4 21st century players in the top 10 is too much

[Duderonomy]

I see Shaq,Kobe,Duncan, and Lebron on a lot of lists on here. No real basketball historian would have More than 2 in the top ten let's be honest.

[SexSymbol]

I see Shaq,Kobe,Duncan, and Lebron on a lot of lists on here. No real basketball historian would have More than 2 in the top ten let's be honest.
No real historian would take any of those guys out. Only LeBron can be taken out with solid argument, and that's probably about to change in a few years too.
00-10 was the best era for basketball. Period.

[T_L_P]

Great logic.

Please, make a case for Shaq or Duncan not being the top ten.

[SHABBA]

Duncan is definitely top 10, maybe top 5.

Kobe and Shaq are probably top 10.

LeBron is not top 10.

Hope this helps.

[Duderonomy]

No real historian would take any of those guys out. Only LeBron can be taken out with solid argument, and that's probably about to change in a few years too.
00-10 was the best era for basketball. Period.
No it's because of the lack of history of the game by youngins. Did you know the Celtics won championships in 1974 and 1976? Probably not, because it hasn't been brought up in years on here.

[KyrieTheFuture]

No real historian would take any of those guys out. Only LeBron can be taken out with solid argument, and that's probably about to change in a few years too.
00-10 was the best era for basketball. Period.
It's maybe the third best decade

[T_L_P]

It's maybe the third best decade

Maybe? The '60s didn't even have as much star power, let alone as much depth. And the '70s? :roll:

[red1]

thats a pretty weak argument

[robert_shaww]

The Only top 10 are Bryant. No Duncan, No Oneal No James

[robert_shaww]

It's maybe the third best decade

http://media.tumblr.com/0f49ad1b4a039e883e3785c0cde1f4c8/tumblr_inline_mp7wmsbsrd1qz4rgp.gif

[T_L_P]

The Only top 10 are Bryant. No Duncan, No Oneal No James

It's so funny that when you joined this forum you said you were a Spurs fan.

It's becoming more and more obvious by the day that you're someone like kennethgriffith or another Kobe stan.


Why is Kobe top 10 and not Duncan?

[sd3035]

Duncan and Bran don't belong

[T_L_P]

Duncan and Bran don't belong

Shaq: 4 rings, 3 as the man one as the clear-cut second best player, in 18 years, with Penny, Kobe, Wade, LeBron, Nash, Garnett, Allen, Pierce.

Duncan: 4 rings, all as the man, in 17 years, with past-his-prime David Robinson, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Kawhi Leonard.

Yet Duncan is the one out of the top 10? :oldlol:

[Mr.Kite]

Collusion.

/thread

[BuffaloBill]

lol TLP feeding trolls all day long in here

[BuffaloBill]

In my opinion 6 20th century players in the top 10 is too much

[Marchesk]

In my opinion 6 20th century players in the top 10 is too much

IMO, Oscar and West get screwed out of the top 10, when they have resumes worthy of being there.

Yeah, rings. Well West did his best, but it wasn't enough to overcome Boston. And Oscar had the misfortune of having to wait till the end of his career to play with Kareem. If he had been in Magic's situation, we might have him at 5 instead.

[[GR]]

Simmons routinely ranks Shaq out of the top 10. In fact, I think he ranks Hakeem higher

[BoutPractice]

I see Shaq,Kobe,Duncan, and Lebron on a lot of lists on here. No real basketball historian would have More than 2 in the top ten let's be honest.
Because...? I fail to see an argument.

[Mure]

Shaq, Duncan, and LeBron are cemented in the top 10 already. Kobe is like 12-15, so 3 from the 21st is fine by me. Great era of b-ball tbh.

[The JKidd Kid]

There's only 3 Duncan, Shaq and Lebron. :confusedshrug:

[Trollsmasher]

It's generally accepted that Kobe fell off the TOP 10:confusedshrug:

[KyrieTheFuture]

Maybe? The '60s didn't even have as much star power, let alone as much depth. And the '70s? :roll:
90's and 80's >>>>

How about it IS the third best?

[navy]

']Simmons routinely ranks Shaq out of the top 10. In fact, I think he ranks Hakeem higher
So? :oldlol:

[rhowen4]

Why is that hard to believe? The 20th century was 20 years long and they have 6 of the top 10. 21st century has been 15 years already.

