The top 25 players from 2000-2009 [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

ShaqAttack3234

06-30-2012, 05:27 PM

I had made lists for these years 2 years ago, but was dissatisfied with them, so I decided to spend more time and redo them. Thanks to NugzHeat who helped with these lists by discussing each year and particularly some of the closer, tougher rankings.

The lists are based on both the regular season and playoffs. Players must play at least 42 regular season games and 50 total games between regular season and playoffs to qualify. And a player's ranking may drop if they fail to play 60 games, or if injuries affect their ability to perform or keep them off the court, particularly during the playoffs.

2000
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kevin Garnett
4.Alonzo Mourning
5.Karl Malone
6.Chris Webber
7.Grant Hill
8.Gary Payton
9.Jason Kidd
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Allen Iverson
13.David Robinson
14.Eddie Jones
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Ray Allen
17.Michael Finley
18.Rasheed Wallace
19.Penny Hardaway
20.Scottie Pippen
21.Reggie Miller
22.Latrell Sprewell
23.Terrell Brandon
24.Sam Cassell
25.Dikembe Mutombo

2001
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Allen Iverson
6.Vince Carter
7.Chris Webber
8.Tracy McGrady
9.Jason Kidd
10.Gary Payton
11.Karl Malone
12.Ray Allen
13.Paul Pierce
14.Dirk Nowitzki
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Rasheed Wallace
18.Antonio McDyess
19.David Robinson
20.Jamal Mashburn
21.Michael Finley
22.Dikembe Mutombo
23.Glenn Robinson
24.Peja Stojakovic
25.Jerry Stackhouse

2002
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Chris Webber
7.Jason Kidd
8.Paul Pierce
9.Dirk Nowitzki
10.Allen Iverson
11.Gary Payton
12.Jermaine O'Neal
13.Steve Nash
14.Vince Carter
15.Ray Allen
16.Rasheed Wallace
17.Ben Wallace
18.Elton Brand
19.Karl Malone
20.Baron Davis
21.Stephon Marbury
22.Peja Stojakovic
23.Michael Jordan
24.Shawn Marion
25.Sam Cassell

2003
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Tracy McGrady
5.Kobe Bryant
6.Jason Kidd
7.Dirk Nowitzki
8.Allen Iverson
9.Chris Webber
10.Paul Pierce
11.Jermaine O'Neal
12.Ray Allen
13.Ben Wallace
14.Steve Nash
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Gary Payton
18.Peja Stojakovic
19.Jamal Mashburn
20.Shawn Marion
21.Rasheed Wallace
22.Allan Houston
23.Karl Malone
24.Michael Jordan
25.Sam Cassell

2004
1.Kevin Garnett
2.Tim Duncan
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Kobe Bryant
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Jermaine O'Neal
7.Jason Kidd
8.Dirk Nowitzki
9.Ben Wallace
10.Peja Stojakovic
11.Sam Cassell
12.Baron Davis
13.Paul Pierce
14.Vince Carter
15.Andrei Kirilenko
16.Ron Artest
17.Elton Brand
18.Ray Allen
19.Steve Nash
20.Yao Ming
21.Pau Gasol
22.Stephon Marbury
23.Rasheed Wallace
24.Lamar Odom
25.Michael Redd

2005
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Steve Nash
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Dirk Nowitzki
7.Dwyane Wade
8.Allen Iverson
9.Lebron James
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Amare Stoudemire
13.Ray Allen
14.Paul Pierce
15.Manu Ginobili
16.Elton Brand
17.Gilbert Arenas
18.Ben Wallace
19.Shawn Marion
20.Jason Kidd
21.Yao Ming
22.Chauncey Billups
23.Stephon Marbury
24.Grant Hill
25.Carmelo Anthony

2006
1.Kobe Bryant
2.Dwyane Wade
3.Lebron James
4.Dirk Nowitzki
5.Tim Duncan
6.Kevin Garnett
7.Steve Nash
8.Allen Iverson
9.Elton Brand
10.Shaquille O'Neal
11.Paul Pierce
12.Gilbert Arenas
13.Chauncey Billups
14.Vince Carter
15.Carmelo Anthony
16.Ray Allen
17.Shawn Marion
18.Pau Gasol
19.Yao Ming
20.Andrei Kirilenko
21.Jason Kidd
22.Manu Ginobili
23.Tony Parker
24.Michael Redd
25.Ben Wallace

2007
1.Kobe Bryant
2.Tim Duncan
3.Lebron James
4.Steve Nash
5.Dirk Nowitzki
6.Kevin Garnett
7.Yao Ming
8.Dwyane Wade
9.Carmelo Anthony
10.Tracy McGrady
11.Vince Carter
12.Gilbert Arenas
13.Amare Stoudemire
14.Baron Davis
15.Elton Brand
16.Chris Bosh
17.Jason Kidd
18.Carlos Boozer
19.Allen Iverson
20.Ray Allen
21.Deron Williams
22.Chris Paul
23.Chauncey Billups
24.Manu Ginobili
25.Tony Parker

2008
1.Kobe Bryant
2.Lebron James
3.Chris Paul
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tim Duncan
6.Dwight Howard
7.Dirk Nowitzki
8.Steve Nash
9.Amare Stoudemire
10.Paul Pierce
11.Yao Ming
12.Deron Williams
13.Manu Ginobili
14.Allen Iverson
15.Carmelo Anthony
16.Tracy McGrady
17.Pau Gasol
18.Chris Bosh
19.Baron Davis
20.Chauncey Billups
21.Carlos Boozer
22.Joe Johnson
23.Tony Parker
24.Vince Carter
25.Ray Allen

2009
1.Lebron James
2.Dwyane Wade
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Chris Paul
5.Dwight Howard
6.Dirk Nowitzki
7.Yao Ming
8.Brandon Roy
9.Pau Gasol
10.Carmelo Anthony
11.Deron Williams
12.Tim Duncan
13.Paul Pierce
14.Chauncey Billups
15.Tony Parker
16.Steve Nash
17.Kevin Garnett
18.Chris Bosh
19.Andre Igoudala
20.Danny Granger
21.Kevin Durant
22.Vince Carter
23.Ray Allen
24.Joe Johnson
25.Shaquille O'Neal

kuniva_dAMiGhTy

06-30-2012, 05:36 PM

StateOfMind12

06-30-2012, 05:42 PM

Several disagreements, I'll point out the ones I disagree with the most.

2003 - Kobe should be ahead of McGrady. Mcgrady was never better than Kobe in any season in my opinion. Kobe should be 3rd, McGrady should be 4th, and Shaq should be 5th in my opinion for this season

2004 - I have no idea how Mcgrady is in the top 5 after having the worst record in the league. I can't imagine anyone being considered top 5 after having the literal worst record in the league. He didn't even have a good season really, he just won the scoring title. I would put JO or Dirk over him this season.

2005 - Kobe and Wade over Mcgrady. McGrady had a pretty good season this season and a much better one than he did in 2004 but I still felt Kobe and Wade were better.

2006 - Iverson shouldn't be in the top 10 and Pierce should be in over him instead. Iverson had a great season but I just thought Pierce's was better.

2009 - Gasol and Melo above Yao? Seriously? Yao only missed the last 4 games of the playoffs so I hope you didn't pick those two over him because of durability because Yao was actually more durable than Melo. Many argued that Melo wasn't even the MVP on his team that season and that Billups was. I believe Billups was top 5 in MVP voting that season while Melo missed like 10-15+ games in that regular season. I don't even know or if it is even possible to argue that they were more talented and better talented than Yao that season either because they weren't and they surely did not make a bigger or better impact. I would actually put Yao 5-6 for this season but I don't have much of a problem putting Dirk, Roy, and Deron over him but I do with Melo and Gasol.

I would also put Kobe over Wade in 2009 as kuniva mentioned.

magnax1

06-30-2012, 05:55 PM

Good list, but here's a couple of my bigger disagreements
01 Kobe should not be that high. I can't see him carrying AI's 01 team as far as Iverson did, and I can't see him being as productive as KG. He's right there with TMac to me. He had a better playoff run then some of the guys you listed him over, but he didn't reproduce those results again until far later, which to me means he just got hot.
06 I'd switch Nash and Dirk. Dirk won something like 5 more games then Nash with a more talented team.
In 09, I think Yao deserve to be considerably higher. That was probably his second best season, and I dont think there is another player you could switch him with that could create that mix of offense and defensive impact. Borderline top 5 to me. Actually, I just don't agree with the 09 list in general. I wouldn't have Pau nearly as high, he was below Duncan to me quite clearly. Nash at 16 is quite brutal. He had a mediocre start when he had a coach who seemed like he was trying run the team into the ground, but other then that he was basically the same as 08 Steve.
I don't agree with CP3 being that high in 08, but I'm in a very small minority so Ill leave it alone lol.

jlauber

06-30-2012, 06:07 PM

I can't imagine taking the time to research all of those seasons. However, I would generally agree with the Top-3 in virtually every one of them.

Too bad Garnett was saddled with average to poor rosters for much of his career.

G.O.A.T

06-30-2012, 06:14 PM

2000
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kevin Garnett
4.Alonzo Mourning
5.Karl Malone
6.Chris Webber
7.Grant Hill
8.Gary Payton
9.Jason Kidd
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Allen Iverson
13.David Robinson
14.Eddie Jones
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Ray Allen
17.Michael Finley
18.Rasheed Wallace
19.Penny Hardaway
20.Scottie Pippen
21.Reggie Miller
22.Latrell Sorewell
23.Terrell Brandon
24.Sam Cassell
25.Dikembe Mutombo

I thought I'd let the guy who put substantial time into this do the critiquing so without looking at your list, I put my own top twenty together based on my yearly top ten most significant players and a quick overview of the season (plus my recollection of that year) to come up with a top 20 to compare to yours. Here it is...

My top twenty for 2000
1. Shaq
2. Garnett
3. Duncan
4. Mourning
5. Miller
6. Webber
7. Payton
8. Malone
9. Iverson
10. Kidd
11. Kobe
12. Hill
13. Robinson
14. Carter
15. Rasheed
16. Marbury
17. Allen
18. E. Jones
19. Sprewell
20. J. Rose

Actually pretty darn close.

The major differences, and my questions about them are as follows...tell me what you learned and why I am wrong.

1. The obvious one. Reggie Miller. I have him as a top five based on importance, but I understand you have different criteria so I can see Webber, Malone and Payton over him. But how are guys like Iverson and Kobe and Allen ahead of him? Let alone Jones, Pippen, Penny, Finley, Marbury etc.

The first round came down to one game and the Bucks team outplayed the Pacers team but Ray Allen shot 6-21 and Reggie Miller 15-25 for 41 points and the Pacers won.

In the second round Miller outplayed Iverson throughout. He had 40 in game one, the Pacers won in a route in game two. Miller matched Iverson's 29 points and led the Pacers to a fourth quarter rally to steal game three. The Sixers won game four despite Ai's worst game of the series. The Sixers won game five with Miller out of the line-up. Reggie goes for 25 in game six and AI for 18 on 7-20 shooting as the Pacers close it out.

In the Finals Reggie averaged 24-3-4 on 42/38/97 shooting while Kobe averaged 16-4-4 on 37/20/91 shooting

Reggie was the leader and go-to-guy in the clitch all season and best player in the playoffs for the team that won the most games in the East and went to the NBA finals. He can't be outside the top 20.

2. Why Duncan over Garnett despite the injury for the playoffs?

3. Eddie Jones a bit overrated? I thought that all-NBA selection was a stretch. Not an efficient scorer or a guy you can count on down the stretch to create his or others shots.

4. Grant Hill too high? Now it's true he scored more than he ever had before and his shot had shown solid improvement all-around that season. (He added the slow dribble pull-up three from the top in his arsenal that year) But Hill had his worst season rebounding and passing since his rookie year and he too was injured for the playoffs.

5. Why guys like TB, Cassell, Pippen, Mutombo over Jalen Rose, who had one of his best years and a strong playoff run to match it?

ShaqAttack3234

06-30-2012, 06:20 PM

Great lists. As you well know, I'm not a fan of Bryant's, but I feel he was a better player than Wade in 2009. Dwyane definitely has the edge during the regular season, but Kobe was unreal in the postseason (in fact, I've seen people debate whether he had a top 10 playoff run for an NBA Finals MVP).

I usually go with Kobe over Wade, I'd have Kobe back over Wade in 2010, but I'd have Wade in 2011, and Kobe in 2012.

But Wade had stepped up his defensive effort this season, had greatly improved his jumper and played in control a lot more than when he was a young player while regaining that same explosiveness off the dribble. Wade's explosiveness and defense combined with his excellent mid-range shooting that season gave him the edge. Usually, Kobe had a significant edge shooting the ball, and he was still the better 3 point shooter and more skilled overall, but Wade's athleticism and ability off the dribble, and individual dominance makes me favor him slightly.

It's very close, though in '09.;

Everything else seems legit though. I'd imagine after #1-10, it got pretty tough. :lol

Yeah, it gets tougher the farther you go down on the list because you start comparing players in different roles and many are very close.

2003 - Kobe should be ahead of McGrady. Mcgrady was never better than Kobe in any season in my opinion. Kobe should be 3rd, McGrady should be 4th, and Shaq should be 5th in my opinion for this season

I went with McGrady over Kobe because he was more consistent throughout the season and less disappointing in the playoffs.

Kobe at his absolute best during the 40 point streaks has the edge, but I'll value season long consistency. And McGrady's numbers are a tiebreaker because watching both of the players, they're too close to call. Just depends on what night you watch them because they do all of the same things well. Mid-range and long range shooting, creating off the dribble, finishing, footwork, ball handling and playmaking. They both specialized in it.

2004 - I have no idea how Mcgrady is in the top 5 after having the worst record in the league. I can't imagine anyone being considered top 5 after having the literal worst record in the league. He didn't even have a good season really, he just won the scoring title. I would put JO or Dirk over him this season.

As bad as McGrady's team was, they would've been that much worse without him. They weren't even competitive when McGrady was out. McGrady had made them a respectable offensive team, but they were about as bad as any offensive team when he was out, and they were the worst defensive team in the league that year, and not only did they not get better when T-Mac was out, but they got worse defensively.

They were 2-13 without him, but they lost their first 13, and their only wins came against a 23-59 Bulls team, and a 33-49 Sixer team that didn't have Allen Iverson or Glenn Robinson in their last 2 games of the season.

T-Mac also got top 5 because it was just a really bad year for individual players. Dirk didn't have a great year himself, and I like Jermaine O'Neal for his offensive skills and defensive ability, but he settled for too many jumpers, imo, and his efficiency was terrible for a big man.

2005 - Kobe and Wade over Mcgrady. McGrady had a pretty good season this season and a much better one than he did in 2004 but I still felt Kobe and Wade were better.

T-Mac played really inspired basketball that year, while Kobe had a down year and seemed to be limited somewhat by injuries. Wade was too raw. He broke out in the playoffs, but he was often out of control(hence his 4+ turnovers) and didn't have a jump shot yet.

2006 - Iverson shouldn't be in the top 10 and Pierce should be in over him instead. Iverson had a great season but I just thought Pierce's was better.

I don't have a strong preference either way that year. They're in a group that's debatable. Both had similar years to me. Great individual years on bad teams that missed the playoffs.

2009 - Gasol and Melo above Yao? Seriously? Yao only missed the last 4 games of the playoffs so I hope you didn't pick those two over him because of durability because Yao was actually more durable than Melo. Many argued that Melo wasn't even the MVP on his team that season and that Billups was. I believe Billups was top 5 in MVP voting that season while Melo missed like 10-15+ games in that regular season. I don't even know or if it is even possible to argue that they were more talented and better talented than Yao that season either because they weren't and they surely did not make a bigger or better impact. I would actually put Yao 5-6 for this season but I don't have much of a problem putting Dirk, Roy, and Deron over him but I do with Melo and Gasol.

I initially had the order as Yao, Melo and Gasol. I switched it around last minute due to Yao's injury in the playoffs and Gasol's superior mobility since teams could take Yao out of games by fronting him and any pass that was a little low to Yao would usually be a turnover.

But that's the one that I'm changing back. Well, Yao is back at 9, Pau moves to 10, and Melo drops to 11.

Good list, but here's a couple of my bigger disagreements
01 Kobe should not be that high. I can't see him carrying AI's 01 team as far as Iverson did, and I can't see him being as productive as KG.

Kobe was just a better player than Iverson to me. He was a better shooter and a much better finisher due to his size, he was a much better defender than Iverson, he could also impact the game more on the boards due to his size, and he did a better job as a playmaker in the playoffs.

I could see Kobe leading Iverson's team, I think Kobe would like the situation to have that freedom offensively, but I don't see a volume scorer like Iverson succeeding in the second option role on a championship team like Kobe did.

KG and Kobe were close, but I went with Kobe due to his unbelievable playoff run when I felt he was easily the 2nd best player in the playoffs.

06 I'd switch Nash and Dirk. Dirk won something like 5 more games then Nash with a more talented team.

You mean Nash over Dirk in '06? I can't agree with that, Dirk was unbelievable in the playoffs until the finals.

In 09, I think Yao deserve to be considerably higher. That was probably his second best season, and I dont think there is another player you could switch him with that could create that mix of offense and defensive impact. Borderline top 5 to me. Actually, I just don't agree with the 09 list in general. I wouldn't have Pau nearly as high, he was below Duncan to me quite clearly. Nash at 16 is quite brutal. He had a mediocre start when he had a coach who seemed like he was trying run the team into the ground, but other then that he was basically the same as 08 Steve.

Pau was better than Duncan by '09, imo. Duncan completely wore down in the second half of the season, and Pau was probably a bit better offensively by that point due to being younger, having better stamina and more mobility, and Duncan's defense really slipped that year so that's not a determining factor.

Nash was really disappointing for the entire first half of the season, I understand that was due to Porter, but I can't put him above players who he just didn't play better than for most of the season.

noosaman

06-30-2012, 06:21 PM

This list is laughably stupid. I won't comment further because this is all a subjective exercise anyways.

magnax1

06-30-2012, 06:23 PM

This list is laughably stupid. I won't comment further because I don't know what I'm talking about anyways.
fixed.

noosaman

06-30-2012, 06:24 PM

fixed.

Tell me more!

jlauber

06-30-2012, 06:33 PM

This list is laughably stupid. I won't comment further because this is all a subjective exercise anyways.

If you are not even going to bother to comment, why even bother posting. Anyone can pop in and claim someone's list is stupid, but I would at least expect them to give me reasons why.

AlonzoGOAT

06-30-2012, 06:34 PM

This list is laughably stupid. I won't comment further because this is all a subjective exercise anyways.

You haven't said shit why don't you state your argument dumbass.

magnax1

06-30-2012, 06:46 PM

Kobe was just a better player than Iverson to me. He was a better shooter and a much better finisher due to his size, he was a much better defender than Iverson, he could also impact the game more on the boards due to his size, and he did a better job as a playmaker in the playoffs.
I agree with the defense, but otherwise I don't. Even AI's rebounding was great for his size, though Kobe's was better.
I don't think Kobe did a better job as a playermaker at all. There were a number of games where Iverson's shot wasn't falling and he started to make an effort to get his team mates involved, and when he was hot he usually just kept going. They both had real PG skills while playing SG, and had a similar mentality as basically absolute scorers. They looked for their shots above all else, but did a great job as facilitators in stretches.
Also I think Iverson had an intangible value that very few other players did. He just created havoc for opposing defenses with how much he moved around the court, and by the 4th quarter, whoever was defending him was just wore down while he was 100% even if he played the whole game. I don't think it's easy to overstate how much defensive attention AI garnered that season.

I could see Kobe leading Iverson's team, I think Kobe would like the situation to have that freedom offensively, but I don't see a volume scorer like Iverson succeeding in the second option role on a championship team like Kobe did.
We've had this conversation before, but I think AI's volume scoring was pretty much caused by his situation. Once Webber Join the Sixers, his efficiency soared, and then he went to Denver to play with Melo, and he scored less and more efficiently again.

You mean Nash over Dirk in '06? I can't agree with that, Dirk was unbelievable in the playoffs until the finals.
Nash had a great run too. I don't think there really is any difference between what they did in the playoffs and the regular season. Nash just seemed better to me in both. Dirk had a couple memorable big games, but I don't think it's fair to place a large amount more value on one game then another.

Pau was better than Duncan by '09, imo. Duncan completely wore down in the second half of the season, and Pau was probably a bit better offensively by that point due to being younger, having better stamina and more mobility,
Duncan might have wore down, but it didn't affect him in the playoffs where he had a fantastic first round.

and Duncan's defense really slipped that year so that's not a determining factor.
I think it's a huge factor. Wether it slipped or not, he was still one of the better defensive bigs in the league, and Pau has always ranged from average to poor on that end.

Nash was really disappointing for the entire first half of the season, I understand that was due to Porter, but I can't put him above players who he just didn't play better than for most of the season.
Fair enough I guess, but I still don't see him better then a guy like Parker who was mostly just a scorer, and not a whole lot better then Nash in that category in the first pace.

ShaqAttack3234

06-30-2012, 07:04 PM

I thought I'd let the guy who put substantial time into this do the critiquing so without looking at your list, I put my own top twenty together based on my yearly top ten most significant players and a quick overview of the season (plus my recollection of that year) to come up with a top 20 to compare to yours. Here it is...

My top twenty for 2000
1. Shaq
2. Garnett
3. Duncan
4. Mourning
5. Miller
6. Webber
7. Payton
8. Malone
9. Iverson
10. Kidd
11. Kobe
12. Hill
13. Robinson
14. Carter
15. Rasheed
16. Marbury
17. Allen
18. E. Jones
19. Sprewell
20. J. Rose

Actually pretty darn close.

The major differences, and my questions about them are as follows...tell me what you learned and why I am wrong.

Well, I think the fact that we do have different criterias as you mention will lead to a lot of differences. Mine is better players, while yours as you explained in your other thread is more significant.

I think yours looks accurate for most significant players except I think Duncan should remain above KG despite the injury because KG only played 4 playoff games. I also think Kobe should be higher because he won a title. Based on Miller ranking so high for a finals appearance, I think Kobe should end up with a similar ranking for a championship.

1. The obvious one. Reggie Miller. I have him as a top five based on importance, but I understand you have different criteria so I can see Webber, Malone and Payton over him. But how are guys like Iverson and Kobe and Allen ahead of him? Let alone Jones, Pippen, Penny, Finley, Marbury etc.

Iverson was one of the most explosive perimeter scorers at the time, and a much better playmaker than Miller. He could just do more on the court, he shot a lot of jumpers, not nearly as well as Miller, but he could get hot and carry a team, but also create off the dribble for himself and others, which Miller could not do.

Kobe was a real all around player, which made him an easy choice for me when ranking the best players. He was arguably the best perimeter defender that year, a much more capable playmaker than Reggie, and perhaps the most skilled and talented perimeter scorer at that time, even though he was still learning how to incorporate all of his individual ability into the team concept. He was also one of the best rebounding guards.

Reggie did one thing, run off screens and shoot or draw fouls. I prefer more versatile players even though Reggie had a great playoff and could carry a team when he was hot. But others could get their shots in more ways and also make plays for others.

Allen is an example, he was a pure shooter like Miller, but much more athletic and a much better ball handler, plus he was a better passer.

2. Why Duncan over Garnett despite the injury for the playoffs?

I saw enough of Duncan that year to determine that imo, he was clearly the second best player of the league. KG was more debatable with Mourning and Malone, imo. During that stretch, Shaq and Duncan were just a step above everyone else. I always preferred Duncan's post game and shot blocking over Garnett's versatility and perimeter skills. KG took his game to a next level with more aggressiveness in '03 and '04, he seemed more dominant then, but I don't think he was at Duncan's level in 2000.

And Duncan's injury in the playoffs may have made more of a difference had KG done anything significant in the playoffs, but he was out in 4 games.

3. Eddie Jones a bit overrated? I thought that all-NBA selection was a stretch. Not an efficient scorer or a guy you can count on down the stretch to create his or others shots.

Jones had a habit of choking, particularly in the playoffs as he did this year. But he was among the absolute best perimeter defenders, and a 20 ppg scorer who wasn't as skilled and creative as other scorers, but he could shoot, he was a good athlete and how many 20 ppg perimeter scorers are also elite defenders?

4. Grant Hill too high? Now it's true he scored more than he ever had before and his shot had shown solid improvement all-around that season. (He added the slow dribble pull-up three from the top in his arsenal that year) But Hill had his worst season rebounding and passing since his rookie year and he too was injured for the playoffs.

I think Grant Hill is rated correctly, he'd always rank in a fairly similar to spot to where he did this year, but I did like his improved jumper and the fact that he became a better scoring and more assertive. But I think he was just clearly better than anyone behind him, only Payton was close.

5. Why guys like TB, Cassell, Pippen, Mutombo over Jalen Rose, who had one of his best years and a strong playoff run to match it?

Rose was initially in my top 25 in the final spot, but I gave it more thought, and I was just never a big fan of his game, or his decision making, too 1 on 1 oriented at times.

Brandon and Cassell were both gifted scorers who did a very good job of running their offense and making plays for others. Brandon had an excellent mid-range shot and he was one of the league's best pick and roll players, and a very smart point guard who wasn't the flashiest, but made the right plays. Cassell was one of the most crafty, smart and reliable point guards, who used his size and posted up well. Didn't shoot many 3s, but did a great job of getting his own shot in the mid-range area.

Pippen was clearly a better player than Rose, imo. He was still the best help defender on the perimeter, as good of a rebounder at his position as anyone, an excellent playmaking forward and still a capable scorer. The numbers are deceptive due to playing on the deepest and most talented team in the league who had over a half dozen scoring options and played at a slow pace.

Mutombo was the league's leading rebounding, second in blocked shots and 2nd in FG%. You can't ask more from your big man. He was the best of his era at blocking shots in the paint and protecting the rim. He was on a bad team, but he did things that are very valuable and help teams win, you just need to be on a team where those things can be put to use(we saw this in the '01 playoffs).

I agree with the defense, but otherwise I don't. Even AI's rebounding was great for his size, though Kobe's was better.
I don't think Kobe did a better job as a playermaker at all. There were a number of games where Iverson's shot wasn't falling and he started to make an effort to get his team mates involved, and when he was hot he usually just kept going. They both had real PG skills while playing SG, and had a similar mentality as basically absolute scorers. They looked for their shots above all else, but did a great job as facilitators in stretches.

Well, Iverson may have done a better job as a playmaker in the regular season, but Kobe's playmaking was just phenomenal during the playoffs, and while Iverson was a good playmaker, I don't see Iverson having that same success in the triangle.

And Kobe being so much more efficient made it an easier choice for me as well. Iverson's skill set and style are unique, but I think he's a much tougher player to build around or fit in playing different roles.

Also I think Iverson had an intangible value that very few other players did. He just created havoc for opposing defenses with how much he moved around the court, and by the 4th quarter, whoever was defending him was just wore down while he was 100% even if he played the whole game. I don't think it's easy to overstate how much defensive attention AI garnered that season.

I agree with the intangible part some what, how hard Iverson played did seem to inspire his team, and he was tough to stay with when Brown had him playing off the ball more. I also think that was a more effective way to incorporate his scoring into the team.

Again, as far as defensive attention, most of the league's elite receive a ton of defensive attention. Iverson did receive as much as any perimeter player, but there were other perimeter scorers playing on teams with not much offensive talent such as Carter on Toronto and McGrady in Orlando.

We've had this conversation before, but I think AI's volume scoring was pretty much caused by his situation. Once Webber Join the Sixers, his efficiency soared, and then he went to Denver to play with Melo, and he scored less and more efficiently again.

I've never viewed it as a big deal since most of the league's top scorers get a ton of defensive attention. One of the keys in Denver was him shooting less and also playing at such a fast pace with more easy baskets.

Nash had a great run too. I don't think there really is any difference between what they did in the playoffs and the regular season. Nash just seemed better to me in both. Dirk had a couple memorable big games, but I don't think it's fair to place a large amount more value on one game then another.

I thought Dirk clearly had the better postseason run, Nash seemed to be getting tired at times during that run, iirc.

Duncan might have wore down, but it didn't affect him in the playoffs where he had a fantastic first round.

Pau was great in every playoff round, he had a remarkably consistent run.

I think it's a huge factor. Wether it slipped or not, he was still one of the better defensive bigs in the league, and Pau has always ranged from average to poor on that end.

Pau did a fine job defensively, imo in '09.

G.O.A.T

06-30-2012, 09:25 PM

Well, I think the fact that we do have different criterias as you mention will lead to a lot of differences. Mine is better players, while yours as you explained in your other thread is more significant.

I don't see it being problem though as we've both been able to discern the difference and discuss in the appropriate context.

Iverson was one of the most explosive perimeter scorers at the time, and a much better playmaker than Miller. He could just do more on the court, he shot a lot of jumpers, not nearly as well as Miller, but he could get hot and carry a team, but also create off the dribble for himself and others, which Miller could not do.

Kobe was a real all around player, which made him an easy choice for me when ranking the best players. He was arguably the best perimeter defender that year, a much more capable playmaker than Reggie, and perhaps the most skilled and talented perimeter scorer at that time, even though he was still learning how to incorporate all of his individual ability into the team concept. He was also one of the best rebounding guards.

Reggie did one thing, run off screens and shoot or draw fouls. I prefer more versatile players even though Reggie had a great playoff and could carry a team when he was hot. But others could get their shots in more ways and also make plays for others.

Allen is an example, he was a pure shooter like Miller, but much more athletic and a much better ball handler, plus he was a better passer.

I don't disagree with any of this (except Kobe getting as much of a boost for being Shaq's sidekick as Miller for leading the small market Pacers), but a few things to consider and a final question on the topic:

1) Miller was the best (by far) at what he did. Come off screens and score.

2) Playing that style actually creates offense for the players setting the screen (and either slipping or returning to the ball) and spot up shooters whose man was drawn to help as Miller got free.

3) Not Allen, Kobe or Iverson were as established as stars the way Reggie was at the time.

If those players were all better than Miller, which you have made a fair case that they are, why, in your opinion, was Miller able to perform better head-to-head than those players during the playoffs?

magnax1

06-30-2012, 09:58 PM

Well, Iverson may have done a better job as a playmaker in the regular season, but Kobe's playmaking was just phenomenal during the playoffs, and while Iverson was a good playmaker, I don't see Iverson having that same success in the triangle.
AI's playmaking in the playoffs was pretty terrific too. I remember he had 15 assists in game 7 vs Toronto

he was tough to stay with when Brown had him playing off the ball more. I also think that was a more effective way to incorporate his scoring into the team.
I definitely agree with that. Playing him at SG also made a huge difference.

