Publications that voted Kobe player of the decade...

[stalkerforlife]

http://www.sportingnews.com/nba-news/118425-sporting-news-nba-athlete-decade-kobe-bryant-sg-lakers

"The numbers say...

Bryant: 28.2 points per game, 5.9 rebounds, 5.2 assists, one MVP, four titles
Duncan: 21.2 points per game, 11.7 rebounds, 3.3 assists, two MVPs, three titles

You say...

SportingNews.com voting
Bryant 55%
Duncan 45%"

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/340253-kobe-bryant-player-of-the-decade-in-the-nba

"He

[pegasus]

:applause: :applause:

[riseagainst]

OP delivers once again.

:bowdown:

inb4 the haters

[HOoopCityJones]

They lying though.

It's funny because half of these same guys will now try to argue Duncan was the best of his decade in hindsight. Despite what both Shaq and Kobe have done to him at separate points of their career. Kobe in general always been The Spurs killer.

[WayOfWade]

This is for 00'-10' right? If so definetely Kobe, no argument here

[Akrazotile]

Every basketball fan alive would draft Duncan over Kobe if they actually had something of value at stake with regards to winning. This is how you know Duncan is actually better.

Anyone can vote for the guy they like more or prop up the flashier guy to sell magazines. When something is actually on the line, everyone here KNOWS Duncan is the pick.

That's all that matters.

[Haymaker]

. Kobe in general always been The Spurs killer.

This is true.

[Kblaze8855]

So does the medias opinion matter or not? The guy who put together that article for sporting news was discussed here years ago(around the time of this article actually) for getting into an argument with Laker fans over Lebron being MVP. I wanna say he was arguing with some Lakersground posters mad that he(as a know nothing media member) had an MVP vote.

Anyway im guessing the SN was a fan vote. A glance at the article suggests it at least. These were their yearly picks:


SN PLAYERS OF THE YEAR

2001: Allen Iverson
2002: Tim Duncan
2003: Tim Duncan
2000: Shaquille O’Neal
2004: Kevin Garnett
2005: Shaquille O’Neal
2006: LeBron James, Steve Nash
2007: Dirk Nowitzki
2008: Kobe Bryant
2009: LeBron James


I suspect if SNs head NBA guy posted here you wouldnt agree with much he had to say.

[stalkerforlife]

Every basketball fan alive would draft Duncan over Kobe if they actually had something of value at stake with regards to winning. This is how you know Duncan is actually better.

Anyone can vote for the guy they like more or prop up the flashier guy to sell magazines. When something is actually on the line, everyone here KNOWS Duncan is the pick.

That's all that matters.

Bullshit.

Kobe won 5 titles as the best or second best player.

Duncan's been able to continue a winning tradition because of surrounding players. Duncan's a GREAT role player at this point, but he is NOT better than Kobe on any of Kobe's title teams.

Kobe's a better winner and he actually won back to back titles as the man, where-as Duncan never could. Kobe won those b2b titles with a worse supporting cast than Duncan's ever had.

[ralph_i_el]

Bullshit.

Kobe won 5 titles as the best or second best player.

Duncan's been able to continue a winning tradition because of surrounding players. Duncan's a GREAT role player at this point, but he is NOT better than Kobe on any of Kobe's title teams.

Kobe's a better winner and he actually won back to back titles as the man, where-as Duncan never could. Kobe won those b2b titles with a worse supporting cast than Duncan's ever had.

back to back titles doesn't mean shit.

Duncan won 5 titles as the best or second best player

Also, never won less than 50 games....which Kobe did in his PRIME :roll: :roll:

If you want to win Duncan>Kobe and it's not even arguable.

[stalkerforlife]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]So does the medias opinion matter or not? The guy who put together that article for sporting news was discussed here years ago(around the time of this article actually) for getting into an argument with Laker fans over Lebron being MVP. I wanna say he was arguing with some Lakersground posters mad that he(as a know nothing media member) had an MVP vote.

Anyway im guessing the SN was a fan vote. A glance at the article suggests it at least. These were their yearly picks:


SN PLAYERS OF THE YEAR

2001: Allen Iverson
2002: Tim Duncan
2003: Tim Duncan
2000: Shaquille O

[Psileas]

"He’s not only perfected Jordan’s cobra-like "drive and strike" dribbling style and turnaround fadeaway, he’s added Magic’s junior sky-hook, McHale and Hakeem’s up-and-under move, George Gervin’s finger-roll, Tim Hardaway’s cross-over, Tim Duncan’s bank shot, Reggie Miller’s flailing-leg three point form, and Clyde Drexler’s hand-switching spin move. And he seems to be able to do all of these with either hand."

Sorry, but that's bs. Trying a specific move once every 1,000 tries doesn't mean you've "added" this shot. You'd expect from someone with all that ridiculous arsenal to be able to shoot way better than 32%, even at 37.

[stalkerforlife]

back to back titles doesn't mean shit.

Duncan won 5 titles as the best or second best player

Also, never won less than 50 games....which Kobe did in his PRIME :roll: :roll:

If you want to win Duncan>Kobe and it's not even arguable.

:biggums:

Winning back to back titles is one of the hardest things to do in any sport. You have a bulls-eye on your back and it takes amazing mental toughness to continue being the best.

[HOoopCityJones]

back to back titles doesn't mean shit.

Duncan won 5 titles as the best or second best player

Also, never won less than 50 games....which Kobe did in his PRIME :roll: :roll:

If you want to win Duncan>Kobe and it's not even arguable.

Except if it's Duncan vs Kobe.

[stalkerforlife]

Sorry, but that's bs. Trying a specific move once every 1,000 tries doesn't mean you've "added" this shot. You'd expect from someone with all that ridiculous arsenal to be able to shoot way better than 32%, even at 37.

Hater alert.

[riseagainst]

why wouldn't 2peat or 3peat matter? Not being able to make it to 2 or more finals in consecutive years means it was a fluke year. Winning consistently in a tough conference means sustained greatness.

[Kblaze8855]

This is the MVP vote having writer of that SN article discussing Kobe/Lebron with a Laker forum poster....

Long but interesting if you wonder what actual award voters would be like on a forum.......







[QUOTE]I say:

It sounds like you really want Lebron to win the MVP. So much so that you are reporting information that is factually incorrect.

You say:
"And it’s not a coincidence that guys like Mo Williams and Delonte West are having career years. James is helping to elevate them."

Mo Williams is not having a "career year". In fact is performance is down from last year. He is shooting a lower percentage this year, has 38% fewer assists this year, fewer blocks, fewer rebounds and his scoring is only .8 PPG more this year.

As for Delonte, this is not a career year either. He had a better season in Boston in 05-06 when he shot a higher percentage, had more rebounds and more assists per game and scored at virtually the same rate 11.8 PPG vs 12.0 PPG.

I would love to hear your response to this, since Mo Williams and Delonte West have both had better seasons elsewhere than playing with "King" James.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sean responds:

Next time I put factual mistakes in an article, I will put in a correction. But I haven't put any factual mistakes.

