer in 2009, and no way was Wade a much better defender.
No, Lebron was not right there with Wade as a scorer. It's basically the same as I pointed out before, and yes Wade was a much better defender. Lebron still at that point did not give a full effort on defense and often times was a below average man to man defender.




The teams were closer in talent outside of their stars than a 23 win edge and the difference between a first round exit and making a team championship contender. Lebron kept his team competitive against a very good Orlando team pretty much by himself.
Really, the 23 win difference is pretty close to their overall talent difference. The largest part of the gap is the defense (though offense is pretty huge too) Lebron had Ben Wallace, Varajeo, Delonte West, who were all really good defenders and there was a 5 point per 100 possession difference in the team's defenses. Then he had offensive pieces that fit really well with him since they were all off the ball shooters. Wade had Marion for half a season, who was pretty good, JO who really was one of the worst starters in the league (he was much better the next year though) Beasley who Spoelstra refused to play very much and was poor on defense, and then Chalmers and Haslem who were both pretty good role players. I'd say the difference is enough to get Wade above the 60+ win plateau.

[ShaqAttack3234]

The only reason you wouldn't think that is letting all the media Bullshit that it was going to be some epic 7 game series. His team was shit, he was great, that's what happened and it's just plain idiotic that you're arguing against it. He wasn't that efficient, but that's expected given his team.

I'm not holding him losing that series against him, but he sure as hell wasn't great. Is it easy to see why? Yes, but saying Duncan was great in that series is revisionist history. Hell, Kobe was the clear best player on either team that series. Meanwhile, he absolutely dominated the 2003 playoffs and was a tier above everyone else in the playoffs.


I never said he was in worse shape. I said that it finally got to him, and it obviously did.
And your point about adding new team mates makes sense if he actually put more effort into other areas of his game, but he didn't. He scored less, played worse defense, and didn't do anything else better.

2003 Shaq- 11.1 rpg, 7.2 drpg, 2.4 bpg, 16.5 TRB%, 21.6 DRB%, 4.5 blk%
2004 Shaq- 11.5 rpg, 7.8 drpg, 2.5 bpg, 17.7 TRB%, 24.4 DRB%, 5.0 blk%

To put this into perspective, in 2000 and 2001, his DRB% was 24.8%, his TRB% was 18.3 and 18.1, respectively and BLK% was 5.3 and 4.9.

He was definitely more active blocking shots and on the defensive boards in 2004 than 2003.

It should come as no surprise that while the 2003 Lakers finished with the 11th worst defensive rating , the 2004 Lakers finished with the 8th best defensive rating.

2003 Shaq
Points allowed per 48 minutes when on the floor- 97.9 ppg
Points alloed per 48 minutes when off the floor- 97.1 ppg

2004 Shaq
Defensive rating when on the floor- 102.1
Defensive rating when off the floor- 106.0

So as you can see the Lakers were actually a slightly worse defensive team when Shaq was on the floor in 2003 than when he was off the floor, but in 2004, they were a much better defensive team when he was on the floor than when he was off the floor.

Really, I think that's just a coincidence. All of the guys that dropped off were injured that year..


Kobe recovered. Shaq didn't. The second half of the season in 04 Kobe averaged 27-7-6. Like I already said, at his best that year he was far superior to Shaq.

but his best wasn't in the playoffs, while Shaq's best was.

And by this logic, well, Yao at his best was better than Lebron in 2007, imo, but how long was Yao at his best? Hell, that very same year, T-Mac went on that insane stretch when Yao was out where he was playing like a top MVP candidate, but again, how long was T-Mac at his best that year?


I agree that Lebron is better defensively, but you can't just throw the scoring out there like that. Wade just has been a better scorer through out most of his career. As I already said, he gets inside more and is much more skilled all around. Lebron sometimes struggles against the best defensive teams, where Wade has excelled against the best defensive teams with the only exclusion being the Bulls this year.

Not true, for the most part, Lebron has scored more on better efficiency, while facing at least as much, or even more defensive attention(depending on what stages of their career).