Again, as far as defensive attention, most of the league's elite receive a ton of defensive attention. Iverson did receive as much as any perimeter player, but there were other perimeter scorers playing on teams with not much offensive talent such as Carter on Toronto and McGrady in Orlando.
I think they both had more offensive pieces then AI. VC especially, who had a lot of bigs who could set screens very well and were tough, quite a few good shooters, and Corliss Williamson who was a 20 ppg scorer if he got minutes.

Pau was great in every playoff round, he had a remarkably consistent run.
I mostly agree. I think he had some issues against Houston, but other then that he was good.

Pau did a fine job defensively, imo in '09.
He was alright, but Duncan was far from alright. Even now he's still elite defensively, and he was even better back then.

ShaqAttack3234

06-30-2012, 10:35 PM

I don't disagree with any of this (except Kobe getting as much of a boost for being Shaq's sidekick as Miller for leading the small market Pacers), but a few things to consider and a final question on the topic:

Well, regardless of being a sidekick, Kobe was considered a major star at the time. And outside of his scoring ability, talent for making plays within or even going off on his own, his commitment to defense and talent for on the ball defense(it was great to watch Kobe hounding point guards and bothering them with his length), and finally, his clutch play throughout the playoffs. His play was somewhat inconsistent throughout the run, but remember the game-winning jumper over Kidd in game 2 vs Phoenix, the game-saving block on Sabonis in game 3 vs Portland, leading the Lakers in points(25), rebounds(11) and assists(7) in game 7 vs Portland, and his 8 point takeover in OT of game 4 of the finals to win by 2, including hitting what turned out be the game-winner? That's a pretty impressive clutch resume.

1) Miller was the best (by far) at what he did. Come off screens and score.

True, but he was such a one-dimensional player, I have trouble putting him much higher. I'd have less of a problem if he was a great all around scorer who could create off the dribble, post up ect. And even then, there'd be a limit if he was as limited of a rebounder, playmaker and defender as he was. If you look at the players in front of him, a lot of them were on good teams.

Pippen and Rasheed Wallace were both on a team that was a quarter away from beating the champion Lakers. Wallace was long and athletic with an unstoppable go to move in the post, a mid-range jumper, but he was also unselfish and a terrific defensive player. Just much more talented than Miller, and he came to play in the WCF, dominating the Lakers power forwards in the post. This was when Sheed posted up. Pippen had lost a step, but the all around game and the basketball IQ were there.

Penny was on a 53 win Suns team that was loaded with talent, but had a ton of injuries. Penny was an effective enough player that the Suns were 33-12 with Backcourt 2000, and he still led Phoenix to a 9-6 record without Kidd, despite Tom Gugliotta also being out for the season by that point. He led the Suns past the Spurs(granted Duncan was out), with a limited Kidd only returning for the clinching game 4. And Penny played quite well in those playoffs with games like his triple double or 30+ point game as well as three straight 25+ games. He averaged 20/5/6 on 46% for the playoffs vs the league's top 2 defensive teams, and pretty much played Kobe even.

Penny had a relatively healthy year after his early injury that didn't limit him once he returned, and he was playing like Penny, just not as explosive as mid 90's Penny. But he had the passing, court vision, ball handling, post game and mid-range shot, and solid athleticism. I love versatile guards like this with size who can score, but are unselfish and have a gift for making plays.

Michael Finley played the season with plantar fasciitis, and had to assume a real ball-handling/playmaking role as well as a heavy scoring load. He averaged 23/6/5 on 46%, led a young Mavericks team to a respectable 40-42 record thanks to a tremendous late season run that seemed to change Don Nelson's mind about retirement. They probably make the playoffs in the East and this was before Dirk was an all-star and also before Nash became a full time starter.

2) Playing that style actually creates offense for the players setting the screen (and either slipping or returning to the ball) and spot up shooters whose man was drawn to help as Miller got free.

Good point, and a reason why Indiana was the best offensive team and prolific 3 point shooting team. And playing off the ball also allowed others to handle the ball, and wasn't taking away from his teammates. This was ideal considering they had a 1 on 1 scorer(Rose), a pass-first point guard(Jackson) and a skilled post scorer(Smits), along with their physical, defensive-minded double/double PF Dale Davis, they had a very well rounded starting 5, that fit together and complemented each other perfectly.

That was an underrated Indiana team, imo, and shouldn't be grouped in with the weaker Eastern Conference teams that followed.

3) Not Allen, Kobe or Iverson were as established as stars the way Reggie was at the time.

True, but Kobe became a big star who was talked about a lot at the time, same with Iverson, and Ray Allen was also an emerging star.

If those players were all better than Miller, which you have made a fair case that they are, why, in your opinion, was Miller able to perform better head-to-head than those players during the playoffs?

I'm not sure, Reggie certainly shot the ball better than Kobe, but Kobe did so much from an all around standpoint, he was LA's primary playmaker on the perimeter(though Harper had a significant role running the offense that first year since Kobe was young and he knew the triangle), their best perimeter defender, their only real perimeter threat off the dribble.

Kobe didn't guard Miller either except for short stretches, he was usually guarding Mark Jackson.

I don't put a ton of weight on head to head match ups when deciding who the better player was. Miller's playoff run was certainly impressive, but when judging each of those players, I looked at their entire skill set and what they did on a basketball court at that time. I was tempted to put Miller over Allen at one point due to the superior team success and that 41 point performance, but my explanation before is what sold me, which was Allen giving you similar shooting, but better athletic ability, more ways to score and create.

And also, I'd say that Miller clearly had the superior team compared to Allen's Bucks(though I did feel that Allen's Bucks underachieved in the regular season), yet Allen's Bucks took Miller's Pacers to a ridiculously close game 5.

While The Bucks were a talented young team, I expected an experienced team like Indiana with more depth, that was constructed much better with a superior frontcourt and a respectable defense vs Milwaukee's horrible defense to beat the Bucks. In fairness, in took a monster game by Miller, and credit to Reggie to adding another huge clutch performance to his resume.

By the way, I think you did the right thing listing Miller as a more significant player, I think it's an obvious choice with that criteria. I feel that Allen was the better, more complete player, but that Miller clearly had the more significant season. His season was more significant than Iverson too.

I do understand your view that Miller had a more significant season than Kobe after your explanation, and all of Indiana's losses were games that were up for grabs entering the 4th, they lost game 4 by 2 in OT, game 2 was close, game 1 was close until Shaq took over the 4th, and they had a lead midway through the 4th in game 6, iirc, and the game wasn't decided until the last minute or 2.

So Miller's Pacers having a chance to beat the Lakers in the finals, and being on the verge of stretching the series to 7 is very significant.

Anyway, I'm enjoying your contributions to this thread. Discussions like these are exactly what I was hoping for when creating this thread.

AI's playmaking in the playoffs was pretty terrific too. I remember he had 15 assists in game 7 vs Toronto

True, Kobe just impressed me more.

I think they both had more offensive pieces then AI. VC especially, who had a lot of bigs who could set screens very well and were tough, quite a few good shooters, and Corliss Williamson who was a 20 ppg scorer if he got minutes.

Williamson was good, but Carter was still lacking in offensive support overall. Oakley was never a very good post player and a poor finisher. He could pass, and would hit some jumpers, though. Antonio Davis was a pretty good offensive player, but Iverson did have Aaron McKie(15/5/5 in the playoffs) and Mutombo(14/14/3 in the playoffs) who were effective offensive players. Both were valuable for their defense, but gave Philly some offense. Mutombo got offensive rebounds, hit some sweeping hooks and would sometimes hit a short 10 foot jumper, and also made his free throws. He was an awkward, but effective offensive center. McKie handled the ball well, was a good passer/playmaker with solid size, and he hit mid-range jumpers with regularity.

Both Snow and McKie could handle the ball and do a good job running the offense which allowed Iverson to play shooting guard.

He was alright, but Duncan was far from alright. Even now he's still elite defensively, and he was even better back then.

I'm still not sure I'd call Duncan elite by that point. I thought Pau got tougher that year, and his length made an impact. He also focused more on defense after the '08 loss. He impressed me in the finals when he arguably outplayed Dwight.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree on exactly how good Duncan's defense was. I don't deny that he was better than Pau, but Gasol's advantages as an offensive player by that point as well as his durability and stamina advantages are enough for me. And winning a title didn't hurt.

Like I said to GOAT, I appreciate your contributions to the thread, you seem like someone who has followed the NBA and various teams for quite a while.

oolalaa

06-30-2012, 10:42 PM

It seems egregious to even attempt to nitpick such lists, considering that I'm sure you've put a lot of thought and research into it, and that you are CERTAINLY more knowledgable than me.

I'll just mention the thing that immediately jumped out at me...

Allen Iverson, 2001. He was the leagues MVP. He led Philly to the NBA finals, by chucking up averages of 34/4/7 & 3stls against Carter's Raptors (On surprisingly good shooting Percentages) in the ECSF and ousting Ray Allen's Bucks in the ECFs with a 44/6/7 game 7. He also put up one of the GREAT finals peformances in NBA history in game 1 against the UNDEFEATED Lakers.

Now, there comes a point when, however much you love Duncan's and Garnett's leadership, intangibles, defense and all round game, you just just have to give in and accept that A.I was too ****ing dominant! He was the heart and soul of his team. He WILLED them to the finals.

I would rank him as 2nd best, just above Kobe at 3rd. Kobe was AWESOME against the Spurs (Throughout the whole playoffs really) but having someone as dominant as Shaq on your team eases the pressure considerably - there was relatively little double teaming going on from what I can remember (Please correct me if I've got that wrong). A.I was a one manned, relentless band.

Also, I would LOVE to hear your reasoning for Kobe "only" being 5th best in '03. I would especially love to hear why you think he was worse than Shaq at that point. Kobe was SCARY good that year and I was under the impression that Phil Jackosn handed over the reigns to Kobe early in the season - that the Lakers became HIS team. Maybe you can enlighten me on that.

ShaqAttack3234

06-30-2012, 11:55 PM

It seems egregious to even attempt to nitpick such lists, considering that I'm sure you've put a lot of thought and research into it, and that you are CERTAINLY more knowledgable than me.

Thank you, but I don't know that I'm more knowledgeable than you. I'm familiar with your posts and you seem quite knowledgeable.

Allen Iverson, 2001. He was the leagues MVP. He led Philly to the NBA finals, by chucking up averages of 34/4/7 & 3stls against Carter's Raptors (On surprisingly good shooting Percentages) in the ECSF and ousting Ray Allen's Bucks in the ECFs with a 44/6/7 game 7. He also put up one of the GREAT finals peformances in NBA history in game 1 against the UNDEFEATED Lakers.

Iverson was great, but the guys he's behind are three top 10 players(Shaq, Duncan and Kobe) and a top 15-20 player all time, in or near their primes. AI ranking 5th with those 4 in front of him is quite impressive, imo.

I didn't agree with the league MVP voting, but he did an excellent job leading the Sixers to the finals. But I think a guy like Vince Carter was actually at a similar level, he had an inferior team, imo(Iverson's Sixers were phenomenal defensively and compared to any defensive team that year, while Carter's Raptors were below average statistically, and imo, maybe a slightly above average defensive team) and Vince came within 1 shot of beating Iverson's Sixers.

Now, there comes a point when, however much you love Duncan's and Garnett's leadership, intangibles, defense and all round game, you just just have to give in and accept that A.I was too ****ing dominant! He was the heart and soul of his team. He WILLED them to the finals.

Eh, to me Duncan was a player I'd like to build a team around 10 times out of 10. His defensive impact, low post game and rebounding made him a better franchise player. I just can't say there was ever a time when Iverson was a better player than Duncan. I did think about putting Iverson over KG, he had a more notable season, but KG's all around game and defense also made it impossible for me to say that Iverson was a better player than Garnett in his prime.

I would rank him as 2nd best, just above Kobe at 3rd. Kobe was AWESOME against the Spurs (Throughout the whole playoffs really) but having someone as dominant as Shaq on your team eases the pressure considerably - there was relatively little double teaming going on from what I can remember (Please correct me if I've got that wrong). A.I was a one manned, relentless band.

Kobe was able to play 1 on 1 more than the other perimeter stars, but watching him play, his scoring skill set and ability was second to none among perimeter players. I thought Kobe was the second best scorer in the league and best perimeter scorer. His footwork wasn't quite what it became around '03, and he wasn't quite as crafty and he hadn't added a reliable 3 point shot and extra range like he did in '03, but his first step was so explosive, he was a great ball handler, he'd elevate quick and high plus finish strong, and he already had a terrific mid-range game after shooting 500 or whatever jumpers over that offseason. While his scoring skill set wasn't as complete as '03-'09, he had his full athleticism and was more of an all around player in that postseason than at any point other than '08, and his playmaking in the '01 postseason was only matched by his '08 season. I've also never seen him attack the basket more aggressively than he did during that playoff run.

He did a remarkable job of picking his spots in transition and semi-transition and taking smart shots to fit in as the second scoring option and the team's de facto point guard while also succeeding as an efficient prolific scorer.

I've never agreed with the classification of Iverson's Sixers as a one man team. Their greatest strength was being arguably the best, most complete defensive team in the league that year, and the league's most dominant rebounding team outrebounding opponents by 4 rpg, and I thought that was a very effective way to build a team around Iverson. Iverson's efficiency hurt him a bit for me, but I understand his rare ability to get up so many shots and get so hot, which. But I'd also like to point out that Iverson's streaky style also worked in part due to Philly's defense, which would keep them in games when Iverson went cold, as well as their rebounding which got them garbage baskets when Iverson missed, allowing Philly to pull away when Iverson got hot.

Also, I would LOVE to hear your reasoning for Kobe "only" being 5th best in '03. I would especially love to hear why you think he was worse than Shaq at that point. Kobe was SCARY good that year and I was under the impression that Phil Jackosn handed over the reigns to Kobe early in the season - that the Lakers became HIS team. Maybe you can enlighten me on that.

That was tough, and it's among the strongest top 5 I can remember. Duncan, KG and T-Mac just had remarkable seasons, all career years, except KG who maintained that level in '04.

Kobe had the better regular season than Shaq, but Shaq's value on the basketball court was still incredible. With Shaq out for the first 12 games, the Lakers started out 3-9, now that's not entirely fair to hold against Kobe, because they did still struggle when Shaq first returned to the lineup. And the Lakers season turned around when Phil gave Kobe freedom essentially making him the first option in late January when he went on the 35 and 40+ streaks.

Now that's probably what you're referring to with it becoming Kobe's team, but it's confusing. Kobe was the 1st option by default with Shaq out the 1st 12 games, and then they went back to their usual style with Shaq as the focal point when he returned, but with the Lakers not having much success, Kobe became the focal point for about a month turning around the Lakers season. According to Kobe, Phil had come to him and told him that this year, Shaq wasn't in the condition to carry the offensive load like in the past, so he apparently asked Kobe to do it. However Kobe claimed that Shaq got upset so Phil made Shaq the 1st option again, this would explain his player of the month award. But by this point, they kept winning with the team having momentum, and Shaq playing his way into shape. So it really was a 1.A/1.B situation that year, which seemed to lead to some confusion since they were basically alternating as the focal point depending on the time of year.

As for why I ended up going with Shaq over Kobe. Well, despite Shaq's subpar effort defensively this season, he ended up averaging 28/11/3 with 2.4 bpg on 57% shooting. And one thing this version of Shaq had over any other version is free throw shooting. As funny as it sounds, Shaq was such a dominant offensive player that even improving to a career best 62% like he did that year made his free throw shooting seem like a non-issue. It wasn't talked about anymore, and teams weren't going to the hack-a-Shaq.

And while Shaq's defense slipped from the 3peat, Kobe's did as well with the increased scoring load, and Shaq remained one of the league's leading shot blockers, and a more than capable post defender who would take away most big men's back to the basket game which is an advantage over what Kobe brought as a guard, imo.

And Shaq's offensive skills had improved over the years, and he was at this point, a very skilled low post player with excellent footwork, an automatic jump hook which he could get almost whenever he wanted, a terrific drop step, he used fakes well, and his baseline one-handed turnaround gave him a reliable shot over either shoulder which makes you a complete post player. That added to his greatest asset, which was strength. Despite the weight gain, he remained quick for a man his size, and he still jumped well.

His offensive game was still there, and he was probably still the most effective offensive player in the game.

Also, the playoffs were really what gave Shaq the edge over Kobe for me since as I mentioned, Kobe had the better regular season. Kobe was really disappointing during the Spurs series, and it's not just the performance, which I can excuse due to the shoulder injury and facing an excellent defender(Bowen) and a great defensive team. But he shot way too much(27 times per game) given his shooting percentage(43%), and considering Shaq was scoring much more effectively inside, but not getting anywhere near as many shots. I would've liked to have seen him show better recognition and defer to Shaq.

Shaq also showed up in the elimination game, while Kobe was a no show, particularly in the 2nd half, when the Lakers still had a chance to win the game. Kobe did have his moment in game 5 when he almost brought the Lakers back. A game that would've been a classic for Kobe had Horry's 3 not rimmed out, which was probably the difference in the Lakers not 4peating. But outside of that, Kobe was disappointing and showed a questionable approach in the series.

In the end, my gut tells me to go with the dominant big man over the high scoring guards in McGrady and Bryant, no matter how spectacular those 2 were. It's so tough considering how great those 2 were. But I'm not alone in this belief, in March 2003, Shaq was selected as the best player in a GM survey, and this was right after Kobe's 40 ppg February and before Shaq's own player of the month/superior postseason. I just think Shaq's value and how much he changed the game was off the charts. I somewhat reluctantly put KG over him for defense, the added dominance he showed that year, which along with '04 had me have more faith in him offensively during those years than at any other time, as well as KG carrying his Wolves to 51 wins.

BlackVVaves

07-01-2012, 12:00 AM

Shep

07-01-2012, 12:19 AM

L.Kizzle

07-01-2012, 12:24 AM

2004
6. jermaine o'neal
7. andrei kirilenko
8. jason kidd
Please explain?

Shep

07-01-2012, 12:33 AM

Please explain?
on top of averaging 16.5ppg, 8.1rpg, 3.1apg, 1.9spg, 2.8bpg, he was the most versatile defender in the nba. the fact that kirilenko led such a putrid roster to above .500 also plays a huge part, considering his second and third best players consisted of carlos arroyo and greg ostertag, and the rest of the team was d-league talent. this was the first season without stockton and malone, and they only lost 5 games more than the previous season

Ebuka_Okafor

07-01-2012, 12:34 AM

where is emeka okafor?

L.Kizzle

07-01-2012, 12:42 AM

on top of averaging 16.5ppg, 8.1rpg, 3.1apg, 1.9spg, 2.8bpg, he was the most versatile defender in the nba. the fact that kirilenko led such a putrid roster to above .500 also plays a huge part, considering his second and third best players consisted of carlos arroyo and greg ostertag, and the rest of the team was d-league talent. this was the first season without stockton and malone, and they only lost 5 games more than the previous season
I remember, he had a hell of a season but 7th best that season is a little too high don't you think? DO you have Darrell Armstrong that high for him leading the Magic to a 41-41 record in 2000?

BlackVVaves

07-01-2012, 12:57 AM

oolalaa

07-01-2012, 10:19 AM

Thank you, but I don't know that I'm more knowledgeable than you. I'm familiar with your posts and you seem quite knowledgeable.

Well thanks. I'm a little more knowledgable than most but I think it's fair to say you are one of the very best posters on this site. I've always been an NBA fan - somewhat intermittently over the years, it has to be said - but it's only in the last 18 months or so (Not long before I joined this forum really) that I've got into researching the history of the game.

Iverson was great, but the guys he's behind are three top 10 players(Shaq, Duncan and Kobe) and a top 15-20 player all time, in or near their primes. AI ranking 5th with those 4 in front of him is quite impressive, imo.

I didn't agree with the league MVP voting, but he did an excellent job leading the Sixers to the finals. But I think a guy like Vince Carter was actually at a similar level, he had an inferior team, imo(Iverson's Sixers were phenomenal defensively and compared to any defensive team that year, while Carter's Raptors were below average statistically, and imo, maybe a slightly above average defensive team) and Vince came within 1 shot of beating Iverson's Sixers.

I did think about putting Iverson over KG, he had a more notable season, but KG's all around game and defense also made it impossible for me to say that Iverson was a better player than Garnett in his prime.

I've never agreed with the classification of Iverson's Sixers as a one man team. Their greatest strength was being arguably the best, most complete defensive team in the league that year, and the league's most dominant rebounding team outrebounding opponents by 4 rpg, and I thought that was a very effective way to build a team around Iverson. Iverson's efficiency hurt him a bit for me, but I understand his rare ability to get up so many shots and get so hot.

I've never been a big fan of Garnett's. It used to annoy me, around '04/'05 especially, when people would say "If only KG had what Timmy has in San Antonio. They'd be calling HIM the best power forward of all time!".

NO FRIGGIN WAY!

One of the most underrated commodities for a big man to have in his game is the ability to get your ass down low, back your man into the post and grind out an easy(ish) close range hook or banker. It sounds almost too simple and obvious, but it's true - It gives you a great chance of getting an offensive rebound and tipping in a miss (Their respective Off Reb numbers are an indication of this), and an even better chance of getting yourself to the line for some cheap points. That's what Duncan has done his whole career and that's what made him a FAR more effective offensive player than KG (Far more than the numbers would indicate, even).

KG has always taken WAAY too many turnaround/fall away jumpers for my liking. He had very few proper 'back your man down post moves' from what I could tell. He had a borderline obsession with trying to spin off his opponents which rarely seemed to work against the best defenders. He did have that spin/pump fake/up and under move which he used a lot, and it was pretty effective, but he always seemed to desert it in crunch time of a close game and settle for his patented fall away instead.

Also, whilst he's undoubtedly a super competitive "warrior" who has a singular obsession with winning, I have always doubted just how great his leadership, and ability to raise his teammates level of play, was. I mean, the guy didn't make it out of the 1st round for 7 straight years, and then missed the playoffs entirely between '05 & '07!! Clearly something wasn't quite right. Perhaps he was TOO intense and homicidally driven. Maybe he sapped the life out of his teammates. Who knows.

What I do know is that I would take '01 Iverson over KG in a heartbeat. Whilst I can't disagree that the Sixers defense was a big part of the reason for them getting to the finals, I do think it's unfair to hold that against A.I. When I said that he was a "one manned, relentless band" I meant that he was their only real scoring threat. He had to carry an inordinate amount of the offense. Heck, he WAS their offense! His "poor" efficiency gets over blown, too. If we compare him to KG in '01 for example:

Iverson regular season 31.1ppg on 45% shooting (efg%)
Garnett regular season 22.0ppg on 48% shooting

Iverson post season 32.9ppg on 43%
Garnett post season 21.0ppg on 47%

There's not a huge difference in efficiency and, when you consider the scoring disparity and the fact that Iverson was relentlessly double teamed, you can see why there's any difference at all. Even Kobe only shot around 48% in both the regular season and the playoffs. And, having said all this, I think efficiency is MASSIVELY overrated, anyway. As long as you shoot it above 40%, I am far more concerned with HOW and WHEN you score your points.

I can understand having Timmy and Kobe over A.I in '01, but Garnett is a stretch too far, imo.

That was tough, and it's among the strongest top 5 I can remember. Duncan, KG and T-Mac just had remarkable seasons, all career years, except KG who maintained that level in '04.

Kobe had the better regular season than Shaq, but Shaq's value on the basketball court was still incredible. With Shaq out for the first 12 games, the Lakers started out 3-9, now that's not entirely fair to hold against Kobe, because they did still struggle when Shaq first returned to the lineup. And the Lakers season turned around when Phil gave Kobe freedom essentially making him the first option in late January when he went on the 35 and 40+ streaks.

Now that's probably what you're referring to with it becoming Kobe's team, but it's confusing. Kobe was the 1st option by default with Shaq out the 1st 12 games, and then they went back to their usual style with Shaq as the focal point when he returned, but with the Lakers not having much success, Kobe became the focal point for about a month turning around the Lakers season. According to Kobe, Phil had come to him and told him that this year, Shaq wasn't in the condition to carry the offensive load like in the past, so he apparently asked Kobe to do it. However Kobe claimed that Shaq got upset so Phil made Shaq the 1st option again, this would explain his player of the month award. But by this point, they kept winning with the team having momentum, and Shaq playing his way into shape. So it really was a 1.A/1.B situation that year, which seemed to lead to some confusion since they were basically alternating as the focal point depending on the time of year.

As for why I ended up going with Shaq over Kobe. Well, despite Shaq's subpar effort defensively this season, he ended up averaging 28/11/3 with 2.4 bpg on 57% shooting. And one thing this version of Shaq had over any other version is free throw shooting. As funny as it sounds, Shaq was such a dominant offensive player that even improving to a career best 62% like he did that year made his free throw shooting seem like a non-issue. It wasn't talked about anymore, and teams weren't going to the hack-a-Shaq.

And while Shaq's defense slipped from the 3peat, Kobe's did as well with the increased scoring load, and Shaq remained one of the league's leading shot blockers, and a more than capable post defender who would take away most big men's back to the basket game which is an advantage over what Kobe brought as a guard, imo.

And Shaq's offensive skills had improved over the years, and he was at this point, a very skilled low post player with excellent footwork, an automatic jump hook which he could get almost whenever he wanted, a terrific drop step, he used fakes well, and his baseline one-handed turnaround gave him a reliable shot over either shoulder which makes you a complete post player. That added to his greatest asset, which was strength. Despite the weight gain, he remained quick for a man his size, and he still jumped well.

His offensive game was still there, and he was probably still the most effective offensive player in the game.

Also, the playoffs were really what gave Shaq the edge over Kobe for me since as I mentioned, Kobe had the better regular season. Kobe was really disappointing during the Spurs series, and it's not just the performance, which I can excuse due to the shoulder injury and facing an excellent defender(Bowen) and a great defensive team. But he shot way too much(27 times per game) given his shooting percentage(43%), and considering Shaq was scoring much more effectively inside, but not getting anywhere near as many shots. I would've liked to have seen him show better recognition and defer to Shaq.

Shaq also showed up in the elimination game, while Kobe was a no show, particularly in the 2nd half, when the Lakers still had a chance to win the game. Kobe did have his moment in game 5 when he almost brought the Lakers back. A game that would've been a classic for Kobe had Horry's 3 not rimmed out, which was probably the difference in the Lakers not 4peating. But outside of that, Kobe was disappointing and showed a questionable approach in the series.

In the end, my gut tells me to go with the dominant big man over the high scoring guards in McGrady and Bryant, no matter how spectacular those 2 were. It's so tough considering how great those 2 were. But I'm not alone in this belief, in March 2003, Shaq was selected as the best player in a GM survey, and this was right after Kobe's 40 ppg February and before Shaq's own player of the month/superior postseason. I just think Shaq's value and how much he changed the game was off the charts. I somewhat reluctantly put KG over him for defense, the added dominance he showed that year, which along with '04 had me have more faith in him offensively during those years than at any other time, as well as KG carrying his Wolves to 51 wins.

Great stuff. Thanks.

Punpun

07-01-2012, 10:27 AM

I can see you are a Shaq stan.

:yaohappy:

tmacattack33

07-01-2012, 02:03 PM

You do know that Wade in 2006 won the Finals and had a historically great playoff run correct?

That should have been one of the easier years to choose a number one player.

ShaqAttack3234

07-01-2012, 08:11 PM

2000
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. tim duncan
4. alonzo mourning
5. kevin garnett
6. gary payton
7. chris webber
8. karl malone
9. david robinson
10. jason kidd
11. allen iverson
12. terrell brandon
13. eddie jones
14. scottie pippen
15. anfernee hardaway
16. rasheed wallace
17. vince carter
18. jalen rose
19. michael finley
20. john stockton
21. derrick coleman
22. stephon marbury
23. sam cassell
24. latrell sprewell
25. reggie miller

One thing I've noticed with your rankings including your 90's ones, is that you sometimes give too much credit to the 2nd option on championship teams and rank the 2nd option as the second best player in the NBA such as Kobe in 2000, Robinson in '99 and Pippen in '91, '92 and '96. It's extremely rare that a team has 2 players you can even argue as the top 2 in the league, and the 2000 Lakers certainly aren't one of them. I can see the argument for Kobe at 2 in 2001, I was somewhat tempted to put him there based on his playoff run when he was the 2nd best player in the playoffs. And by that point people were regularly calling Shaq and Kobe the 2 best players in the league. But outside of '01 Shaq/Kobe, there are only a few years I can see an argument for a team having the 2 best players such as maybe '86 Bird/McHale, and maybe '11 Lebron/Wade. But I don't think a team has ever actually had the 2 best players in the league.

You used to have Kobe at number 6 in 2000, I believe, and that was much more reasonable, though Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Mourning, Malone, Webber and Grant Hill were all clearly better. I didn't have to think too hard about taking Payton over Kobe that year, but they're a little closer.

But top 2 for Kobe is beyond a stretch. He was very good, the best shooting guard that year ahead of Iverson, and the best second option ahead of David Robinson, but he doesn't have a case over those elite big men. If you want to penalize Hill for his injury in the playoffs, then I can sort of see that, but the gap between them as players in 2000 was still pretty clear. And both Payton and Kidd are close enough that I don't have a huge problem. But you're old top 6 ranking for Kobe is about 1 spot higher than the absolute highest ranking I could see anyone justifying for Kobe in 2000.

Well thanks. I'm a little more knowledgable than most but I think it's fair to say you are one of the very best posters on this site. I've always been an NBA fan - somewhat intermittently over the years, it has to be said - but it's only in the last 18 months or so (Not long before I joined this forum really) that I've got into researching the history of the game.

Well, I was impressed with your knowledge, you've retained quite a bit in just 18 months.

I've never been a big fan of Garnett's. It used to annoy me, around '04/'05 especially, when people would say "If only KG had what Timmy has in San Antonio. They'd be calling HIM the best power forward of all time!".

NO FRIGGIN WAY!

One of the most underrated commodities for a big man to have in his game is the ability to get your ass down low, back your man into the post and grind out an easy(ish) close range hook or banker. It sounds almost too simple and obvious, but it's true - It gives you a great chance of getting an offensive rebound and tipping in a miss (Their respective Off Reb numbers are an indication of this), and an even better chance of getting yourself to the line for some cheap points. That's what Duncan has done his whole career and that's what made him a FAR more effective offensive player than KG (Far more than the numbers would indicate, even).

KG has always taken WAAY too many turnaround/fall away jumpers for my liking. He had very few proper 'back your man down post moves' from what I could tell. He had a borderline obsession with trying to spin off his opponents which rarely seemed to work against the best defenders. He did have that spin/pump fake/up and under move which he used a lot, and it was pretty effective, but he always seemed to desert it in crunch time of a close game and settle for his patented fall away instead.