These have been the best years of both Williams' and West's career. West has had one other good year and Williams has had some good years, too. They've never been as efficient on both ends of the floor as they have this year, though. Remember, Williams was an All-Star this year, and he was never even considered for the All-Star team in his career, ever. Playing with LeBron has allowed Williams to focus more on scoring rather than being a point guard, which he is not very good at (that's why the Bucks traded him). This year, he is hitting 43.2 percent of his 3s, way above his career average. That's because LeBron attracts so much attention that Williams is left with easy, wide-open 3s. The same goes for West, who's shooting 41.4 percent.

You can cherry-pick past seasons, and say, "See, this one is better," but ask either Williams or West (as I have done) and they'll tell you this has been their best year. And they'll tell you it comes from playing with James.

My only interest is making sure the right guy wins the MVP. I have yet to hear a convincing argument for anyone besides LeBron James. If your only argument is that Williams and West once had better years ... then, well, that's not very convincing.

Thanks,
Sean Deveney
Sporting News

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, you are welcome to your opinion. To me, it's clear that West and Williams are having career years, they've never been more effective than they have this season. And, no offense, but I will take their opinions over yours. There's something called true shooting percentage, which takes into account the fact that both players are shooting far more 3-pointers than in the past. So, their overall percentage might be down, but that's because they're taking more 3s. Both players have career highs in true shooting percentage.

Either way, you're taking one small point I made and making it into my whole argument in favor of James, which is silly. I don't think you can rationally argue against him. On what basis? That 34-year-old Ben Wallace (who is out for the year) was an All-Star three years ago? The guy is terrible. Or that Zydrunas Ilgauskas, now 33 and two steps slower, was an All-Star four years ago? Are you saying that a frontcourt trio of Lamar Odom, Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum is worse than a trio of Ben Wallace, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Anderson Varejao? That would be a pretty stupid argument.

I am arguing in favor of LeBron because he is the best player in the league, and the best player should be the MVP, not because I have any personal feeling for or against the guy. You seem to be nitpicking these little arguments against him because you don't like him or something. That's a little bizarre to me.

Thanks,
Sean Deveney
Sporting News

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I say:

Ok, I see you are not willing to acknowledge anything on this issue. But to me, a player is not having a career year just because he got more open looks at 3 and made more of them when his assists are way down, his rebounds are down, his steals are down, his blocks are down. And a player is not always the most objective judge of how well they are playing.

Why can't Lebron make the former all-stars on his team better players since he is making Mo Williams and Delonte West better? When guys underperform on his team, it's apparently not his fault in any way, but when they play well it's because of him? Why doesn't anyone state the facts: "Lebron plays with a current all-star and three former all-stars and the three former all-stars are not playing as well as they have in the past?" But no one goes there. Is this because they don't want there to be any negative insinuations towards Lebron? Why can't we get some objectivity from the media? Give us all sides of the equation, not just the good parts.

Why is the media lying to us when they say Kobe plays with 3 or 4 all stars? I know you were probably watching TNT and heard it too. This is pure propoganda to try and minimize Kobe's role on his team, a team with the best record. I wonder who they think the 4th all-star is after Gasol, Odom and Bynum? Fisher. Walton, Ariza maybe? And never mind that Bynum has hardly played in two years and that Kobe only plays with one all-star.

"I am arguing in favor of LeBron because he is the best player in the league, and the best player should be the MVP"

The best player in the league should be MVP? So your criteria is different than most of the voters? Nash was not the best player in the league and neither was Iverson when they won. Nash is one of the worst defenders in the league and Nash was a system player that thrived in a run and gun system that inflated his stats and ignored defense. And no one would have ever traded Iverson for Shaq in 2001 or at any point of their careers. Shaq was clearly the better player.

Lebron will be the best player in the league at some point, and he's in the top two right now, but most GM's and coaches would pick Kobe today if they had a 7 game series they needed to win right now. I think that makes Kobe the (slightly) better player as of today.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sean responds:

Apparently, you have no concept of aging. Ben Wallace and Zydrunas Ilgauskas are old, that is why they are not as effective as they once were. That is what happens in sports. If you put Kareem Abdul-Jabbar on the floor with Kobe, there's no way Kobe could make him into an All-Star. Your argument there really makes no sense and shows your bias.

Steve Nash WAS the best player in the league when he won it. No one was doing more to help his team win than he was. That's why he won. I agree that Iverson was not the best player when he won --- I voted for Shaq that year.

And stop saying that "the media" is lying to us about how many All-Stars Kobe plays with. One guy on TNT said it, that's all. In the end, you're the one who is lying by implying that everyone is saying that.

The MVP is not decided based on how many GMs would chose a guy in a seven-game series. That is a ridiculous hypothetical, and it's not necessarily true --- I am sure a lot of GMs would pick LeBron, maybe even more than those who pick Kobe. But, I don't know, because it is a hypothetical, and I don't vote based on hypotheticals. I vote on the season, and no one is having a better year than LeBron.

Again, you can pick out little things in my case for LeBron that you can quibble with, and that is fine. But, overall, you can't present a reasonable case against him. There's no way.

Sean Deveney
Sporting News



If anything, there is a bias TOWARD Los Angeles, toward the Lakers. It is better for networks like ESPN and TNT if Kobe is the MVP, because the L.A. market is about 10 times the size of Cleveland. What possible reason would people have to boost a guy who plays in Cleveland? Other than this stark reality: HE IS HAVING A BETTER YEAR THAN KOBE. Period. You're looking for all these media conspiracies. They're not there.

Thanks,
Sean Deveney
Sporting news

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------

I say:

I don't think you all got together and decided to back Lebron, but maybe the league office wants to promote Lebron as it's poster child and the MVP is how they will do it. When an NBA ref is throwing games, anything is possible.

When TNT, ESPN, NBA.com and yourself at Sporting News all come up with reasons why Kobe is not the MVP that tells me something is not quite right. Any objective person would rate this race a dead heat or at the very least acknowledge it is extremely close. Objectivity is important for sportswriters that cover national stories and I just don't see it from the major sources of NBA coverage.

One more thing, consider how well Lebron has performed against the best teams in league. His record this season against the best competition is not good.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------




It goes on and on but is too long to post it all.

I find him mostly reasonable but wrong in places. I dont think the OP would care much for him.

Hes pretty much an ISH poster with an MVP vote.

[HOoopCityJones]

why wouldn't 2peat or 3peat matter? Not being able to make it to 2 or more finals in consecutive years means it was a fluke year. Winning consistently in a tough conference means sustained greatness.

3peating and 2peating don't mean shit, and even if it does, it's cuz of Phil.

Because it's not Duncan hasn't had the same elite Coach his entire career.

[SouBeachTalents]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]So does the medias opinion matter or not? The guy who put together that article for sporting news was discussed here years ago(around the time of this article actually) for getting into an argument with Laker fans over Lebron being MVP. I wanna say he was arguing with some Lakersground posters mad that he(as a know nothing media member) had an MVP vote.

Anyway im guessing the SN was a fan vote. A glance at the article suggests it at least. These were their yearly picks:


SN PLAYERS OF THE YEAR

2001: Allen Iverson
2002: Tim Duncan
2003: Tim Duncan
2000: Shaquille O

[ShaqTwizzle]

Except if it's Duncan vs Kobe.

Lettuce be fair.
Duncan did outplay Kobe in 99, 02 & 03.
Kobe outplayed Duncan in 01, 04 & 08.


why wouldn't 2peat or 3peat matter? Not being able to make it to 2 or more finals in consecutive years means it was a fluke year. Winning consistently in a tough conference means sustained greatness.