[Unbiased_one]

I see Shaq,Kobe,Duncan, and Lebron on a lot of lists on here. No real basketball historian would have More than 2 in the top ten let's be honest.

There are only 3. Duncan, shaq, lebron. In that order.

[kennethgriffin]

if we go by what most people think... duncan isnt a top 10 player all time on the publics opinion list.

shaq barely makes it i think on most polls

lebron makes it on some


kobe makes it on all of them... he's really the only sured sport on every list

so nothings set in stone for the 2000s except for 1 guy who makes it on all fan/player/writer/expert/coach/gm lists



but me personally i rank all 4 in the top 10.. with lebron being tied for the 10 spot with hakeem



#1A Jordan
#1B Kareem
#1C Russell

#4A Wilt
#4B Kobe
#4C Magic

#7A Bird
#7B Shaq
#7C Duncan

#10A Hakeem
#10B Lebron





http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-top-nba-players-of-all-time?var=2&utm_expid=16418821-9.Bl7_VsXZQ6i2wC9rw_ppGQ.1&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ca%2F

[ImKobe]

Kobe, Shaq, Duncan & Lebron belong in the top 10.

And if you think about it, Kobe, Shaq & Duncan are from the 20th century, Lebron is the only true 21st century player to go down top 10 all-time right now.

Shaq started in 92, Kobe in 96, Duncan in 98...they had their primes in the early 2000s(Kobe's lasted longer), but they are not from the same era as Lebron because Lebron became great when others were done, much like MJ, when he started winning after Bird was done & Magic was on his way out, Kareem had retired already...

[Sakkreth]

Well, Kobe barely doesn't make it, LeBron barely makes it, Shaq and Timmy makes is comfortably. 3 players definetly reasonable number seeing how good 2000s decade was + LeBron is mostly 2010s.

[HoopsFanNumero1]

Kobe doesn't really belong in the top ten. He's around the 11-15 range. The rest are fine.

[kennethgriffin]

if we look at where each guy ranks out of the arguable top 10 players all time... its pretty obvious kobe belongs beyond a shadow of a doubt




Rings

#1 russell 11
#2 Jordan 6
#2 kareem 6
#4 Kobe 5
#4 Magic 5
#6 Shaq 4
#6 Duncan 4
#8 Bird 3
#10 Hakeem 2
#10 Lebron 2

Finals MVPs

#1 Jordan 6
#2 Magic 3
#3 Shaq 3
#3 Duncan 3
#5 Kobe 2
#5 Kareem 2
#5 Bird 2
#5 Lebron 2
#5 Hakeem 2
#10 Wilt 1
#11 Russell 0

season MVPs


#1 kareem 6
#2 jordan 5
#2 russell 5
#4 wilt 4
#4 lebron 4
#6 bird 3
#6 magic 3
#8 Duncan 2
#9 Kobe 1
#9 Shaq 1
#9 Hakeem 1


All NBA 1st teams


#1 Kobe 11
#2 Jordan 10
#2 Kareem 10
#2 Duncan 10
#5 Bird 9
#5 Magic 9
#7 Shaq 8
#8 Wilt 7
#8 Lebron 7
#10 Hakeem 6
#11 Russell 3



All Defensive 1st teams

#1 Kobe 9
#1 Jordan 9
#3 Duncan 8
#4 Kareem 5
#4 Hakeem 5
#4 Lebron 5
#7 Wilt 2
#8 Russell 1
#9 Shaq 0
#9 Magic 0
#9 Bird 0



Points

#1 Kareem 38k
#2 Jordan 33k
#3 Kobe 32k
#4 wilt 31k
#5 shaq 28k
#6 hakeem 27k
#7 duncan 25k
#8 lebron 23k
#9 bird 22k
#10 magic 18k
#11 russell 14k





then factor in kobe is 3rd behind wilt and jordan in nearly every scoring streak or record.. sometimes 2nd behind wilt for a few

then factor in kobes won 2 titles with less help than any of those guys asside from hakeem in 94

then factor in kobe has the most game winning shots ever



he's easly top 10... arguably top 5..

kobes also #1 all time in consecutive allstar games/starts and has the most all nba teams period ( 15 with kareem )


oh yeah and kobe has the all time record for most 50+ win teams beatin in playoff history


Kobe Bryant -24
Michael Jordan -20
Shaquille O'neal -17
Tim Duncan - 15
Magic Johnson -13
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar -13
Hakeem Olajuwon-10
Larry Bird -10
Bill Russell -10
Wilt Chamberlain -5
LeBron James -4

[ArbitraryWater]

recovered from meltdown, back to regular crap


If it would be so easy, eh?