Also, whilst he's undoubtedly a super competitive "warrior" who has a singular obsession with winning, I have always doubted just how great his leadership, and ability to raise his teammates level of play, was. I mean, the guy didn't make it out of the 1st round for 7 straight years, and then missed the playoffs entirely between '05 & '07!! Clearly something wasn't quite right. Perhaps he was TOO intense and homicidally driven. Maybe he sapped the life out of his teammates. Who knows.

I pretty much agree with your thoughts on taking Duncan over KG. Outside of Duncan's post game, I've also preferred Duncan's shot blocking. What set him apart vs some who block more shots than him is that he wouldn't bike on fakes and had such great timing that he was pretty much the best in the league at blocking shots flatfooted. But he had more athleticism than people remember and could jump and block shots when he had to. He was just a very smart defensive anchor who would protect the basket and wouldn't reach in and pick up stupid fouls.

What I do know is that I would take '01 Iverson over KG in a heartbeat. Whilst I can't disagree that the Sixers defense was a big part of the reason for them getting to the finals, I do think it's unfair to hold that against A.I. When I said that he was a "one manned, relentless band" I meant that he was their only real scoring threat. He had to carry an inordinate amount of the offense. Heck, he WAS their offense! His "poor" efficiency gets over blown, too. If we compare him to KG in '01 for example:

Iverson regular season 31.1ppg on 45% shooting (efg%)
Garnett regular season 22.0ppg on 48% shooting

Iverson post season 32.9ppg on 43%
Garnett post season 21.0ppg on 47%

There's not a huge difference in efficiency and, when you consider the scoring disparity and the fact that Iverson was relentlessly double teamed, you can see why there's any difference at all. Even Kobe only shot around 48% in both the regular season and the playoffs. And, having said all this, I think efficiency is MASSIVELY overrated, anyway. As long as you shoot it above 40%, I am far more concerned with HOW and WHEN you score your points.

Well, Iverson's actual FG% was 38.9% in the postseason which was low for me to not consider efficiency. And it's one of the problems I have because Iverson was streaky. But it did work in best of 7 series where he'd also go off and have big games. Which is probably why Philly had back to back 7 game series. A streaky shooter can be effective in the playoffs.

Of course, scoring clearly favors Iverson, but Garnett impacted the game in so many ways other than scoring, we're still seeing him do that in his mid 30's in Boston. His defense and rebounding made big differences, and those are aspects of the game that you don't really get anything from Iverson in, partially due to size and position. And Garnett still gives you quite a bit offensively between his passing, scoring, drawing more defensive attention than his teammates, setting screens ect.

I can understand having Timmy and Kobe over A.I in '01, but Garnett is a stretch too far, imo.

And you're certainly not alone in this belief, so I understand where you're coming from, but Garnett's all around game in his prime makes it tougher for me to pick Iverson over him.

Great stuff. Thanks.

Thanks, I've enjoyed the discussion.

You do know that Wade in 2006 won the Finals and had a historically great playoff run correct?

Yes, that's why he raised his ranking all the way up to 2, which he wouldn't have been at after the regular season.

That should have been one of the easier years to choose a number one player.

It was, I thought that Kobe was pretty clearly the best player back then in '06, and I still think he was. He was widely considered the best player. He was much more skilled than Wade, and a better shooter who was also a better man to man defender. Wade was on a contending, while Kobe was not.

Wade had a hell of a playoff run, and he really did play great in the ECF and Finals, but I don't see what makes him the superior player.

oolalaa

07-01-2012, 10:03 PM

I pretty much agree with your thoughts on taking Duncan over KG. Outside of Duncan's post game, I've also preferred Duncan's shot blocking. What set him apart vs some who block more shots than him is that he wouldn't bike on fakes and had such great timing that he was pretty much the best in the league at blocking shots flatfooted. But he had more athleticism than people remember and could jump and block shots when he had to. He was just a very smart defensive anchor who would protect the basket and wouldn't reach in and pick up stupid fouls.

Well said, especially the bolded - that was another one of Timmy's underrated commodities.

Well, Iverson's actual FG% was 38.9% in the postseason which was low for me to not consider efficiency. And it's one of the problems I have because Iverson was streaky. But it did work in best of 7 series where he'd also go off and have big games. Which is probably why Philly had back to back 7 game series. A streaky shooter can be effective in the playoffs.

Of course, scoring clearly favors Iverson, but Garnett impacted the game in so many ways other than scoring, we're still seeing him do that in his mid 30's in Boston. His defense and rebounding made big differences, and those are aspects of the game that you don't really get anything from Iverson in, partially due to size and position. And Garnett still gives you quite a bit offensively between his passing, scoring, drawing more defensive attention than his teammates, setting screens ect.

And you're certainly not alone in this belief, so I understand where you're coming from, but Garnett's all around game in his prime makes it tougher for me to pick Iverson over him.

FG% is an insultingly bad stat for perimeter players who shoot a lot of threes :oldlol: I actually think it should be banned form ANY and ALL basketball discussion that ever takes place, and those that do use it should be sent to prison for a minimum of 12 months without parole :D It's insulting because we have a stat that takes into account the extra value of making 3s, as opposed to 2s - eFG% (Essentially a combination of FG% and 3P%). Calling Jason Kidd a 40% shooter for his career, for example, is just flat out wrong. He was taking 4/5 3s a game in his prime and making a good percentgae of them. That translates to a .462 eFG% over his career - still below par but not "abominablly horrendous" like so many have claimed and held against him.

And regarding Garnett's "impact"....That's the thing though, I think his actual impact on a basketball court is overrated. Granted, it's not entirely logical - he is one of the most "talented" all round big men in history - but not everything necessarily has to make sense (being a more all round player doesn't always mean you're a better player, either). For an MVP winner, his team success in his first 12 years in the league was a little pitiful, and I simply refuse to believe we can pin all of that on a bad organisation and teammates. The greats TRANSFORM franchises. KG, rather emphatically, did NOT transform Minny. By the end of his tenure there, they were back to where they started before they drafted him.

His fans will point to '08 and shout from the rooftops "Look! See! The season he gets a good team he wins a championship!". Whilst I don't doubt that he was their best player, and that he changed the "culture" of the team, I do think it was a 1a/1b scenario with Pierce. It would be highly unfair to put KGs '08 ring along side any of Duncan's and claim they are equals.

Anyway, I should probably cease this Kevin Garnett vendetta I've got going on before it goes too far. It's not healthy :oldlol:

Thanks, I've enjoyed the discussion.

Likewise. I'll give you some 'rep', even though you don't exactly need any :oldlol:

Unstoppabull

07-01-2012, 10:09 PM

Well composed list, since the edit, can't really nitpick

Boston C's

07-01-2012, 11:14 PM

great list... i feel like in 2005 though ray should have been number 10 what he and the sonics accomplished that yr was amazing and his playoff performances were pretty impressive to boot

G.O.A.T

07-02-2012, 12:45 AM

@ Shaqattack3234

Same formula as before...I've edited my own top ten (based on most "significant/important" season) and tried to fit to your criteria, based on a players overall skill level and how they adjusted/fit into the team/system they played on/in that season. In parenthesis, I put where they were on my list with my criteria (if it varied).

2001
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Allen Iverson
6.Vince Carter
7.Chris Webber
8.Tracy McGrady
9.Jason Kidd
10.Gary Payton
11.Karl Malone
12.Ray Allen
13.Paul Pierce
14.Dirk Nowitzki
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Rasheed Wallace
18.Antonio McDyess
19.David Robinson
20.Jamal Mashburn
21.Michael Finley
22.Dikembe Mutombo
23.Glenn Robinson
24.Peja Stojakovic
25.Jerry Stackhouse

My 2001 top 20

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Iverson
4. Kobe
5. Garnett (6)
6. Webber (5)
7. McGrady
8. Kidd (9)
9. Carter (10)
10. Malone (12)
11. Payton
12, Sheed
13. Allen (8)
14, Pierce (13)
15 Dirk
16. Mashburn (ur)
17. Francis (ur)
18. G. Robinson (ur)
19. Finley (ur)
20. Marbury (ur)

And now a few questions/comments.

1) Where's the love for Roscoe?
-We're going to have consistent disagreements on where Rasheed ranks, so lets get to the bottom of it. Would you really trade (not considering the make-up of the team otherwise) a prime Rasheed for Allen, Pierce, Francis or Marbury? He is the only big man and the only guy who could play D out of the group, seems like a no-brainer. Sure Sheed's were down, but in fact he played for two of the most balanced contending teams in NBA history throughout his prime. The '99-'03 Blazers and '04-'08 Pistons were all about sharing the wealth. Every coach and every teammate will tell you that Sheed's impact goes way beyond the stat sheet.

2) Iverson/Kobe what gives?
-Yes, Kobe is the greater player and every year after this it was clear Kobe was a level above AI. But for this season Iverson was the MVP, led a team to the Finals and played as well or better than Bryant (I think a good deal better) while shouldering a much larger burden. Kobe isn't top three yet.

3) Vinsanity!
- Carter at six too high. I can see an argument over everyone but Webber. No way was he better than C-Webb. I have him much lower (as usual) I never bought into Vince and I consider his career to have proven me right. I can't see him above Kidd at any point either (though this is the closest year and I have them 9/10) Kidd always did so much more to help his team win than VC.

4) More love for the Big Dog
- It was Robinson's career year and he was right there with Allen at that point. Averaged like 22-7-4 that year and shot well. Had the best mid-range jumper in the league. In the playoffs Allen was clearly the man, but throughout the season they shared clutch duties.

5) Starbury?
- Was he so talented that big numbers on a 20-win team let you crack the top-15? Especially with what we know now? I know you'll explain well.

Great list as usual, tell me where I went wrong.

Shep

07-02-2012, 02:31 AM

I remember, he had a hell of a season but 7th best that season is a little too high don't you think? DO you have Darrell Armstrong that high for him leading the Magic to a 41-41 record in 2000?
no i don't. bo outlaw was alot closer to darrell armstrong than carlos arroyo was to andrei kirilenko.

This fool did not just say that BEN WALLACE was better than Kobe Bryant in 2004.

This guy didn't just say AK47 was a better player than Kobe Bryant in 2006, the year he went full schizo on the NBA.

You did NOT just say Billups was better than Yao in 2009.

You think Baron Davis was better than Dirk in 2008?

What NBA were you watching? In what universe was Baron Davis better than Dirk??? I'm sorry man, hate to make fun of posters, but I really, truly, believe your list is so ****ed that you should just be banned based off pure idiocy.

And that's being kind.
:roll: who is this schmuck? were you even born in 2008?

One thing I've noticed with your rankings including your 90's ones, is that you sometimes give too much credit to the 2nd option on championship teams and rank the 2nd option as the second best player in the NBA such as Kobe in 2000, Robinson in '99 and Pippen in '91, '92 and '96. It's extremely rare that a team has 2 players you can even argue as the top 2 in the league, and the 2000 Lakers certainly aren't one of them. I can see the argument for Kobe at 2 in 2001, I was somewhat tempted to put him there based on his playoff run when he was the 2nd best player in the playoffs. And by that point people were regularly calling Shaq and Kobe the 2 best players in the league. But outside of '01 Shaq/Kobe, there are only a few years I can see an argument for a team having the 2 best players such as maybe '86 Bird/McHale, and maybe '11 Lebron/Wade. But I don't think a team has ever actually had the 2 best players in the league.
nah i don't give too much credit, i give just the right amount of credit. to be the second best player on a championship team takes alot of commitment, you do afterall, play the game to win championships so it takes alot of individual sacrifice. guys that win as a second best player could easily be more dominant in a less successful team..and not only that, you have to gel with different ego's, coaches, and schemes. kobe showed what he could do in the defining moments of those playoffs, the trail blazers series, and when shaq was fouled out in the finals, he took those moments and proved to the world that he was the second best player on the planet.

Pointguard

07-02-2012, 03:50 AM

ShaqAttack3234

07-02-2012, 04:41 AM

FG% is an insultingly bad stat for perimeter players who shoot a lot of threes

I disagree because I think FG% helps show consistency better, and it tells you simply how many shots a player usually makes out of how many they take. I like looking at both stats.

For an MVP winner, his team success in his first 12 years in the league was a little pitiful, and I simply refuse to believe we can pin all of that on a bad organisation and teammates. The greats TRANSFORM franchises. KG, rather emphatically, did NOT transform Minny. By the end of his tenure there, they were back to where they started before they drafted him.

Well, I don't think there was all that much he could, there wasn't a single year from '99-'04 when KG's teams lost to a team they should've beaten. Whether it was the Spurs in '99 and '01, The Blazers in '00, the Mavs in '02 or the Lakers in '03 and '04.

The 1 year in Minnesota that he had a chance to contend was '04, and he did, but Sam Cassell got injured.

His fans will point to '08 and shout from the rooftops "Look! See! The season he gets a good team he wins a championship!". Whilst I don't doubt that he was their best player, and that he changed the "culture" of the team, I do think it was a 1a/1b scenario with Pierce. It would be highly unfair to put KGs '08 ring along side any of Duncan's and claim they are equals.

It was arguably 1.A/1.B offensively, though I think you could make the case that Garnett was their 1st option that year, he was their playoff scorer.

1) Where's the love for Roscoe?
-We're going to have consistent disagreements on where Rasheed ranks, so lets get to the bottom of it. Would you really trade (not considering the make-up of the team otherwise) a prime Rasheed for Allen, Pierce, Francis or Marbury? He is the only big man and the only guy who could play D out of the group, seems like a no-brainer. Sure Sheed's were down, but in fact he played for two of the most balanced contending teams in NBA history throughout his prime. The '99-'03 Blazers and '04-'08 Pistons were all about sharing the wealth. Every coach and every teammate will tell you that Sheed's impact goes way beyond the stat sheet.

Sheed was lower for 2 reasons. because he seemed to just have a meltdown in the playoffs, and had a terrible series.

And Sheed's team also underachieved greatly. Anything less than a championship was considered a disappointment with this team. They were still considered by many to be the most talented team in the league.

They went 30-11 over the first half of their season, which is more what you'd expect, but went just 20-21 the rest of the way, and it's tough to excuse a team with this much talent being under .500 for half a season.

For example, compare the team Steve Francis had in Houston, and they only finished 5 games behind Portland with nowhere near as much talent.

I like what Sheed brings to a team when he keeps his temper under control, but for the higher rankings on the list, I favor players who I think will carry a team, and play like superstars. Particularly Ray Allen this year who broke out in a way with his playoff run and at least reached borderline superstar status.

2) Iverson/Kobe what gives?
-Yes, Kobe is the greater player and every year after this it was clear Kobe was a level above AI. But for this season Iverson was the MVP, led a team to the Finals and played as well or better than Bryant (I think a good deal better) while shouldering a much larger burden. Kobe isn't top three yet.

I've explained Kobe vs Iverson, and it's not a difficult choice for me. I think Kobe did just about everything better. While Iverson was certainly among the best perimeter scorers, I think Kobe was already even better due to his size and much more reliable jump shot. He had similar ability as a volume scorer, but could score much more efficiently, and do so more within the flow of a conventional offense. He had the talent to be a first option on just about any other team, but had to be a second option and the team's primary playmaker in the playoffs, and still did that extremely well and gave the team 1st option production. I don't see Iverson fitting in as well when he's not the man, and I don't see any superior ability to be the man. In other words, I think that Kobe was capable of doing what Iverson did, but I don't think Iverson was doing what Kobe did. And was what Iverson did more significant than Kobe winning a title on a team with the best postseason record in NBA history?

Bryant also rebounded the ball extremely well for a guard, which was another advantage you get with Kobe's size. He averaged over 7 rebounds per game in those playoffs despite playing with Shaq who was averaging over 15 boards, and Horace Grant, who even at 35, remained a strong rebounder.

And finally, Kobe was on the all-defensive second team, and actually deserved it back then. This is yet another advantage you get with Kobe over Iverson.

The only case I personally see for Iverson is if you put Kobe lower due to his selfish play and attitude in the first 2-3 months of the regular season, but I think that has to be overlooked due to his exceptional play in the playoffs. He not only became arguably the greatest second option ever in those playoffs, but he had a playoff run better than quite a few first options on championship teams.

Kobe played his best basketball from an all around standpoint outside of his 2008 season during that playoff run considering playmaking, scoring, defense and rebounding. Here's Phil Jackson talking about Kobe's playmaking that year.

"I think it's the best that I've ever seen a player of mine play with an overall court game. I'm asking him to do so much, and he's accomplishing it. I never asked Michael to be a playmaker. That's the greatest player that I've ever had, that I could consider the greatest player in the game, and I never asked him to be a playmaker in those terms. I asked him to be playmaker when he was doubled or tripled. But Kobe has to set up the offense, to advance the ball, to read the defense, to make other players happy, and he's doing a great job of that."

3) Vinsanity!
- Carter at six too high. I can see an argument over everyone but Webber. No way was he better than C-Webb. I have him much lower (as usual) I never bought into Vince and I consider his career to have proven me right. I can't see him above Kidd at any point either (though this is the closest year and I have them 9/10) Kidd always did so much more to help his team win than VC.

Webber and Carter were very close, I like Webber's all around game better, but he had such a weak playoff run, and this was a problem throughout his career. I'm not sure that there's ever been a player of that caliber who has been a bigger choker. And this is coming from someone who was always a fan of Webber because I really enjoyed watching him play.

Carter on the other hand went in the opposite direction in the playoffs, and was living up to the superstar label, particularly after Oakley called him out in the Knicks series. He went back and forth with AI in that series, and was lighting up a phenomenal defensive team as well as a very good individual defender in Aaron McKie.

To be honest, I think the gap between Iverson and Carter is far too big on your list. I don't think you get that much more with one over the other. Iverson is my choice for intangibles such as heart, toughness and stamina. I just think they were in the same tier that particularly year.

As far as Carter vs Kidd, well, Kidd was definitely more well rounded as the top passer in the league, one of the best defensive guards, and arguably the best rebounding guard.

But Kidd's jump shot was still a weakness, and he didn't have a particularly strong playoff series. Carter had his best full season, and was really seen as one of the premier stars in the league due to his play in this season and these playoffs. I definitely think Carter was doing a lot for his team at this point carrying them to a 47-35 record despite them going 2-5 without him.

4) More love for the Big Dog
- It was Robinson's career year and he was right there with Allen at that point. Averaged like 22-7-4 that year and shot well. Had the best mid-range jumper in the league. In the playoffs Allen was clearly the man, but throughout the season they shared clutch duties.

I liked Robinson's mid-range game and his whole skill set in that area including his post game, but he was one-dimensional other than being a decent rebounder. He was also a terrible defender. He was as much of the first option as Ray Allen, but I didn't have any doubt who the superior player was. I think a ranking in the 20-25 range is fair for Robinson considering he's only going to give you scoring, and while he does that very well, most of the players ahead are more complete players, and many are fairly close as scorers.

5) Starbury?
- Was he so talented that big numbers on a 20-win team let you crack the top-15? Especially with what we know now? I know you'll explain well.

Hard to say, I wasn't entirely sure, but the farther you get down the list, the tougher the decisions get. He had superstar ability, and superstar numbers, but the negatives keep him from that status.

However, I had him at 15 in 2000, and I don't see any real decline, the Nets dropped from 31 to 26 wins largely because Marbury missed 7 more games than '00, Kerry Kittles was out for the season and Keith Van Horn missed 31 more games than the previous season.

He was probably the best scoring point guard in 2001, and he did have talent and skills as a playmaker despite his scoring mentality. But given that particular team, I don't see a real problem with his approach.

oolalaa

07-02-2012, 10:46 AM

Well, I don't think there was all that much he could, there wasn't a single year from '99-'04 when KG's teams lost to a team they should've beaten. Whether it was the Spurs in '99 and '01, The Blazers in '00, the Mavs in '02 or the Lakers in '03 and '04.

The 1 year in Minnesota that he had a chance to contend was '04, and he did, but Sam Cassell got injured.

You can say EXACTLY the same thing about Carmelo Anthony. In fact, barring Garnett's MVP, both Melo's and KG's first 8 NBA seasons are REMARKABLY similar.

Season after season, Melo and KG were leading their teams to 1st round playoff exits. Every single year they were underdogs.

The one year Minnesota were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. The one year Denver were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. Both made the western conference finals.

Now, I'm not for a second saying that Melo is as good as KG but I'm going to guess that you don't even think Melo is in the same stratosphere. Why not? Couldn't Melo have got very close to a title playing with a Gasol (To replace Pierce), RayRay, Rondo and Perkins?

ShaqAttack3234

07-02-2012, 11:41 AM

Well composed list, since the edit, can't really nitpick

Yeah, I'm still not sure about Gasol vs Yao in '09. It's pretty tough considering Yao faced more defensive attention, and was stronger, but Gasol was more mobile and versatile who passed the ball better. And Pau could handle lower passes better and fronting him wasn't nearly as effective.

Rasheed was ok but I wouldn't have him over Dikembe. In fact I wouldn't have Rasheed in there. I would have replaced him with Antoine Walker.

Antoine? Definitely don't know about that one. Never liked Walker much, particularly his shot selection. I thought Sheed was more effective offensively due to his length, athleticism and unstoppable turnaround, and in 2000, a lot of his game was in the low post. And defensively, it's no contest, Sheed was one of the best defensive big men. Sheed didn't carry a superstar's offensive burden, and didn't have to playing on the deepest and most talented team, and he's not higher because of that. Well, not because he was on a team where he didn't have to, but because he never proved willing to take that burden consistently, despite the talent.

What does AI have to do? He carried that team unlike very few others. He just kept coming unlike any player ever in the game. You could not stop him. He's top three.

I think putting AI top 5 is showing respect. Shaq and Duncan are out of reach for him, imo. Kobe was just a more well rounded player, imo, who did what Iverson did best at least as well, and was a team that didn't require as much of a specialized cast and could succeed in more roles, imo. Because he was more of a conventional player. KG is the most debatable, but I know you know how good Garnett was from your posts about him, so Iverson is only behind the best of the best. I did boost him for what he did in '01, as you can see, he's several spots higher than where he is in any other year.

What Kidd did that year was off the hook. He took a last place team and totally converted the worst team to make it to the finals ever. No experience, no talent, nobody scoring 15ppg, nobody getting 8 or more rebounds, nobody getting steals or blocks, all had bad career shooting percentages, were bad from the FT line - Kidd should be top three. He took a nobody team and made them believers.

Kidd did have a great year, though I thought he was even better in '01. His season was one of the more memorable ones, at least top 4 in that regard, but aside from the 2 obvious guys Shaq and Duncan, I'm definitely not comfortable saying he was a better player than Kobe or KG. And McGrady was extremely close to Kobe at that time, imo with the difference being Kobe's championship and play late in games during the playoffs. His defense also helped his case over McGrady.

Webber is the guy I'd consider putting Kidd over the most, but I thought Webber was a more talented and dominant player due to his scoring in addition to being the best passing big man. And he was on a title contender, and the playoffs weren't as big of a problem, he maintained a high ranking like in 2000 because I wouldn't exactly call him disappointing in the '02 playoffs, at least not compared to some of his other years, with the exception of his free throw shooting.

Kidd did transform the Nets, but there are several reasons why I'm not as amazed. 1 is the quality of the Eastern Conference. Another is that the Nets were the best defensive team statistically, and while Kidd was an excellent defensive guard who was part of that, and probably had an additional part in that due to setting up his teammates for easy baskets and keeping them involved offensively(which many agree causes players to play harder defensively), and Kidd's presence had the team more confident in winning games, there's only so much credit he can take since it takes a lot to be ranked number 1 defensively. As far as one guy taking credit defensively, I've almost only really seen centers/big men and coaches be able to change a defense so dramatically.

Kidd didn't have the best shooters, or guys who excelled at creating their own shots, but he had some athletic finishers who ran the floor well and complemented Kidd, good size and some good role players.

Kidd raising his game to almost 20 ppg with 8 rpg and 9 apg in the playoffs was impressive, though because scoring wasn't what he looked to do, but recognized what his team needed.

You can say EXACTLY the same thing about Carmelo Anthony. In fact, barring Garnett's MVP, both Melo's and KG's first 8 NBA seasons are REMARKABLY similar.

Season after season, Melo and KG were leading their teams to 1st round playoff exits. Every single year they were underdogs.

The one year Minnesota were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. The one year Denver were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. Both made the western conference finals.

Now, I'm not for a second saying that Melo is as good as KG but I'm going to guess that you don't even think Melo is in the same stratosphere. Why not? Couldn't Melo have got very close to a title playing with a Gasol (To replace Pierce), RayRay, Rondo and Perkins?

Melo did have a lot of talent around him in '09 and '10. His team had a comparable amount of talent to any team in the league. But in '10, they seemed affected by Karl leaving the team because of cancer, so I'll give them a pass for that. But even the '08 team had a considerable amount of talent.

Melo is actually my favorite current player, and to answer your question, I'm imagine Gasol, Melo, Allen, Rondo and Perkins would at least contend.

nah i don't give too much credit, i give just the right amount of credit. to be the second best player on a championship team takes alot of commitment, you do afterall, play the game to win championships so it takes alot of individual sacrifice. guys that win as a second best player could easily be more dominant in a less successful team..and not only that, you have to gel with different ego's, coaches, and schemes. kobe showed what he could do in the defining moments of those playoffs, the trail blazers series, and when shaq was fouled out in the finals, he took those moments and proved to the world that he was the second best player on the planet.

He did have big clutch moments, trust me I remember, the game-winning jumper in game 2 vs the Suns, the game-saving block vs Sabonis in game 3 in the WCF, his game 7 vs Portland in general, and OT of game 4 vs Indiana.

But a few big moments do not make him a better player than guys like Duncan, Garnett and Mourning. Despite Kobe being an elite perimeter defender, his impact with his on the ball defense couldn't approach that of these 3 big men. Plus, Duncan and Garnett were more effective offensive players at that point. Mourning had also become more polished offensively and more poised and had a much more efficient scoring season while scoring nearly as much as the primary focus of opposing defenses.

Webber and Malone were also clearly the superior offensive players, while Webber was also arguably the best passing big man in the league, Malone was an excellent post defender and both impacted the game more as rebounders since they were big men.

Onto to the perimeter players, Hill was more efficient and more well rounded. He had the better scoring season while receiving more defensive attention with his improved jumper, and was also the better decision maker and playmaker. Payton was closer since Kobe had surpassed him defensively by that point, and Payton had developed a habit of chucking in addition to holding the ball, but he was clearly the superior playmaker, and actually had the more impressive scoring season.

Hill- 25.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, 3.2 TO, 1.4 spg, 48.9 FG%, 34.7 3P%(0.5 3PM)
Payton- 24.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 8.9 apg, 2.7 TO, 1.9 spg 44.8 FG%, 34 3P%(2.3 3PM)
Kobe- 22.5 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 4.9 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.6 spg, 46.6 FG%, 31.9 3P%(0.7 3PM)

Kidd is the closest, I had Kobe over him for a long time, but I have to go with Kidd due to his basketball IQ and ability to make his teammates better, though his injury makes it extremely close.

Again, Kobe's clutch moments were memorable, but that doesn't make up for the significant gap in impact between Kobe, and most of these players, the big men in particular. Many wouldn't even take prime Kobe over Duncan, who was in his prime in 2000. Much less 2000 Kobe.

Kobe was still developing, maturing and learning how to be a consistent facilitator while also learning how to incorporate his individual talent into the team concept.

There's no way anyone is taking 2000 Kobe if they're building a team for a single season over pretty much any of these players.

Bigsmoke

07-02-2012, 12:17 PM

I dont really like Kobe but i know he should be higher than Wade in 2009

oolalaa

07-02-2012, 12:33 PM

Melo did have a lot of talent around him in '09 and '10. His team had a comparable amount of talent to any team in the league. But in '10, they seemed affected by Karl leaving the team because of cancer, so I'll give them a pass for that. But even the '08 team had a considerable amount of talent.

Melo is actually my favorite current player, and to answer your question, I'm imagine Gasol, Melo, Allen, Rondo and Perkins would at least contend.

Fair enough. I'll leave it at that.

G.O.A.T

07-02-2012, 05:49 PM

2002
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Chris Webber
7.Jason Kidd
8.Paul Pierce
9.Dirk Nowitzki
10.Allen Iverson
11.Gary Payton
12.Jermaine O'Neal
13.Steve Nash
14.Vince Carter
15.Ray Allen
16.Rasheed Wallace
17.Ben Wallace
18.Elton Brand
19.Karl Malone
20.Baron Davis
21.Stephon Marbury
22.Peja Stojakovic
23.Michael Jordan
24.Shawn Marion
25.Sam Cassell

My top 20 in terms of level of play in 2002 (Season significance ranking in parenthesis)

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. Garnett (6)
5. McGrady (7)
6. Kidd (4)
7. Webber (5)
8. Dirk (9)
9. Pierce (8)
10. Iverson
11. Carter (15)
12. Payton (11)
13. Sheed (14)
14. J. O'Neal (12)
15. Jordan (ur)
16. Malone (ur)
17. Allen (ur)
18. Nash (ur)
19. B. Davis (ur)
20. Wallace (13)

1) Was it more Kidd's team success or Webber's slight athletic decline that allowed the 1994 ROTY to surpass the 1993 winner?

2) Did you feel that Steve Nash was better than Carter, Allen and Rasheed in 2002, or is that in retrospect once we saw what he could be as an alpha player?

3) Why isn't Jordan higher? The level he was playing at before the injury was borderline top 10 in the league. I have him at 15 based on his level of play when healthy. I just don't see Allen, Nash, Baron Davis, Marbury or Elton Brand playing at the same level. Bascially just give me your thoughts on the season MJ was having through 50-some games.

4) Who was more talented in 2002, Rasheed or Jermaine O'Neal? What would you have done if you were Portland the previous off-season?

5) Why does Carter fall so far this season? I agree that 2001 was his best season, but had he declined so much so fast in your opinion?

The Iron Fist

07-02-2012, 07:29 PM

Good list, but here's a couple of my bigger disagreements
01 Kobe should not be that high. I can't see him carrying AI's 01 team as far as Iverson did
So Kobe can't take a team as far with the coach,6th man and defensive player of the year, coming out of the east?:roll:

ShaqAttack3234

07-03-2012, 04:31 AM

1) Was it more Kidd's team success or Webber's slight athletic decline that allowed the 1994 ROTY to surpass the 1993 winner?

Well, I have Webber over Kidd. I thought Webber played the second best ball of his career in '02. 2000 was the absolute best I've seen Webber play as far as a combination of skills, athleticism, aggressiveness and his improved FT shooting.

2) Did you feel that Steve Nash was better than Carter, Allen and Rasheed in 2002, or is that in retrospect once we saw what he could be as an alpha player?