The 3peat was Shaq's 3peat so that doesn't really count.
Kobe was a Pippen level #2 in 00 & 02.

The 2peat was impressive however the competition those two years but especially in 09 was not all that fantastic.
Even in 2010 the best team they faced was a hobbled Boston squad which nearly beat them.

Duncan was the best player on at the very least 4 out of 5 title teams.
Kobe was the best on 2 of 5.

[ralph_i_el]

:biggums:

Winning back to back titles is one of the hardest things to do in any sport. You have a bulls-eye on your back and it takes amazing mental toughness to continue being the best.

Not harder than winning titles in 3 different decades.

You know what takes amazing mental toughness? Being a contender for now 19 straight seasons. Tim Duncan has never won less than 50 games a season, even in TWO lockout seasons where they played like 66 games.

Duncan has had great help. Everyone with a championship has. No modern hall of famer had more help than Kobe.

[HOoopCityJones]

Lettuce be fair.
Duncan did outplay Kobe in 99, 02 & 03.
Kobe outplayed Duncan in 01, 04 & 08.



The 3peat was Shaq's 3peat so that doesn't really count.
Kobe was a Pippen level #2 in 00 & 02.

The 2peat was impressive however the competition those two years but especially in 09 was not all that fantastic.
Even in 2010 the best team they faced was a hobbled Boston squad which nearly beat them.

Duncan was the best player on at the very least 4 out of 5 title teams.
Kobe was the best on 2 of 5.

Pipped never averaged the numbers kobe did next to Shaq with Jordan, get the fucc outta here.

Also that 3peat is just as much Kobe's as it is Shaq's. They don't say Shaq's Lakers like they do with Jordan's Bulls. They says Shaq and Kobe Lakers.

[Wade's Rings]

This is for 00'-10' right? If so definetely Kobe, no argument here

How does Duncan not have an argument?

[Akrazotile]

why wouldn't 2peat or 3peat matter? Not being able to make it to 2 or more finals in consecutive years means it was a fluke year. Winning consistently in a tough conference means sustained greatness.


So you want to count back to back as a positive, but conveniently exclude three straight years with no second round appearances (during his peak) as a negative?

Obviously if the team won with Shaq, then during three years of just Kobe they did nothing, than Pau comes along and they win again, this tells you something.

Meanwhile Duncan was winning 50+ always and never missed the second round in consecutive years.

Kobe was part of a couple eras with stacked teams and giant payrolls. So what? Fisher was too. Fisher has 5 rings. Fisher has a significantly better playoff win % than Kobe.

Just bc Kobe lucked into some stacked teams doesnt make him anywhere close to as impactful as Duncan.

Deal with the facts.

[HOoopCityJones]

Duncan and Shaq both have arguments.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Pipped never averaged the numbers kobe did next to Shaq with Jordan, get the fucc outta here.


00 Kobe : 21 / 5 / 4.4 on 52%TS (19.4 PER)
02 Kobe : 26 / 6 / 4.6 on 51%TS (20.5 PER)

92 Pippen : 20 / 9 / 6.7 on 54%TS (20.1 PER)
91 Pippen : 22 / 9 / 5.8 on 56%TS (22.0 PER)

Definitely comparable and those numbers don't factor in Pippen's superior defense.


They don't say Shaq's Lakers like they do with Jordan's Bulls.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/70/13/0f/70130fe601f7266117014cc50c7e102a.jpg

Anyway Kobe was a truly great #2 and I was a big fan of his back then so I don't wanna hate but the gap between them was Jordan/Pippen sized in my opinion outside of their 01 run where Kobe did play at a Super-Star level.

I don't mind if you feel differently.
There is nothing shameful about being a great #2 and then winning as a great #1 like Kobe did.

:cheers:

[riseagainst]

So you want to count back to back as a positive, but conveniently exclude three straight years with no second round appearances (during his peak) as a negative?

Obviously if the team won with Shaq, then during three years of just Kobe they did nothing, than Pau comes along and they win again, this tells you something.

Meanwhile Duncan was winning 50+ always and never missed the second round in consecutive years.

Kobe was part of a couple eras with stacked teams and giant payrolls. So what? Fisher was too. Fisher has 5 rings. Fisher has a significantly better playoff win % than Kobe.

Just bc Kobe lucked into some stacked teams doesnt make him anywhere close to as impactful as Duncan.

Deal with the facts.

see you are not being very objective. 3 straight years of 1st round exits, but what were the contexts? The whole team was rebuilding. He never had a good enough team to compete in the first place.


What I am talking about is making the finals, even winning the chip, then the very next year with no big changes to the roster, they get eliminated in the 1st round. Duncan and the Spurs never made the finals on consecutive years until the 2013/2014 years where Duncan was just a role player at that point.

Kobe managed to go to 3 straight finals and win back to back.

[feyki]

00 - Kobe

01 - Kobe

02 - Duncan

03 - Duncan

04 - Duncan

05 - Duncan

06 - Duncan

07 - Duncan

08 - Kobe

09 - Kobe

10 - Kobe ,

Duncan 6 > Kobe 5

[SouBeachTalents]

00 - Kobe

01 - Kobe

02 - Duncan

03 - Duncan

04 - Duncan

05 - Duncan

06 - Duncan

07 - Duncan

08 - Kobe

09 - Kobe

10 - Kobe ,

Duncan 6 > Kobe 5

Switch '00 & '06 and I agree

[NBAplayoffs2001]

[QUOTE=stalkerforlife]http://www.sportingnews.com/nba-news/118425-sporting-news-nba-athlete-decade-kobe-bryant-sg-lakers

"The numbers say...

Bryant: 28.2 points per game, 5.9 rebounds, 5.2 assists, one MVP, four titles
Duncan: 21.2 points per game, 11.7 rebounds, 3.3 assists, two MVPs, three titles

You say...

SportingNews.com voting
Bryant 55%
Duncan 45%"

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/340253-kobe-bryant-player-of-the-decade-in-the-nba

[B]"He

[feyki]

Switch '00 & '06 and I agree

Duncan wasn't played in the playoffs . He was injured at 2000 .



Duncan averaged 26 pts , 10.5 rib , 3.3 ast , 0.8 stl , 1.9 blk , 2.6 to ; with % 62.5 TS at 2006 playoffs .


Kobe averaged 28 pts , 6.3 rib , 5.1 ast , 1.1 stl , 0.4 blk , 4.7 to ; with % 58.7 TS at 2006 playoffs .


Duncan was better on both ends .

[FKAri]

Damn, LeBron & Nash over Wade/Kobe in '06, that's ridiculous

No. It's perfectly reasonable. What's unfortunate is how Wade's 2009 year is overlooked so much. This should be about individual play not stars aligning with teammates and coaches to result in a much better team.

[SouBeachTalents]

No. It's perfectly reasonable. What's unfortunate is how Wade's 2009 year is overlooked so much. This should be about individual play not stars aligning with teammates and coaches to result in a much better team.

So you really think Nash was better/had better seasons than Wade & Kobe in '06?

[FKAri]

So you really think Nash was better/had better seasons than Wade & Kobe in '06?

It's arguable either way. That's basically Nash's best year vs Wade's 3rd year in the league.