No, Lebron was not right there with Wade as a scorer. It's basically the same as I pointed out before, and yes Wade was a much better defender. Lebron still at that point did not give a full effort on defense and often times was a below average man to man defender.

2009 was easily Lebron's 2nd best defensive season. He played very good defense that year, maybe not enough to warrant his 2nd place DPOY finish, but still very good.

As scorers, well, I'd agree that Wade was the better ball handler and mid-range shooter, but Lebron was the better finisher, better free throw shooting, better 3 point shooter and as good/if not better at getting to the line.


Really, the 23 win difference is pretty close to their overall talent difference. The largest part of the gap is the defense (though offense is pretty huge too) Lebron had Ben Wallace, Varajeo, Delonte West, who were all really good defenders and there was a 5 point per 100 possession difference in the team's defenses. Then he had offensive pieces that fit really well with him since they were all off the ball shooters. Wade had Marion for half a season, who was pretty good, JO who really was one of the worst starters in the league (he was much better the next year though) Beasley who Spoelstra refused to play very much and was poor on defense, and then Chalmers and Haslem who were both pretty good role players. I'd say the difference is enough to get Wade above the 60+ win plateau.

Z missed 17 games, Delonte missed 18 games and Ben missed 26 games, but they didn't stop winning.

[InspiredLebowski]

Glad to see JO get a couple shout outs. Shame what became of him, thanks to the bad advice he got from the franchise, woulda gone down as one of the biggest fleecings ever.

[guy]

Nash, Shaq, Duncan, Dirk, KG and Wade all were better.....and so were other players.

LOL

You should add AI and T-Mac to that, and arguably even Lebron, Amare, Vince, Arenas, Pierce, and/or Allen.

[blablabla]

2000
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Alonzo Mourning

2001
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2002
1.Shaq
2.Duncan
3.Kobe

2003
1.Duncan
2.Garnett
3.Shaq

2004
1.Garnett
2.Duncan
3.Shaq

2005
1.Duncan
2.Shaq
3.Garnett

2006
1.Kobe
2.Wade
3.Dirk

2007
1.Kobe
2.Duncan
3.Nash

2008
1.Kobe
2.Paul
3.Lebron

2009
1.Lebron
2.Wade
3.Kobe

2010
1.Lebron
2.Kobe
3.Wade

2011
1.Dirk
2.Dwight
3.Lebron

great list
you could maybe make a case for kobe being in the top 3 in 02/03

[I.R.Beast]

Steve nash ...top 3 player???.....LMAO...steve nash was never a top 3 player. He didnt even deserve that MVP award.

[creepingdeath]

Anyone not mentioning Dirk in the top three in 2011 is a clear as day HATER.

Anyone mentioning Dirk in the top three in 2011 needs to get smacked.

Anyone not mentioning Dirk in top three in 2011 needs to be punched in the mouth.

Anyone not mentioning Dirk in 2011 needs to get tea bagged for their stupidity.
Fixed this for you.

[DMAVS41]

Fixed this for you.

:pimp:

[PowerGlove]

Fixed this for you.
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

and anyone who puts him at number one should off themselves.

[DMAVS41]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

and anyone who puts him at number one should off themselves.

Why?

Who was better this year overall?

[creepingdeath]

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

and anyone who puts him at number one should off themselves.
Top 3 does not automatically equal number 1. But care to elaborate on who was the best player if you take the postseason into consideration? The one guy who put up insane numbers but lost against Atlanta? The other guy that disappeared completely in the ECFs versus Chicago? Or that guy's teammate who was nowhere to be found in any of the finals' 4th quarters?

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Why?

Who was better this year overall?

Not hating on the man, I just don't see what's different between him last season and the season before last. What skills did he have in 2010-2011 that he didn't have in 2009-2010?

The only difference is a title and a FMVP, but you are always the one preaching that titles are overrated and don't make a player better, considering almost everyone on this board said LeBron was better than Kobe in 2009-2010 despite Kobe leading his team to a title.

[DMAVS41]

Top 3 does not automatically equal number 1. But care to elaborate on who was the best player if you take the postseason into consideration? The one guy who put up insane numbers but lost against Atlanta? The other guy that disappeared completely in the ECFs versus Chicago? Or that guy's teammate who was nowhere to be found in any of the finals' 4th quarters?