Can't say what Nash did after hurts him, but I tried not to consider it. However, he had an excellent season in '02, a real breakout year, and was now considered one of the elite point guards. Among the elite scoring point guards and among the elite passers and shooters in the league already by that point. I remembered '02 as his breakout year, and probably his best as a Mav. He played very well in the playoffs, and was having a monster year before the Van Exel trade. Good enough to get on the all-nba 3rd team. Prior to the Van Exel trade, Nash was averaging 19.5 ppg, 7.8 apg, 2.9 TO, 48.8 FG%/45 3P%/89.5 FT%.

I'll explain Carter below since you brought him up specifically.

Allen also missed the playoffs with one of the more talented teams in the East. Don't remember a decline in his play, but it caused me to drop him from '02, particularly without the playoff run in '01 which got him a higher ranking.

3) Why isn't Jordan higher? The level he was playing at before the injury was borderline top 10 in the league. I have him at 15 based on his level of play when healthy. I just don't see Allen, Nash, Baron Davis, Marbury or Elton Brand playing at the same level. Bascially just give me your thoughts on the season MJ was having through 50-some games.

Yeah, I thought about that, but he ended up only playing around 50 healthy games or so because he wasn't really able to produce after he tried coming back from the knee injury, iirc. And his game was more or less limited to mid-range jumpers at this point since he didn't have the athletic ability of the younger shooting guards and small forwards, or the same stamina. I do think that there were some intangibles in play there.

I disagree that he was borderline top 10 before the injury, though. More like 15-20 range had he stayed healthy, imo.

A little tough for me to overlook the efficiency. 22.9 ppg on 22.1 FGA and 41.6 FG% with almost no threes. And even before his injury, 24.6 ppg on 23.5 FGA and 42 FG%.

I think he was much more impressive watching him than those numbers suggest, but I'm not going to completely disregard them. He did have an elite mid-range game, but his game depended on how much he had in his legs that night.

Allen was more athletic by that point and shot the ball so much better making him a much more efficient scorer than MJ, and didn't miss as many games.

Elton Brand hadn't really developed his jump shot which would take his game to the next level in '06, but he was a strong post player and inside player, who rebounded very well, blocked a lot of shots and contributed defensively, and scored very efficiently. Not only that, but he had thew Clippers in playoff contention late into the season, probably until March, iirc. The Clippers had young talent, but Lamar Odom only played 29 games that year due to the suspension and also various injuries.

Nash was one of the easier ones for me as one of the best passing and scoring point guards, and one of the best pure shooters on a team that almost won 60 games, and he had some strong playoff performances as well.

Baron's ranking was due in large part to leading the Hornets with Mashburn out half the year, and also his breakout performance in the playoffs, when he started looking like a star.

Marbury is the guy I'm thinking about moving down the most. He got there on talent, but his team did underachieve. But a coaching change can do that. Their record was much better before Skiles stepped down, and while Phoenix did have talent, they seemed to lack the big men to compete in the West.

Not all of them would've been ranked ahead of him had MJ stayed healthy.

4) Who was more talented in 2002, Rasheed or Jermaine O'Neal? What would you have done if you were Portland the previous off-season?

Both were very talented, and I never thought either fully achieved their potential, I'd say that Rasheed was more talented, but I think that Jermaine gave his team just about as much.

Jermaine gave you more rebounding and shot blocking, without the temper and other problems.

5) Why does Carter fall so far this season? I agree that 2001 was his best season, but had he declined so much so fast in your opinion?

His habit of settling for jumpers got worse, he missed a significant amount of games, and Toronto had that great stretch late in the season without him.

The positive was his playmaking improved. He was at 25.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.4 apg, 2.7 TO, 1.7 spg, 42.8 FG%, 37.5 3P%(2.1 3PM) before his first injury and Torotno was a respectable 28-21(28-20 with Carter).

But missing 22 regular season games as well as sitting out Toronto's playoff series dropped him a few spots lower than he would have been. He ends up 14th, as opposed to 12th in 2000 when he had a better season, and didn't miss a game. He was more skilled in '02, but more aggressive and motivated in 2000.

You've given me some things to think about though, if I do make some revisions, there will be a few in particular that I'm thinking about.

G.O.A.T

07-03-2012, 12:09 PM

2003
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Tracy McGrady
5.Kobe Bryant
6.Jason Kidd
7.Dirk Nowitzki
8.Allen Iverson
9.Chris Webber
10.Paul Pierce
11.Jermaine O'Neal
12.Ray Allen
13.Ben Wallace
14.Steve Nash
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Gary Payton
18.Peja Stojakovic
19.Jamal Mashburn
20.Shawn Marion
21.Rasheed Wallace
22.Allan Houston
23.Karl Malone
24.Michael Jordan
25.Sam Cassell

my (adjusted) top 20 for 2003 as I still try and properly apply your criteria

1. Duncan
2. Garnett
3. Shaq
4, McGrady
5. Kobe
6. Kidd
7. Dirk
8. Iverson
9. Webber
10. Pierce
11. J. O'Neal
12. Wallace
13. Nash
14. Mashburn
15. Sheed
16. Allen
17. Francis
18. Marion
19. Malone
20. Payton

1) Simpatico - We're lockstep 1-11. That's kind of scary. As I go through each season, the way you do this makes more and more sense. What were the toughest decisions for you in the top 11? For me KG over Shaq was very close, same with T-Mac over Kobe and Finally Webber over Pierce despite Webber's injury in the playoffs.

2) Denzel's Boy - Ray Allen a but high maybe? My thinking is the Bucks are 25-22 with Allen and 15-13 with Payton. Not seeing a big difference. Allen did make the Sonics better, but ultimately at 16-13 with Seattle they weren't anything great either, essentially playing in between where they were in 2002 and 2003. Additionally, it was Allen's worst shooting year in five seasons and yet he's ranked as high or higher than he was the previous three seasons when he also made the playoffs.

3) Monster Mash - Mashburn had his best NBA season and I have to argue for him over the likes of Peja (playoff choke, number 2 option, not better stats), Payton (down year, traded, not as good as Mash in their respective playoff series), Francis (No playoffs, more of a head case, distraction i.e your criticisms of Sheed) and Marbury, for reasons discussed below.

4) And 1...more thing - Why Marbury over Marion? To me Marion brings more to the table. He shoots as well or better, scores without needing isolation, ball screens or plays run for him, much better on ball and help defender, his rebounding has more impact than Steph's playmaking.

ShaqAttack3234

07-03-2012, 01:45 PM

1) Simpatico - We're lockstep 1-11. That's kind of scary. As I go through each season, the way you do this makes more and more sense. What were the toughest decisions for you in the top 11? For me KG over Shaq was very close, same with T-Mac over Kobe and Finally Webber over Pierce despite Webber's injury in the playoffs.

KG over Shaq was a tough one for me as well. Shaq's impact was still viewed as being on another level than other players prior to Duncan dethroning Shaq and the Lakers as evidenced by him finishing first again in the GM survey, and that was before he played his best ball of the season as he had gotten in better shape and won the March player of the month award and then had a strong playoff showing.

But ultimately what did it was Shaq's "hurt on company time, heal on company time", Shaq's decline in effort defensively, KG leading the Wolves to 51 wins(on pace for 55 when Wally played) and this being 1 of 2 years when I saw more dominance and assertiveness/aggressiveness from Garnett along with '04. In fact, I thought he played pretty much as well as '04, he just didn't have the support. Also, Shaq didn't even have the best regular season on his own team this year.

Regardless, Shaq had a career season at the line at a still mediocre 62%, but this put a stop(at least for that season) to the hack-a-Shaq strategy, and at 57% from the field, it did the job. He was still the league's biggest mismatch 1 on 1, the most unstoppable player in single coverage, the league's most efficient high scorer, the player who caused the most adjustments and probably the most effective offensive player overall. And as disappointing as the Lakers season was, and despite Shaq having a down year relative to his others, we'd have probably seen a 4peat if Horry's 3 doesn't rim out in game 5 vs the Spurs, or if Fox wasn't out with an injury/Horry wasn't in that mysterious shooting slump going 0/18 on 3s in the Spurs series.

T-Mac and Kobe wasn't as tough for me. While I think their ability was too close to call, and it was basically too difficult to pick one purely on the eye test just by watching them depending on the night, T-Mac had a more consistent season, put up better numbers, had more significant team accomplishments considering his miserable roster vs Bryant's championship contending team, and Kobe's more disappointing playoff. In other words, I thought they were very close as players, but when looking at each player's case over the others, I thought McGrady had the clear edge, though their ability was identical as I mentioned. I thought the same thing about '02 as well, but in that year, all of the edges went to Bryant with the title, clutch performances and defense.

Webber vs Pierce was also one of the tougher ones for me, much like Shaq vs KG. In fact, NugzHeat made a really good case for Pierce that almost caused me to change my mind. And Webber's injury in the playoffs didn't help. But a big man as versatile and talented as Webber on a championship contender, I believe was more of a commodity than a high-scoring swingman, albeit one who was adding to his all around game. I also remember Webber being more highly regarded at the time. I also believe that the Kings with Webber were the best team in the NBA, and I think they would have won the championship had he not gotten injured. The Kings offense was one of my favorites to watch, if not my favorite, and Webber's passing, particularly from the high post was a huge part of the Kings Princeton offense.

And another one that was difficult for me was Kidd vs Dirk. What Dirk did on a 60 win Western Conference team while upping his numbers to 25/10/3 and having some monster games before his injury in game 3 of the WCF made me tempted to put him over Kidd.

But Kidd had his best season improving his 3 point shot and increasing his scoring average by 4 points from the previous year to a career high of nearly 19 points per game and over 20 per game in the playoffs in addition to being the NBA's best rebounding point guard, the best defensive point guard and the best passer.

He was actually averaging 20.4 ppg and having a solid shooting season for the time at 44% from the field, 35% on 3s and 84% from the line while making 1.5 threes per game and the Nets were 30-14 before his strained groin, and he later had tendinitis in his foot about a month later that brought his numbers down a bit more.

His Nets also swept a Piston team that I thought was deeper and more talented than the Nets and Detroit had HCA. And the Nets were legitimately competitive in the finals, the series was tied 2-2, and they actually had a chance to win unlike 2002.

I always liked Kidd's intangibles, I could go on all day about them, but when he started improving his shooting before his microfracture surgery, he was on another level, imo. His prime was from '99-'04, imo, but '03 stands out as Kidd as his absolute best.

2) Denzel's Boy - Ray Allen a but high maybe? My thinking is the Bucks are 25-22 with Allen and 15-13 with Payton. Not seeing a big difference. Allen did make the Sonics better, but ultimately at 16-13 with Seattle they weren't anything great either, essentially playing in between where they were in 2002 and 2003. Additionally, it was Allen's worst shooting year in five seasons and yet he's ranked as high or higher than he was the previous three seasons when he also made the playoffs.

A lot of that was due to it being a weak year when it gets to that point, imo. Allen did not have as good of a season as he did in '01, but while there was a very strong top 10 in '03, it gets weaker as you go on, imo. Allen also did get to show more of his all around game in Seattle. He averaged 24.5 ppg, 5.6 rpg and 5.9 apg after the trade. All of which would've been career highs at the time over a full season, and the rebounds and assists would still stand as his career highs.

And I don't hold missing the playoffs against him, he probably makes it if he hadn't been traded, but he went to a team that finished 40-42 despite Allen's 16-13 record with the team.

I do look at player's rankings across years to see how consistent they are, but I can only compare them to the other players in that particular season.

3) Monster Mash - Mashburn had his best NBA season and I have to argue for him over the likes of Peja (playoff choke, number 2 option, not better stats), Payton (down year, traded, not as good as Mash in their respective playoff series), Francis (No playoffs, more of a head case, distraction i.e your criticisms of Sheed) and Marbury, for reasons discussed below.

Good point, I did think about Mashburn above Payton, but GP was ultimately still pretty close offensively to what he was. His defense had slipped, and he found himself off of the all-defensive teams for the 1st team, though honestly, it was about several years overdue.

Francis had some really explosive games(particularly that laker game), he led a young Rocket team to a respectable record, was a triple double threat every night, and I thought he was only one step below legitimate superstar level.

I'll get into Marbury more below, but regarding Peja, he was right up there with Ray as the best pure shooter, and while he wasn't as versatile as Mashburn, he was much more efficient, and fit very well into Sacramento's offense.

After Peja's injuries in November/December, he was at 20.6 ppg on 51/41/87 shooting while making 2.3 threes over his last 50 games while turning the ball over just 1.3 times per game.

And he had a much more impressive playoff run than in previous years, he had some explosive games and his Kings took Dallas to 7 despite Webber getting injured in game 2.

I did like some things about Mashburn's game, he was crafty and good in the mid-post and low-post area, iirc. He was also a versatile player, but there were negatives with Mashburn. He did have a reputation as a selfish player, though I believe he matured in New Orleans, but he was also still an inefficient scorer.

I think you can argue him a little higher, but players like Marbury and Francis were more talented, imo and had better seasons while leading Western Conference teams to within a few wins of Mashburn's Hornets in the East.

4) And 1...more thing - Why Marbury over Marion? To me Marion brings more to the table. He shoots as well or better, scores without needing isolation, ball screens or plays run for him, much better on ball and help defender, his rebounding has more impact than Steph's playmaking.

It's tough for me because they bring such different things. For the higher ranking, I chose the guy that I felt had superstar ability, and I really did like how Marbury was playing that year.

He was getting more praise, and people thought he had "figured it out". He led a young Suns team to the postseason, though they were pretty talented. He could be an absolutely explosive scorer who could beat you off the dribble, with floaters, or with jumpers when he got hot. And was one of the most athletic point guards who had talent as a playmaker. He looked to score first and foremost, but I don't think he was playing particularly selfish this year, and I didn't expect his Suns to do anything more than they did.

Marion could score without having a play run for him, was the best rebounding small forward and a very versatile defender, but Marbury could take over a game, and set up his teammates. Marion couldn't really do either, and getting into the top 15 range, I thought a player like Marbury fit better in that range.

I thought he deserved his all-nba selection. Then again, I must admit that I was actually a Marbury fan in the late 90's/early 00's, actually until his 3rd year with the Knicks, and had been excited about the trade to NY.

Gifted Mind

07-03-2012, 01:59 PM

Out of curiosity ShaqAttack, 05 Duncan or 07 Kobe?

ShaqAttack3234

07-03-2012, 02:33 PM

Out of curiosity ShaqAttack, 05 Duncan or 07 Kobe?

I'd probably lean towards Kobe. Would have been really tough if Duncan didn't have the nagging injuries in '05, and if he had played more minutes. Only negative about '07 Kobe is that his defense was subpar and he was still recovering from knee surgery at the start, but he was doing a great job of getting his teammates involved early, and then when on the amazing scoring binge late when Phil gave him the greenlight.

G.O.A.T

07-03-2012, 03:01 PM

2004
1.Kevin Garnett
2.Tim Duncan
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Kobe Bryant
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Jermaine O'Neal
7.Jason Kidd
8.Dirk Nowitzki
9.Ben Wallace
10.Peja Stojakovic
11.Sam Cassell
12.Baron Davis
13.Paul Pierce
14.Vince Carter
15.Andrei Kirilenko
16.Ron Artest
17.Elton Brand
18.Ray Allen
19.Steve Nash
20.Yao Ming
21.Pau Gasol
22.Stephon Marbury
23.Rasheed Wallace
24.Lamar Odom
25.Michael Redd

my 2004 top 20

1. Garnett
2. Duncan
3. Shaq
4. Kobe
5. Wallace
6. O'Neal
7. McGrady
8. Kidd
9. Dirk
10. Pierce
11. Stojakovic
12. Cassell
13. Davis
14. Sheed
15. Billups
16. Artest
17. Kirilenko
18. Allen
19. Carter
20. LeBron

1) This is such a hard year to figure out. Nothing made sense all season. I have McGrady behind O'Neal and Ben Wallace because his team won just 21 games that season, even with good numbers and horrible talent around him, a top five player gets you to at least 30 wins. Thoughts?

2) Why the drop for Pierce? Like McGrady he had virtually no help. His shooting numbers were poor, but he got that crap team into the playoffs.

3) Billups/Sheed/Artest - These players may not have been so valued in other NBA seasons, but they were exact;y what you needed in 2004. Surprised not to see Billups in your top 25, even more surprised to see Wallace drop considering he sort of proved his critics wrong by winning a title as the Pistons most talented all-around player. And Kirilenko over Artest? Artest won DPOTY and was as effective offensively and most of all was on a contending team.

4) No LeBron? What makes Vince Carter so much better in 2004 than LeBron than there are at least 12 players between them?

VC's numbers: 73 games (Toronto 33-40 with him), 23-5-5; 2.1 combined blocks and steals per game. 42/39/81 shooting.

LBJ's numbers: 79 games (Cleveland 33-46 with him), 21-6-6; 2.3 combined blocks and steals per game. 42/29/75 shooting.

ShaqAttack3234

07-03-2012, 05:15 PM

1) This is such a hard year to figure out. Nothing made sense all season. I have McGrady behind O'Neal and Ben Wallace because his team won just 21 games that season, even with good numbers and horrible talent around him, a top five player gets you to at least 30 wins. Thoughts?

Well, I didn't like ranking him top 5 considering his team's record, but I just had a hard time justifying anyone below him.

Despite being lazy defensively and settling for jumpers quite a bit, McGrady was just such a skilled and talented scorer, a very good rebounder for his position, and he passed as well as anyone at his position. It wasn't his best season, he impressed me much more the following year, or '02 and '03, but the players below him can't really compete in talent, skills or production. He still had quite a big games this year, and was generally an impressive player when I watched him.

Looking at why Orlando was so bad, aside from his poor leadership which probably contributed to some extent, the primary reasons they were bad had nothing to do with him.

They ended up losing their first 14 games they played without McGrady including a game vs the Knicks he played 11 scoreless minutes in and they lost 114-86, and this was the pre-Marbury/pre-Lenny Wilkens Knicks who were 12-19 entering the game. They didn't win until the final 2 games when they beat a 23-59 Bulls team and a 33-49 Sixer team that was playing without Iverson and Glenn Robinson.

Orlando was a decent offensive team for the year, they were 13th best 103.7 points per 100 possessions, and obviously significantly higher in just the games McGrady played because when he was out, they scored just an anemic 98.3 points per 100 possessions and just 87.6 points per game.

But the reason they were a bad team even with McGrady was their defense. They were easily the worst in the league allowing 110.4 points per 100 possessions. And McGrady didn't make them worse defensively because they allowed 114.4 points per 100 possessions when he was out.

2) Why the drop for Pierce? Like McGrady he had virtually no help. His shooting numbers were poor, but he got that crap team into the playoffs.

His team did suck, but I didn't think his performance justified any higher than 14th, which is a pretty solid ranking. His season was extremely similar to Carter's, so I ranked them back to back.

3) Billups/Sheed/Artest - These players may not have been so valued in other NBA seasons, but they were exact;y what you needed in 2004. Surprised not to see Billups in your top 25, even more surprised to see Wallace drop considering he sort of proved his critics wrong by winning a title as the Pistons most talented all-around player. And Kirilenko over Artest? Artest won DPOTY and was as effective offensively and most of all was on a contending team.

Wallace was in a reduced role, though, so there wasn't as much pressure on him. He played great in his role, but part of the reason many felt he was comfortable was that he now wasn't expected to be the man. And that's one of the reasons why Rasheed never ranked higher because despite having superstar talent, he never embraced the burden of carrying a team consistently. While I also liked his unselfish attitude, it also prevented him from being the dominant player I think he could have been.

Billups didn't make it because I just didn't think he was good enough prior to the finals. I thought Rip was Detroit's best offensive player by far through the first 3 rounds. I did give Billups a lot of thought, but I didn't want to give it to him just for the finals. He impressed me a lot more in the years after '04.

Artest's man to man defense was better than AK47, but Kirilenko was the better help defender, and overall player, imo. He played out of position at PF, rebounded well, and almost led Utah team expected to finish with one of the worst records to a 42-40 record and they competed for a playoff spot. They probably would have made the playoffs if they weren't 0-4 without Kirilenko. Some of their success has to be attributed to Sloan, but Kirilenko was their only notable player, and versatility can make a big impact.

I didn't think there was a big difference so they were ranked back to back.

4) No LeBron? What makes Vince Carter so much better in 2004 than LeBron than there are at least 12 players between them?

VC's numbers: 73 games (Toronto 33-40 with him), 23-5-5; 2.1 combined blocks and steals per game. 42/39/81 shooting.

LBJ's numbers: 79 games (Cleveland 33-46 with him), 21-6-6; 2.3 combined blocks and steals per game. 42/29/75 shooting.

Vince could shoot, while Lebron was an awful shooter when he entered the league. And the fact that Toronto was 0-9 without Vince tells you something about his team. He actually had a pretty underrated year, imo, he obviously wasn't giving effort in '05 before the trade, but he had a solid year that was definitely on par with Pierce's in '04. Vince had improved his passing considerably by that point. Given his talent, production, and the fact that he did have a positive impact on his team compared to what they were capable of without him, I don't see him dropping much further.

I initially had Lebron in one of the lower spots on the list, but NugzHeat made a good case for Lebron not being deserving yet. There were other players who were more effective, and I started thinking that I was giving Lebron too much credit for what he'd go on to do.

magnax1

07-03-2012, 05:51 PM

And Kirilenko over Artest? Artest won DPOTY and was as effective offensively and most of all was on a contending team.
While I'm not sure if AK or Artest was better, I have to disagree about him being as effective offensively. I think Artest often time took shots that he didn't really need to because he thought he was a better scorer then he was. He averaged 18 ppg, but shot an awful % (51 TS%) and turned the ball over an awful lot. While AK is often times a very frustrating player on offense, he averaged 56 TS% that season, was capable of playing a point forward role (he's one of the most under rated passers in the NBA) and has always been an absolutely fantastic cutter, and that's where he got most of his points. Defensively I'll probably take Artest, because I think even at his peak AK was a bit over rated because of his crazy stats, but AK was a lot better on offense to me.

Artest's man to man defense was better than AK47, but Kirilenko was the better help defender, and overall player, imo. He played out of position at PF, rebounded well, and almost led Utah team expected to finish with one of the worst records to a 42-40 record and they competed for a playoff spot
Well AK was actually better off at PF. His body type might not suggest it, but he really excelled at that spot, and he never really returned to his level of play at PF in 04 again, probably because he never really had a chance to play PF again.

I have to disagree with people ranking Shaq so high in 04 though. He just didn't play as well as he did the year before, or the year after. I think if he comes in 04 in as good of shape as 05, they probably win the title. He scored less while not really putting in an extra effort in any other part of the game.
04 was the first year Kobe was the absolute first option, and when he was healthy it was clear to me he was a lot better then Shaq. After January Kobe averaged 26-6-6 on 56 TS%, and when there was a 34 game stretch where they went 29-5 when he played, and much of that stretch was without Malone, which made it even more impressive since he was huge as a glue guy for that team, and looked quite weak without him much of the time.
I think Shaq was much close to the guys after the top 4 (TMac, Duncan, Kobe KG) then those four.

Nash

07-03-2012, 06:07 PM

Isn't Lebron a bit too low on your 2007 list? Didn't he literally carry a shit team all the way to the finals.

Ikill

07-03-2012, 06:16 PM

Isn't Lebron a bit too low on your 2007 list? Didn't he literally carry a shit team all the way to the finals.
he didn't carry them tho most overrated playoff run ever

ShaqAttack3234

07-03-2012, 11:51 PM

While I'm not sure if AK or Artest was better, I have to disagree about him being as effective offensively. I think Artest often time took shots that he didn't really need to because he thought he was a better scorer then he was. He averaged 18 ppg, but shot an awful % (51 TS%) and turned the ball over an awful lot. While AK is often times a very frustrating player on offense, he averaged 56 TS% that season, was capable of playing a point forward role (he's one of the most under rated passers in the NBA) and has always been an absolutely fantastic cutter, and that's where he got most of his points. Defensively I'll probably take Artest, because I think even at his peak AK was a bit over rated because of his crazy stats, but AK was a lot better on offense to me.

Good post about AK47. I remember Kirilenko in the point forward role a bit even later. I believe when Deron missed some games, or when Deron went to the bench.

On a side note, 51 TS% wasn't awful in '04, it was about league average that year.

Well AK was actually better off at PF. His body type might not suggest it, but he really excelled at that spot, and he never really returned to his level of play at PF in 04 again, probably because he never really had a chance to play PF again.

He did have a very good season in '06 too.

I have to disagree with people ranking Shaq so high in 04 though. He just didn't play as well as he did the year before, or the year after. I think if he comes in 04 in as good of shape as 05, they probably win the title. He scored less while not really putting in an extra effort in any other part of the game.
04 was the first year Kobe was the absolute first option, and when he was healthy it was clear to me he was a lot better then Shaq. After January Kobe averaged 26-6-6 on 56 TS%, and when there was a 34 game stretch where they went 29-5 when he played, and much of that stretch was without Malone, which made it even more impressive since he was huge as a glue guy for that team, and looked quite weak without him much of the time.
I think Shaq was much close to the guys after the top 4 (TMac, Duncan, Kobe KG) then those four.

I really don't see your point here. Shaq was declining by that point, but he was in better shape than '03, and it paid off defensively. His defense was clearly improved over '03, and he had his best rebounding and shot blocking seasons since '01. Aside from his free throw shooting falling off, one of the bigger reasons his scoring dropped so much was the Lakers not only had a 3rd option, but also a 4th option for half the year.

I agree that Malone was very important for them. People sometimes group the Malone/Payton signings in together as mistake, but Malone was a great addition, it was just bad luck that he got injured. But his skill set fit well in the triangle and next to Shaq. Payton was a bad fit, and terrible in the playoffs, though. They did need Malone because that was the first year the Lakers couldn't get by as much with Shaq and Kobe as a 2 man team with Shaq starting to decline a bit at 32, and Kobe being limited due the off the court issues and knee surgery as well as some other nagging injuries.

Phil did say that Kobe wasn't healthy until the second half, and he did average 27 ppg, 6.6 rpg ad 6.1 apg on 45% shooting compared to 21.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg and 4.3 apg on 42% shooting in the 1st half. And that was with a game where he only played 1 minute, without that game, he was at an even 28 ppg in the second half.

But Shaq was more consistent throughout the season and clearly better in the playoffs. And Kobe's knee surgery affected him noticeably defensively, while Shaq's shot blocking made a bigger impact at that end.

I thought Shaq was clearly the better player, Kobe had a disappointing season in '04, while Shaq was clearly aging, but not really disappointing and still physically dominant. And the impact of a dominant big man and a power player makes him a clear top 3 in such a weak year.

Kobe wasn't clearly the 1st option either. Phil called Shaq the 1st option, though I wouldn't disagree with someone saying it was 1.A/1.B like '04 the way it worked out.

But any case Kobe had over Shaq based on those 28-29 second half games went out the window in the playoffs.

Isn't Lebron a bit too low on your 2007 list? Didn't he literally carry a shit team all the way to the finals.

He's top 5, considering how bad his shooting was, I'd say that's about where he belongs. Nash had an unbelievable year, maybe the greatest shooting season by a guard, and his passing was obviously comparable to the best point guards ever. Dirk had a great regular season, he drops below Nash because of the embarrassing 1st round, but I still thought he was a less flawed player than Lebron that year.

'07 was a disappointing year for Lebron, imo, easily his worst from '06-present. And you could make a case for '05 over it.

Lebron faced very weak competition in the playoffs. He faced a Wizards team without their 2 best players Gilbert Arenas and Caron Butler. And faced a Net team with a terrible frontcourt. Their big men were Mikki Moore, Jason Collins and Josh Boone. And that was actually a close 6 game series. Game 1 was probably decided by a late chasedown block by Sasha Pavlovic on a potential Jason Kidd, game 4 was decided by Vince Carter turning the ball over vs Eric Snow when he was going for a last second shot, and game 6 was a 1 point game entering the 4th, but Donyell Marshall came off the bench and made 6 threes in that game. And that was with Vince Carter, who the Nets really relied on for scoring, shoot 35% in the series. So many of the differences vs a mediocre Nets team weren't even Lebron.

Detroit was a legit opponent, though. But his jumper was exposed in the finals when Bowen backed off of him and San Antonio close off the paint as Lebron shot 35% from the field and averaged 5.8 turnovers.

But outside of the competition, the Cavs were also top 4 defensively and they outrebounded opponents by 3.7 rpg. I don't think rebounding and defense can be overlooked when talking about Lebron's help, particularly in such a weak conference. And Lebron's cast was filled with legit NBA players at least, even though they weren't the most talented team.

G.O.A.T

07-05-2012, 01:31 PM

Two at a time

2005
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Steve Nash
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Dirk Nowitzki
7.Dwyane Wade
8.Allen Iverson
9.Lebron James
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Amare Stoudemire
13.Ray Allen
14.Paul Pierce
15.Manu Ginobili
16.Elton Brand
17.Gilbert Arenas
18.Ben Wallace
19.Shawn Marion
20.Jason Kidd
21.Yao Ming
22.Chauncey Billups
23.Stephon Marbury
24.Grant Hill
25.Carmelo Anthony

2006
1.Kobe Bryant
2.Dwyane Wade
3.Lebron James
4.Dirk Nowitzki
5.Tim Duncan
6.Kevin Garnett
7.Steve Nash
8.Allen Iverson
9.Elton Brand
10.Shaquille O'Neal
11.Paul Pierce
12.Gilbert Arenas
13.Chauncey Billups
14.Vince Carter
15.Carmelo Anthony
16.Ray Allen
17.Shawn Marion
18.Pau Gasol
19.Yao Ming
20.Andrei Kirilenko
21.Jason Kidd
22.Manu Ginobili
23.Tony Parker
24.Michael Redd
25.Ben Wallace

My 2005
1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Garnett
4. Nash
5. Dirk
6. Wade
7. McGrady
8. Iverson
9. James
10. Kobe
11. Amare
12. Allen
13. Pierce
14. Billups
15. Manu
16. Wallace
17. Brand
18. Kidd
19. Carter
20. Arenas

My 2006
1. Kobe
2. Wade
3. Dirk
4. Duncan
5. Shaq
6. Nash
7. LeBron
8. Garnett
9. Iverson
10. Billups
11. Brand
12. Pierce
13. Carter
14. Arenas
15. Carmelo
16. Gasol
17. Allen
18. Marion
19. Kidd
20. Manu

For 2005

1) Why not Shaq (my pick for MVP in '05) over Garnett who missed the playoffs (in a very tough conference with injuries to key players)?

2) Dirk/Wade/McGrady - I had Dirk on top because the other guys had major injuries that cost their teams a lot in the end. Why does McGrady get the nod over Nowitzki but not Wade?