Kobe was better than both imo. Kobe had shit teams but he was a monster.

[rmt]

Bullshit.

Kobe won 5 titles as the best or second best player.

Duncan's been able to continue a winning tradition because of surrounding players. Duncan's a GREAT role player at this point, but he is NOT better than Kobe on any of Kobe's title teams.

Kobe's a better winner and he actually won back to back titles as the man, where-as Duncan never could. Kobe won those b2b titles with a worse supporting cast than Duncan's ever had.

Your memory is faulty:

2009 Playoffs
Gasol 18.3 pts 10.8 rebs 2.5 asst 2 blks 58%FG 21.9 PER 4.3 WS 6.5 BPM 2 VORP
Odom 12.3 pts 9.1 rebs 52.4%FG 18 PER 2.6 WS 4.6 BPM 1.2 VORP
Ariza 11.3 pts 4.2 rebs 49.7%FG 14.7 PER 2.2 WS 5 BPM 1.3 VORP

2010 Playoffs
Gasol 19.6 pts 11.1 rebs 3.5 asst 2.1 blk 53.9%FG 24 PER 4.3 WS 6.3 BPM 1.9 VORP
MWP 11.2 pts 4 rebs 39.8%FG 10.8 PER 1.1 WS 1.3 BPM 0.7 VORP
Fisher 10.3 pts 2.8 asst 44.8%FG 10.8 PER 1.4 WS 0.6 BPM 0.5 VORP
Odom 9.7 pts 8.6 rebs 46.9%FG 15.4 PER 1.7 WS 2.1 BPM 0.7 VORP

2003 Playoffs
Parker 14.7 pts 3.5 asst 40.3%FG 11.9 PER 1.1 WS -1.8 BPM 0 VORP
SJax 12.8 pts 4.1 rebs 41.4%FG 12 PER 1.3 WS 1.6 BPM 0.7 VORP
Manu 9.4 pts 3.8 rebs 38.6%FG 15 PER 2.1 WS 4.7 BPM 1.1 VORP

[imnew09]

Well deserved. More obvious than Jameer is a queer

[West-Side]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]So does the medias opinion matter or not? The guy who put together that article for sporting news was discussed here years ago(around the time of this article actually) for getting into an argument with Laker fans over Lebron being MVP. I wanna say he was arguing with some Lakersground posters mad that he(as a know nothing media member) had an MVP vote.

Anyway im guessing the SN was a fan vote. A glance at the article suggests it at least. These were their yearly picks:


SN PLAYERS OF THE YEAR

2001: Allen Iverson
2002: Tim Duncan
2003: Tim Duncan
2000: Shaquille O

[RRR3]

:facepalm

Kobe was arguably the [B]ONLY player from 01' to 10' that was a top 5 player each year .

No other player has sustained this consistency from 2001 to 2010.
Kobe also won 4 titles and has been to the NBA finals 6 times.

If player A is considered a top 3 player for all ten years and Player B was the best player for 3 years [2003-2005] but fell off in 2007; would you not say that player A is the player of the decade.

Breaking it down by year is a stupid argument and has zero relevance.
Poor argument considering that's the time in which his prime occurred. I could say LeBron is arguably the only player who has been top 5 every year from 2006-now. :confusedshrug:

[Uncle Drew]

Kobe won a fan voted poll? :eek: Who would have guessed?!

[Uncle Drew]

Duncan > Kobe

[game3524]

They lying though.

It's funny because half of these same guys will now try to argue Duncan was the best of his decade in hindsight. Despite what both Shaq and Kobe have done to him at separate points of their career. Kobe in general always been The Spurs killer.

Yeah, the Duncan revisionist history is hilarious.

[Bernkastel]

Whose alt is OP?

[tpols]

Meanwhile Duncan was winning 50+ always and never missed the second round in consecutive years.
.

silly argument.. Duncan has never played with a poor supporting cast.


A bit hypocritical to ignore that given how help is all you talk about with kobe.

[feyki]

silly argument.. Duncan has never played with a poor supporting cast.


A bit hypocritical to ignore that given how help is all you talk about with kobe.

No , he played with bad supporting cast at between 2001-2004(4 years) .

[HOoopCityJones]

No , he played with bad supporting cast at between 2001-2004(4 years) .

Bullshit.

Only bad cast he ever played with is 03 and even then he still had Tony, Manu and Robinson.

[feyki]

Bullshit.

Only bad cast he ever played with is 03 and even then he still had Tony, Manu and Robinson.

2001 ;

16 pts , 10 rib , 1.7 ast , 1.3 stl , 2.4 blk , 2.2 to , % 53.8 TS Admiral

13 pts , 3 ast A.Daniels


2002 ;

12 pts , 8 rib , 1 ast , 1stl , 2 blk Admiral

9 pts , 4 ast Tony P.

2003 ;

15 pts , 3.5 ast , % 47 TS Tony P.

13 pts , 3 ast , 3 to , % 53 TS Stephen Jackson

9 pts , 3 ast Gino

7 pts , 7 rib Admiral


2004 ;

18 pts, 7 ast , % 50 TS Tony P.

13 pts , 3 ast Gino

[NBASTATMAN]

:facepalm

Kobe was arguably the ONLY player from 01' to 10' that was a top 5 player each year [besides maybe 2005 due to injuries].

No other player has sustained this consistency from 2001 to 2010.
Kobe also won 4 titles and has been to the NBA finals 6 times.

If player A is considered a top 3 player for all ten years and Player B was the best player for 3 years [2003-2005] but fell off in 2007; would you not say that player A is the player of the decade.

Breaking it down by year is a stupid argument and has zero relevance.


He scuked in 2005 before the injury and after the injury... STOP YOUR BS..Otherwise you may be correct.. Duncan fell off in 2008-10 imo... But he was still a force on both sides of the court...

[Eye Test]

http://img01.deviantart.net/4a31/i/2012/331/e/2/captain_obvious_by_stuartmcghee-d5mbxhw.jpg

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Cool thread, doesn't change Duncan > Kobe.

[TheImmortal]

It's common knowledge to anyone who watched basketball the last 20 years that Kobe is the player of the decade of the 00s. Come on now.. Only trolls would say otherwise.

[ralph_i_el]

It's common knowledge to anyone who watched basketball the last 20 years that Kobe is the player of the decade of the 00s. Come on now.. Only trolls would say otherwise.

- Says dumb stuff
- Kobe Stan
- "Wigginsville"
- 92 posts


Hi Kenneth

[tmacattack33]

Duncan had two super star years and a title in the 90's. And of course he got a ring in 2014 too.

Congrats for Kobe for having his prime years align up perfectly with the decade breaks. 2000-2010 is literally Kobe's prime.

Duncan's was around 1998-2007. Same for KG more or less.

And of course, Wade and Lebron weren't even in the league until the mid 2000s.

[Anaximandro1]

Sports Illustrated
(http://www.si.com/more-sports/2009/12/15/nba-highlightslowlights)


PLAYER OF THE DECADE: Tim Duncan, San Antonio Spurs


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


Duncan has been better than Kobe in three different decades : 90s, 2000s and 2010s ... the gap is overwhelming.