[GODbe]

if we look at where each guy ranks out of the arguable top 10 players all time... its pretty obvious kobe belongs beyond a shadow of a doubt




Rings

#1 russell 11
#2 Jordan 6
#2 kareem 6
#4 Kobe 5
#4 Magic 5
#6 Shaq 4
#6 Duncan 4
#8 Bird 3
#10 Hakeem 2
#10 Lebron 2

Finals MVPs

#1 Jordan 6
#2 Magic 3
#3 Shaq 3
#3 Duncan 3
#5 Kobe 2
#5 Kareem 2
#5 Bird 2
#5 Lebron 2
#5 Hakeem 2
#10 Wilt 1
#11 Russell 0

season MVPs


#1 kareem 6
#2 jordan 5
#2 russell 5
#4 wilt 4
#4 lebron 4
#6 bird 3
#6 magic 3
#8 Duncan 2
#9 Kobe 1
#9 Shaq 1
#9 Hakeem 1


All NBA 1st teams


#1 Kobe 11
#2 Jordan 10
#2 Kareem 10
#2 Duncan 10
#5 Bird 9
#5 Magic 9
#7 Shaq 8
#8 Wilt 7
#8 Lebron 7
#10 Hakeem 6
#11 Russell 3



All Defensive 1st teams

#1 Kobe 9
#1 Jordan 9
#3 Duncan 8
#4 Kareem 5
#4 Hakeem 5
#4 Lebron 5
#7 Wilt 2
#8 Russell 1
#9 Shaq 0
#9 Magic 0
#9 Bird 0



Points

#1 Kareem 38k
#2 Jordan 33k
#3 Kobe 32k
#4 wilt 31k
#5 shaq 28k
#6 hakeem 27k
#7 duncan 25k
#8 lebron 23k
#9 bird 22k
#10 magic 18k
#11 russell 14k





then factor in kobe is 3rd behind wilt and jordan in nearly every scoring streak or record.. sometimes 2nd behind wilt for a few

then factor in kobes won 2 titles with less help than any of those guys asside from hakeem in 94

then factor in kobe has the most game winning shots ever



he's easly top 10... arguably top 5..

kobes also #1 all time in consecutive allstar games/starts and has the most all nba teams period ( 15 with kareem )


oh yeah and kobe has the all time record for most 50+ win teams beatin in playoff history


Kobe Bryant -23
Michael Jordan -20
Shaquille O'neal -17
Tim Duncan - 15
Magic Johnson -13
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar -13
Hakeem Olajuwon-10
Larry Bird -10
Bill Russell -10
Wilt Chamberlain -5
LeBron James -4
GOAT gonna GOAT. :applause:

[SexSymbol]

No it's because of the lack of history of the game by youngins. Did you know the Celtics won championships in 1974 and 1976? Probably not, because it hasn't been brought up in years on here.
I know A LOT about the history of the league, and I don't see how Celtics winning in 74 or 76 changes the top 10.
Who is worth being put in the top 10 from the 90s? Jordan, Hakeem, nobody else has a case.
From the 80s - Kareem/Magic/Bird, nobody else besides erving has a case
60 - Only russell, Wilt has a case for being in the top 10 if you have a bias for him
00 - Kobe, Duncan, Shaq are certainly in the top 10, maybe duncan can be thrown out, but you'd have to have a bias against him too to do that. And LeBron is knocking on the door of top 10 too, so there you have it.
2 from 90s
3 from 80s
3 from 00s
2 from 60s

[kennethgriffin]

GOAT gonna GOAT. :applause:


had to correct 1.. kobe actually beat 24 teams with 50+ wins in the playoffs

[16X]