Regular season:

23/7/3 52/39/89 61% TS....57 wins (2-7 without Dirk)

Playoffs:

28/8/3 49/46/94 61% TS....led his team to the title and won finals mvp...had one of the most clutch playoff runs in nba history


Who trumps that?

Lebron? Not after the finals
Wade? Not after the ECF
Howard? I guess an argument can be made, but I don't think he did enough to warrant jumping Dirk.....
Rose? LOL after crumbling in the playoffs / ECF

The only person I could see would be Howard. But honestly, I don't think he was as good as his stats against Atlanta. He was great, but he could have been better.

Dirk should go down as the best player in 2011. All the evidence supports it.

[DMAVS41]

Not hating on the man, I just don't see what's different between him last season and the season before last. What skills did he have in 2010-2011 that he didn't have in 2009-2010?

The only difference is a title and a FMVP, but you are always the one preaching that titles are overrated and don't make a player better, considering almost everyone on this board said LeBron was better than Kobe in 2009-2010 despite Kobe leading his team to a title.

Its not about winning only, its about what he did. I don't think Dirk was really any better this year, but he played better. And you obviously have to factor in actually performing and winning. That counts for something.

And its really not so much what Dirk did, its what other people didn't do. How can you rank Lebron over Dirk when we saw them go head to head in the most important series of their careers in the NBA finals? Lebron was horrible.

Like I said, I could kind of see Howard, but I don't think he was the better player this year.

Regardless, there are maybe 1 or 2 guys you could say were better basketball players than Dirk this year. I'm cool with that...its personal preference.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Its not about winning only, its about what he did. I don't think Dirk was really any better this year, but he played better. And you obviously have to factor in actually performing and winning. That counts for something.

And its really not so much what Dirk did, its what other people didn't do. How can you rank Lebron over Dirk when we saw them go head to head in the most important series of their careers in the NBA finals? Lebron was horrible.

Like I said, I could kind of see Howard, but I don't think he was the better player this year.

Regardless, there are maybe 1 or 2 guys you could say were better basketball players than Dirk this year. I'm cool with that...its personal preference.

Ok

[PowerGlove]

I'm done with creepingdeath and Gino. Now, its all about the postseason and the 4th quarter just because Dirk excelled. SMH. Last year you guys were whining your ass off saying that Dirk didnt have any help but try to slight Dwight for losing to Atlanta??? I'm guessing you didnt watch the series.

Seriously, there isnt ANY difference between your behavior and the Kobe trolls of the last two years.

[tpols]

I'm done with creepingdeath and Gino. Now, its all about the postseason and the 4th quarter just because Dirk excelled. SMH. Last year you guys were whining your ass off saying that Dirk didnt have any help but try to slight Dwight for losing to Atlanta??? I'm guessing you didnt watch the series.
Dwight was the better player this year than Dirk.. he just didn't have the personel to go anywhere in the playoffs.. and when I say Dwight didn't have the personel I dont mean like in the fake way that Gino has said Dirk hasnt had the teams to compete because Dwight's team played worse than Dirk's ever has and it's not even remotely comparable.

Dwight was a better scorer, rebounder, and defender all year than Dirk.. and although dirk was better in the clutch it doesn't make up for every other area in basketball that he got beaten in.

[PowerGlove]

Dwight was the better player this year than Dirk.. he just didn't have the personel to go anywhere in the playoffs.. and when I say Dwight didn't have the personel I dont mean like in the fake way that Gino has said Dirk hasnt had the teams to compete because Dwight's team played worse than Dirk's ever has and it's not even remotely comparable.

Dwight was a better scorer, rebounder, and defender all year than Dirk.. and although dirk was better in the clutch it doesn't make up for every other area in basketball that he got beaten in.

But...didnt you hear? All the evidence points to Dirk being the best player this year!!