Wins -> Duncan 1108 / Kobe 959

MVP -> Duncan 2 / Kobe 1

FMVP -> Duncan 3 / Kobe 2

Reg S Win Shares -> Duncan 202.08 / Kobe 173.04

Playoff Win Shares -> Duncan 37.47 / Kobe 28.26

Rings as#1 -> Duncan 4 / Kobe 2

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Sports Illustrated
(http://www.si.com/more-sports/2009/12/15/nba-highlightslowlights)




Duncan has been better than Kobe in three different decades : 90s, 2000s and 2010s ... the gap is overwhelming.


Wins -> Duncan 1108 / Kobe 959

MVP -> Duncan 2 / Kobe 1

FMVP -> Duncan 3 / Kobe 2

Reg S Win Shares -> Duncan 202.08 / Kobe 173.04

Playoff Win Shares -> Duncan 37.47 / Kobe 28.26

Rings as#1 -> Duncan 4 / Kobe 2

Game over.

[Eye Test]

Kobe has these haters SHOOK :lol

Player of the decade, and by a pretty wide, huge margin.

No guys, its not debatable, sorry. The world ain't flat. Take your meltdowns elsewhere, they wont change history.

[ArbitraryWater]

- Says dumb stuff
- Kobe Stan
- "Wigginsville"
- 92 posts


Hi Kenneth

Thats Immortal, he has 1-2 other accs here.. his previous one he rocked the Bron/Kobe/Wiggins avatar, that guy.. not sure why he has a new acc.

[West-Side]

Poor argument considering that's the time in which his prime occurred. I could say LeBron is arguably the only player who has been top 5 every year from 2006-now. :confusedshrug:

What? How is that a poor argument? :facepalm

Player A

01 - #3
02 - #2
03 - #3
04 - #2
05 - #2
06 - #2
07 - #4
08 - #2
09 - #3
10 - #2

Player B

01 - #5
02 - #5
03 - #4
04 - #1
05 - #1
06 - #1
07 - #9
08 - #21
09 - #24
10 - #51

You wouldn't say Player A should be player of the decade?

[West-Side]

Switch '00 & '06 and I agree

07' Kobe was better than 07' Duncan. :roll:

[West-Side]

00 - Kobe

01 - Kobe

02 - Duncan

03 - Duncan

04 - Duncan

05 - Duncan

06 - Duncan

07 - Duncan

08 - Kobe

09 - Kobe

10 - Kobe ,

Duncan 6 > Kobe 5

01' - Kobe
02' - Duncan
03' - Tied
04' - Duncan
05' - Duncan
06' - Kobe
07' - Kobe
08' - Kobe
09' - Kobe
10' - Kobe


In 2003;

Duncan: 23.3 PPG, 12.9 RPG, 3.9 APG, 2.9 BPG, .564 TS%, 26.9 PER
Kobe: 30.0 PPG, 6.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 2.0 SPG, .550 TS%, 26.2 PER

This was arguably Kobe's best all around season of his career.
He was a better scorer than Duncan and play-maker. He was also playing elite defense on a consistent basis. His efficiency also is pretty much identical to Duncan's that year.

[ArbitraryWater]

00' - Duncan
01' - Duncan
02' - Duncan
03' - Duncan
04' - Duncan
05' - Duncan
06' - Kobe
07' - Kobe
08' - Kobe
09' - Kobe

Hey West side, the decade is 2000-2009, don't go full kenneth retarded mode on us...

so yeah, Duncan wins.

[Gus Hemmingway]

kobetards getting shitted on STILL :lol

[ArbitraryWater]

00' - Duncan
01' - Duncan
02' - Duncan
03' - Duncan
04' - Duncan
05' - Duncan
06' - Kobe
07' - Kobe
08' - Kobe
09' - Kobe

So yeah, Duncan.

[ralph_i_el]

Thats Immortal, he has 1-2 other accs here.. his previous one he rocked the Bron/Kobe/Wiggins avatar, that guy.. not sure why he has a new acc.

I can't add any new ******s to my hate list, so I'm just going to pretend he's KennyG

[West-Side]

00' - Duncan
01' - Duncan
02' - Duncan
03' - Duncan
04' - Duncan
05' - Duncan
06' - Kobe
07' - Kobe
08' - Kobe
09' - Kobe

Hey West side, the decade is 2000-2009, don't go full kenneth retarded mode on us...

so yeah, Duncan wins.

00 - Duncan
01 - Kobe (:oldlol: @ you picking Duncan)
02 - Duncan
03 - Tied
04 - Duncan
05 - Duncan
06 - Kobe
07 - Kobe
08 - Kobe
09 - Kobe

5-4 favoring Kobe.
Fact is, Kobe was a top 3/4 player from 01 to 04.
Duncan wasn't even top 10 player after 2007 season.

Kobe remained an elite player throughout the decade, while Duncan became a role player following the 2007 campaign.

I find it really amusing as to why you picked Duncan over Kobe in 2001.
No I really want to hear this.

Proceed.

[West-Side]

2001 Season

Kobe: 28.5 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.0 APG, 1.7 SPG, .553 TS%, 24.5 PER
Duncan: 22.2 PPG, 12.2 RPG, 3.0 RPG, 2.3 BPG, .536 TS%, 23.6 PER

Playoffs

Kobe: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, .555 TS%, 25.0 PER
Duncan: 24.4 PPG, 14.5 RPG, 3.8 APG, 2.7 BPG, .531 TS%, 25.4 PER

Head to head

Kobe: 33.3 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 7.0 APG, 1.5 SPG, .571 TS%
Duncan: 23.0 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 4.3 APG, 4.3 BPG, .539 TS%

Kobe embarrasses Duncan in a clean sweep, by a 20+ margin of victory.

Kobe had a 25.4 game score that series, to Duncan's 19.4.
Kobe shot 51.4% from the field to Duncan's 47.8%.

Here, I even provided you with their numbers.
Now go on, tell me exactly why you think Duncan was better than Kobe in 2001. When the entire world believed he was the 2nd best player that season, only behind Shaq.

[feyki]

2001 Season

Kobe: 28.5 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.0 APG, 1.7 SPG, .553 TS%, 24.5 PER
Duncan: 22.2 PPG, 12.2 RPG, 3.0 RPG, 2.3 BPG, .536 TS%, 23.6 PER

Playoffs

Kobe: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, .555 TS%, 25.0 PER
Duncan: 24.4 PPG, 14.5 RPG, 3.8 APG, 2.7 BPG, .531 TS%, 25.4 PER

Head to head

Kobe: 33.3 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 7.0 APG, 1.5 SPG, .571 TS%
Duncan: 23.0 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 4.3 APG, 4.3 BPG, .539 TS%

Kobe embarrasses Duncan in a clean sweep, by a 20+ margin of victory.

Kobe had a 25.4 game score that series, to Duncan's 19.4.
Kobe shot 51.4% from the field to Duncan's 47.8%.

Here, I even provided you with their numbers.
Now go on, tell me exactly why you think Duncan was better than Kobe in 2001. When the entire world believed he was the 2nd best player that season, only behind Shaq.


2006 Duncan at playoffs - 30.4 PER


2006 Kobe at playoffs - 19.9 PER


2007 Duncan at playoffs - 27.4 PER

2007 Kobe at playoffs - 24.1 PER


And PER is ball hog lover formula , Duncan way better player on both ends at 2006 and 2007 .