3) Carter way too high. For the level he played at to start the year in Toronto he'd have needed to do a lot more than get the Nets the eight seed while Orlando and Cleveland collapsed down the stretch. And even though he played the best of any of the Nets down the stretch, Kidd was more valuable to that team in my opinion as evidenced by the start NJ had with him out and how well he played (13/9/10) down the stretch as NJ made their push.

For 2006

1) Surprised how high LeBron is. I had him behind Nash because despite how great James numbers were, I though the playoffs showed how his game was still developing and not there yet. To me 2007 was his better season simply for what he was able to do in the playoffs. Just explain your thinking here.

2) Shaq lower than I'd have expected. He was still a 20-10 guy shooting 60% from the field and anchoring a defense. I don't think Elton Brand (who had an amazing season, his best) should be above him. He wasn't their star anymore, but Miami doesn't win a title wihtout Shaq. What were the factors leading to Shaq's drop here?

3) How close is the Kobe/Wade debate for you that season?

oolalaa

07-05-2012, 06:09 PM

I've decided to copy you, shaqattack, and compile my own lists (Only top 15, not top 25 like you've done ). It's taken me a few days but I've done the '12, '11 and '10 seasons, and I'm reasonably happy with them. I welcome any critiques/feedback....

2012....
1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Chris Paul
5. Dwight Howard
6. Kevin Love
7. Rajon Rondo
8. Dwyane Wade
9. Russell Westbrook
10. Andrew Bynum
11. Tony Parker
12. Tim Duncan
13. Kevin Garnett
14. Deron Williams
15. Derrick Rose

2011....
1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Kevin Durant
6. Derrick Rose
7. Chris Paul
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Zach Randolph
10. Deron Williams
11. Carmelo Anthony
12. Amare Stoudemire
13. Steve Nash
14. Paul Pierce
15. LaMarcus Aldridge

2010....
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Steve Nash
7. Deron Williams
8. Carmelo Anthony
9. Pau Gasol
10. Kevin Durant
11. Rajon Rondo
12. Tim Duncan
13. Chris Bosh
14. Paul Pierce
15. Brandon Roy

che guevara

07-05-2012, 06:48 PM

For 2006

1) Surprised how high LeBron is. I had him behind Nash because despite how great James numbers were, I though the playoffs showed how his game was still developing and not there yet. To me 2007 was his better season simply for what he was able to do in the playoffs. Just explain your thinking here.

2) Shaq lower than I'd have expected. He was still a 20-10 guy shooting 60% from the field and anchoring a defense. I don't think Elton Brand (who had an amazing season, his best) should be above him. He wasn't their star anymore, but Miami doesn't win a title wihtout Shaq. What were the factors leading to Shaq's drop here?

3) How close is the Kobe/Wade debate for you that season?
1. What? Lebron played just fine in the playoffs, he averaged 31-8-6 on 48% FG (5 TOs, though), made two game winners in his first playoff series ever (including scoring 45 and making the game winner in the pivotal game 5), and pushed a 64 win Detroit team to 7 games in the 2nd. In '07, he averaged worse numbers (25-8-8 on a paltry 42% FG), played a Wizards team missing their two best players in the first round, and a 6th seeded Nets team in the 2nd round with Vince shooting 35%. We all know what happened in the Detroit series, but people forget that Lebron was having a mediocre game 5 up until 6 minutes left in the 4th.

He was a lot better in '06 than '07, just look at the numbers, watch the games (his shooting was much better in '06) and don't get blinded by his game 5 (which wasn't really even much better than his game 5 vs. the Wizards in '06).

As far as shooting:

'06 Lebron:
.738 FT%
.335 3p%
.398 16-23

'07 Lebron:
.698 FT%
.319 3p%
.344 16-23

I honestly don't know what the case is for '07 over '06. He regressed in just about every area that year, except defense.

oolalaa

07-05-2012, 07:03 PM

1. What? Lebron played just fine in the playoffs, he averaged 31-8-6 on 48% FG (5 TOs, though), made two game winners in his first playoff series ever (including scoring 45 and making the game winner in the pivotal game 5), and pushed a 64 win Detroit team to 7 games in the 2nd. In '07, he averaged worse numbers (25-8-8 on a paltry 42% FG), played a Wizards team missing their two best players in the first round, and a 6th seeded Nets team in the 2nd round with Vince shooting 35%. We all know what happened in the Detroit series, but people forget that Lebron was having a mediocre game 5 up until 6 minutes left in the 4th.

He was a lot better in '06 than '07, just look at the numbers, watch the games (his shooting was much better in '06) and don't get blinded by his game 5 (which wasn't really even much better than his game 5 vs. the Wizards in '06).

As far as shooting:

'06 Lebron:
.738 FT%
.335 3p%
.398 16-23

'07 Lebron:
.698 FT%
.319 3p%
.344 16-23

I honestly don't know what the case is for '07 over '06. He regressed in just about every area that year, except defense.

Completely agree. He flat out REGRESSED in 2007, compared to '06. I've noticed that a lot of superstars seem to do this - after ascending for 3 straight years upon entering the league, they regress in their 4th year (as a starter). Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Kobe and Tmac (As well as many more who I can't remember off the top of my head) all experienced a 4th year slump.

Lebron's entire '07 season rested on one game.

ShaqAttack3234

07-05-2012, 11:21 PM

1) Why not Shaq (my pick for MVP in '05) over Garnett who missed the playoffs (in a very tough conference with injuries to key players)?

His minutes were limited to a new career low of 34 per game, yet got injured late in the season and it prevented him from playing like himself in the playoffs. In fact, he missed playoff games for the first time in his career.

Shaq being less mobile did hurt his defense a bit, and also resulted in more foul trouble.

I didn't think Garnett was quite as good as he was in '03 and '04, but he was as good as any of his other seasons, imo. And Garnett edged out a late prime Shaq or at worst, slightly past his prime Shaq in '03 so I thought it'd be more logical to still choose prime Garnett over a past his prime Shaq.

I think their impact was very comparable even at that stage, though, so I can't argue too much.

2) Dirk/Wade/McGrady - I had Dirk on top because the other guys had major injuries that cost their teams a lot in the end. Why does McGrady get the nod over Nowitzki but not Wade?

McGrady didn't have injuries that year, his back would act up every now and then, but it hadn't really derailed his career yet. He was still at prime level, and had a really memorable season, imo. They depended on him heavily, particularly since Van gundy was far from an offensive genius. He dropped 40 quite a few times and still as deadly of a streak scorer as there was in the league, but he was also a fantastic playmaker, pretty much as good as there was among non-PG.

T-Mac really got going after his first month in Houston, he had been looking to fit in for the first month, but when Van Gundy told him he wanted him to step up and carry the team in early December, he really picked it up. I liked his approach coming off a season where his motivation was questionable at times in '04. He seemed really motivated, and healthy for the most part.

At that point, I thought T-Mac was still more talented and could impact the game in more ways than Dirk. Plus McGrady completely outplayed Dirk in their playoff series. Dirk won, but it was because he had more overall talent around him, and a more balanced team. And beyond McGrady just outplaying him averaging 31/7/7 on 46% shooting to Dirk's 21/9/3 on 35% shooting, T-Mac even guarded Dirk very effectively for stretches, which showed another part of McGrady's game when he stepped up in a big match up. While this was not the determing factor, McGrady being able to be a game changer defensively when he wanted help make it easier. And if I did have any doubts, I'd use the playoffs as a tiebreaker.

I was tempted to put Wade higher because of how well he was playing in the playoffs, but despite breaking out that year, Wade was still too raw, imo. He didn't have a jump shot yet, everything was going to the basket, while he started showing a nice mid-range game in '06. And he could also play out of control at times, an example is his average of over 4 turnovers. I still thought he had a little to learn and add to his game before I'd put him over more skilled players like Dirk and McGrady.

3) Carter way too high. For the level he played at to start the year in Toronto he'd have needed to do a lot more than get the Nets the eight seed while Orlando and Cleveland collapsed down the stretch. And even though he played the best of any of the Nets down the stretch, Kidd was more valuable to that team in my opinion as evidenced by the start NJ had with him out and how well he played (13/9/10) down the stretch as NJ made their push

I did drop Carter lower than he would've been had he played the entire season at his New Jersey level, but he was arguably playing like the best SG/SF in the league after his trade. And he also played the best basketball of his career after the trade to New Jersey. It doesn't top 2001 as his best season because I dropped him for the Toronto stretch, but not only was Vince motivated again, but he was a smarter and more skilled player than he had been in '01. He had become a better ball handler, and a very good playmaker, while also improving his mid-range game, and taking less off balance shots. Vince really saved the Nets season, they were well under .500 when he joined thand Richard Jefferson went down until the playoffs shortly after, and they had also lost Kenyon Martin and Kerry Kittles in the offseason.

Kidd got better as the season went on, but I personally had no doubt that Vince was the Nets best player after Kidd's microfracture surgery.

The Nets finished up 26-14 and over those last 40 games, Carter averaged 29/6/5 on shooting % of 47/44/84 while making 2.2 threes per game and turning the ball over just 2.7 times per game. Like I've said, I've never seen him play better.

1) Surprised how high LeBron is. I had him behind Nash because despite how great James numbers were, I though the playoffs showed how his game was still developing and not there yet. To me 2007 was his better season simply for what he was able to do in the playoffs. Just explain your thinking here.

I thought Lebron was significantly better in '06 because he had actually improved his jump shot and become a respectable shooter. His shooting was atrocious in '07, and just a major weakness that the Spurs exposed, and throughout that season, and in general, Lebron's level of play had disappointed me throughout that year. I had thought he clearly regressed and he wasn't having the same type of big games. His one noticeable improvement was defensively where he went from poor in '06 to average in '07.

But Lebron had also led the Cavs to 50 games in '06 without Larry Hughes even playing half a season. And not only did Larry hughes fail to play even half the season, but the Cavs were also still an average defensive team in '06, while they became elite defensively in '07 and Hughes didn't miss a significant amount of games that year. And Lebron took an '06 Piston team to 7 games that had won 64 games and still had Ben Wallace.

His '07 playoff run didn't blow me away either, his playmaking was what really impressed me that run. I don't see the problem with his '06 playoff play. That's one of the 3 years he hasn't disappointed me along with '09 and '12.

I was tempted to put Dirk above Lebron in '06. Was very close, but Lebron with a pretty good jump shot as well as his athletic ability and the passing ability he entered the league with was a little too much.

2) Shaq lower than I'd have expected. He was still a 20-10 guy shooting 60% from the field and anchoring a defense. I don't think Elton Brand (who had an amazing season, his best) should be above him. He wasn't their star anymore, but Miami doesn't win a title wihtout Shaq. What were the factors leading to Shaq's drop here?

Durability was one. He dropped below 31 mpg, and was slower. You could argue him a little higher, but considering the limited minutes, I thought top 10 was high enough.

But aside from the limited minutes, he lost more mobility, and I noticed what that did at times defensively, it also caused him to be in foul trouble more often including more offensive fouls.

3) How close is the Kobe/Wade debate for you that season?

Wade's excellent ECF and legendary finals make me understand why people consider him, but it wasn't too close in the regular seaso and I thought Kobe was jut the better, more skilled player. Wade winning a title wasn't going to change that for me because Kobe obviously didn't have the team to contend, but he did a remarkable job of carrying that Laker tea.

2012....
1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Chris Paul
5. Dwight Howard
6. Kevin Love
7. Rajon Rondo
8. Dwyane Wade
9. Russell Westbrook
10. Andrew Bynum
11. Tony Parker
12. Tim Duncan
13. Kevin Garnett
14. Deron Williams
15. Derrick Rose

Well, I'd drop Kobe below Paul and Howard for sure. Paul would be top 3 for me and Howard top 4. Love is quite a bit too high, he's never seemed like a player approaching top 5 status to me.

2011....
1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Kevin Durant
6. Derrick Rose
7. Chris Paul
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Zach Randolph
10. Deron Williams
11. Carmelo Anthony
12. Amare Stoudemire
13. Steve Nash
14. Paul Pierce
15. LaMarcus Aldridge

It's pretty debatable, the top 4 can be in any order, but I'd go with lebron and Howard at 1 and 2, and I haven't decided on who would be 3rd between Wade and Dirk. I definitely don't think Randolph was top 9, though. Pau Gasol was also still top 15 at least to me despite the poor playoffs.

2010....
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Steve Nash
7. Deron Williams
8. Carmelo Anthony
9. Pau Gasol
10. Kevin Durant
11. Rajon Rondo
12. Tim Duncan
13. Chris Bosh
14. Paul Pierce
15. Brandon Roy

I understand why some rank Kobe 1st, but Lebron was still the best player to me despite those last 3 games vs Boston.

I definitely don't understand Wade over Lebron, though. Wade is clearly 3rd that year behind Lebron and Kobe, imo. His jump shot completely diappeared and he was out of shape and playing well below his standards to start the season. Wade was averaging 26.3 ppg, 5 rpg, 6.1 apg on just 43.9% shooting in his first 2 months or first 30 games that season. I understand Wade over Kobe more because he was playing very poorly due to injuries from January until the end of the OKC series when he got his knee drained. And hurting the team at times because he was trying to shoot himself out of the But he was having an MVP type season the first 2 months killing guys in the post and scoring more efficiently and consistently than I've seen him, and was back to playing very well after the 1st round.

I wouldn't put Rondo or Duncan at that stage ahead of Bosh either, particularly not Rondo, who I think should be in the top 15-20 range.

G.O.A.T

07-06-2012, 01:29 AM

@ Shaqattack

Just wanted to run a thought by you.

I think we agree that a lot times there is more than one correct/fair spot to rank a player based on talent. For example Shaq and Garnett from 2003-2005.

When it's that close in terms of skill/impact, is it fair to determine which player gets the higher ranking based on how well he led/fit in with his team?

Because Shaq did not show great leadership in 2003 and 2004 I have Garnett above him, because he did in 2005, I gave him the nod over KG.

StateOfMind12

07-06-2012, 01:44 AM

I'll just post top 10s each season starting from '02

2002
1. Shaquille O'Neal
2. Tim Duncan
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Jason Kidd
6. Tracy McGrady
7. Paul Pierce
8. Chris Webber
9. Dirk Nowitzki
10. Allen Iverson

2003
1. Tim Duncan
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Tracy McGrady
5. Shaquille O'Neal
6. Jason Kidd
7. Dirk Nowitzki
8. Paul Pierce
9. Chris Webber
10. Allen Iverson

2004
1. Kevin Garnett
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Tim Duncan
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Jermaine O'Neal
6. Dirk Nowitzki
7. Jason Kidd
8. Peja Stojakovic
9. Tracy McGrady
10. Paul Pierce

2005
1. Tim Duncan
2. Steve Nash
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Dwyane Wade
7. Kobe Bryant
8. Tracy McGrady
9. Allen Iverson
10. LeBron James

2006
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Dirk Nowitzki
4. Steve Nash
5. LeBron James
6. Tim Duncan
7. Kevin Garnett
8. Elton Brand
9. Paul Pierce
10. Shaquille O'Neal

2007
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan
3. Steve Nash
4. Dirk Nowitzki
5. LeBron James
6. Kevin Garnett
7. Yao Ming
8. Dwyane Wade
9. Carmelo Anthony
10. Vince Carter

2008
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Chris Paul
3. LeBron James
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Tim Duncan
6. Dirk Nowitzki
7. Deron Williams
8. Steve Nash
9. Dwight Howard
10. Paul Pierce

2009
1. LeBron James
2. Kobe Bryant
3. Dwyane Wade
4. Chris Paul
5. Yao Ming
6. Dwight Howard
7. Dirk Nowitzki
8. Brandon Roy
9. Deron Williams
10. Paul Pierce

oolalaa

07-06-2012, 12:34 PM

2012....
1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Chris Paul
5. Dwight Howard
6. Kevin Love
7. Rajon Rondo
8. Dwyane Wade
9. Russell Westbrook
10. Andrew Bynum
11. Tony Parker
12. Tim Duncan
13. Kevin Garnett
14. Deron Williams
15. Derrick Rose

Well, I'd drop Kobe below Paul and Howard for sure. Paul would be top 3 for me and Howard top 4. Love is quite a bit too high, he's never seemed like a player approaching top 5 status to me.

I think my criteria is slightly different to yours. Im judging who had the best season, rather than exclusively judging who the better player was. I certainly don't dismiss that but maybe you can see why I have Kobe ahead of Howard, for example. Howard was dealing with a lot of distractions off the court. He was mailing in a lot of games. His leadership was non existent (It's never been good anyway). And let's not forget that Howard, STILL, is an incredibly limited offensive player.

Kobe, on the other hand, had a focus and determination like I hadn't seen since '08. Sure, his desperation to prove to everyone that he was still an elite player cost his team a few games (Definitely should have defered to Bynum a bit more) but I would take that over a half hearted effort anyday.

It was close between CP3 and Kobe, though. It could have gone either way.

I somewhat agree with you about Kevin Love. A lot of those stats he puts up are rather empty. He doesn't affect the game as much as he should. I'm not very comfortable with him being at #6, either. However, of the players behind him, who was better last year?

Rondo? He was really great in the playoffs but he had a much better team around him and a much worse regular season. Wade? His jumper was a disgrace the whole year and with his nagging knee and leg injuries, he couldn't even do what has made him great his whole career - i.e get to the line at will. Westbrook? A point guard should not be dribbling the ball up the court and jacking up mid range jumpers without so much as even looking at his teammates. The OVERWHELMING reason OKC beat the Spurs in the WCFs was because, from game 3 onwards, Westbrook decided to become a facilitator. The ball was moving. When the ball is moving, OKC are UNBEATABLE. Bynum? Blame Kobe. Duncan & KG? Their defense has slipped enough to where I cannot ignore the BIG offensive discrepancy. Dwill? Similar scenario to Howard.

Also, if Love plays almost exactly the same next year as he did this year, I'm pretty sure he will be move down the list, simply because quite a few players will naturally improve and/or be rejuvinated, and will overtake him. I expect Wade, Westbrook (Perhaps more in hope than expectation), DWill, Rondo (If he can reproduce his playoff from in the regular season), Rose (Fingers crossed) and maybe even Griffin to overtake him. He will probably end up being a borderline top 10 player, which is where he belongs.

2011....
1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Kevin Durant
6. Derrick Rose
7. Chris Paul
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Zach Randolph
10. Deron Williams
11. Carmelo Anthony
12. Amare Stoudemire
13. Steve Nash
14. Paul Pierce
15. LaMarcus Aldridge

It's pretty debatable, the top 4 can be in any order, but I'd go with lebron and Howard at 1 and 2, and I haven't decided on who would be 3rd between Wade and Dirk. I definitely don't think Randolph was top 9, though. Pau Gasol was also still top 15 at least to me despite the poor playoffs.

I can't simply dismiss a choke job as big as Lebron's in the finals. And, as far as I'm concerned, Dirk posted one of the great playoff runs in history - that should give him the nod over Wade. He led a team with ZERO All Stars to a championship. He was 'clutch' over and over and over again. He made MULTIPLE game winners in the finals (How many players can say that?).

Randolph was really, really good the entire year, not just the playoffs. He was playing both ends of the floor, rebounding like a mini Moses Malone (Over 4 offensive rebounds per game), dominating in the post and had an intensity that rubbed off on his teammates. Outside of Dirk and pre All Star break Stoudemire, he was definitely the power forward that impressed me most. I gave him the nod over DWill, Melo and Amare becuase they only produced for half the season.

Gasol and Aldridge were close, but I was impressed with the fact that Portalnd were still a very relevant team, despite Brandon Roy's injuries.

2010....
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Lebron James
4. Dwight Howard
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Steve Nash
7. Deron Williams
8. Carmelo Anthony
9. Pau Gasol
10. Kevin Durant
11. Rajon Rondo
12. Tim Duncan
13. Chris Bosh
14. Paul Pierce
15. Brandon Roy

I understand why some rank Kobe 1st, but Lebron was still the best player to me despite those last 3 games vs Boston.

I definitely don't understand Wade over Lebron, though. Wade is clearly 3rd that year behind Lebron and Kobe, imo. His jump shot completely diappeared and he was out of shape and playing well below his standards to start the season. Wade was averaging 26.3 ppg, 5 rpg, 6.1 apg on just 43.9% shooting in his first 2 months or first 30 games that season. I understand Wade over Kobe more because he was playing very poorly due to injuries from January until the end of the OKC series when he got his knee drained. And hurting the team at times because he was trying to shoot himself out of the But he was having an MVP type season the first 2 months killing guys in the post and scoring more efficiently and consistently than I've seen him, and was back to playing very well after the 1st round.

I wouldn't put Rondo or Duncan at that stage ahead of Bosh either, particularly not Rondo, who I think should be in the top 15-20 range.

lebron's psyche was made out of paper mache. You stood a much better chance at winning a title if Kobe or Wade was your best player.

I'm a big Rondo fan. With pierce and particuarly KG slipping, I think he became the Cs best player in 2010 (1a/1b with pierce). His jumper had improved to the point where it was now only incredibly mediocre, compared to woefully bad the previous season (He had also developed that short range floater of his to where it was now a real weapon). Along with Nash, he was the best playmaker/passer in the league. Let's not discount his great rebounding and defense, either.

Boston made it to the finals, and, even though he was poor against L.A, that has to count for something. It would be ridiculous to just dismiss this. He completely DESTROYED Mo Williams in the ECSFs (I know they weren't always guarding each other, but still). He chucked up a 29/18/13 & 2stl clinic in the PIVATOL game 4 (One of the underrated playoff performances of all time) and, ultimately, was the best player in a series that had Lebron James in it.

Bosh sacrificed his defense (Which has always been exceedingly average to begin with) in order to put up a career high 24ppg. I didn't see the commitment on that end that he had shown in previous years. I remember thinking his overall effort was lacking and I think this came to light when Toronto slipped from the 20th ranked defense in '09 to the 27th ranked defense in '10.

He's also one of these players where his "impact" doesn't sufficiently match the numbers he puts up. In 2010, Duncan was still a much better passer/facilitator, a better rebounder, much better defensively, a better shot blocker and much better "intangibly" (Certainly a better "leader", for example). All of this outweighs Bosh's scoring edge....surely?

ShaqAttack3234

07-06-2012, 12:41 PM

I think we agree that a lot times there is more than one correct/fair spot to rank a player based on talent. For example Shaq and Garnett from 2003-2005

I definitely agree with that.

When it's that close in terms of skill/impact, is it fair to determine which player gets the higher ranking based on how well he led/fit in with his team?

Yeah, if it's a virtual tie then I often go to those things which are "tiebreakers", because there are other factors that affect how much a player can help their team win that season.

Because Shaq did not show great leadership in 2003 and 2004 I have Garnett above him, because he did in 2005, I gave him the nod over KG

I can agree with that, though I also think KG just flat out played better than anyone in '04. But that is the reason I gave KG the nod over Shaq in '03, but it was very tough as we both said. I didn't have as much of a problem with Shaq's leadership in '04, he showed up quite a bit lighter than he had been in '03, and the Shaq/Kobe feud died down a bit after the preseason. They were right there in the finals with a shot at a championship.

Completely agree. He flat out REGRESSED in 2007, compared to '06. I've noticed that a lot of superstars seem to do this - after ascending for 3 straight years upon entering the league, they regress in their 4th year (as a starter). Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Kobe and Tmac (As well as many more who I can't remember off the top of my head) all experienced a 4th year slump.

Lebron's entire '07 season rested on one game.

I agree that Lebron regressed, I thought that throughout the season. His jump shot really bothered me. But I'm not sure those other players really regressed Lebron did.

Shaq didn't really regress to me in '96. He actually looked a little more skilled, and I thought he continued to improve his skills until the early 00's.

the thing about Shaq in '96 is that he missed the first 22 games after breaking his thumb in the preseason, and it was also the first year he started lifting weights and bulked up significantly to 332 pounds. So he started the season a little slower, and Penny had also started the season off playing like the MVP of the league in his absence, and Orlando ended up winning 60 games so those factors also dropped Shaq's minutes to just 36 per game.

I've never heard anything to suggest Kareem regressed in his 4th season, he still won 60 games and posted the best numbers in the league, though he was a real disappointment in the playoffs, but he had been sort of disappointing in the '72 playofs, and the '73 upset was vs Nate Thurmond's Warrio, and Rick Barry had also returned to the NBA. Thurmond always gave Kareem a lot of trouble and a team with both Barry and Thurmond is very dangerous.

But the only real disappointment was the upset loss, which I don't think of as really regressing. I think that was also the year Kareem had bodyguards traveling with him because of the black muslims at the time.

I'm not sure if T-Mac really regressed from year 3 to year 4 as a starter. I think it was more that his '03 season was so good that it's tough to go up from there. And by that point he also wanted out from Orlando, and really wasn't playing quite as hard. He pretty much still had the ability, though. His ability didn't start to decline until after his first season in Houston when his career was really derailed by injuries.

And Kobe's 4th year as a starter was '02, and I also don't think he deferred. He just matured more that year and accepted his role from the start, while it had taken him until the second half and the playoffs to accept his role. But there wasn't the cancerous selfish play from the first 2-3 months of the '00-'01 season. Phil Jackson, Robert Horry and others were talking about Kobe's maturation in the '02 season and about how he was making passes he wouldn't have made a year ago.

He could still go off as evidenced by his 56 points in 3rd quarters vs Memphis, and while he wasn't as consistent or as amazing in the '02 playoffs. He came up big in 4th quarters and that was really when he was establishing himself as the premier clutch player in the league, particularly in the Spurs series with Shaq limited by injuries. Kobe was the best player in that series which included the 2 best players in the league. Shaq and Duncan.

So I see a difference between Lebron and the others. The others you mentioned didn't have a season quite as good as their 3rd due to a variety of factors, but they didn't seem any less capable of it, or didn't seem to lose a skill. Lebron did in his 4th season with all of the improvement he had made on his jump shot going out the window.

As far as your explanations for your criteria and selection, you did a good job of explaining your point of view in your last post.

2002
1. Shaquille O'Neal
2. Tim Duncan
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Jason Kidd
6. Tracy McGrady
7. Paul Pierce
8. Chris Webber
9. Dirk Nowitzki
10. Allen Iverson

Looks good, I don't think Kidd was a better player than McGrady, but a lot would have him above T-Mac in '02. Pierce over C-Webb is interesting, care to explain that one? Was it because of Webber missing 28 games in the regular season?

2003
1. Tim Duncan
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Tracy McGrady
5. Shaquille O'Neal
6. Jason Kidd
7. Dirk Nowitzki
8. Paul Pierce
9. Chris Webber
10. Allen Iverson

Nothing that I can disagree with strongly on this one. I don't see as strong of a case for Kobe over T-Mac, but I don't see a real difference in their ability so I can't really complain.

2004
1. Kevin Garnett
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Tim Duncan
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Jermaine O'Neal
6. Dirk Nowitzki
7. Jason Kidd
8. Peja Stojakovic
9. Tracy McGrady
10. Paul Pierce

This is a tough year, I see you penalized T-Mac for his team's season. Can't argue too much, i thought about that too, and had a tough time putting him as high as I did. I really didn't want to put him top 5. I'm guessing that Shaq was over Duncan because he played much better in the Laker/Spurs series?

2005
1. Tim Duncan
2. Steve Nash
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Dwyane Wade
7. Kobe Bryant
8. Tracy McGrady
9. Allen Iverson
10. LeBron James

T-Mac is too low, imo. I really don't see what Kobe did to get over T-Mac this year. Nash at 2 is interesting, but it makes sense. He is probably now my choice for MVP that year and he followed it up with a very impressive playoff run, while Shaq was limited in the playoffs.

2006
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Dirk Nowitzki
4. Steve Nash
5. LeBron James
6. Tim Duncan
7. Kevin Garnett
8. Elton Brand
9. Paul Pierce
10. Shaquille O'Neal

This one looks good, I wouldn't agree with Nash over Lebron, and probably not Duncan either. The level Duncan played at in the WCSF got him at least top 5 for me. And Duncan was always around the top 1-3 range every other year so i think that dropping him to 5th is penalizing him enough for being limited in the regular season with plantar fasciitis.

2007
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan
3. Steve Nash
4. Dirk Nowitzki
5. LeBron James
6. Kevin Garnett
7. Yao Ming
8. Dwyane Wade
9. Carmelo Anthony
10. Vince Carter

Looks solid, I've gone back on Carter vs T-Mac, though. T-Mac wasn't as terrible vs Utah as Carter was vs Cleveland. I liked Carter's scoring more by this point, he was more aggressive, settled less, but seemed like a better pure shooter and had an insane season as far as clutch play. T-Mac was the better passer and playmaker, but Carter had become quite good. Though T-Mac did average a career high 6.5 apg, and was putting up Orlando numbers for a long stretch after he returned with Yao out.

2008
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Chris Paul
3. LeBron James
4. Kevin Garnett
5. Tim Duncan
6. Dirk Nowitzki
7. Deron Williams
8. Steve Nash
9. Dwight Howard
10. Paul Pierce

Our top 5s are the same and I gave Dirk a lot of consideration over Dwight, but Dwight at 9 is too low, imo. I don't think Deron or even Nash(considering his play in the second half) deserved to be over him.

2009
1. LeBron James
2. Kobe Bryant
3. Dwyane Wade
4. Chris Paul
5. Yao Ming
6. Dwight Howard
7. Dirk Nowitzki
8. Brandon Roy
9. Deron Williams
10. Paul Pierce

Only thing that really stands out is Yao being too high, imo. Pierce in the top 10 is interesting. He was still pretty much capable of scoring like he was in his prime if you look at how his game never really changed, and did average 24 ppg in 24 games without KG. I'd prefer Gasol for that spot, but Pierce definitely had a case.

StateOfMind12

07-06-2012, 01:22 PM

Looks good, I don't think Kidd was a better player than McGrady, but a lot would have him above T-Mac in '02. Pierce over C-Webb is interesting, care to explain that one? Was it because of Webber missing 28 games in the regular season?

I'm considering putting both Mcgrady and Pierce above Kidd to be honest because I think they were both better. I actually have Pierce above Kidd in my all-time list. McGrady is no where near though due to short peak, negative intangibles, etc.

I have Pierce above C-Webb because of the injuries. I didn't like the way he played in that Game 7 in the WCF either where he went super passive. My ranking is not solely based just on talent and individual ability but also how well that player played that season specifically how many games played otherwise Yao would be in the top 10 for 2008 opposed to not there at all.