These dudes are trying to rewrite history and claiming to have evidence on their side. He said Dwight could have been better in the first round series against Atlanta too....I guess 27 and 15 on 63%(fg percentage not this ts% bullshit everyone likes to use when its applicable) isnt good enough to get it done, it couldnt have been due to the lack of help at all. Maybe he should have went for 35 and 20 or something.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Dirk is/was top 3 in these years:

04-05 season
05-06 season
06-07 season
10-11 season

[Bigsmoke]

So Wade better than Lebron in 2009 because he was better in the regular season... which i think he wasnt

Lebron raped the same team Wade struggled against.:lol

then Wade better than Lebron in 2010 because he was better in the playoffs when he only played in 5 games.

double standerds anyone?

Dirk is #1 in 2011!

[Bigsmoke]

Dirk is/was top 3 in these years:

04-05 season
05-06 season
06-07 season
10-11 season

i agree with all besides 2005

I dont see him being above Shaq, Nash, or Duncan in that season.

[PowerGlove]

So Wade better than Lebron in 2009 because he was better in the regular season... which i think he wasnt

Lebron raped the same team Wade struggled against.:lol

then Wade better than Lebron in 2010 because he was better in the playoffs when he only played in 5 games.

double standers anyone?

Dirk is #1 in 2011!

So much hypocrisy in this thread. It's clear that people change their standards or criteria for being a top three player just so that their favorite player can make it on the list.

Take this list for example:

Dirk is/was top 3 in these years:

04-05 season
05-06 season
06-07 season
10-11 season

WTF is this?

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

i agree with all besides 2005

I dont see him being above Shaq, Nash, or Duncan in that season.

Well, the first year without Nash, Nelson trading away the clusterf*ck that was the 2003-2004 team... and Dirk on his "own"... he

lead the league in WS/48
Finished 2nd in win shares
Finished 3rd in MVP voting
First team all-nba

He struggles against Houston in the first round but the Mavs made the second round and for the whole playoffs he averaged 24/10/3....

I would think that is Top 3 that year.

[DirkNowitzki41]

LOL at people not having Dirk in the top ****ing 3 when he was easily the best this year.

Wade was easily the best in 08-09 too.

[creepingdeath]

I'm done with creepingdeath and Gino. Now, its all about the postseason and the 4th quarter just because Dirk excelled. SMH. Last year you guys were whining your ass off saying that Dirk didnt have any help but try to slight Dwight for losing to Atlanta??? I'm guessing you didnt watch the series.

Seriously, there isnt ANY difference between your behavior and the Kobe trolls of the last two years.
No, NO, we can still save our relationship....
Like I give a sh*t about what YOU think about me. :lol


First of all, gino said he'd have no problem with someone choosing Dwight over Dirk. Also, stop acting like you don't twist my words all the time in every thread. When I say it's laughable to not have Dirk in the top 3, you act as if I said Dirk SHOULD be number 1. And another thing: guys like yourself, tpols, SDAC, GoGetter etc. were all slighting Dirk after the Mavs loss against the Spurs despite his insane numbers. Claiming he was soft, unable to lead his team to a title, should've risen to the occasion and elevated his teammates yaddada yaddada. Now when Dirk does exactly what you demanded (which does not imply that he wasn't giving his best to achieve that before, even if you don't get that) the narrative is like "Oh, but Dirk has always been that good, but his title doesn't make him a better player and guys like XYZ [with less success] are still simply better". Talk about using double standards.

[DMAVS41]

I'm done with creepingdeath and Gino. Now, its all about the postseason and the 4th quarter just because Dirk excelled. SMH. Last year you guys were whining your ass off saying that Dirk didnt have any help but try to slight Dwight for losing to Atlanta??? I'm guessing you didnt watch the series.

Seriously, there isnt ANY difference between your behavior and the Kobe trolls of the last two years.

How is it slighting Dwight when I say you could make an argument for him over Dirk?

Jesus man. I have him as the 2nd best player this year on this list. And you'll find a lot of people have him there as well.

Stop acting like its absurd to rank Dirk as the best player of 2011. Its not. If you don't want to factor in playoff success and winning....etc. So be it. I've never been a proponent of not factoring that in. I just think people take it to the extreme. If I did do that, I'd rank both Lebron and Wade over Howard for last year. I don't.