[Eye Test]

NBA player of the DECADE:

Option 1

http://theartmad.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Kobe-Bryant-Dunk-28.jpg

Option 2

http://i.imgur.com/cRx53NU.jpg


You be the judge.

[West-Side]

2006 Duncan at playoffs - 30.4 PER


2006 Kobe at playoffs - 19.9 PER


2007 Duncan at playoffs - 27.4 PER

2007 Kobe at playoffs - 24.1 PER


And PER is ball hog lover formula , Duncan way better player on both ends at 2006 and 2007 .

PER is the single worst stat in the history of basketball.
It's a decent supplementary stat but shouldn't be used to distinguish players.

Kobe: 27.9 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.1 APG, .497 FG%, .587 TS%, 19.9 PER [4.3 TO]
Wade: 28.4 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.7 APG, .497 FG%, .593 TS%, 26.9 PER [3.9 TO]

Please explain to me why Wade's PER is so much higher?
They literally have identical numbers.

Which is why I really hate using PER.
It's a pretty weird stat.

[West-Side]

2006 Duncan at playoffs - 30.4 PER


2006 Kobe at playoffs - 19.9 PER


2007 Duncan at playoffs - 27.4 PER

2007 Kobe at playoffs - 24.1 PER


And PER is ball hog lover formula , Duncan way better player on both ends at 2006 and 2007 .

I really think this forum needs to start using an IQ test as a pre-requisite to registering for this site.

[pastis]

kobe is top 12-15 all time. this era goes to shaq, lebron and duncan. then dirk, kg, wade, kobe, pau gasol

[ShaqTwizzle]

Even if Kobe was the best player of the 00-09 decade I still rank him behind Shaq, Duncan and Hakeem All-Time without hesitation.

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

[24-Inch_Chrome]

PER is the single worst stat in the history of basketball.
It's a decent supplementary stat but shouldn't be used to distinguish players.

Kobe: 27.9 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.1 APG, .497 FG%, .587 TS%, 19.9 PER [4.3 TO]
Wade: 28.4 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.7 APG, .497 FG%, .593 TS%, 26.9 PER [3.9 TO]

Please explain to me why Wade's PER is so much higher?
They literally have identical numbers.

Which is why I really hate using PER.
It's a pretty weird stat.

Include their 3P%, per-36 production (per-minute production is big for PER), and team pace, all three things factor in. Should shed more light on the disparity, though I won't claim to be an expert on the subject.

[riseagainst]

kobe is top 12-15 all time. this era goes to shaq, lebron and duncan. then dirk, kg, wade, kobe, pau gasol

:biggums:
:wtf:

[ShawkFactory]

NBA player of the DECADE:

Option 1

http://theartmad.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Kobe-Bryant-Dunk-28.jpg

Option 2

http://i.imgur.com/cRx53NU.jpg


You be the judge.
Look at how stoic option 2 looks

[West-Side]

Include their 3P%, per-36 production (per-minute production is big for PER), and team pace, all three things factor in. Should shed more light on the disparity, though I won't claim to be an expert on the subject.

It's flawed though.
TS% already considers 3PT% & FT%.

You're saying a 7 point difference is justifiable for difference in minutes?
Wade played 41.7 MPG in 2006 playoffs; Kobe played roughly 3 minutes more in the 7 games against Phoenix.

[West-Side]

Even if Kobe was the best player of the 00-09 decade I still rank him behind Shaq, Duncan and Hakeem All-Time without hesitation.

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

:oldlol: Downright laughable.

[ShaqTwizzle]

It's flawed though.
TS% already consider 3PT% & FT%.

You're saying a 7 point difference is justifiable for difference in minutes?
Wade played 41.7 MPG in 2006 playoffs; Kobe played roughly 3 minutes more in the 7 games against Phoenix.

It is not flawed.
PER is a perfect stat. The ultimate all in 1 rating stat.

:mad:

[24-Inch_Chrome]

It's flawed though.
TS% already consider 3PT% & FT%.

You're saying a 7 point difference is justifiable for difference in minutes?
Wade played 41.7 MPG in 2006 playoffs; Kobe played roughly 3 minutes more in the 7 games against Phoenix.

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm just explaining what PER takes into consideration. If you want to understand the disparity, 3P%, per-minute stats, and team pace are relevant components.

[West-Side]

Kobe shot 40% from 3 & Wade shot 38% from 3.
Please explain the 7 point difference for me?

[ShaqTwizzle]

:oldlol: Downright laughable.

Why?
Shaq statistically has the 2nd best playoff Peak & Prime after Jordan and is arguably the GOAT Finals performer.
He is one of only three players including (Jordan/Russell) that ever 3peated as the man.
He has amazing longevity with really only Kareem eclipsing him when looking at the Top 10.

He is a strong GOAT candidate and is well deserving of a Top 5 spot at the very worst.

Hakeem has better Prime Playoff scoring stats then Kobe while being one of the GOAT defenders and he also has excellent longevity.
The only real knock against him I suppose is titles but he 2peated as the man which is equal to what Kobe did and is comparable to some other Top 10'ers.
He was generally stuck in shitty team situations during his early years.

Kobe had an impressive Peak stretch but not one better then Bird's or nessasarily even Hakeem's and his early Prime years were hardly impressive compared to the other GOATs.
Having him at 11 is perfectly reasonable unless you're one of those "resume" guys who overvalue team/media given accomplishments.

[West-Side]

Kobe: 44.9 MPG, .497 FG%, .400 3PT%, .771 FT%, 27.9 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.1 APG, 1.1 SPG, 0.4 BPG, 4.3 TO, .587 TS%, 19.9 PER
Wade: 41.7 MPG, .497 FG%, .378 3PT%, .808 FT%, 28.4 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2.2 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 3.9 TO, .593 TS%, 26.9 PER

The only real difference I see is SPG & BPG, that really warrants 7 whole points? :oldlol:

Like I said, if we used PER as a determinant; than they'd be a lot of false conclusions.

Chris Paul - 25.56
Neil Johnston - 24.69
Kareem Abdul Jabbar - 24.58
Moses Malone - 22.00
Dwight Howard - 22.00

[ShawkFactory]

Honestly it's Kobe, because his prime lined up perfectly. Now if we compared Kobes 01-10 with Duncan's 98-07..then things get truly interesting.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Kobe: 44.9 MPG, .497 FG%, .400 3PT%, .771 FT%, 27.9 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.1 APG, 1.1 SPG, 0.4 BPG, 4.3 TO, .587 TS%, 19.9 PER
Wade: 41.7 MPG, .497 FG%, .378 3PT%, .808 FT%, 28.4 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2.2 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 3.9 TO, .593 TS%, 26.9 PER

The only real difference I see is SPG & BPG, that really warrants 7 whole points?

The overall difference are quite significant.

More productive offensively and in terms of defensive stats.
Played 3+ less minutes per game.
More efficient offensively and less turnover prone.

Any of those one things might not make a big difference but all together they do.
There is other stuff you didn't mention that also can effect it.


Like I said, if we used PER as a determinant; than they'd be a lot of false conclusions.

Chris Paul - 25.56
Neil Johnston - 24.69
Kareem Abdul Jabbar - 24.58
Moses Malone - 22.00
Dwight Howard - 22.00

No because using "career" PER is stupid and in many cases you use it alongside other information not just alone.
You can misuse PER and make it look stupid but it doesn't mean the stat is actually stupid.