Nothing that I can disagree with strongly on this one. I don't see as strong of a case for Kobe over T-Mac, but I don't see a real difference in their ability so I can't really complain.
Superior defense, superior playmaking. This was the season that Tmac pretty much stopped playing defense and just focused completely on offense similar to Kobe's '06-'07 season. I personally don't even think '03 McGrady was his best season, it was his best statistical season but stats aren't everything. I think '02 and/or maybe even his '01 season was better.

I'm guessing that Shaq was over Duncan because he played much better in the Laker/Spurs series?
Yep, Duncan doesn't get as much of a blackmark as many other greats get for poor series. He was the favorite of this series, he was backdoor swept, and most importantly he didn't play well in that series.

T-Mac is too low, imo. I really don't see what Kobe did to get over T-Mac this year. Nash at 2 is interesting, but it makes sense. He is probably now my choice for MVP that year and he followed it up with a very impressive playoff run, while Shaq was limited in the playoffs.
Kobe was just a better overall player. Kobe missed a decent amount of games but nothing serious like 20+. I believe he only missed like 15 so it's not that big of a deal in my opinion. Kobe was still statistically superior in this season and in my opinion if you replaced Tmac with Kobe on those Rockets, the Rockets would have gotten past the 1st round.

Tmac gets too much credit for what he did in this post-season. The Mavericks used to be the team that every star player would get amazing stats against specifically perimeter players. It was only when Marion and Chandler arrived before Dallas started playing good/great defense especially on star players but before then they were the team that stars would get their numbers but they would still find a way to win.

Looks solid, I've gone back on Carter vs T-Mac, though. T-Mac wasn't as terrible vs Utah as Carter was vs Cleveland. I liked Carter's scoring more by this point, he was more aggressive, settled less, but seemed like a better pure shooter and had an insane season as far as clutch play. T-Mac was the better passer and playmaker, but Carter had become quite good. Though T-Mac did average a career high 6.5 apg, and was putting up Orlando numbers for a long stretch after he returned with Yao out.
True, but VC played against a defensive oriented Cleveland team while Tmac just faced some average defensive team in Utah so I think we have to take it into context. If they both played similar defensive teams then I would consider putting Tmac above VC but since he didn't, I have VC above Tmac. I'm actually considering putting Kidd over both but I remember I had VC at #10 when I was ranking this season so I'll stick with him.

Our top 5s are the same and I gave Dirk a lot of consideration over Dwight, but Dwight at 9 is too low, imo. I don't think Deron or even Nash(considering his play in the second half) deserved to be over him.
I wasn't too impressed with Dwight this season but I'll probably put Dwight over Nash, not Deron though. Deron was pretty good this season but it was overshadowed by CP3's MVPs season.

Only thing that really stands out is Yao being too high, imo. Pierce in the top 10 is interesting. He was still pretty much capable of scoring like he was in his prime if you look at how his game never really changed, and did average 24 ppg in 24 games without KG. I'd prefer Gasol for that spot, but Pierce definitely had a case.
Yao is either 5/6 to me with Dwight and I go with Yao because Dwight was not yet polished or skilled enough offensively. Yao was always underrated defensively too so it's not like that area isn't close. Yao didn't put up big statistical numbers this season but he made a massive impact on the court if you check out +/-, adjusted plus/minus, RAPM stats.

I also think his stats were down this season because he didn't have a passer to play with. The best passer on the team was young Kyle Lowry who only played with the 2nd unit. The best passer that he played with when he was out there was probably Shane Battier so he didn't have as much of a chance to get big numbers specifically scoring/offensive numbers but he still made his presence felt with double teams on and away from the ball.

ShaqAttack3234

07-06-2012, 01:41 PM

I'm considering putting both Mcgrady and Pierce above Kidd to be honest because I think they were both better. I actually have Pierce above Kidd in my all-time list. McGrady is no where near though due to short peak, negative intangibles, etc.

I have Pierce above C-Webb because of the injuries. I didn't like the way he played in that Game 7 in the WCF either where he went super passive. My ranking is not solely based just on talent and individual ability but also how well that player played that season specifically how many games played otherwise Yao would be in the top 10 for 2008 opposed to not there at all.

Thanks for the explanations. I also factor in the season to some extent, and I'd agree that Yao would be higher. He was still probably the best center. Dwight had defense and rebounding, but he was raw offensively and exposed by the Pistons, particularly Jason Maxiell. Yao was not only the superior offensive player by that point, but scoring more too.

Missing 27 games probably wouldn't have kept him out, but missing the playoffs on top of that is what did it. Yao returning healthy for the playoffs is why he made the '07 top 10 despite missing 34 games.

Superior defense, superior playmaking. This was the season that Tmac pretty much stopped playing defense and just focused completely on offense similar to Kobe's '06-'07 season. I personally don't even think '03 McGrady was his best season, it was his best statistical season but stats aren't everything. I think '02 and/or maybe even his '01 season was better.

I don't think Kobe's defense was a big advantage by that point, he was better, but his defense slipped too. He was gambling more, and his effort wasn't as consistent. Phil Jackson called him out on gambling and not playing fundamentally sound defense anymore.

McGrady was every bit the passer Kobe was, imo, and also averaged almost as many assists while averaging while averaging almost 1 less turnover over per game.

McGrady's superior statistical season, particularly with nobody else on his team for the defense to focus on was a part of what made him the clear choice for me.

In '02, I thought they were very close, but clutch play, the championship and a more significant defensive advantage gave the clear edge to Kobe. But he didn't really show any intangible advantage in '03, imo and didn't have the championship advantage that year.

Kobe was just a better overall player. Kobe missed a decent amount of games but nothing serious like 20+. I believe he only missed like 15 so it's not that big of a deal in my opinion. Kobe was still statistically superior in this season and in my opinion if you replaced Tmac with Kobe on those Rockets, the Rockets would have gotten past the 1st round.

I don't think Kobe was better that year, he was only shooting about 40% outside the triangle when Rudy T was there while averaging 4.5 turnovers and once Frank Hamblen started putting the triangle back in, Kobe's numbers were better, but they could barely win a game.

And just watched them, Kobe seemed to have more of a down year, while McGrady had one of his most impressive seasons to me.

I don't understand why you think the Rockets win with '05 Kobe in T-Mac's place. T-Mac played extremely well in that series in about every aspect of the game. Dallas just had a deeper, more balanced team, of course, T-Mac didn't have a very good game 7, but he had a great game 6 to fight off elimination.

Tmac gets too much credit for what he did in this post-season. The Mavericks used to be the team that every star player would get amazing stats against specifically perimeter players. It was only when Marion and Chandler arrived before Dallas started playing good/great defense especially on star players but before then they were the team that stars would get their numbers but they would still find a way to win.

They started playing better defense under Avery Johnson and finished the season 16-2.

True, but VC played against a defensive oriented Cleveland team while Tmac just faced some average defensive team in Utah so I think we have to take it into context. If they both played similar defensive teams then I would consider putting Tmac above VC but since he didn't, I have VC above Tmac. I'm actually considering putting Kidd over both but I remember I had VC at #10 when I was ranking this season so I'll stick with him.

Yeah, I thought it was close anyway, i'm still not that convinced one way or the other.

Yao is either 5/6 to me with Dwight and I go with Yao because Dwight was not yet polished or skilled enough offensively. Yao was always underrated defensively too so it's not like that area isn't close. Yao didn't put up big statistical numbers this season but he made a massive impact on the court if you check out +/-, adjusted plus/minus, RAPM stats.

I have looked at +/- occasionally, but I have no idea what adjusted plus/minus is or RAPM.

Yao did draw a ton of defensive attention, that is one thing that's overlooked about his impact in the portland series, especially that blowout game 1 when he was 9 for 9 or something like that. I didn't have as much of a problem with Dwight's offensive game this season, he was playing with more confidence, and he did have really big offensive series vs Philly and Cleveland, but anchoring the number 1 ranked defensively was a big part of him making my top 5, as well as leading Orlando to the finals. Obviously Boston was the best defensive team when KG was healthy, and Cleveland was right there. Also, defensive rating doesn't account for Orlando's perimeter defense which made them vulnerable vs elite perimeter scorers. But most of their defensive success was owed to Dwight.

StateOfMind12

07-06-2012, 02:20 PM

Thanks for the explanations. I also factor in the season to some extent, and I'd agree that Yao would be higher. He was still probably the best center. Dwight had defense and rebounding, but he was raw offensively and exposed by the Pistons, particularly Jason Maxiell. Yao was not only the superior offensive player by that point, but scoring more too.
Agreed. Yao was still the best Center when healthy but he wasn't healthy so he wasn't in my top 10.

I don't think Kobe's defense was a big advantage by that point, he was better, but his defense slipped too. He was gambling more, and his effort wasn't as consistent. Phil Jackson called him out on gambling and not playing fundamentally sound defense anymore.
It was big enough of an advantage in my opinion and even if Kobe was over gambling and such, it was still better defense than whatever the heck McGrady was playing.

McGrady was every bit the passer Kobe was, imo, and also averaged almost as many assists while averaging while averaging almost 1 less turnover over per game.

McGrady's superior statistical season, particularly with nobody else on his team for the defense to focus on was a part of what made him the clear choice for me.
I would give Kobe the slight edge. McGrady became a comparable and probably a better passer in Houston though.

As for the 2nd part, didn't' Kobe put up big numbers even when Shaq was out?

I don't understand why you think the Rockets win with '05 Kobe in T-Mac's place. T-Mac played extremely well in that series in about every aspect of the game. Dallas just had a deeper, more balanced team, of course, T-Mac didn't have a very good game 7, but he had a great game 6 to fight off elimination.
I believe Kobe would have been better since he would always kill teams from Texas when he was in his prime.

They started playing better defense under Avery Johnson and finished the season 16-2.
Even with Avery Johnson, star players would still get big numbers against that team but the Mavericks would still find a way to win anyways. I feel like it was probably by design to let the opponent stars get big numbers but stop everyone else.

If you look up all the star players that have went up against the Mavericks in the post-season, you would see that they all put up big numbers

'05 Tmac and Yao
'06 Duncan and Manu
'06 Diaw, Marion, and Nash
'06 Wade
'07 Baron
'08 CP3 and West
'09 Parker
'09 Melo and Billups

The trend stop in '10 when they acquired Shawn Marion but seriously those dudes put up extremely huge numbers and bigger numbers against Dallas than what they would normally put.

I have looked at +/- occasionally, but I have no idea what adjusted plus/minus is or RAPM.
Adjusted plus minus factors in both offense and defense +/- opposed to just one overall regular +/- does.

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,42/func,display/letter,A/page,1/

What Adjusted Plus-Minus (APM) in brief is:
Over a given time period, the basic plus-minus results are getting adjusted to account for both the teammates and the opponents on the court.

What Adjusted Plus-Minus does:
It reflects the impact of each player on his team's scoring margin after controlling for the strength of every teammate and every opponent during each minute he's on the court.

What Adjusted Plus-Minus incorporates:
Every time segment a player is in a game, adjusted plus-minus tracks:
(1) The other nine players on the floor,
(2) The length of the segment,
(3) The score at the start and at the end of the segment.

How to interpret Adjusted Plus-Minus numbers:
Adjusted +/- ratings indicate how many additional points are contributed to a team’s scoring margin by a given player in comparison to the league-average player whose adjusted +/- value is zero over the span of a typical game. It is assumpted that in a typical game a team has 100 offensive and 100 defensive possessions. For example, if a +6.5 "adjusted +/-" player is on the floor with 4 average teammates, his team will average about 6.5 points better per 100 possessions than 5 average players would.

RAPM is regularized adjusted plus minus.

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,42/func,view/term,Regularized%20Adjusted%20Plus%20Minus%20%28RA PM%29/

In "Regularized Adjusted Plus-Minus" (RAPM), the goal is to provide more accurate results by employing a special technique called "ridge regression" (a.k.a. regularization). It significantly reduces standard errors in Adjusted Plus-Minus (APM).

Here are the 2009 RAPM rankings.

http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ranking09

Yao did draw a ton of defensive attention, that is one thing that's overlooked about his impact in the portland series, especially that blowout game 1 when he was 9 for 9 or something like that. I didn't have as much of a problem with Dwight's offensive game this season, he was playing with more confidence, and he did have really big offensive series vs Philly and Cleveland, but anchoring the number 1 ranked defensively was a big part of him making my top 5, as well as leading Orlando to the finals. Obviously Boston was the best defensive team when KG was healthy, and Cleveland was right there. Also, defensive rating doesn't account for Orlando's perimeter defense which made them vulnerable vs elite perimeter scorers. But most of their defensive success was owed to Dwight.
I forgot to respond to this cause I was caught up explaining APM and RAPMs.

I believe SVG should get a lot of credit for that defense. Too many times does an individual player get all the credit for a defensive success when a lot of times it is because of the coach's great defensive schemes and defensive focus. SVG is a defensive minded coach. I agree that Dwight should get the most credit because he is the anchor but SVG deserves a decent amount of credit too.

Magic in '09 were the team that perimeter players would kill similar to Dallas though.

I think Yao should still be #5 or #6 in this season because of his great impact and all-around play. He was not just a great offensive player but a solid rebounder and a great defender. This alone should put him above the likes of Roy, Deron, and Dirk otherwise I believe those three should also be ranked above Dwight because the same argument as to why Roy, Deron, and Dirk are better than Yao are probably the same reasons why he should also be listed above Dwight.

I have no problem with Dwight over Yao in '09 but I believe if this is the case then Yao should be right behind him considering how you have him that high due to his great and enormous overall impact specifically defensive impact.

Vman23

07-07-2012, 08:03 PM

Gilbert Arenas is a little bit too low on these lists for 07. Consider that he was a top 5 MVP candidate for most of the season, led the Wizards to the top record in the East up until the All-Star break, and finished All-NBA 2nd team despite missing the last 15 games of the season.

ShaqAttack3234

07-08-2012, 01:50 AM

It was big enough of an advantage in my opinion and even if Kobe was over gambling and such, it was still better defense than whatever the heck McGrady was playing.

I think it takes a pretty special perimeter defender to make that large of a difference in the player's overall impact, and usually it's guys who excel more at help defense. And in Kobe's best defensive seasons, his man to man defense was more notable.

I would give Kobe the slight edge. McGrady became a comparable and probably a better passer in Houston though.

I think that he was already about as good as he'd ever be as a passer. He was just in more of a facilitator role in Houston. Particularly '07, and also '08. But that's also because

As for the 2nd part, didn't' Kobe put up big numbers even when Shaq was out?

Yeah, but still not as good as T-Mac's season numbers.

32.3 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 5.8 apg, 3.5 TO, 2.1 spg, 43.6 FG%, 52.1 TS%

He was at T-Mac's scoring average, but using 3 more shots per game to get there(27.2 in this stretch for Kobe vs 24.2 for T-Mac), about the same assist numbers, but much more worse assist to turnover ratio. Rebounding is very impressive, though. The added weight while being in his athletic prime seemed to make him a better rebounder.

I believe Kobe would have been better since he would always kill teams from Texas when he was in his prime.

The playoffs are a different story, though. He was a Spur killer every year he played them except '99 and '03, but he didn't have his best series vs Houston in '09. And simply playing a team from Texas doesn't convince me.

Even with Avery Johnson, star players would still get big numbers against that team but the Mavericks would still find a way to win anyways. I feel like it was probably by design to let the opponent stars get big numbers but stop everyone else.

It was by design to make Nash a scorer in '05, even though that didn't work. But I didn't think it was with McGrady.

If you look up all the star players that have went up against the Mavericks in the post-season, you would see that they all put up big numbers

'05 Tmac and Yao
'06 Duncan and Manu
'06 Diaw, Marion, and Nash
'06 Wade
'07 Baron
'08 CP3 and West
'09 Parker
'09 Melo and Billups

Well, you listed some really good players, Several of those series don't belong in the same class as T-Mac's, though. Manu only averaged 21/4/2, although his shooting % were 49/41/87. West averaged 23/7/3 on 48%.

Regardless, T-Mac played very well in the series in just about every aspect, including his defense. And he played extremely well all year.

Adjusted plus minus factors in both offense and defense +/- opposed to just one overall regular +/- does.

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,42/func,display/letter,A/page,1/

RAPM is regularized adjusted plus minus.

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,42/func,view/term,Regularized%20Adjusted%20Plus%20Minus%20%28RA PM%29/

Here are the 2009 RAPM rankings.

http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ranking09

Doesn't regular +/- just show you how many points the team outscores the opponent by while that opponent is on the floor?

I forgot to respond to this cause I was caught up explaining APM and RAPMs.

I believe SVG should get a lot of credit for that defense. Too many times does an individual player get all the credit for a defensive success when a lot of times it is because of the coach's great defensive schemes and defensive focus. SVG is a defensive minded coach. I agree that Dwight should get the most credit because he is the anchor but SVG deserves a decent amount of credit too.

Magic in '09 were the team that perimeter players would kill similar to Dallas though.

I agree that Van Gundy deserves some credit. I actually think that Jeff was the better defensive coach out of the 2, while Stan is the more well rounded coach since he's the superior offensive coach and a good defensive coach himself.

I think Yao should still be #5 or #6 in this season because of his great impact and all-around play. He was not just a great offensive player but a solid rebounder and a great defender. This alone should put him above the likes of Roy, Deron, and Dirk otherwise I believe those three should also be ranked above Dwight because the same argument as to why Roy, Deron, and Dirk are better than Yao are probably the same reasons why he should also be listed above Dwight.

I have no problem with Dwight over Yao in '09 but I believe if this is the case then Yao should be right behind him considering how you have him that high due to his great and enormous overall impact specifically defensive impact.

I did have Yao higher in '09, above some of those perimeter players, but I don't think he has the same case as Dwight. For one, he wasn't the defensive player Dwight was, or nearly as mobile or durable.

Plus, the injury in the playoffs was a factor. And I really noticed teams often taking Yao out of games by fronting him at times, and entry passes couldn't be low. But I think it's fair to put him up at 7 above Rpy and Deron. I can't put him any higher than that though.

Gilbert Arenas is a little bit too low on these lists for 07. Consider that he was a top 5 MVP candidate for most of the season, led the Wizards to the top record in the East up until the All-Star break, and finished All-NBA 2nd team despite missing the last 15 games of the season.

I thought about that, but I was never a big fan of Gilbert's game. He was a chucker and shot about 42% that year. He has a case to be higher, but the injury that kept him out for the playoffs didn't help. There were a lot of big scorers that year.

Gifted Mind

07-17-2012, 03:13 AM

Good list overall. There obviously will be some disagreements, but the higher the ranking we disagree, the more it is worth discussing.

The only #1 pick I disagree with is placing Kobe in 2007 over Tim Duncan.

I believe this is a case of revisionist history. Back in 2007, almost everyone had Duncan over Kobe, and now almost everyone has Kobe over Duncan. In fact, here is a thread made in 2007 where everyone ranked their Top 5 players:

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

Almost everyone had Duncan over Kobe in 2007 as a better player. Notice, this was not a better season ranking, everyone was clearly ranking based on which player was better. To support that statement, most had KG (was on a 32 win team) over Dirk Nowitzki (MVP that season).

So now to go back and discuss why I choose Duncan over Kobe for 07, and why everyone else from during that time also picked Duncan. He was simply the better player. Bryant was the best player in 2006 I would agree, and he didn't drop much in 2007. However, Duncan at age 30 was still in his prime. In 2006 he suffered injuries and struggled throughout the regular season. But in 2007 he was back to how good he was in at least 2005.

If the objective of basketball is to win, then this Tim Duncan version was a better basketball player than Kobe ever was. He was a very efficient scorer 20.0ppg on 54.6% FG, while anchoring the best defense (at worst 2nd best) in the NBA. Far greater defensive impact than Kobe while still averaging 20/11. If I had #1 pick going into 2007 for just 1 year, I would easily pick Tim Duncan. Because with him I would have an offensive anchor and defensive anchor and higher my chances of winning than any other player in the NBA. There are just far more teams Duncan could and would make more impact than Kobe. I agree Kobe was a better offensive player at this point, but Duncan was very efficient and could do so much more for your defense while also being one of the top rebounders.

And in the playoffs, he showed why he was the best, leading his team to the NBA championship. He still had great leadership and stepped up in the playoffs when he needed to. The Spur's biggest series was against the Suns (who had the best record in the NBA) where Tim Duncan had big games like: 33/16, 29/11, 33/19, 24/13/9blk, and so on. There also seems to be a more common misconception Tony Parker was the best on the Spurs since he won Finals MVP. This is completely false and you would get laughed at if you said this in 2007.

You could argue Kobe Bryant is more individually talented and I would agree. But if your goal is to win the NBA championship, the qualities Duncan provides you the greatest chance to win it. In 2007, everyone knew this. Now I don't know why everyone has forgotten.

ShaqAttack3234

07-17-2012, 07:29 AM

The only #1 pick I disagree with is placing Kobe in 2007 over Tim Duncan.

I believe this is a case of revisionist history. Back in 2007, almost everyone had Duncan over Kobe, and now almost everyone has Kobe over Duncan. In fact, here is a thread made in 2007 where everyone ranked their Top 5 players:

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

Almost everyone had Duncan over Kobe in 2007 as a better player. Notice, this was not a better season ranking, everyone was clearly ranking based on which player was better. To support that statement, most had KG (was on a 32 win team) over Dirk Nowitzki (MVP that season).

Duncan over Kobe did appear to be the consensus on this board back then, but among players/coaches/media, I remember Kobe being considered the best player from '06-'10(though most on message boards were choose Lebron by '09 and '10). At the time, I thought Kobe was clearly the best from '06-'08, and it wasn't until after I reflected on the '09 season that I thought Lebron had surpassed him.

So now to go back and discuss why I choose Duncan over Kobe for 07, and why everyone else from during that time also picked Duncan. He was simply the better player. Bryant was the best player in 2006 I would agree, and he didn't drop much in 2007. However, Duncan at age 30 was still in his prime. In 2006 he suffered injuries and struggled throughout the regular season. But in 2007 he was back to how good he was in at least 2005.

Duncan was clearly limited with plantar fasciitis during the '06 season, and it did affect his ranking, as you can see, I ranked him 5th, which was the only time in my '00-'07 lists that he failed to make the top 2, and I'd throw '99 in there as well when I'd rank him number 1. But Tim still anchored the best defensive team in the league, led them to 63 wins with the same core he won 58 with in '07 except Manu missed more games in '06, and he was back to his old self in the playoffs having what he called his best series vs the Mavs.

But I do agree he was better overall in '07 due to his consistent health, and while he wasn't as athletic or mobile as he once was, he appeared to have regained some mobility and athleticism compared to his limited '06 season. You could argue that Duncan was still in his prime in '07, although towards the end of it. Aside from not being as athletic as he was in the late 90's/early 00's, his stamina didn't appear to be the same, and I don't think he could play the same big minutes that he once did. But the Spurs were good enough so this wasn't necessary, and his overall effectiveness hadn't fallen off much at all. He was still arguably the best defensive player in the game.

I also think that Kobe was better in '06, he was more capable of carrying the team for an entire season because he wasn't coming off a knee surgery which took him a while to recover 100% from in '07. He also had some impressive defensive performances vs elite shooting guards in '06, while his defensive effort wasn't consistent due to the scoring load he had to carry, it was considerably better than 2007, which was a subpar season defensively, and impressive considering the circumstances. Kobe was told to carry the '05-'06 Lakers from the start by Phil Jackson because he knew the team had limited talent and that it would take a while for the young players to adjust to the triangle, as well as the fact that he put Lamar Odom in the point forward role. So the gameplan was for the Lakers to win games for the time being on Kobe's back.

But he did show something he didn't in '06, with the exception of the playoffs vs the Suns. Kobe started off the '06-'07 season in a more conventional role allowing his teammates to shine, this was probably due to 2 reasons. 1 is that they had a year under their belt in the offense and almost every supporting player started off the season better, and also because Kobe wasn't 100% at the start of the season due to knee surgery.

But while the 35 ppg Kobe from '06 and the second half of the '07 season isn't how you're going to win a title, Kobe was showing a championship style of play early in the season before injuries. Not unlike his '08 approach, except with worse defense and less athleticism.

But anyway, we both agree that Duncan was better in '06 than '07, while Kobe wasn't quite as good, but pretty close. However, Kobe vs Duncan in '06 wasn't a tough call, so even with this considered, I think Kobe vs Duncan end up being very debatable for '07.

If the objective of basketball is to win, then this Tim Duncan version was a better basketball player than Kobe ever was. He was a very efficient scorer 20.0ppg on 54.6% FG, while anchoring the best defense (at worst 2nd best) in the NBA. Far greater defensive impact than Kobe while still averaging 20/11. If I had #1 pick going into 2007 for just 1 year, I would easily pick Tim Duncan. Because with him I would have an offensive anchor and defensive anchor and higher my chances of winning than any other player in the NBA. There are just far more teams Duncan could and would make more impact than Kobe. I agree Kobe was a better offensive player at this point, but Duncan was very efficient and could do so much more for your defense while also being one of the top rebounders.

And in the playoffs, he showed why he was the best, leading his team to the NBA championship. He still had great leadership and stepped up in the playoffs when he needed to. The Spur's biggest series was against the Suns (who had the best record in the NBA) where Tim Duncan had big games like: 33/16, 29/11, 33/19, 24/13/9blk, and so on. There also seems to be a more common misconception Tony Parker was the best on the Spurs since he won Finals MVP. This is completely false and you would get laughed at if you said this in 2007.

You could argue Kobe Bryant is more individually talented and I would agree. But if your goal is to win the NBA championship, the qualities Duncan provides you the greatest chance to win it. In 2007, everyone knew this. Now I don't know why everyone has forgotten.

While Tim was still pretty much the ideal franchise player as the great two-way player with few weaknesses(only free throw shooting, and probably not being able to play as many minutes as some stars were the 2). He did win a title, but unlike Kobe, he had the team to do so.

I see no reason why Kobe couldn't have won a title that year if he had a good team. The Lakers were overachieving early in the season with Kobe's more unselfish approach, which was an approach I see him going to and I see working if he had a championship-caliber team around him.

The Lakers were 26-15 at the halfway point, and keep in mind that injuries had already affected them, here is their core up to that point. Kobe was averaging 28/5/6 on 47% shooting while not even attempting 20 shots(19.7 FGA) and Odom had only played in about half of these games.

Kobe was approaching a game in a way that allowed his teammates to maximize their potential. Lamar Odom for example was playing the best ball of his career, and seemed to be on his way to the all-star team before his injury. The Lakers were 14-6 before Odom's injury and here were his numbers and Kobe's numbers.

Kobe- 26.4 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 4.4 apg, 3.4 TO, 1.5 spg, 49.5 FG%, 60.8 TS%, 37.7 mpg, 17 games (only 18.1 FGA)
Odom- 18.4 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 5.1 apg, 3.9 TO, 47.7 FG%, 58.6 TS%, 39.6 mpg, 20 games

But Odom didn't keep up this level of play when he returned from his injury, his shoulder bothered him the rest of the season, and 3 of his top 4 teammates missed at least 20 games. Odom missed 26, Walton missed 22 and Kwame Brown missed exactly half of the season. And the other of his top 4 teammates was Smush Parker. It's amazing to have that cast, have almost all of them miss a lot of games and still finish over .500.

Duncan on the otherhand had 2 all-star caliber guards in Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker who made my top 25 in addition to arguably the league's top perimeter defender Bruce Bowen who also hit those corner 3s, and 2 other solid offensive players and shooters in Michael Finley and Brent Barry. The Spurs were 3rd in 3P% at 38.1% and Duncan had multiple scoring options surrounding him.

He shouldn't be penalized for this because he did what you're supposed to with a great team, which is win, and he did something that many greats never do. But while I think it's a valid part of the argument for Duncan, I don't think it's an indictment against Kobe because he simply didn't have the opportunity that season.

Not only did Kobe show he could make his teammates player and play efficient, unselfish basketball, which is why I'm confident that '07 Kobe could have won a title with the right cast, but he showed individual ability that few in the history the game have shown late in the season.

Phil Jackson gave Kobe the green light to snap a 7 game losing streak and he responds with four straight 50+ games including games of 65 and 60 points. From that point on, he averaged 40.3 ppg, 5.6 rpg and 4.4 apg over his final 17 games. Overall, he had seven 50+ games in those final 17 games, and ten 50+ games overall.

I see a valid argument for both players, but I'm sticking with Kobe because I think he was the more dominant player by that point, more capable of carrying a team, especially since he could go out there and average 41 mpg. Changing approaches like he did depending on what the coach asked was amazing, and I do believe that he won about as much as he could with that team considering the circumstances.

I think Kobe was a bit better in '07 than he was in '09 when he won a title, and clearly better than '10 when he won another title, so I don't consider this to be a case of comparing a championship player to a guy who isn't capable of leading a team there.

AlphaWolf24

07-17-2012, 11:53 AM

Great List...

2 things..

2003 Kobe was the best player in the NBA...saying TMAC was better?..really?...TMAC had a better overall season?..no way.

serious that's crazy....No one on the west side of Florida thought TMAC was better then Kobe in 03'...arguably Kobe's best overall season ...he was the best overall player in the league.

01' Kobe was also had a better season then Duncan...if you said "TMAC was better then Kobe because of consistency and postseason play"...then how could Kobe (who absolutley destroyed Duncan in the postseason) not be better....Kobe's 01' Post season Run was one of the greatest runs of the decade ...and he was easily LA's best overall player...with Shaq himself (as with Phil) saying Kobe was the best player.

yeah I said it....

Dukem

07-17-2012, 02:40 PM

Shaqattack just wondering but had Webber stood up to the plate in game 7 (perhaps the whole series) against the Lakers in 2002, where would he have been placed in your 2002 best players list?

Great lists by the way! I'd have T-Mac over Kobe in 2003 and 2000 but Kobe over T-Mac in every other year.

ShaqAttack3234

07-17-2012, 05:26 PM

Great List...

:cheers:

2003 Kobe was the best player in the NBA...saying TMAC was better?..really?...TMAC had a better overall season?..no way.

serious that's crazy....No one on the west side of Florida thought TMAC was better then Kobe in 03'...arguably Kobe's best overall season ...he was the best overall player in the league.

'03 was a very tough year to rank except Duncan was the obvious choice for best player, imo. Throughout the season, people were split on the best players with many arguing for all of the top 5, but Duncan's all-time great playoff run after his well deserved MVP and his defensive impact make it tough for me to argue for anyone over him.

2-5 can be put in any order, imo. Kobe was looking like the best player during those midseason streaks when Phil gave him more freedom and stopped running the offense through Shaq as the 1st option for the time being.

But I explained my choice for T-Mac. As far as individual ability and skills, they're virtually identical so I went with him for the more consistent season, better numbers, his team overachieving more and T-Mac having the less disappointing playoffs.