I think Howard has a legit argument for best player in the game for last year. I just personally think Dirk proved enough to put him there. That is how it goes.

I don't see anyone ranking Dirk in the top 3 for 2010....so if winning doesn't matter, why not?

Regular season - 25/8/3 48/42/92 85% TS
Playoffs - 27/8/3 55/57/95 64% TS :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

But you are probably the same person that wants to hammer Dirk for not winning in the playoffs last year and give Howard and his 10 turnovers a game a free pass. Right?

[DMAVS41]

Dwight was the better player this year than Dirk.. he just didn't have the personel to go anywhere in the playoffs.. and when I say Dwight didn't have the personel I dont mean like in the fake way that Gino has said Dirk hasnt had the teams to compete because Dwight's team played worse than Dirk's ever has and it's not even remotely comparable.

Dwight was a better scorer, rebounder, and defender all year than Dirk.. and although dirk was better in the clutch it doesn't make up for every other area in basketball that he got beaten in.

Coming from the poster that hammers Dirk for losing in the playoffs to the Spurs in 2010.

Coming from the poster that called Dirk's playoff run this year one of the best ever.

You are so all over the place its hilarious. Did you actually watch the Hawks series anyway? And you have the audacity to claim Lebron's stats are inflated and then you argue for Howard as best player because of his stats.

And no, Dirk hasn't had the kind of help that most players have won titles with. Its just a ****ing fact. I don't know how many times I have to own you in that area.

But its all just gravy now. Dirk proved you and the other morons like you wrong and now you just can't admit it. Remember when Dirk was a choker and too soft to win?

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

http://mavsmag.com/redirk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/258027_522846740410_162900200_30684324_6201276_o-500x373.jpg

Stop acting like what Dirk did in the playoffs is just normal. He was great overall. He wasn't just clutch. But yea, his clutch play was all time great. So this idea that we should just ignore what he did night in night out is silly.

[brownmamba00]

If Dirk's #1 in '11, Kobe should be #1 in '10 aswell.

[DMAVS41]

If Dirk's #1 in '11, Kobe should be #1 in '10 aswell.

I personally don't see the logic in that actually. I'm not saying its wrong, because Kobe was probably top 3 in 10, but you don't have to do both.

Lebron won MVP in 10. He was easily the better regular season player. He played better and won more games despite playing for a worse team.

They both played the same team in the playoffs and their performances were very similar. I personally think Lebron actually played a little better than Kobe.

So there is no doubt who the better regular season player was....and then in the playoffs they went up against the same team and performed similarly.

So I'll go with Lebron in 2010.

For Dirk, there isn't something like that. Rose was clearly not as good as Dirk this year. Rose won MVP, but Dirk did exactly what Rose couldn't. Come through with the game on the line against the Heat.

Lebron crumbled so badly in the finals that he just can't have the title of best in the game.

Wade has an argument I guess, but Dirk was actually the best player on his team and led that team to only 1 less win....despite the Mavs going 2-7 without Dirk. Dirk didn't have an "awful" playoff series like Wade did against the Bulls. Wade did play better than Dirk in the finals and that makes it close.

Howard has a legit argument, but I give the slight edge to Dirk because of what was able to do consistently in the playoff with the game on the line. Its one of the most clutch playoff runs ever. That has to matter on some level.

Who else is there?

[PowerGlove]

No, NO, we can still save our relationship....
Like I give a sh*t about what YOU think about me. :lol

Ok.



First of all, gino said he'd have no problem with someone choosing Dwight over Dirk. Also, stop acting like you don't twist my words all the time in every thread.
Exaggerations with no proof.:sleeping


When I say it's laughable to not have Dirk in the top 3, you act as if I said Dirk SHOULD be number 1. And another thing: guys like yourself, tpols, SDAC, GoGetter etc. were all slighting Dirk after the Mavs loss against the Spurs despite his insane numbers. Claiming he was soft, unable to lead his team to a title, should've risen to the occasion and elevated his teammates yaddada yaddada. Now when Dirk does exactly what you demanded (which does not imply that he wasn't giving his best to achieve that before, even if you don't get that) the narrative is like "Oh, but Dirk has always been that good, but his title doesn't make him a better player and guys like XYZ [with less success] are still simply better". Talk about using double standards.
You've repeatedly stated that he was the best this season before so dont act like you wouldnt have him at number one if you posted a list in this thread. I already knew where you stood and criticized you for equally being ignorant.