PER is an amazing stat that is almost never wrong.

[West-Side]

Why?
Shaq statistically has the 2nd best playoff Peak & Prime after Jordan and is arguably the GOAT Finals performer.
He is one of only three players including (Jordan/Russell) that ever 3peated as the man.
He has amazing longevity with really only Kareem eclipsing him when looking at the Top 10.

He is a strong GOAT candidate and is well deserving of a Top 5 spot at the very worst.

Hakeem has better Prime Playoff scoring stats then Kobe while being one of the GOAT defenders and he also has excellent longevity.
The only real knock against him I suppose is titles but he 2peated as the man which is equal to what Kobe did and is comparable to some other Top 10'ers.
He was generally stuck in shitty team situations during his early years.

Kobe had an impressive Peak stretch but not one better then Bird's or nessasarily even Hakeem's and his early Prime years were hardly impressive compared to the other GOATs.
Having him at 11 is perfectly reasonable unless you're one of those "resume" guys who overvalue team/media given accomplishments.

Eh, Shaquille O'Neal played his entire career with great players.
Penny; Van Axel & E.Jones; Kobe; Wade; LeBron.

The guy at his peak (00 - 02') was probably the most dominant player I have ever seen, if we rank players based off that, I'd easily have him in the top 3.

As far as completely resume's go, he just doesn't stack up with guys like Jordan, Kareem, Magic, Kobe, Duncan, Wilt.

[West-Side]

The overall difference are quite significant.

More productive offensively and in terms of defensive stats.
Played 3+ less minutes per game.
More efficient offensively and less turnover prone.

Any of those one things might not make a big difference but all together they do.

There is other stuff you didn't mention that also can effect it.



No because using "career" PER is stupid and in many cases you use it alongside other information not just alone.
You can misuse PER and make it look stupid but it doesn't mean the stat is actually stupid.

Dude, listen to you try to justify this.
The "efficiency" and turnover difference is extremely minor.
Kobe averaged 0.4 more TO's in 3.2 more MPG.
Kobe's efficiency is nearly identical to Wade's; look at their TS%.
Kobe also attempted more shots per game while maintaining that efficiency, a pretty important criteria to consider.

I'm not talking about a 2 point difference here.
It's a SEVEN point difference, and the only difference that's noticeable here is the SPG & BPG.

Like I said, this metric is only good for to wipe your ass with.
But whatever suits the argument to belittle Kobe right?

[feyki]

I really think this forum needs to start using an IQ test as a pre-requisite to registering for this site.

Kobe is ball hog , Duncan isn't . If you don't get it , you need a brain . Def ribaunds value is 0.3 points , a shot miss is 0.7 pts ; that is formula perfectly fit for perimeter ball hoggers , like Jordan,Kobe,Lebron,Wade,Westbrook .




Wade better cause ; He had 2.2 stl , 3.9 to . Kobe has 1.1 stl , 4.7 to .

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Steals and blocks are probably a significant factor, plus Wade turns it over less. Adjust all of that to per-minute stats and the gap grows.

Wade would have higher scoring, more assists, more rebounds, more steals, more blocks, and fewer turnovers if we looked at per-36 or per-100 numbers. I don't think that the gaps would be significant in all of those areas but it's enough to justify a PER disparity based on what we know about the formula.

As far as Kareem: Kareem lost blocks/steals for the first four years of his career, turnover numbers for the first 8 because they weren't recorded. He also played well past his prime, last three years definitely dropped his numbers (25.7 PER without those three, would be 6th all-time).

Just trying to explain what I can, you could probably find a better explanation out there somewhere who really knows what they're talking about.

[ShaqTwizzle]

But whatever suits the argument to belittle Kobe right?

PER works best for high usage high shot takers like Kobe.
This has nothing to do with him. I genuinely like the stat.

Plus I never said you needed to like it or that I would be offended if you didn't.
To each his own my friend.

[West-Side]

Kobe is ball hog , Duncan isn't . If you don't get it , you are need a brain . Def ribaunds value is 0.3 points , a shot miss is 0.7 pts ; that is formula perfectly fit for perimeter ball hogger , like Jordan,Kobe,Lebron,Wade,Westbrook .




Wade better cause ; He had 2.2 stl , 3.9 to . Kobe has 1.1 stl , 4.7 to .

The SPG difference of 1.1 and BPG difference of 0.7 is reason enough to give Wade a 7 point differential?

Wade turned the ball over every 10.69 minutes.
Kobe turned the ball over every 10.44 minutes.

Kobe was actually less turnover prone if you consider the minutes they played on the court.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Eh, Shaquille O'Neal played his entire career with great players.


And other guys didn't?


Penny; Van Axel & E.Jones; Kobe; Wade;

Penny was good. Solid All-Star.
Shaq only had him for 2 years though and he struggled in the 96 playoffs against Chicago.

Van Exel was a shitty flashy chucker. Not sure why some people hype him up.
Jones was an elite roleplayer. Not worth hyping either.

Kobe was young in the early 00's.
He wasn't all that special of a #2 in terms of performance level in 00 or 02 and he got injured in 03 then stunk in 04.

The casts Shaq won with in 00 & 02 weren't all that great and the competition was tough.

Oh and yeah he had healthy Prime Wade for one year (06).
That was indeed a luxury.


The guy at his peak (00 - 02') was probably the most dominant player I have ever seen, if we rank players based off that, I'd easily have him in the top 3.


Yeah but his extended Playoff Prime was also absurdly dominant and better then pretty much anyone elses not named Jordan.
By what measure would you say it wasn't?

Dude was wrecking the league by his 3rd year.
Was 2nd in MVP voting in 95 & 2nd in MVP voting in 05.
Long, sustained, consistent dominance.


As far as completely resume's go, he just doesn't stack up
He is still arguably Top 5 in terms of resume and even if he wasn't who is to say that everyone values "resume" as much as you do?

Anyway I think Shaq was the 2nd best playoff performer ever after Jordan.
I only rank Kareem higher because of his GOAT longevitiy.

Obviously statistically Shaq stands at the top but even in terms of team success this guy 3peated as the man, won 4 titles overall and made the Finals in his 3rd, 9th and 14th year. He also made the CFinals many other years.
Team success is there in abundance.
Numbers, team success, MVP, 3FMVP, 15 ASG's.... and on and on.
Having him in my Top 5 is perfectly reasonable I think... maybe one day you'll come around.

[West-Side]

And other guys didn't?



Penny was good. Solid All-Star.
Shaq only had him for 2 years though and he struggled in the 96 playoffs against Chicago.

Van Exel was a shitty flashy chucker. Not sure why some people hype him up.
Jones was an elite roleplayer. Not worth hyping either.

Kobe was young in the early 00's.
He wasn't all that special of a #2 in terms of performance level in 00 or 02 and he got injured in 03 then stunk in 04.

The casts Shaq won with in 00 & 02 weren't all that great and the competition was tough.

Oh and yeah he had healthy Prime Wade for one year (06).
That was indeed a luxury.



Yeah but his extended Playoff Prime was also absurdly dominant and better then pretty much anyone not named Jordan.
By what measure would you say it wasn't?
Dude was wrecking the league by his 3rd year.
Was 2nd in MVP voting in 95, 2nd in MVP voting in 05.