T-Mac's only teammates in his rotation for the entire year were Pat Garrity, 34 year old Darrell Armstrong, Jacque Vaughn, 310 pound Shawn Kemp and Andrew DeClercq. Pretty amazing to get that team to a winning record.

01' Kobe was also had a better season then Duncan...if you said "TMAC was better then Kobe because of consistency and postseason play"...then how could Kobe (who absolutley destroyed Duncan in the postseason) not be better....Kobe's 01' Post season Run was one of the greatest runs of the decade

This comparison doesn't work because Kobe definitely wasn't more consistent than Duncan. Kobe was the second best player in the postseason, but the reason I went with Duncan was because of the problems with Kobe's regular season and because if I'm building a championship team from scratch for that one year, I'm picking Duncan to build around for that season.

Kobe did have a tremendous playoff run which made it tempting to pick him. He played magnificent all around basketball. Even though he was more skilled later, as far as playmaking, defense and rebounding, it was the second best I've seen him play from an all around standpoint other than '08.

I thought it would be cool to rank 2 players from a team as the top 2 in the league, particularly because of the 15-1 playoff record, but my gut made me go with Duncan.

I have absolutely no problem with anyone putting Kobe 2nd, though.

...and he was easily LA's best overall player...with Shaq himself (as with Phil) saying Kobe was the best player.

Shaq was widely regarded as the best player in the game during the 3peat, he was winning the gM surveys for best player as late as March '03. There's no question about that.

Shaq did in fact call Kobe the best player in the game, but he also says that by best, he just meant more skilled, and claimed he was the most dominant. It was before game 2 of the '01 WCF.

Phil never called Kobe the best, though. He did call Shaq the most dominant player in the game, though and said Shaq's MVP votes were a slap in the face.

However, Kobe was regularly called the second best player in the game in '01 and '02, people use to often say LA had the 2 best players as well. Kobe did even finish above Duncan in those GM surveys.

Shaqattack just wondering but had Webber stood up to the plate in game 7 (perhaps the whole series) against the Lakers in 2002, where would he have been placed in your 2002 best players list?

I'd have to say he'd have a shot at top 3-4. I was tempted to put him higher anyway for being the star player on a team that was probably a shot away from a championship, and for how great the Kings offense was running through Webber.

But at the same time, I have to remember they were a stacked team. 7 players in double figures in that era is amazing. Aside from Webber, there was another 20+ ppg scorer in Peja who was the best pure shooter at the time not named Ray Allen and he fit well in the offense since he moved well without the ball, and was also pretty good in the mid-post area. Mike Bibby also proved to be one of the best scoring point guards and another shooter when he stepped up and averaged 20+ in the playoffs while hitting huge shots, and while he had the skills to play point guard, he was good without the ball which made him the ideal fit with the offense running through Webber and Vlade. Doug Christie was a very well rounded 2 guard known for his defense, but he could handle the ball, was a good passer and a solid shooter. Vlade was one of the most skilled centers, who may have been one of the 2 best passing big men along with Webber, he had a good post game, but could hit mid-range shots, was a solid rebounder, and despite the flopping, he was a pesky defender who could make an impact at that end drawing charges, stripping the post and knocking away entry passes with his good hands and blocking some shots. Bobby Jackson was an excellent scoring point guard and a good shooter, and one of four Kings capable of averaging 20 ppg. He averaged 11 ppg in just 22 mpg, but he got a chance to start 26 games the following season and averaged 20/5/4 on 50% shooting as a starter. Hedo was also a double digit scorer in 24 mpg off the bench and a versatile 6'9" small forward who could handle the ball, pass, create off the dribble and shoot. He averaged 17/7/3 in his 10 starts that year. Scott Pollard was also a solid backup big man and physical role player who rebounded well.

They also had one of the all-time great coaches in Rick Adleman. Aside from mental toughness, they didn't have a weakness. That's just an incredible collection of talent. One of the teams that can accurately be described as stacked. The only other early 00's team that arguably had that much talent was the 2000 Blazers.

So while winning a title would have helped Webber's ranking, it wouldn't have gotten him over Shaq and Duncan. Who I also think were clearly better players regardless of accomplishments.

Great lists by the way! I'd have T-Mac over Kobe in 2003 and 2000 but Kobe over T-Mac in every other year.

Thanks, but 2000? T-Mac was still in Toronto then, and while he was showing a lot of potential that season, he wasn't a legitimate all-star player bordering on superstar level like Kobe was at that time.

pauk

07-17-2012, 05:44 PM

2000
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kevin Garnett
4.Alonzo Mourning
5.Karl Malone
6.Chris Webber
7.Grant Hill
8.Gary Payton
9.Jason Kidd
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Allen Iverson
13.David Robinson
14.Eddie Jones
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Ray Allen
17.Michael Finley
18.Rasheed Wallace
19.Penny Hardaway
20.Scottie Pippen
21.Reggie Miller
22.Latrell Sorewell
23.Terrell Brandon
24.Sam Cassell
25.Dikembe Mutombo

2001
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Allen Iverson
6.Vince Carter
7.Chris Webber
8.Tracy McGrady
9.Jason Kidd
10.Gary Payton
11.Karl Malone
12.Ray Allen
13.Paul Pierce
14.Dirk Nowitzki
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Rasheed Wallace
18.Antonio McDyess
19.David Robinson
20.Jamal Mashburn
21.Michael Finley
22.Dikembe Mutombo
23.Glenn Robinson
24.Peja Stojakovic
25.Jerry Stackhouse

2002
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Chris Webber
7.Jason Kidd
8.Paul Pierce
9.Dirk Nowitzki
10.Allen Iverson
11.Gary Payton
12.Jermaine O'Neal
13.Steve Nash
14.Vince Carter
15.Ray Allen
16.Rasheed Wallace
17.Ben Wallace
18.Elton Brand
19.Karl Malone
20.Baron Davis
21.Stephon Marbury
22.Peja Stojakovic
23.Michael Jordan
24.Shawn Marion
25.Sam Cassell

2003
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Tracy McGrady
5.Kobe Bryant
6.Jason Kidd
7.Dirk Nowitzki
8.Allen Iverson
9.Chris Webber
10.Paul Pierce
11.Jermaine O'Neal
12.Ray Allen
13.Ben Wallace
14.Steve Nash
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Gary Payton
18.Peja Stojakovic
19.Jamal Mashburn
20.Shawn Marion
21.Rasheed Wallace
22.Allan Houston
23.Karl Malone
24.Michael Jordan
25.Sam Cassell

2004
1.Kevin Garnett
2.Tim Duncan
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Kobe Bryant
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Jermaine O'Neal
7.Jason Kidd
8.Dirk Nowitzki
9.Ben Wallace
10.Peja Stojakovic
11.Sam Cassell
12.Baron Davis
13.Paul Pierce
14.Vince Carter
15.Andrei Kirilenko
16.Ron Artest
17.Elton Brand
18.Ray Allen
19.Steve Nash
20.Yao Ming
21.Pau Gasol
22.Lebron James
23.Stephon Marbury
24.Rasheed Wallace
25.Lamar Odom

2005
1.Kobe Bryant
2.Lebron James
3.Tim Duncan
4. Kevin Garnett
5.Shaquille O'Neal
6.Steve Nash
7.Tracy McGrady
8.Dirk Nowitzki
9.Dwyane Wade
10.Allen Iverson
11.Vince Carter
12.Amare Stoudemire
13.Ray Allen
14.Paul Pierce
15.Manu Ginobili
16.Elton Brand
17.Gilbert Arenas
18.Ben Wallace
19.Shawn Marion
20.Jason Kidd
21.Yao Ming
22.Chauncey Billups
23.Stephon Marbury
24.Grant Hill
25.Carmelo Anthony

2006
1.Dwyane Wade
2.Lebron James
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Dirk Nowitzki
5.Tim Duncan
6.Kevin Garnett
7.Steve Nash
8.Allen Iverson
9.Elton Brand
10.Shaquille O'Neal
11.Paul Pierce
12.Gilbert Arenas
13.Chauncey Billups
14.Vince Carter
15.Carmelo Anthony
16.Ray Allen
17.Shawn Marion
18.Pau Gasol
19.Yao Ming
20.Andrei Kirilenko
21.Jason Kidd
22.Manu Ginobili
23.Tony Parker
24.Michael Redd
25.Ben Wallace

2007
1.Lebron James
2.Kobe Bryant
3.Dwyane Wade
4.Steve Nash
5.Dirk Nowitzki
6.Tim Duncan
7.Kevin Garnett
8.Yao Ming
9.Carmelo Anthony
10.Tracy McGrady
11.Vince Carter
12.Gilbert Arenas
13.Amare Stoudemire
14.Baron Davis
15.Elton Brand
16.Chris Bosh
17.Jason Kidd
18.Carlos Boozer
19.Allen Iverson
20.Ray Allen
21.Deron Williams
22.Chris Paul
23.Chauncey Billups
24.Manu Ginobili
25.Tony Parker

2008
1.Lebron James
2.Kobe Bryant
3.Chris Paul
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Dwight Howard
6.Dirk Nowitzki
7.Steve Nash
8.Amare Stoudemire
9.Deron Williams
10.Tim Duncan
11.Paul Pierce
12.Yao Ming
13.Manu Ginobili
14.Allen Iverson
15.Carmelo Anthony
16.Tracy McGrady
17.Pau Gasol
18.Chris Bosh
19.Baron Davis
20.Chauncey Billups
21.Carlos Boozer
22.Joe Johnson
23.Tony Parker
24.Vince Carter
25.Ray Allen

2009
1.Lebron James
2.Dwyane Wade
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Chris Paul
5.Dwight Howard
6.Dirk Nowitzki
7.Yao Ming
8.Brandon Roy
9.Deron Williams
10.Pau Gasol
11.Carmelo Anthony
12.Tim Duncan
13.Paul Pierce
14.Chauncey Billups
15.Tony Parker
16.Steve Nash
17.Kevin Garnett
18.Chris Bosh
19.Andre Igoudala
20.Danny Granger
21.Kevin Durant
22.Vince Carter
23.Ray Allen
24.Joe Johnson
25.Shaquille O'Neal

Fixed!

Figured out two things with your rankings:

1. You overrated Tim Duncan to HELL...
2. You underrated http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_top_10.html that guy to HELL....

Gifted Mind

07-17-2012, 06:42 PM

Duncan over Kobe did appear to be the consensus on this board back then, but among players/coaches/media, I remember Kobe being considered the best player from '06-'10(though most on message boards were choose Lebron by '09 and '10). At the time, I thought Kobe was clearly the best from '06-'08, and it wasn't until after I reflected on the '09 season that I thought Lebron had surpassed him.

I always considered Kobe overrated by the general media. Him being picked in 09 and 10 over LeBron supports that assertion. In fact, I would say the message has been more accurate than the media in these selections. But what I find strange is in 2007 everyone was picking Duncan, and now everyone is picking Kobe.

Duncan on the otherhand had 2 all-star caliber guards in Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker who made my top 25 in addition to arguably the league's top perimeter defender Bruce Bowen who also hit those corner 3s, and 2 other solid offensive players and shooters in Michael Finley and Brent Barry. The Spurs were 3rd in 3P% at 38.1% and Duncan had multiple scoring options surrounding him.

He shouldn't be penalized for this because he did what you're supposed to with a great team, which is win, and he did something that many greats never do. But while I think it's a valid part of the argument for Duncan, I don't think it's an indictment against Kobe because he simply didn't have the opportunity that season.

Not only did Kobe show he could make his teammates player and play efficient, unselfish basketball, which is why I'm confident that '07 Kobe could have won a title with the right cast, but he showed individual ability that few in the history the game have shown late in the season.

Phil Jackson gave Kobe the green light to snap a 7 game losing streak and he responds with four straight 50+ games including games of 65 and 60 points. From that point on, he averaged 40.3 ppg, 5.6 rpg and 4.4 apg over his final 17 games. Overall, he had seven 50+ games in those final 17 games, and ten 50+ games overall.

I see a valid argument for both players, but I'm sticking with Kobe because I think he was the more dominant player by that point, more capable of carrying a team, especially since he could go out there and average 41 mpg. Changing approaches like he did depending on what the coach asked was amazing, and I do believe that he won about as much as he could with that team considering the circumstances.

I think Kobe was a bit better in '07 than he was in '09 when he won a title, and clearly better than '10 when he won another title, so I don't consider this to be a case of comparing a championship player to a guy who isn't capable of leading a team there.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. Kobe was phenomenal in 2007, and both Kobe and Duncan were capable of leading their teams to the championship. And it is extremely close in deciding which one of them was a better player. But if my goal was to win, the qualities Duncan brings is easier to build around and more important to win. He was the best defensive player in the NBA in 2007 while highly efficient on offense shooting 55% with 20ppg and grabbing over 10 rebounds. Do you honestly believe what Kobe brings is more valuable than Duncan for winning a championship? That is the question. I mean think about that, good and highly efficient low-post scoring, strong rebounding, and the best defense in the league. What is more important than this when it comes to winning? Even I need to think it over.

ShaqAttack3234

07-18-2012, 08:46 PM

Fixed!

Regarding 2005, did you put Kobe at number 1 to distract me from your equally absurd choice of Lebron at number 2?

What makes these players better than Duncan, KG or Shaq at this time?

Kobe's Lakers finished 34-48, and he struggled in the ball-dominant role Rudy T had him in. Frank Hamblen replaced Rudy T and started bringing the triangle back, while Kobe's efficiency was back to normal under Hamblen, the Lakers went just 9-23 after his return, and he went just 3-13 without Lamar Odom. He finished with his lowest FG as a starter until this year at 43.3% and a career worst 4.1 TO per game. Kobe's mid-range game also wasn't nearly as strong as usual. Kobe's subpar defense caused him to get left off the all-defensive team, which has been almost automatic for him,

I'm not one to rely on these sort of things since they're still just subjective opinions, but when is the last time a supposed best player didn't receive a single MVP point and finished on the all-nba 3rd team)?

Lebron still lacked a mid-range jumper at 37% from 16-23 feet, and lacked a polished offensive skill set. He was also a poor defender back then. This wasn't prime Lebron leading teams to 50+ wins, his team finished 42-40 in the East, and missed the playoffs.

Kevin Garnett was the victim of a poor team, but went 44-38, far more respectable than Kobe. Garnett also won more games than Lebron in a tougher conference. KG was relatively close to the level he had played at the previous season.

Garnett averaged 22/14/6 with 1.4 bpg and 1.5 spg on 50% shooting, and we know his defense was far beyond Kobe or Lebron's especially in '05. Cassell had dropped to a 14/3/5, 47 FG% player who played just 59 games. Sprewell also dropped to a 13/3/2 player. Both Cassell and Sprewell distracted the team with contract disputes.

Shaq instantly transformed Miami into a 59 win team and a contender. He averaged 23/10/3, 2.3 bpg on 60% in 34 mpg. There was nobody in the league who had that presence at that time, made team's adjust to their defenses so much or was as tough to match up with 1 on 1.

Wade made quotes like this throughout the '04-'05 season and it's an example of why Shaq's impact goes well beyond numbers.

"Everyone is focused on him," Wade said. "I've never seen anyone get the attention he does. When Shaq's on the floor, thing open up for me. It's been a little easier for me to pick and choose my spots. The attention that he draws makes things a lot easier when he's on the floor."

Shaq as a shot blocker and 7'1" presence, made a far greater defensive impact than Bryant or James did as perimeter players who didn't appear particularly interested in defending that season.

And finally we have Duncan. He was at his usual 20/11/3, 2.6 bpg in 33 mpg, and arguably the league's best defensive player as well as one of the top post scorers and better passing big men like KG and Shaq.

He led the Spurs to another championship despite playing through injuries, and still managed 23/12/3 with 2.3 bpg,

As far as '06? Kobe was the best. What did Lebron do to deserve to be ranked over him. Kobe led his team to a 45-35 record when he played in the West, while Lebron's Cavs weren't that much better in an inferior conference at 47-32 in the games Lebron played.

Kobe did this without having a consistent teammate until the second half of the season. Aside from Lamar Odom, he didn't have one player who you could call a legitimate starter, and once Odom started playing consistently in the second half(16/9/6, 53 FG% vs 14/9/5, 45 FG% 1st half), the Lakers finished the year 19-11, a 52 win pace, including an 11-3 finish to the season. Odom was also forced into the role of their second best player by far averaging 40 mpg, while he's a player who is clearly more comfortable as a third option.

To put Kobe's cast in perspective, Phil Jackson who is obviously a team first guy(hence the triangle), told Kobe from the start of the season he was going to have to carry them for the Lakers to compete due to the limited talent and the younger players learning the triangle. Kobe responded with a 35/5/5 season including arguably the 2 greatest volume scoring feats we've seen of 81 and 62 in 3 quarters. He was also still capable of locking down elite scorers as he had memorable defensive games vs Ray Allen and Vince Carter, while also taking the challenge vs players like T-Mac, Wade and Lebron, iirc. He was the better defender than Wade, and especially Lebron while clearly being the better scorer.

Wade did win a title, but he had a team, unlike Kobe. I could definitely see Kobe winning a title given the right cast, but I don't see Wade carrying a team like Kobe did. His mid-range game was improving, but he wasn't the polished player Kobe was. And while he was the man on his team, he also benefited from Shaq's presence, he shot 51.6% in 54 games with Shaq and just 44.7% in 21 games without him, and he was just 10-11 without him despite having a great backup center in Zo who averaged 12/9 with 4 bpg as a starter, in addition to more quality NBA players than Bryant had, even without Shaq.

And I know damn well you'll be the first to argue Lebron over Kobe in '09 and '10 when Kobe was winning titles.

And in the postseason, Kobe immediately switched approaches, after being told to carry the team all year, and succeeding, he changed his approach to a facilitator and even somewhat of a decoy, and nearly upset a superior Suns team.

Lebron first in '07? :roll: Remember his shooting. 34% from 16-23 feet, 32% on 3s and 70% from the line, this was exposed in a 35%, near 6 TO finals series. I've already made the case for Kobe in a previous post, Gifted Mind did the honors for Duncan, Lebron has no case over those players.|

And why is Lebron over Kobe in '08? Kobe was the better scorer and better defender, plus, he did a phenomenal job as a playmaker and he really elevated his teammates games that year closing that gap in that area which is usually Lebron's biggest advantage. Kobe also didn't have a hole in his game like Lebron's jumper, which was again exposed in the playoffs. Despite his big game 7, he had another 36 FG% and 5+ TO series. Kobe meanwhile led the Lakers to the best record ina West where every playoff team won at least 50+ games despite only having Gasol for 26 games and Bynum for just 35(neither at the same time), with Gasol, they were almost unbeatable(22-4), which shows the level Kobe was at and what he could do with some legitimate help. They overachieved for most of the season before Gasol. And he destroyed the West averaging 32/6/6 on 51% through the first 3 rounds. He was facilitating early, getting everyone involved and taking over effortlessly like clockwork when he had to.

2. You underrated http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_top_10.html that guy to HELL....

:roll: What is this shit supposed to mean? You linked PER numbers, am I supposed to care? That's just a made up formula stat, which is nothing more than subjective values given to each area and mashed up into one pile of shit for people too lazy to watch basketball and analyze the game.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. Kobe was phenomenal in 2007, and both Kobe and Duncan were capable of leading their teams to the championship. And it is extremely close in deciding which one of them was a better player. But if my goal was to win, the qualities Duncan brings is easier to build around and more important to win. He was the best defensive player in the NBA in 2007 while highly efficient on offense shooting 55% with 20ppg and grabbing over 10 rebounds. Do you honestly believe what Kobe brings is more valuable than Duncan for winning a championship? That is the question. I mean think about that, good and highly efficient low-post scoring, strong rebounding, and the best defense in the league. What is more important than this when it comes to winning? Even I need to think it over.

You're right, it's very close, I would say it might be easier to find the necessary players to put around Duncan because it's typically been harder to find the franchise big man, and anchoring a top defense while being a guy you can throw the ball to for an efficient quality shot or a double team trusting he'll make the right pass is invaluable.

At the same time, we have seen teams build championship teams differently than how we're used to in recent years.

If this was '02/'03 Duncan with that extra athleticism and stamina to average 25/13 and play 40 mpg or flirt with quad doubles and 30/20 games, I'm taking Duncan.

But while '07 Duncan still provided many of the same things, at 31, I think he lacked some of the stamina and wasn't quite as dominant, making it closer.

These 2 players are the first 2 I'd choose to build a team around with just the '07 season in mind. I might take Duncan first depending on what type of teammates I can acquire, but I'm not sure Kobe needed more help at this stage. Are Gasol, Odom and a few quality role players better than Manu, Parker and a few quality role players? The Spurs '07 team probably had an extra 1 or 2 role players than what LA had in '08 and '09. So I think you'll need a pretty comparable support around these players.

I don't have a problem with someone taking Duncan, you make a good case for him. In the end, we both agree that you'll contend, and have a great shot at a title with a quality team around either player.

StateOfMind12

07-18-2012, 08:57 PM

The playoffs are a different story, though. He was a Spur killer every year he played them except '99 and '03, but he didn't have his best series vs Houston in '09. And simply playing a team from Texas doesn't convince me.
I don't blame him for not playing well against the Rockets or not elevating his play considering how he went up against the two best perimeter defenders since MJ and Pippen with Battier and Artest. Kobe still played well but Kobe still destroyed the Mavericks back in his prime in '03-'09.

Well, you listed some really good players, Several of those series don't belong in the same class as T-Mac's, though. Manu only averaged 21/4/2, although his shooting % were 49/41/87. West averaged 23/7/3 on 48%.
The point is that all of those players that I had listed put up numbers way better and way beyond their averages which is my point about how Dallas more than likely let the star player get theirs but stop everyone else specifically the role players. If it wasn't then it was obvious that elite players would still get big numbers which would mean that their defense was weak and couldn't contain star play.

I did have Yao higher in '09, above some of those perimeter players, but I don't think he has the same case as Dwight. For one, he wasn't the defensive player Dwight was, or nearly as mobile or durable.

Plus, the injury in the playoffs was a factor. And I really noticed teams often taking Yao out of games by fronting him at times, and entry passes couldn't be low. But I think it's fair to put him up at 7 above Rpy and Deron. I can't put him any higher than that though.
I have no problem putting Yao below Dwight although I would give Yao the slight edge over Dwight due to the superior and more reliable offense but I would put Yao above Dirk.

I'd take Yao over Dirk just because of the superior all-around game. Dirk was the better scorer/shooter obviously but I don't think it was by much and I think Yao's advantages defensively, on the boards, passing, etc. gives him the edge over Dirk. I have never been a fan of one-dimensional players or players close to it and that was what Dirk honestly was and that was what he honestly was for most of his career. He put up decent rebounding numbers only when he paired up with terrible Centers like Erick Dampier or DeSagna Diop. When Dirk played with Chandler and Haywood, his rebounds were mediocre at best.

As for the fronting part, I think it has more to do with the fact that he had no passers on his teams at least when McGrady went down. The best passer on the team at least in terms of entry pass was Shane Battier and he was literally just standing in the corner on offense. Aaron Brooks couldn't pass and never could pass to save his life. There was also no slasher on the team to make Yao's life easier, McGrady was that player in his first season there but McGrady declined and became a shell of his former self after 2005 and he was no longer there at all in the 2009 season. Yao really had to earn every single one of his points and he did a pretty good job at it and was extremely efficient at it.

Plus, Yao was always doubled when he was fronted which left somebody on his team for a dead open 3 or mid-range shot which is the benefit of his presence. I don't remember Yao ever being fronted 1 on 1 and being taken out of the game because of it. He was always doubled in his fronts and because of that nobody passed him the ball but I also remember that nobody really had the capability to pass him the ball in the fronts except Battier. Battier was the only one I remember that passed it to Yao despite a front and Yao got an easy layup/dunk.

The fronting issue was a combination of his lack of passers/slashers on the team and also double teams. Honestly, I think if Alston was still on that 2009 season in the 2nd half, Yao's life would have been easier since he was like 100x the passer Brooks ever was and ever will be.

I got no problem with Howard over Yao but I would give Yao the nod over Dirk.

b1imtf

07-18-2012, 08:58 PM

WockaVodka

07-18-2012, 11:01 PM

I'm not a KG hater at the slightest but he surely was not the 2nd best player in 2005.

magnax1

07-18-2012, 11:15 PM

I'm not a KG hater at the slightest but he surely was not the 2nd best player in 2005.
I don;t know how one could make a case that he wasn't at least 2. I have him ranked 2 behind Duncan, but I just don't know how he gets lower then that.

WockaVodka

07-18-2012, 11:17 PM

I don;t know how one could make a case that he wasn't at least 2. I have him ranked 2 behind Duncan, but I just don't know how he gets lower then that.
He missed the post-season that season and the team was pretty similar to the 2004 team except for Cassell being hurt. Cassell for like 15 games is the difference between a 1st seed and a 9th seed?

magnax1

07-18-2012, 11:23 PM

He missed the post-season that season and the team was pretty similar to the 2004 team except for Cassell being hurt. Cassell for like 15 games is the difference between a 1st seed and a 9th seed?
Not really that similar at all. Sprewell didn't play well, Cassell didn't play well when he was in the game so him missing 20 games isn't the whole story, and those 04 05 teams really had no depth other then KG, Cassell, and Sprewell anyway, so when two out of three played pretty poorly is kind of screwed the team.
I don't know how you watch 05 KG and think there is some big decline though. he was worse in 05 by small margins, but what exactly do you think he did that made a 15ish difference in wins from 04? Because I surely don't see it.

WockaVodka

07-19-2012, 01:01 AM

Not really that similar at all. Sprewell didn't play well, Cassell didn't play well when he was in the game so him missing 20 games isn't the whole story, and those 04 05 teams really had no depth other then KG, Cassell, and Sprewell anyway, so when two out of three played pretty poorly is kind of screwed the team.
I don't know how you watch 05 KG and think there is some big decline though. he was worse in 05 by small margins, but what exactly do you think he did that made a 15ish difference in wins from 04? Because I surely don't see it.
I just thought Shaq was better that season. I suppose Top 3 is alright but I think Duncan and Shaq were quite clearly #1 and #2.

Boston C's

07-19-2012, 01:09 AM

I wanna put ray allen in the top 10 in 2005 but its hard to take someone out of there...the season the sonics had along with what he had to work with in the playoffs was remarkable with how he carried them i feel though that he was a top 10 player that yr but it could be my homerism coming out

Gifted Mind

07-19-2012, 01:27 AM

Just another key stat supporting Duncan for 2007, the +/- for him that season was +14.9, #1 in the league. For Kobe it was +7.6. Notice, this was with Ginobili coming off the bench most of the season, while Parker's +/- was +8.1.

Not always the most telling stat, but clearly shows 2007 Duncan was still a very impacting player.

ShaqAttack3234

07-19-2012, 02:10 AM

I don't blame him for not playing well against the Rockets or not elevating his play considering how he went up against the two best perimeter defenders since MJ and Pippen with Battier and Artest. Kobe still played well but Kobe still destroyed the Mavericks back in his prime in '03-'09.

'05 Kobe was noticeably less effective than other years during that time. Playing the way he was, I don't see him having the same success as T-Mac in that particular year. He obviously still had the ability to go off and have a great series, but I don't think Kobe would have gotten 50+ wins with that Rocket team playing the way he was that season. '03 Kobe? Or '06-'09 Kobe? That's a different story.

The point is that all of those players that I had listed put up numbers way better and way beyond their averages which is my point about how Dallas more than likely let the star player get theirs but stop everyone else specifically the role players. If it wasn't then it was obvious that elite players would still get big numbers which would mean that their defense was weak and couldn't contain star play.

I haven't really noticed this trend before, there may be something to it, but all I know is that I was impressed with T-Mac's play that series in every aspect of the game.

]I have no problem putting Yao below Dwight although I would give Yao the slight edge over Dwight due to the superior and more reliable offense but I would put Yao above Dirk.

I'd take Yao over Dirk just because of the superior all-around game. Dirk was the better scorer/shooter obviously but I don't think it was by much and I think Yao's advantages defensively, on the boards, passing, etc. gives him the edge over Dirk. I have never been a fan of one-dimensional players or players close to it and that was what Dirk honestly was and that was what he honestly was for most of his career. He put up decent rebounding numbers only when he paired up with terrible Centers like Erick Dampier or DeSagna Diop. When Dirk played with Chandler and Haywood, his rebounds were mediocre at best.

As for the fronting part, I think it has more to do with the fact that he had no passers on his teams at least when McGrady went down. The best passer on the team at least in terms of entry pass was Shane Battier and he was literally just standing in the corner on offense. Aaron Brooks couldn't pass and never could pass to save his life. There was also no slasher on the team to make Yao's life easier, McGrady was that player in his first season there but McGrady declined and became a shell of his former self after 2005 and he was no longer there at all in the 2009 season. Yao really had to earn every single one of his points and he did a pretty good job at it and was extremely efficient at it.

Plus, Yao was always doubled when he was fronted which left somebody on his team for a dead open 3 or mid-range shot which is the benefit of his presence. I don't remember Yao ever being fronted 1 on 1 and being taken out of the game because of it. He was always doubled in his fronts and because of that nobody passed him the ball but I also remember that nobody really had the capability to pass him the ball in the fronts except Battier. Battier was the only one I remember that passed it to Yao despite a front and Yao got an easy layup/dunk.

The fronting issue was a combination of his lack of passers/slashers on the team and also double teams. Honestly, I think if Alston was still on that 2009 season in the 2nd half, Yao's life would have been easier since he was like 100x the passer Brooks ever was and ever will be.

I got no problem with Howard over Yao but I would give Yao the nod over Dirk.

This is a solid post, but I thought Dirk was really good this year, he was great all year after a sort of quiet(by his standards) '08 season and started restoring his reputation with his play this year. And he was amazing vs Denver. I think he actually has a solid case over Dwight as well. There's probably not a big difference between all 3 in impact, but Yao going down in the playoffs doesn't help.

I did give Yao credit for the defensive attention he received, that does make a big difference.

Not really that similar at all. Sprewell didn't play well, Cassell didn't play well when he was in the game so him missing 20 games isn't the whole story, and those 04 05 teams really had no depth other then KG, Cassell, and Sprewell anyway, so when two out of three played pretty poorly is kind of screwed the team.
I don't know how you watch 05 KG and think there is some big decline though. he was worse in 05 by small margins, but what exactly do you think he did that made a 15ish difference in wins from 04? Because I surely don't see it.

I agree, I thought he was just a bit above his other seasons during '04 and '03, but he was pretty much as good as '05 as he was in any other season.

His cast was weak due to Cassell and Sprewell declining noticeably and Cassell missing games. the fact that he went from a 20/7, 49 FG%, 40 3P%, 87 FT% all-nba second team guard who averaged 14/5 on 46%, and he came off the bench for 21 games.