Also find these posts where I criticized Dirk for not winning a championship.:oldlol:I might have made a joke about him losing in the first round, but your sensitive ass probably lumped me in with the others. I dont know why I would knock Dirk for not winning a championship, I'm always the one downplaying championships since that they are also a team achievement.

[PowerGlove]

Please let there be an NBA season so i dont have to read more of this bullshit.

[brownmamba00]

I personally don't see the logic in that actually. I'm not saying its wrong, because Kobe was probably top 3 in 10, but you don't have to do both.

Euhm the only reason why you are putting Dirk at #1 is because of his playoff run. And Kobe's playoff run was easily much much better then Bron's chokejob last year and Wade got eliminated in the first round.


Lebron won MVP in 10. He was easily the better regular season player. He played better and won more games despite playing for a worse team.


Rose was MVP last year:confusedshrug: what's your point? And don't act like Dirk was the best reg. season player last year. No one (including you) was putting Dirk in the top 5 before the playoffs.


They both played the same team in the playoffs and their performances were very similar. I personally think Lebron actually played a little better than Kobe.

no, Bron was not better then Kobe in the '10 playoffs:facepalm


So there is no doubt who the better regular season player was....and then in the playoffs they went up against the same team and performed similarly.


Kobe didn't quit on his team and unlike Bron he took his team to finals with an epic series vs the Suns. That has to count for something.


For Dirk, there isn't something like that. Rose was clearly not as good as Dirk this year. Rose won MVP, but Dirk did exactly what Rose couldn't. Come through with the game on the line against the Heat.

Lebron crumbled so badly in the finals that he just can't have the title of best in the game.

Wade has an argument I guess, but Dirk was actually the best player on his team and led that team to only 1 less win....despite the Mavs going 2-7 without Dirk. Dirk didn't have an "awful" playoff series like Wade did against the Bulls. Wade did play better than Dirk in the finals and that makes it close.

I agree

[creepingdeath]

Exaggerations with no proof.:sleeping

:facepalm


You've repeatedly stated that he was the best this season before so dont act like you wouldnt have him at number one if you posted a list in this thread. I already knew where you stood and criticized you for equally being ignorant.
So you don't see the difference between me putting Dirk at the #1 spot but also accepting other's ranking him #2 or #3 and someone not even mentioning Dirk in the top 3, although almost everyone did that?


Also find these posts where I criticized Dirk for not winning a championship.:oldlol:I might have made a joke about him losing in the first round, but your sensitive ass probably lumped me in with the others. I dont know why I would knock Dirk for not winning a championship, I'm always the one downplaying championships since that they are also a team achievement.
We both know how impossible that is with ISH's non-existent search option. :lol And which one of us is sensitive? I mean you are the one who said you're done with me and compared me with Kobesexuals because of my statement that not having Dirk in this season's top 3 is ignorant. Oh, and I still don't get why you called me a pseudo-intellectual, it's not like I have ever done a Freudian analysis of an ISH user or something. :lol

[DMAVS41]

Euhm the only reason why you are putting Dirk at #1 is because of his playoff run. And Kobe's playoff run was easily much much better then Bron's chokejob last year and Wade got eliminated in the first round.



Rose was MVP last year:confusedshrug: what's your point? And don't act like Dirk was the best reg. season player last year. No one (including you) was putting Dirk in the top 5 before the playoffs.


no, Bron was not better then Kobe in the '10 playoffs:facepalm



Kobe didn't quit on his team and unlike Bron he took his team to finals with an epic series vs the Suns. That has to count for something.


I agree


A few things:

1. I actually did have Dirk in my top 5 MVP voting. In fact, I had him 3rd i think. Maybe 4th. His regular season was extremely under-rated. If you actually followed the Mavs you would have realized how important he was/is to that team.