They are all top ten. Duncan, then Lebron, then Shaq, then Kobe. Kobe will be the first to drop out, but I don't see that happening for a while. People like to single out one really bad shooting game and make that their entire argument, or talk about how Perkins was out for one game. Kobe made 3 straight Finals with his THIRD best player either playing hurt or not playing at all, and he won two of them lol. Most points scored ever (Wilt felt embarassed by his game because it was such a circus). Best player in the world for multiple years. Very versatile in that he could take over and be the man, or take a backseat and defer. I think Lebron is better than Kobe overall, but when put in that second option role in the 2011 Finals, he disappeared and couldn't adapt. People act like it's a mark against Kobe that he was able to be a great first or second option. I don't see it that way.

[BuffaloBill]

if we look at where each guy ranks out of the arguable top 10 players all time... its pretty obvious kobe belongs beyond a shadow of a doubt




Rings

#1 russell 11
#2 Jordan 6
#2 kareem 6
#4 Kobe 5
#4 Magic 5
#6 Shaq 4
#6 Duncan 4
#8 Bird 3
#10 Hakeem 2
#10 Lebron 2

Finals MVPs

#1 Jordan 6
#2 Magic 3
#3 Shaq 3
#3 Duncan 3
#5 Kobe 2
#5 Kareem 2
#5 Bird 2
#5 Lebron 2
#5 Hakeem 2
#10 Wilt 1
#11 Russell 0

season MVPs


#1 kareem 6
#2 jordan 5
#2 russell 5
#4 wilt 4
#4 lebron 4
#6 bird 3
#6 magic 3
#8 Duncan 2
#9 Kobe 1
#9 Shaq 1
#9 Hakeem 1


All NBA 1st teams


#1 Kobe 11
#2 Jordan 10
#2 Kareem 10
#2 Duncan 10
#5 Bird 9
#5 Magic 9
#7 Shaq 8
#8 Wilt 7
#8 Lebron 7
#10 Hakeem 6
#11 Russell 3



All Defensive 1st teams

#1 Kobe 9
#1 Jordan 9
#3 Duncan 8
#4 Kareem 5
#4 Hakeem 5
#4 Lebron 5
#7 Wilt 2
#8 Russell 1
#9 Shaq 0
#9 Magic 0
#9 Bird 0



Points

#1 Kareem 38k
#2 Jordan 33k
#3 Kobe 32k
#4 wilt 31k
#5 shaq 28k
#6 hakeem 27k
#7 duncan 25k
#8 lebron 23k
#9 bird 22k
#10 magic 18k
#11 russell 14k





then factor in kobe is 3rd behind wilt and jordan in nearly every scoring streak or record.. sometimes 2nd behind wilt for a few

then factor in kobes won 2 titles with less help than any of those guys asside from hakeem in 94

then factor in kobe has the most game winning shots ever



he's easly top 10... arguably top 5..

kobes also #1 all time in consecutive allstar games/starts and has the most all nba teams period ( 15 with kareem )


oh yeah and kobe has the all time record for most 50+ win teams beatin in playoff history


Kobe Bryant -24
Michael Jordan -20
Shaquille O'neal -17
Tim Duncan - 15
Magic Johnson -13
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar -13
Hakeem Olajuwon-10
Larry Bird -10
Bill Russell -10
Wilt Chamberlain -5
LeBron James -4



wow :applause:

[tmacattack33]

1. NBA truly started in around 1970 (it wasn't fully integrated before then).

2. So we've had about 45 years of NBA of which to choose players from to put in our top 10.

3. The 21st century is about 15 years old now, which is 1/3rd of 45. So we should have about 3.333 (1/3rd of 10) players in our top 10 be from the 21st century.

4. Shaq is actually from the 90's. He had 6 great years in the 90's and 5 in the 2000's.


So having those 4 players in your top ten list wouldn't be anything weird statistically speaking.

[tmacattack33]

oh yeah and kobe has the all time record for most 50+ win teams beatin in playoff history


Kobe Bryant -24
Michael Jordan -20
Shaquille O'neal -17
Tim Duncan - 15
Magic Johnson -13
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar -13
Hakeem Olajuwon-10
Larry Bird -10
Bill Russell -10
Wilt Chamberlain -5
LeBron James -4

Actually, Derek Fisher has that weird record that you just made up of "50 win teams" beaten in the playoffs.