Sprewell dropped from 17/4/4 and a season where some thought he deserved an all-star selection(though I'm not sure he was still at that level myself) to a 13/3/2 player.

Though he did have Wally who was a good player and an offensive threat, Trenton Hassell was a good role player and Troy Hudson was fine for a role player.

But you need much more out of Cassell and Sprewell to contend. If Cassell and Sprewell are at their '04 level without the contract disputes, I have little doubt KG is contending that year.

StateOfMind12

07-19-2012, 05:12 AM

This is a solid post, but I thought Dirk was really good this year, he was great all year after a sort of quiet(by his standards) '08 season and started restoring his reputation with his play this year. And he was amazing vs Denver. I think he actually has a solid case over Dwight as well. There's probably not a big difference between all 3 in impact, but Yao going down in the playoffs doesn't help.

I did give Yao credit for the defensive attention he received, that does make a big difference.

Well I'm not really sure if I gave you enough to also convince you that Yao should be above Dirk but I personally do not think it makes much sense to have Dwight be #1 in the group, Dirk #2, and Yao at #3. I actually don't think it makes much sense to put him Yao at #3 of the two.

Dirk is the best offensive player in the group but the worst defensive player of the group. Dwight is the best defensive player in the group but the worst offensive player in the group. Yao gives you pretty much the best of both worlds of the two. He is just #2 at like everything between those two except like passing. That is really the only aspect I think he is better than both of those two in and also low-post/interior scoring but Dirk isn't too shabby himself.

If you value offense/scoring the most, the three should be...

1. Dirk
2. Yao
3. Howard

If you value defense the most, the three should be....

1. Howard
2. Yao
3. Dirk

If you value all-around games the most which I do, the three should be

1. Yao
2. Howard
3. Dirk

I guess if you want to give the edge to Dirk due to durability, it makes some sense. Although I don't feel like it is right to punish Yao for missing 3-4 last playoff games especially when he made more of an impact and was just the better overall player than Dirk was that season.

I'm assuming it didn't convince you though since you didn't edit your original list, lol.

unbreakable

07-19-2012, 05:26 AM

do a point system... tim duncan up top damn near every year

goat player 2000-2009. :bowdown:

Dukem

07-19-2012, 05:31 AM

I'd have to say he'd have a shot at top 3-4. I was tempted to put him higher anyway for being the star player on a team that was probably a shot away from a championship, and for how great the Kings offense was running through Webber.

But at the same time, I have to remember they were a stacked team. 7 players in double figures in that era is amazing. Aside from Webber, there was another 20+ ppg scorer in Peja who was the best pure shooter at the time not named Ray Allen and he fit well in the offense since he moved well without the ball, and was also pretty good in the mid-post area. Mike Bibby also proved to be one of the best scoring point guards and another shooter when he stepped up and averaged 20+ in the playoffs while hitting huge shots, and while he had the skills to play point guard, he was good without the ball which made him the ideal fit with the offense running through Webber and Vlade. Doug Christie was a very well rounded 2 guard known for his defense, but he could handle the ball, was a good passer and a solid shooter. Vlade was one of the most skilled centers, who may have been one of the 2 best passing big men along with Webber, he had a good post game, but could hit mid-range shots, was a solid rebounder, and despite the flopping, he was a pesky defender who could make an impact at that end drawing charges, stripping the post and knocking away entry passes with his good hands and blocking some shots. Bobby Jackson was an excellent scoring point guard and a good shooter, and one of four Kings capable of averaging 20 ppg. He averaged 11 ppg in just 22 mpg, but he got a chance to start 26 games the following season and averaged 20/5/4 on 50% shooting as a starter. Hedo was also a double digit scorer in 24 mpg off the bench and a versatile 6'9" small forward who could handle the ball, pass, create off the dribble and shoot. He averaged 17/7/3 in his 10 starts that year. Scott Pollard was also a solid backup big man and physical role player who rebounded well.

They also had one of the all-time great coaches in Rick Adleman. Aside from mental toughness, they didn't have a weakness. That's just an incredible collection of talent. One of the teams that can accurately be described as stacked. The only other early 00's team that arguably had that much talent was the 2000 Blazers.

So while winning a title would have helped Webber's ranking, it wouldn't have gotten him over Shaq and Duncan. Who I also think were clearly better players regardless of accomplishments.

Thanks, but 2000? T-Mac was still in Toronto then, and while he was showing a lot of potential that season, he wasn't a legitimate all-star player bordering on superstar level like Kobe was at that time.

Yeah had the Kings won the title in 2002, i'd rank Webber behind Shaq and Duncan. It's a shame that Webber had that injury in 2003 mind you, as I truly believe that they would have won the title in 2003 had he not gotten injured.

Sorry I was looking at your 2000 list and accidently put in 2000. I was mean't to say 2004 for T-Mac but even then, Kobe and T-mac for were evenly match in 2004 (maybe Kobe over T-mac slightly actually now looking back on it) and T-Mac only just ahead of Kobe in 2003...the rest of the time, Kobe was clearly the better player.

ShaqAttack3234

07-21-2012, 12:41 AM

Well I'm not really sure if I gave you enough to also convince you that Yao should be above Dirk but I personally do not think it makes much sense to have Dwight be #1 in the group, Dirk #2, and Yao at #3. I actually don't think it makes much sense to put him Yao at #3 of the two.

Dirk is the best offensive player in the group but the worst defensive player of the group. Dwight is the best defensive player in the group but the worst offensive player in the group. Yao gives you pretty much the best of both worlds of the two. He is just #2 at like everything between those two except like passing. That is really the only aspect I think he is better than both of those two in and also low-post/interior scoring but Dirk isn't too shabby himself.

If you value offense/scoring the most, the three should be...

1. Dirk
2. Yao
3. Howard

If you value defense the most, the three should be....

1. Howard
2. Yao
3. Dirk

If you value all-around games the most which I do, the three should be

1. Yao
2. Howard
3. Dirk

I guess if you want to give the edge to Dirk due to durability, it makes some sense. Although I don't feel like it is right to punish Yao for missing 3-4 last playoff games especially when he made more of an impact and was just the better overall player than Dirk was that season.

I'm assuming it didn't convince you though since you didn't edit your original list, lol.

I don't think Yao being the 2nd best offensive and defensive player out of the 3 automatically makes him 2nd. I go primarily by who impressed me on the court most that year, and who I thought made more of an impact from what I saw. Yao was a presence defensively in the paint, and a shot blocker, but he had his limitations due to his mobility. Dwight was the only one out of the 3 that could single-handedly turn a poor/mediocre defense into an elite one, imo. Yao was the better offensive player because he clearly had the better post game, demanded more defensive attention, made his free throws, and he was a better pass. But Dwight actually scored more on a better FG% in both the regular season and playoffs because of his ability to run the floor, get offensive rebounds, finish, and despite his game still being fairly raw, he had developed confidence that year facing up and going to his running hook.

Dirk on the other hand did not have as much of a defensive impact as Yao, but he was a pretty average defender by that point. And he was the only one out of the 3 that truly had the ability to truly carry a team offensively. Yao had that ability in '07, though.

Plus, both Howard and Dirk seemed to have the ability to play more minutes for their teams. We saw what happened when Adelman tried to play Yao 37 mpg in '08.

Dwight at 5 and Dirk at 6 just makes sense to me based on how I saw them impact games, and their postseason performances.

Yeah had the Kings won the title in 2002, i'd rank Webber behind Shaq and Duncan. It's a shame that Webber had that injury in 2003 mind you, as I truly believe that they would have won the title in 2003 had he not gotten injured.

Amazingly, the Kings won 59 games in '03 while rarely having their full lineup.

Mike Bibby missed the first 27 games of the season, Peja missed 10 games and Bobby Jackson missed a 21 game stretch that started just 5 games into Bibby's return, then Webber missed a 10 game stretch that started while Jackson was still out, and Webber had missed 5 games earlier in the year.

So they really didn't have their full core until the last 26 games of the season when they went 21-5.

Sorry I was looking at your 2000 list and accidently put in 2000. I was mean't to say 2004 for T-Mac but even then, Kobe and T-mac for were evenly match in 2004 (maybe Kobe over T-mac slightly actually now looking back on it) and T-Mac only just ahead of Kobe in 2003...the rest of the time, Kobe was clearly the better player.

T-Mac did have a case over Kobe based on individual play, but I was barely comfortable as it was putting a player top 5 when his team won just over 20 games and finished with the worst record. It's easy to forget, but Kobe did make the finals and play very well after the all-star break while also having a strong series vs the Spurs and a pretty good one vs Minnesota. His approach in the finals was inexcusable and he had his struggles throughout that year, but making the finals is still an accomplishment. Especially since the Lakers didn't turn out to be the super team some imagined due to Malone's injury that kept him out half the season and pretty much made him incapable of playing in the finals, while Payton was declining and a poor fit in the triangle offense. Kobe also has more excuses for his struggles, while T-Mac admittedly didn't always give 100%.

It's debatable when I think about it, but Kobe is the better choice, imo.

But you don't think T-Mac had a case over Kobe in '05? T-Mac impressed me more than in '04, while Kobe had another down year, this time without the team success unlike '04, while T-Mac led Houston to 51 wins.

Dukem

07-21-2012, 04:32 AM

Amazingly, the Kings won 59 games in '03 while rarely having their full lineup.

Mike Bibby missed the first 27 games of the season, Peja missed 10 games and Bobby Jackson missed a 21 game stretch that started just 5 games into Bibby's return, then Webber missed a 10 game stretch that started while Jackson was still out, and Webber had missed 5 games earlier in the year.

So they really didn't have their full core until the last 26 games of the season when they went 21-5.

T-Mac did have a case over Kobe based on individual play, but I was barely comfortable as it was putting a player top 5 when his team won just over 20 games and finished with the worst record. It's easy to forget, but Kobe did make the finals and play very well after the all-star break while also having a strong series vs the Spurs and a pretty good one vs Minnesota. His approach in the finals was inexcusable and he had his struggles throughout that year, but making the finals is still an accomplishment. Especially since the Lakers didn't turn out to be the super team some imagined due to Malone's injury that kept him out half the season and pretty much made him incapable of playing in the finals, while Payton was declining and a poor fit in the triangle offense. Kobe also has more excuses for his struggles, while T-Mac admittedly didn't always give 100%.

It's debatable when I think about it, but Kobe is the better choice, imo.

But you don't think T-Mac had a case over Kobe in '05? T-Mac impressed me more than in '04, while Kobe had another down year, this time without the team success unlike '04, while T-Mac led Houston to 51 wins.

It was during the playoffs of 2003 where I thought that this Kings team has a big chance to win it all, they just played with flair and were just as good of a passing team as the Kings the previous year.

I see your point about 2004, but although T-Mac had an awful season with the Magic, the team were absolutely shocking and I was surprised they managed to string more than 15 wins together. T-Mac during that season was still on top form (obviously not the standard of the 2003 T-Mac) where as Kobe in my opinion, regressed a little and it's hard not to mention his performance in the 2004 finals. That's why I have them neck and neck for this season as although the Magic were god awful that year, T-Mac still had a great season on an individual standpoint. Kobe kind of regressed but his team reached the NBA final. It wouldn't bother me if people put one over the other though but I can see your point.

Now that you mention it, 2004-2005 T-Mac does have a big case over Kobe but at the same time, Kobe had the better individual stats and now a worse team after Malone and Shaq had departed. Kobe and T-Mac was more of an all round player this season with the latter now having a better team in the Rockets than he had with the Magic. It wouldn't bother me if people put T-Mac over Kobe this season though for he did lead the team to the playoffs and that 13 points in 35 seconds is an unbelievable performance against the defending champion Spurs. I'd say neck-and-neck again although i'm favoring Kobe slightly though.

2006 Kobe was on fire and was my favorite season from him. T-Mac doesn't have a case against Kobe this season, even if T-mac had a good season (not quite as good as previous seasons though in my opinion) as Kobe's team is almost as bad as them Magic teams of 2001-2004.

StateOfMind12

07-21-2012, 04:38 AM

Dirk on the other hand did not have as much of a defensive impact as Yao, but he was a pretty average defender by that point. And he was the only one out of the 3 that truly had the ability to truly carry a team offensively. Yao had that ability in '07, though.

Fair enough, but let me ask you this. If 2007 Yao replaced 2009 Yao for the 2009 season rankings, where would he rank in 2009? I would have him at the top 5 at least and above Howard and Dirk. I go back and forth between 2011 Howard and 2007 Yao though but I feel like Howard wasn't as good as peak Yao was in 2007 or Yao was in 2009. I don't think Dirk in his peak was ever as good as either Yao or Dwight either. He just didn't do enough to impact the game compared to the two but his overall career and historical ranking is clearly above both of them though.

ShaqAttack3234

07-21-2012, 03:48 PM

It was during the playoffs of 2003 where I thought that this Kings team has a big chance to win it all, they just played with flair and were just as good of a passing team as the Kings the previous year.

Yeah, they clearly had more talent in the league than anyone, and were the stacked team in the league that year. Dallas had a lot of talent with Dirk, Nash, Finley and Van Exel, but they didn't have the same kind of talent after that compared to the Kings, and Sacramento took them to 7 largely without C-Webb.

We were very close to seeing another Lakers/Kings series which would have been a great rematch because that seemed like it could have been the best rivalry of the 00's. If Horry's 3 stays down in game 5 vs the Spurs, the Lakers probably advance. And the series was that close even with Fox being injured, George eventually getting injured and Horry going through an 0/18 slump on 3s in the series.

I see your point about 2004, but although T-Mac had an awful season with the Magic, the team were absolutely shocking and I was surprised they managed to string more than 15 wins together. T-Mac during that season was still on top form (obviously not the standard of the 2003 T-Mac) where as Kobe in my opinion, regressed a little and it's hard not to mention his performance in the 2004 finals. That's why I have them neck and neck for this season as although the Magic were god awful that year, T-Mac still had a great season on an individual standpoint. Kobe kind of regressed but his team reached the NBA final. It wouldn't bother me if people put one over the other though but I can see your point.

Individually, it is close. It would be interesting to see what they would have done in each other's place this season.

Now that you mention it, 2004-2005 T-Mac does have a big case over Kobe but at the same time, Kobe had the better individual stats and now a worse team after Malone and Shaq had departed. Kobe and T-Mac was more of an all round player this season with the latter now having a better team in the Rockets than he had with the Magic. It wouldn't bother me if people put T-Mac over Kobe this season though for he did lead the team to the playoffs and that 13 points in 35 seconds is an unbelievable performance against the defending champion Spurs. I'd say neck-and-neck again although i'm favoring Kobe slightly though.

Kobe's stats were a little better, but he didn't play as impressively to me as T-Mac did that season. The first month of the season, T-Mac was trying to fit in, and the Rockets started out just 6-10. Van Gundy told T-Mac to assert himself more, and he averaged 27/6/6, 1.9 spg, on 44% the rest of the way with just 2.5 TO while averaging exactly 2 made threes, and Houston finished 45-21 before raising his game in the playoffs.

I think it makes more sense than T-Mac being over Kobe in '04 because T-Mac improved in '05, while Kobe had another disappointing year similar to '04.

2006 Kobe was on fire and was my favorite season from him. T-Mac doesn't have a case against Kobe this season, even if T-mac had a good season (not quite as good as previous seasons though in my opinion) as Kobe's team is almost as bad as them Magic teams of 2001-2004.

Yeah, this is when Kobe separated himself from T-Mac and the comparisons really ended.

Fair enough, but let me ask you this. If 2007 Yao replaced 2009 Yao for the 2009 season rankings, where would he rank in 2009? I would have him at the top 5 at least and above Howard and Dirk. I go back and forth between 2011 Howard and 2007 Yao though but I feel like Howard wasn't as good as peak Yao was in 2007 or Yao was in 2009. I don't think Dirk in his peak was ever as good as either Yao or Dwight either. He just didn't do enough to impact the game compared to the two but his overall career and historical ranking is clearly above both of them though.

Yao ranked lower in '07 because of an injury, so those 48 games would still probably prevent him from being any higher in '09.

I do think he was playing better in '07 before his injury than Dwight played in '09, though.

StateOfMind12

07-21-2012, 07:24 PM

Yao ranked lower in '07 because of an injury, so those 48 games would still probably prevent him from being any higher in '09.

I do think he was playing better in '07 before his injury than Dwight played in '09, though.
I was just asking did you think Yao in 2007 was a better player than Dirk and Dwight were in 2009, not a better season. I suppose your answer is yes in this case. I think if Yao was injury-free in 2007, he would probably be top 5 at least as well which is even more impressive considering how there were more talented players in 2007.

ShaqAttack3234

07-21-2012, 08:47 PM

I was just asking did you think Yao in 2007 was a better player than Dirk and Dwight were in 2009, not a better season. I suppose your answer is yes in this case. I think if Yao was injury-free in 2007, he would probably be top 5 at least as well which is even more impressive considering how there were more talented players in 2007.

He was a better player in '07 than both of them '09, yes. Whenever I think of that season it kind of bothers me because that was a freak injury, I believe he just came down on a Clipper player's foot. He had been shocking me with how many dominant he was before that, I never thought he had that type of potential. He did return from that injury at roughly the same level, and was healthy for the playoffs despite not having his best series, which is why the missed games don't hurt him as much as '06 and '08. The season would get more respect had he at least played 65-70 games, or gotten to the WCF, which they were almost guaranteed to do had they held on in game 7 vs the Jazz because of the Warriors upsetting the Mavs.

Yao was on his way to having a top 5 season. I don't think anyone was playing better than him prior to his injury in late December. He was unstoppable by that point in the low post, and more of a power player than people realize. His strength was underrated, which is why he was attempting over 8 free throws, but you couldn't stop him that way because he was shooting like 86%. His jump hook and turnaround jumper were almost automatic because he had a great touch, and you couldn't really challenge the shots. He also had good footwork, and solid mobility for his size.

The impressive thing was also that Yao was playing well every night. The consistency was because he had those 2 unstoppable shots, and you couldn't foul him, but he'd get to the line regularly. He scored 20+ in 23 of his 26 games before his injury.

A game I've wanted to see for 5 years now is the early season game between Yao and Shaq. Yao outscored him 34-15, outrebounded him 14-10, shot 11-19 from the floor and 12-13 from the line vs O'Neal's 6/14 from the floor and 3-9 from the line.

I've only seen highlights from that game, but I remember reading an article the day after that game that talked about the torch officially being passed from Shaq to Yao. That's when I think I really started taking notice of Yao's early season dominance.

I'm actually wondering if I should move Yao over Wade and Garnett for '07 because at least Yao wasn't limited by his injury in the playoffs like Wade was.

Eat Like A Bosh

07-21-2012, 09:39 PM

He was a better player in '07 than both of them '09, yes. Whenever I think of that season it kind of bothers me because that was a freak injury, I believe he just came down on a Clipper player's foot. He had been shocking me with how many dominant he was before that, I never thought he had that type of potential. He did return from that injury at roughly the same level, and was healthy for the playoffs despite not having his best series, which is why the missed games don't hurt him as much as '06 and '08. The season would get more respect had he at least played 65-70 games, or gotten to the WCF, which they were almost guaranteed to do had they held on in game 7 vs the Jazz because of the Warriors upsetting the Mavs.

Yao was on his way to having a top 5 season. I don't think anyone was playing better than him prior to his injury in late December. He was unstoppable by that point in the low post, and more of a power player than people realize. His strength was underrated, which is why he was attempting over 8 free throws, but you couldn't stop him that way because he was shooting like 86%. His jump hook and turnaround jumper were almost automatic because he had a great touch, and you couldn't really challenge the shots. He also had good footwork, and solid mobility for his size.

The impressive thing was also that Yao was playing well every night. The consistency was because he had those 2 unstoppable shots, and you couldn't foul him, but he'd get to the line regularly. He scored 20+ in 23 of his 26 games before his injury.

A game I've wanted to see for 5 years now is the early season game between Yao and Shaq. Yao outscored him 34-15, outrebounded him 14-10, shot 11-19 from the floor and 12-13 from the line vs O'Neal's 6/14 from the floor and 3-9 from the line.

I've only seen highlights from that game, but I remember reading an article the day after that game that talked about the torch officially being passed from Shaq to Yao. That's when I think I really started taking notice of Yao's early season dominance.

I'm actually wondering if I should move Yao over Wade and Garnett for '07 because at least Yao wasn't limited by his injury in the playoffs like Wade was.
This game?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200611120MIA.html
2007 was the beginning of the end of Shaq, as he's officially out of his prime. Although he did look rejuvenated for periods in Phoenix.

Yao played 48 games that season, while Wade played 51, while Garnett played 76. I don't remember whether or not KG made the playoffs that year(probably not since he's still on the T-wolves), but I would rank it as Garnett, Yao, Wade. Wade got swept by the Chicago Bulls that season? At least Yao's team had a competitive series against the Jazz. Totally should've won that series though

ShaqAttack3234

07-21-2012, 10:26 PM

This game?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200611120MIA.html
2007 was the beginning of the end of Shaq, as he's officially out of his prime. Although he did look rejuvenated for periods in Phoenix

Yeah, that game. Shaq was officially past his prime long before '07. '02 or '03 was his last prime season. After '03, his decade long streak of seasons between 26-30 ppg was snapped.

His true prime was about '98-'02 or '03, but you could extend it with years that were relatively close to that level from '95-'03.

He was still a top 3 player in '04 and '05, but he clearly didn't have the mobility he used to anymore, and he was banged up by playoff time in '05 despite losing 20-30 pounds before that season, and despite playing a career low 34 mpg. He missed playoff games for the first time that year(and only time aside from his last year with Boston) and clearly wasn't himself.

He did have that resurgence in Phoenix when he was one of the best offensive big men in the league had some big games including 45/11 and played well vs all of the premier big men(Dwight, Yao, Gasol, Duncan).

But he also played very well after that all-star break in '07. He led Miami to a 16-7 record without Wade. He didn't make my top 25 list for '07 because he didn't qualify, but there weren't 25 players who made a bigger impact than Shaq did in the second half of the year.

Yao played 48 games that season, while Wade played 51, while Garnett played 76. I don't remember whether or not KG made the playoffs that year(probably not since he's still on the T-wolves), but I would rank it as Garnett, Yao, Wade. Wade got swept by the Chicago Bulls that season? At least Yao's team had a competitive series against the Jazz. Totally should've won that series though

Wade did play 51 games, but he might as well have only played 45, since those were the games he played in the first half. He got injured in the first game after the all-star break vs Houston, came back and played a few games late in the season and the playoffs, but he was clearly not recovered, and shouldn't have been playing.

Yao on the otherhand recovered from that injury and was healthy for the playoffs, which makes his injury less damaging than Wade's despite technically playing 3 fewer games in the regular season(but 3 more in the playoffs).

Garnett pretty much his usual statistical season in '07(22/13/4, 1.7 bpg, 1.2 spg), and he was in the tail end of his prime, or slightly past it and still close. But his FG% did drop from 52.6% in '06 to 47.6%, his lowest since '02 when offensive numbers were down in general, and the 3rd lowest behind '99 and '02.

His team only won 32 games, and fell well short of the playoffs, but they were terrible. They went 0-6 without KG and his cast was Ricky Davis, Mark Blount, Trenton Hassell, Mike James, rookie Randy Foye, Marko Jaric and rookie Craig Smith.

Going 32-44 with that team is actually pretty impressive, and we saw what KG could do the following year with Boston.

Amazingly with that team, the '07 Wolves were 20-20 before they fired Dwyane Casey. The Wolves owner did excuse KG of giving up on that team, though.

I don't remember that much about KG's '07 season in particular other than the same great player on a bad team story like the previous 2 years. He was on national television less by that point, I think he watched KG play maybe a half dozen times that year give or take. I know he had lost a bit by that point compared to '03 or '04, but he didn't seem to have lost much yet. I don't think he really lost A LOT until after he won his championship.

dunksby

07-21-2012, 10:35 PM

I don't wanna drop a one liner about my fav player like a jackass and undermine your efforts but Durant at #22 for 2009 just does not sit well with me, I have to speak out on this injustice :lol Come now the only guy to average 30+ that year, making the playoffs in West and winning two against the defending and eventual champions and you ranked him under Bosh on the Craptors?

Deuce Bigalow

07-21-2012, 10:37 PM

dunksby

07-21-2012, 10:42 PM

Durant did that in 2009-10, not 2008-09.
ah you are right always confuse that shit :facepalm

WockaVodka

07-21-2012, 11:15 PM

Shade8780

08-14-2012, 04:37 PM

I think LeBron should be around the 20-23 mark for 2004. How did he go from not being on the list, to 9th in one year?

ShaqAttack3234

08-14-2012, 05:59 PM

Dirk should be ranked over Dwight in 2009. Dirk's best season and version was 2009. It gets underrated though because he only got to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

He was easily a top 5 player in the league then.

He definitely has a case over Dwight, but I don't think that's the best Dirk has been.

The best I've seen Dirk's all around game was the '06-'07 season when he was voted MVP, and rightfully so based on the regular season, although it is tough to call that his best season even just based on the 1st round, which doesn't represent the type of player Dirk was, but is tough to overlook when talking about that season.

So I'd probably go with '06 as Dirk's best. it was the closest regular season he had to '07 with another 60 win season as well as arguably his best individual produiction(26.6 ppg, 9 rpg, 2.8 apg, 1.9 TO, 1 bpg, 48 FG%, 40.6 3P%, 90.1 FT%) and a playoff run compared to 2011 with the exception of the choke job finals. Same type of big games and clutch moments throughout that run, though and the same offense with much more rebounding. I'd say he was just a little smarter and more efficient and a bit better as a passer and defender in '07 than '06, but his game had pretty much evolved to the same point.

But he wasn't far off in '09, it was really a comeback season of sorts after a quiet '08 season by his standards when his status seemed to drop a bit. In fairness, his reputation was still damaged by the '07 playoffs, but '09 really rebuilt his reputation finishing 4th in scoring at 26 per game, returning to the all-nba 1st team, and some of the best ball he ever played in the playoffs.

I don't blame Dirk for losing in the semifinals that year, his cast wasn't as talented as it was in previous years, imo and he played about as well as you could hope for. He arguably played better than Melo, imo, but didn't get the same hype during that postseason and just happened to run into a Denver team with more talent, probably as much as any team in the league. The Mavs chances were killed by late game mistakes, but Dirk averaged 34/12/4 on 53/39/92 shooting in the series.

However, I went with Dwight because of his two-way impact and how far his impact and presence got Orlando. Dwight didn't have great personnel, but as the league's leading shot blocker who was also an ambidextrous shot blocker, the most athletic big man and a relentless defender who contested everything, he covered for his teammates numerous mistakes to make Orlando the best defensive team statistically despite not having great defensive personnel around him(though the Celtics with KG healthy were clearly the best defensive team).

Outside of that, Howard still averaged almost 21 ppg on 57% during the season and over 20 ppg on 60% shooting during the playoffs, and averaged almost 14 rpg in the season and over 15 in the playoffs. His defensive impact was unmatched at that time, but unlike many of the recent defensive anchors, he was also leading his team in scoring with an extremely efficient 20+ per game. His offensive game still wasn't that polished, but he had made improvements that year becoming confident with the moves that he did have such as running hooks with either hands and occasional spin moves while also capitalizing on his ability to run the floor as well as offensive rebounds, alley oops and screen/rolls with Turkoglu and Nelson. And he had become the dominant rebounder in the league becoming just the 5th player in NBA history to lead the league in rebounds and blocks. And with the ability to go off for games such as the 45/19/8 he had in a regular season game or the 40/14/4 he had to closeout the Cavs in the ECF, it became tough to find another two-way player like that.

His overall impact at both ends was the primary reason Orlando exceeded expectations by winning 59 games and upsetting a 66 win Cavs team to get to the finals. And even vs a veteran Laker team that was built better with fewer weaknesses and a more reliable offense, Orlando was able to compete. Despite losing in 5 games, game 2 was up for grabs with Courtney Lee missing the potential game-winning lay up in regulation. That would have stolen homecourt advantage and tied the series. Game 4 was also all but locked up for Orlando. This would have tied the series as well, but Orlando missed some key free throws(including 2 by Howard) to just leave the door open), and then Jameer Nelson's defensive mistake allowed Fisher to send the game into OT.

A loss is a loss, but the point of this is that Orlando had the ability to contend for a championship, what ultimately prevented them from making a serious run at beating the Lakers was inexperience and mistakes we see from young teams late in games 2 and 4 which dramatically altered the series. And that was in a series where Howard struggled offensively. He wasn't averaging 26/13/3 on 65 FG% as he did in the ECF vs Cleveland, but he was still making a big enough impact to compete vs a top team despite being contained to just over 15 ppg on 49% shooting because of his defense(4 bpg including a finals record 9 in game 4) and rebounding(over 15 per game).

So I went for Howard because of his uncommon ability to impact the game in ways other than scoring while still averaging 20 on unusual efficiency. Dirk having the clear edge as an offensive player, particularly when it comes to ability to take over a game is a convincing argument on his part, but Howard's all around impact and the success it led to gave him the edge for me.

They're in the same tier, and I believe it just comes down to personal preference because it's that close as far as I'm concerned. It's difficult to choose between 2 franchise players who dominate in different ways.

I think LeBron should be around the 20-23 mark for 2004. How did he go from not being on the list, to 9th in one year?

it was his rookie year to his second year. Most players make massive improvements.

This is also reflected statistically(though this is somewhat deceptive due to the years).

2004- 20.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 3.5 TO, 41.7 FG%, 48.8 TS%
2005- 27.2 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 7.2 apg, 3.3 TO, 47.2 FG%, 55.4 TS%

That is a massive improvement, and focusing more specifically on his shooting.

16-23 feet
2004- 1.4 made, 4.0 attempted, 35.2%
2005- 2.0 made, 5.2 attempted, 37.2%

3 point
2004- 0.8 made, 2.7 attempted, 29.0%
2005- 1.4 made, 3.9 attempted, 35.1%

He was still not a good shooter in '05, but he went from having no jump shot at all to a pretty good 3 point shooter

And then there's just learning how to play the NBA game as well as both a facilitator and as a scorer. He clearly improved in that area in his second season. He had the physical ability from day one, and the natural ability as a passer, but was able to put a lot more of it to use in his second season.

I was initially going to put him towards the bottom of the 2004 list, but I was thinking, if not for his name and the kind of player he became, would he be on the list? Was rookie Lebron really going to help a team win more in that particular year than the other players on the lsit? I'm definitely not convinced of that.

Admittedly, an argument can be made for him being in the lower part of the 2004 list, and also being a few spots higher than he was in 2005. Either way, there's no question he made a huge improvement between from his rookie season to his 2nd season.