2. Lebron vs Kobe is different. Lebron was clearly better in the regular season. Its not even remotely comparable. There was a gap on both ends of the court. Not to mention a gap in team success. With Lebron doing more with less.

3. Lebron was a beast against the Bulls. I totally agree that Kobe was great against the Jazz and Suns. But lets not forget what Kobe did against the Thunder. We know the reasons, but he wasn't very good in that series.
So it comes down to how much better you think Kobe was against Boston. I don't think he was any better. So I stick with Lebron in 10. It would be one thing if it was close in the regular season and Kobe/Lebron didn't play the exact same team.

Its simply a fact that Lebron was the better regular season player. I don't know how you can claim Kobe was really any better than Lebron against the Celtics...but even if you do is that enough? Maybe for you, but not for me.



4. So I don't see the logic of both or neither. Dirk didn't have to go up against a player producing at the rate that 10 Lebron did. Howard is really the only person that would have an argument over Dirk this year in my opinion.

And I also clearly hold Dirk's playoff run higher than you. Going through the Blazers, Lakers, Thunder, and Heat playing as well as he did puts him on another level. The Mavs were huge road underdogs in two series playing against great players. Kobe/Pau and Lebron/Wade.....and Dirk was better than 3 of them by a huge margin. Only Wade matched Dirk in a series this year in the playoffs.

I hold that run in higher regard than Kobe's last year. Maybe that is where the difference comes from.

Anyway, I don't have an issue with you putting Kobe first in 10. I just disagree.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Not just factoring the regular season, but how they performed in the playoffs, and how far they went, and others

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Malone

2000-2001
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

2002-2003
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe/T-Mac

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Nash

2005-2006
1. Kobe/Wade
2. Wade/Kobe
3. Dirk/Nash

2006-2007
1. Duncan
2. Kobe
3. LeBron/Nash

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. Chris Paul
3. KG

2008-2009
1. Kobe/LeBron
2. LeBron/Kobe
3. Wade/LeBron


2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. Rose

[ShaqAttack3234]

Not just factoring the regular season, but how they performed in the playoffs, and how far they went, and others

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Malone

2000-2001
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

2002-2003
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe/T-Mac

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Nash

2005-2006
1. Kobe/Wade
2. Wade/Kobe
3. Dirk/Nash

2006-2007
1. Duncan
2. Kobe
3. LeBron/Nash

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. Chris Paul
3. KG

2008-2009
1. Kobe/LeBron
2. LeBron/Kobe
3. Wade/LeBron


2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. Rose

Very good rankings, everything is pretty much reasonable and I can't find anything I'd really object to except for Rose over both Howard and Lebron.

[TrueAristotle]

1999-2000
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Malone

2000-2001
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

2001-2002
1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

2002-2003
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

2003-2004
1. KG
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

2004-2005
1. Duncan
2. Nash
3. Shaq

2005-2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. Dirk

2006-2007
1. Duncan
2. Kobe
3. Nash

2007-2008
1. Kobe
2. Chris Paul
3. KG

2008-2009
1. LeBron
2. Kobe
3. Wade


2009-2010
1. Kobe
2. LeBron
3. Wade

2010-2011
1. Dirk
2. Wade
3. LeBron

I really feel like Kidd should be up there in 2002 since he was a legitimate MVP candidate. I actually thought Kidd should have won the MVP that season over Duncan.

[Jacks3]

00:
Shaq
Duncan
Malone

01:
Shaq
Kobe
Duncan

02:
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

03:
Duncan
KG
Kobe

04:
KG
Duncan
Shaq

05:
Duncan
KG
Shaq

06:
Kobe
Wade
LBJ

07:
Kobe
Duncan
LBJ

08
Kobe
LBJ
CP3

09
LBJ
Wade
Kobe

10
LBJ
Kobe
Wade

11
LBJ
Dirk
Wade

[ShaqAttack3234]

00:
Shaq
Duncan
Malone

01:
Shaq
Kobe
Duncan

02:
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

03:
Duncan
KG
Kobe

04:
KG
Duncan
Shaq

05:
Duncan
KG
Shaq

06:
Kobe
Wade
LBJ

07:
Kobe
Duncan
LBJ

08
Kobe
LBJ
CP3

09
LBJ
Wade
Kobe

10
LBJ
Kobe
Wade

11
LBJ
Dirk
Wade

Good list, every year is reasonable.