[Roundball_Rock]

']Simmons routinely ranks Shaq out of the top 10. In fact, I think he ranks Hakeem higher

Simmons underrates all the Laker centers: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq...

Shaq is clear cut top 10 and has a case for being in the top 5. Someone mentioned his 2006 ring, Shaq was still a 20/9 on 60% player that year and the best center in the league.

[kennethgriffin]

Actually, Derek Fisher has that weird record that you just made up of "50 win teams" beaten in the playoffs.


i said out of the top 10 player candidates. try reading the entire thing next time

this is a discussion about elite players... mvps... not guys coming off the bench for 15 minutes a night

[Derka]

"I read some stuff on Wikipedia" =\= "A real basketball historian"

Shut up

[fpliii]

Serious question...why does everybody have such similar top 10 lists (in terms of inclusion, not ordering)? Is it groupthink? Are they that obvious?

[Kvnzhangyay]

There's only 3 21st century players in top 10... Duncan Shaq and Bron

[jstern]

That's why top ten list are irrelevant. Past players get forgotten, not even watched by most, while present players are so fresh and live.

People also don't take circumstances into consideration.

[PsychoBe]

That's why top ten list are irrelevant. Past players get forgotten, not even watched by most, while present players are so fresh and live.

People also don't take circumstances into consideration.

rings don't lie (as the man)

and before you say "kobe wasn't the man for the threepeat"

1A/1B

[DMAVS41]

Meh...only two sure fire top 10 players ever in the top 10 from the 21st century so far in my opinion;

Shaq/Duncan

I personally have one of either Kobe or Lebron in, but wouldn't be crazy not to.

This was an all time great era for the NBA since 98 in terms of GOAT players.

Duncan/Shaq/Kobe/Lebron/Wade/Dirk/KG...all those guys are in the top 25 of all time in my opinion.

And Durant will join them in a couple years as well....perhaps after this season.

[kennethgriffin]

Serious question...why does everybody have such similar top 10 lists (in terms of inclusion, not ordering)? Is it groupthink? Are they that obvious?


i would say the minimum requirement to be top 10 all time on ISH or most forums is to be the man on atleast 2 title teams

[fpliii]

i would say the minimum requirement to be top 10 all time on ISH or most forums is 2 titles/2fmvps and atleast 1 mvp
Perhaps, but then you're looking at (in no particular order):

Jordan
Duncan
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Bird
Kobe
LeBron
Hakeem
Reed

+ presumably Wilt (didn't exist in 67, but he would've won), Russell (wins 7 or 8), Dr. J (won 2 FMVP in the ABA) as all conceivable candidates. Does this mean that you don't feel comfortable saying that the 10 greatest players ever are among these 13? Not saying that I agree/disagree, but how can we say there aren't better players who just don't have the hardware?

[PsychoBe]

Perhaps, but then you're looking at (in no particular order):

Jordan
Duncan
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Bird
Kobe
LeBron
Hakeem
Reed

+ presumably Wilt (didn't exist in 67, but he would've won), Russell (wins 7 or 8), Dr. J (won 2 FMVP in the ABA) as all conceivable candidates. Does this mean that you don't feel comfortable saying that the 10 greatest players ever are among these 13? Not saying that I agree/disagree, but how can we say there aren't better players who just don't have the hardware?

how can you be a better player without having the hardware? when comparing the best of the best, the hardware provides evidence and indisputable proof of greatness.

[Milbuck]

Anyone who seriously thinks that Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, and Lebron (even now, by let's say at the end of his career) aren't top 10 all-time is ****ing delusional.

[nzahir]

rings don't lie (as the man)

and before you say "kobe wasn't the man for the threepeat"

1A/1B
Then why does he have 0 final mvps to show for it in those years?
If lebron ends up with 3 finals mvps hes greater than kobe. Already has 4 mvps to 1, better stats, and has always done more with less(kobe couldnt make it to the playoffs or get past round 1 without shaq or guys like pau, lebron made it to the finals with gibson and larry hughes as his 2nd and 3rd option lmfao).