He is still arguably Top 5 in terms of resume and even if he wasn't who is to say that everyone values "resume" as much as you do?

Anyway I think Shaq was the 2nd best playoff performer ever after Jordan.
I only rank Kareem higher because of his GOAT longevitiy.

Obviously statistically Shaq stands at the top but even in terms of team success this guy 3peated as the man, won 4 titles overall and made the Finals in his 3rd and 14th year. He also made the ECFinals many other years.
Team success is there in abundance.
Numbers, team success, MVP, 3FMVP, 15 ASG's.... and on and on.
Having him in my Top 5 is perfectly reasonable I think... maybe one day you'll come around.

Your bias is extremely strong, I don't see a point in spending my time debating this. You are very strong headed about Shaq being in your top 3.

It definitely isn't the worst thing I've seen on this forum.
In 2002, Kobe was a top 3/4 player.
In 2003, he was arguably the 2nd best all-around player in the league.
In 2004, he was still very much a top 5 player. He did struggle against Detroit though.

Yet, according to you Kobe wasn't a "special" 2nd option.

[feyki]

The SPG difference of 1.1 and BPG difference of 0.7 is reason enough to give Wade a 7 point differential?

Wade turned the ball over every 10.69 minutes.
Kobe turned the ball over every 10.44 minutes.

Kobe was actually less turnover prone if you consider the minutes they played on the court.

Let's look at the 100 poss stats ;

2006 Wade (playoffs) ;

36 pts , 7.5 rib , 7.3 ast , 2.8 stl , 1.4 blk , 5 to


2006 Kobe (playoffs)

32.5 pts , 7.3 rib , 6 ast , 1.3 stl , 0.5 blk , 5.5 to

[ShaqTwizzle]

In 2002, Kobe was a top 3/4 player.


I didn't say he wasn't (though I am not sure he was that high).
Still he averaged 26 / 4.4-apg on 49%TS against the West.
That isn't "special" compared to a long list of 2nd options over the years, it really isn't.
Obviously his numbers in 2000 were even lower.

In 01 he was crazy good, MVP level but I didn't say he wasn't special that year.


In 2003, he was arguably the 2nd best all-around player in the league.

Yes but he got injured and had a very inconsistent series against the Spurs.


In 2004, he was still very much a top 5 player. He did struggle against Detroit though.

Still his playoff run wasn't all that amazing even for a #2.
Even when just looking at his pre-Finals numbers.

I am not saying he wasn't a quality 2nd option in 00, 02 and even 04 but he wasn't "special" in an All-Time sense as there are many other 2nd options who put up better numbers and had better runs.


Yet, according to you Kobe wasn't a "special" 2nd option.

Well I dunno how you'd define special. It isn't like I have a long list of guys who were way better then 02 Kobe but there is a long list of guys arguably better or on the same level so was he special... I dunno.

He wasn't a very good 2nd option in 00 either.
Didn't perform at even a low All-Star level in many of the Laker playoff wins.

Anyway I rank Kobe at #11 and think he could possibly be argued just inside the Top 10 so I don't think I am unfair towards him.

Resume wise he probably belongs inside but I am very anti-resume as I think most media awards are subjective and are effected by competition/media bias and many other things.
Even titles don't hold a huge sway over me because of the team aspect though neither Kobe or Shaq are weak in that regard.

:cheers:

[West-Side]

I didn't say he wasn't (though I am not sure he was that high).
Still he averaged 26 / 4.4-apg on 49%TS against the West.
That isn't "special" compared to a long list of 2nd options over the years, it really isn't.
Obviously his numbers in 2000 were even lower.

In 01 he was crazy good, MVP level but I didn't say he wasn't special that year.



Yes but he got injured and had a very inconsistent series against the Spurs.



Still his playoff run wasn't all that amazing even for a #2.
Even when just looking at his pre-Finals numbers.

I am not saying he wasn't a quality 2nd option in 00, 02 and even 04 but he wasn't "special" in an All-Time sense as there are many other 2nd options who put up better numbers and had better runs.



Well I dunno how you'd define special. It isn't like I have a long list of guys who were way better then 02 Kobe but there is a long list of guys arguably better or on the same level so was he special... I dunno.

He wasn't a very good 2nd option in 00 either.
Didn't perform at even a low All-Star level in many of the Laker playoff wins.

Anyway I rank Kobe at #11 and think he could possibly be argued just inside the Top 10 so I don't think I am unfair towards him.

Resume wise he probably belongs inside but I am very anti-resume as I think most media awards are subjective and are effected by competition/media bias and many other things.
Even titles don't hold a huge sway over me because of the team aspect though neither Kobe or Shaq are weak in that regard.

:cheers:

Name me three players that were better as 2nd options than 02', 03' & 04' Kobe.

[West-Side]

I don't remember many 2nd options being considered a top 5 player.
In 2002, he was a top 4 player.
In 2003, he was a top 3 player.
In 2004, he was still very much a top 5 player.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Name me three players that were better as 2nd options than 02' Kobe.

Off my head?

91 Pippen
10 Gasol
86 McHale

95 Drexler (debatable but same tier at worst).
I have 12 Wade just below him (but on the same tier).

Even Ray Allen in 01 put up way better playoff numbers then Kobe did in 00 or 02 (albeit in a more leading role).

And it doesn't matter what rank he was (5th best, 3rd best) or whatever it matters how he produced & performed in the playoffs in comparison to other 2nd options.

[West-Side]

Off my head?

91 Pippen
10 Gasol
86 McHale

95 Drexler (debatable but same tier at worst).
I have 12 Wade just below him (but on the same tier).

Even Ray Allen in 01 put up way better playoff numbers then Kobe did in 00 or 02 (albeit in a more leading role).

And it doesn't matter what rank he was (5th best, 3rd best) or whatever it matters how he produced & performed in the playoffs in comparison to other 2nd options.

Are you serious right now?
I understand that Kobe struggled in certain series those years but he also had played brilliantly against other teams from 02' to 04'.

If we use your line of thinking, I could say the same thing about 2011 LeBron James. He struggled against Dallas?

None of those players you mentioned demanded attention from defenses the same way Kobe did. None of them were closers for their respective teams like Kobe was. Kobe was also an elite defender those years. None of them were play-makers for their teams the way Kobe was (except Pippen, but Jordan was a capable play-maker as well). In LA, Kobe was the primary ball handler and play-maker in the triangle. His value is far higher than Pippen, Gasol and McHale's. C'mon now.

This is an absolutely absurd statement to make.

2002

Vs. SA - 26.2 / 5.4 / 4.8 on 46% (outplaying Shaq himself)
Vs NJ - 26.8 / 5.8 / 5.3 on 51%

He struggled shooting the ball against Portland & Sacramento, but still produced 27/5/5 for LA. Should we also question Iverson's value to Philadelphia in 2001? He put up worse efficiency numbers than Kobe did.

2003

Vs. Min - 31.8 / 5.2 / 6.7 on 43%
Vs SAS - 32.3 / 5.0 / 3.7 on 44%

In 2004, Kobe struggled with efficiency but you can understand why, correct? He had to go to court every other game and mentally just wasn't in the game.

He still averaged 24/5/5 playing with Shaq, Payton & Malone that year.
I think you're underrating him immensely.