[Jacks3]

:cheers:

[28renyoy]

00
Shaq

01
Shaq

02
Shaq

03
Duncan

04
Garnett

05
Duncan

06
Kobe

07
Duncan

08
Kobe/CP3

09
LeBron

10
LeBron

11
Dwight


I have a hard time buying into anything that isn't this for the #1's

[Bigsmoke]

LOL at people not having Dirk in the top ****ing 3 when he was easily the best this year.

Wade was easily the best in 08-09 too.

easily?

Only in this site when someone who can lead a team to 66 wins with old Z and Big Ben and Mo Garbage and then average 35ppg on 50% shooting is nothing special.

[D.J.]

easily?

Only in this site when someone who can lead a team to 66 wins with old Z and Big Ben and Mo Garbage and then average 35ppg on 50% shooting is nothing special.


Agreed. I also feel Wade was the best, but certainly not easily. He deserved MVP more than LeBron did, IMO. Not that LeBron's supporting cast was all that great, but they were still better than the D-leaguers Wade had.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Agreed. I also feel Wade was the best, but certainly not easily. He deserved MVP more than LeBron did, IMO. Not that LeBron's supporting cast was all that great, but they were still better than the D-leaguers Wade had.
Wade's supporting cast was definitely worse than LeBron's in 08-09. If you combine the Heat and Cavs into one team, Dwyane Wade would be the only Heat starting, the rest would be Cavs. Nobody on that Heat team was worthy of starting. The second best player Wade had on his team was probably a 7th-8th man on most NBA rotations.

I still think both LeBron and Kobe were better than him that season simply because of his mediocre performance in the playoffs.

[D.J.]

Wade's supporting cast was definitely worse than LeBron's in 08-09. If you combine the Heat and Cavs into one team, Dwyane Wade would be the only Heat starting, the rest would be Cavs. Nobody on that Heat team was worthy of starting. The second best player Wade had on his team was probably a 7th-8th man on most NBA rotations.

I still think both LeBron and Kobe were better than him that season simply because of his mediocre performance in the playoffs.


The best players on the Heat after Wade(at least out of the ones that played on Miami all year) were Beasley(14/5), Haslem(10+/8), and Chalmers(10/5/3/2). Haslem was the only one of the three that wasn't a rookie. The starting 5 for Miami was Chalmers/Wade/Haslem, the PF was between Marion and Jermaine(they were traded for each other) and Jamario Moon started most of the games he was there. If Jamario Moon is starting for you, your team sucks.

Cleveland's starting 5 was Mo Williams/West/LeBron/Ben Wallace/Z. the games when Ben was hurt, Varejao started.

The best player on Miami after Wade was a rookie Beasley, who no doubt is probably the 7th-8th guy on a good team and maybe a 6th man on a mediocre-sh*t team.

[Bigsmoke]

Agreed. I also feel Wade was the best, but certainly not easily. He deserved MVP more than LeBron did, IMO. Not that LeBron's supporting cast was all that great, but they were still better than the D-leaguers Wade had.

the playoffs doesnt matter?

Lebron's season and playoffs performance >>> Wade's

[D.J.]

the playoffs doesnt matter?

Lebron's season and playoffs performance >>> Wade's


It's not like Wade was a scrub in the playoffs. He put up 29/5/5(averaged over 33 a game in games 5-7) and got to the line over 8 times a night. LeBron has an edge in the playoffs, but it's not night and day. Wade gets the nod during the regular season. He did more with less. And you can't say that team would have been horrible without LeBron over the course of a whole season because only 5 guys from that '08-'09 squad are still there.

[Jacks3]

lol @ Wade being better in 08-09. That was the season LBJ established himself as one of the "sacred peak" guys ala Jordan/Kareem/Wilt/Bird/Shaq and a potential GOAT candidate.

Wade isn't on that level. :facepalm