[SexSymbol]

Then why does he have 0 final mvps to show for it in those years?
If lebron ends up with 3 finals mvps hes greater than kobe. Already has 4 mvps to 1, better stats, and has always done more with less(kobe couldnt make it to the playoffs or get past round 1 without shaq or guys like pau, lebron made it to the finals with gibson and larry hughes as his 2nd and 3rd option lmfao).
Because the finals were cherry on a cake, the real battles were in the West
Also, Kobe's lakers were atop the conference before getting Pau mid-season. They also took a great Suns team to 7 games

[reppy]

I don't really think of "the top 10" as being a rigid list. Depending on my mood and the position of the sun in the sky, my list might be different. If you ask me, there are probably 20 guys you could list in the "top 10" and all of them would have legitimate cases. I think of it more like a category than an actual list with a set number of players. Maybe we should just start calling them the NBA 1% or something.

[fpliii]

how can you be a better player without having the hardware? when comparing the best of the best, the hardware provides evidence and indisputable proof of greatness.
Well maybe there's a difference between better and greater.

But let me ask you this...let's say we put all of these guys in the same era, and they play just as well, but there are just guys who are better.

Are guys from other eras all of a sudden better now, since the top-level competition is removed to allow them to collect the necessary hardware?

[Milbuck]

Then why does he have 0 final mvps to show for it in those years?
If lebron ends up with 3 finals mvps hes greater than kobe. Already has 4 mvps to 1, better stats, and has always done more with less(kobe couldnt make it to the playoffs or get past round 1 without shaq or guys like pau, lebron made it to the finals with gibson and larry hughes as his 2nd and 3rd option lmfao).
:rolleyes:

The finals from 2000-2002 were a joke compared to the western conference playoffs. It's not like today where we have a juggernaut in the East to make the finals tough. Every western conference run, or the first 3 rounds of the playoffs for Kobe/Shaq, was clearly tougher than the finals.

Kobe was in no way 1A to Shaq's 1B in 2000, or vice versa. I'll concede that.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 32/7/6/2/1 on 58% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 29/15/3/2 on 56% TS

In the Western conference finals, when they played a better team (Spurs) than they did in the finals (Sixers)

Kobe put up: 33/7/7/2/1 on 57% TS
Shaq put up: 27/13/3/1/1 on 54% TS

So Kobe torched the best team they played that year, and was up there with Shaq for most of the playoffs. If you're gonna dismiss his run that year because he was #2, that's absurd. Considering that literally everyone in NBA history except for prime Jordan would've been #2 to peak Shaq from 2000-2002.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 27/6/5/2/1 on 50% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 26/13/3/3/1 on 55% TS

Once again, Shaq was the #1. But Dismissing that entire run until they played a trash Nets team (relative to other finals teams in history) just because he was #2, is once again, absurd.

[SexSymbol]

:rolleyes:

The finals from 2000-2002 were a joke compared to the western conference playoffs. It's not like today where we have a juggernaut in the East to make the finals tough. Every western conference run, or the first 3 rounds of the playoffs for Kobe/Shaq, was clearly tougher than the finals.

Kobe was in no way 1A to Shaq's 1B in 2000, or vice versa. I'll concede that.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 32/7/6/2/1 on 58% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 29/15/3/2 on 56% TS

In the Western conference finals, when they played a better team (Spurs) than they did in the finals (Sixers)

Kobe put up: 33/7/7/2/1 on 57% TS
Shaq put up: 27/13/3/1/1 on 54% TS

So Kobe torched the best team they played that year, and was up there with Shaq for most of the playoffs. If you're gonna dismiss his run that year because he was #2, that's absurd. Considering that literally everyone in NBA history except for prime Jordan would've been #2 to peak Shaq from 2000-2002.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 27/6/5/2/1 on 50% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 26/13/3/3/1 on 55% TS

Once again, Shaq was the #1. But Dismissing that entire run until they played a trash Nets team (relative to other finals teams in history) just because he was #2, is once again, absurd.
Great post :cheers:

[kennethgriffin]

:rolleyes:

The finals from 2000-2002 were a joke compared to the western conference playoffs. It's not like today where we have a juggernaut in the East to make the finals tough. Every western conference run, or the first 3 rounds of the playoffs for Kobe/Shaq, was clearly tougher than the finals.

Kobe was in no way 1A to Shaq's 1B in 2000, or vice versa. I'll concede that.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 32/7/6/2/1 on 58% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2001 playoffs: 29/15/3/2 on 56% TS

In the Western conference finals, when they played a better team (Spurs) than they did in the finals (Sixers)

Kobe put up: 33/7/7/2/1 on 57% TS
Shaq put up: 27/13/3/1/1 on 54% TS

So Kobe torched the best team they played that year, and was up there with Shaq for most of the playoffs. If you're gonna dismiss his run that year because he was #2, that's absurd. Considering that literally everyone in NBA history except for prime Jordan would've been #2 to peak Shaq from 2000-2002.

Kobe through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 27/6/5/2/1 on 50% TS
Shaq through the first 3 rounds of the 2002 playoffs: 26/13/3/3/1 on 55% TS

Once again, Shaq was the #1. But Dismissing that entire run until they played a trash Nets team (relative to other finals teams in history) just because he was #2, is once again, absurd.


you mean theres someone else on ISH as smart as i am?

:biggums:

[pastis]

Shaq: 4 rings, 3 as the man one as the clear-cut second best player, in 18 years, with Penny, Kobe, Wade, LeBron, Nash, Garnett, Allen, Pierce.

Duncan: 4 rings, all as the man, in 17 years, with past-his-prime David Robinson, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Kawhi Leonard.

Yet Duncan is the one out of the top 10? :oldlol:

you never get tired, do you? now duncan has won 4 rings with being the man for all for his rings? i mean in what fvcking world do you live?
2007 and 2005 he clearly clearly clearly wasn't the man. 03 and 99 are contested as well. 99 winning against loser-knicks, with robinson 15/10/3. gtfo dirk never ever had a "past prime" center averaging these numbers, these numbers are fvcking elite dude.
ginobili and parker and popovic making this team what it is since 01, at worst since 03/04. duncan at best top 30 all time without this stacked teams.
his defense is so fvcking overrated here, incredible.



Lol, you act like Duncan is Tony Allen out there, nonstop frenetic energy defending the post. He camps in the lane and alters shots that come his way. He plays great help defense. He gets a few boards, and camps in the post waiting for the ball to come to him. If he's doubled he kicks it out. He rests for 1/3 of the game, and hasn't played over 38mpg since his last MVP. So much expended energy!


90% of his points easy layups, easy rebounds, cause waiting for the nice assist by parer, ginobili etc. etc. etc pp.


its incredible how you underrate your team and naming parker, ginobili etc like persons who are scrub. these persons carrying since at least 04/05 until now duncan to the playoffs and 2-3 Championshis.
every team would immediatly swap duncans supporting cast (and popovic) with everything else on the market.

[Duderonomy]

Moses, Dr J, Hondo, and Oscar should round out the top 12.

[T_L_P]

you never get tired, do you? now duncan has won 4 rings with being the man for all for his rings? i mean in what fvcking world do you live?
2007 and 2005 he clearly clearly clearly wasn't the man. 03 and 99 are contested as well. 99 winning against loser-knicks, with robinson 15/10/3. gtfo dirk never ever had a "past prime" center averaging these numbers, these numbers are fvcking elite dude.
ginobili and parker and popovic making this team what it is since 01, at worst since 03/04. duncan at best top 30 all time without this stacked teams.
his defense is so fvcking overrated here, incredible.





90% of his points easy layups, easy rebounds, cause waiting for the nice assist by parer, ginobili etc. etc. etc pp.


its incredible how you underrate your team and naming parker, ginobili etc like persons who are scrub. these persons carrying since at least 04/05 until now duncan to the playoffs and 2-3 Championshis.
every team would immediatly swap duncans supporting cast (and popovic) with everything else on the market.

And, on the flip side, I could say it was Phil, Kobe and Wade who made Shaq's career what it was. You so easily skip over that.

Again, nobody was calling Manu or Parker the man in 2005 or 2007. You clearly weren't watching the games; your rational is per 36 for god's sake. :facepalm :facepalm

[DFish24]

Duncan, Kobe, Shaq are all top 10

[ThePhantomCreep]

Bird, Magic, and Jordan kept a lot of guys from fashioning top 10 resumes.