MVP Of The Decade (1998-2008) (Dime Mag)

[duncan228]

MVP of the decade (1998-2008) (http://dimemag.com/2008/12/mvp-of-the-decade-1998-2008/)
By Austin Burton

After last night’s Magic/Spurs game, today’s Smack comments turned to a Tim Duncan vs. Dwight Howard debate. Reader “Three Stacks” chimed in with: “If you were to pick a model player over the past ten years, it’d have to be Duncan. I don’t think anyone else comes close.”

Agreed. I’ve written before that over the last decade — calendar year 1998 to calendar year 2008 — Tim Duncan has been the best basketball player in the world. And the only other players that do come close are Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal. With the end of the year coming up, now’s as good a time as any to settle it. Here’s how they stack up:

DUNCAN (’98-present)

* Four NBA championships (’99, ‘03, ‘05, ‘07)
* Three Finals MVP’s
* Two regular-season MVP’s (’01, ‘02)
* 10 All-Star Games (one MVP)
* Rookie of the Year
* 11-time All-Defensive
* 11-time All-NBA
* Regular-season numbers: 21.6 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.1 apg, 2.4 bpg, 0.8 spg
* Playoff numbers: 23.4 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.5 apg, 2.6 bpg, 0.6 spg.

Kobe Bryant, (’98-present)

* Three NBA championships (’00, ‘01, ‘02)
* Regular-season MVP (’08)
* 10 All-Star Games (two MVP’s)
* Two-time NBA leading scorer (’06, ‘07)
* 10-time All-NBA
* Eight-time All-Defensive
* Regular-season numbers: 26.4 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.5 spg, 0.6 bpg.
* Playoff numbers: 25.2 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.4 spg, 0.6 bpg.

Shaquille O’Neal, (’98-present)

* Four NBA championships (’00, ‘01, ‘02, ‘06)
* Three Finals MVP’s
* Regular-season MVP (’00)
* Nine All-Star Games (two MVP’s)
* NBA scoring leader (’00)
* Nine-time All-NBA
* Three-time All-Defensive
* Regular-season numbers: 24.0 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 2.7 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.2 bpg.
* Playoff numbers: 25.1 ppg, 12.2 rpg, 2.5 apg, 0.5 spg, 2.3 bpg.

Who gets your vote?

[xtremesteven33]

Duncan by miles......

[mexicanjunior]

Duncan...

[phxspurfan]

Who defines a decade as starting on an 8? But yes this is clearly a setup for Duncan.

[timaios]

Who defines a decade as starting on an 8? But yes this is clearly a setup for Duncan.

Post Jordan's Bulls.

[mrspurs]

Kobe...........not hahaaha.....Duncan by along shot.

[Allanon]

For the decade I'd put it into a two-way tie between Shaq and Duncan.

Duncan has been far more consistent in the later years but Shaq simply dominated in the early 00's.

If either Shaq or Duncan gets another ring, that will break the tie in my mind.

[stretch]

Dirk.

[kingmalaki]

It's a tossup between Duncan or Shaq....pick one. I think Duncan has been more consistent but I think Shaq at his peak was better.

[timaios]

It's a tossup between Duncan or Shaq....pick one. I think Duncan has been more consistent but I think Shaq at his peak was better.

Shaq was not better, he was a freak of nature. That's why he was so dominant.
Duncan is, like Shaq said, The Big Fundamental.

[phxspurfan]

It's a tossup between Duncan or Shaq....pick one. I think Duncan has been more consistent but I think Shaq at his peak was better.

Yeah, sadly, Shaq at his peak was embarassingly good. I remember turning off the TV during some of those Spurs playoff losses midway through the 3rd quarter. The look on DRob's face said it all too. He and his 70 yr old back wasn't going to stop the Diesel...

[ploto]

Mid 1990's Shaq. Then Duncan. Not really a fair comparison with their age difference- meaning their peaks were not at the same time.

[m33p0]

aside for that brief moment when Duncan contemplated joining the Magic, he hasn't caused his team any distress.

[Spur-Addict]

aside for that brief moment when Duncan contemplated joining the Magic, he hasn't caused his team any distress.

http://popculturespot.com/ProductImages/2007/timmypost.gif

[Spur-Addict]

Would Duncan have been a better matchup against Hakeem in the prime Magic years? He may have been since he was more polished coming in.

Would Shaq have been as good as Tim coming into the San An situation? I don't think so. Tim provided that polished game, while Shaq would have replicated what D. Rob gave.

As far as overall performance, Shaq has an awesome peak, but so does Timmy. Tim never had Kobe, although he had (has) two all star calibur guards. It almost seemed destined for Shaq to get his fourth with the Gino foul etc. But nevermind that.

Since they both have an incredible intro, and prime resumes, we have to go to post both to get a proper eval in my opinion. To be fair, they had a head to head match up. We all know who won that match up. That would be Mr. Wake Forest himself. Until further notice, I think Duncan is up by a hair.

[Cry Havoc]

For the decade I'd put it into a two-way tie between Shaq and Duncan.

Duncan has been far more consistent in the later years but Shaq simply dominated in the early 00's.

If either Shaq or Duncan gets another ring, that will break the tie in my mind.

Duncan has NEVER sucked in a playoff series like Shaq did when his team was S-W-E-P-T by the Bulls. It has NEVER been Duncan's fault that his team lost a series. Shaq didn't even look like he was trying on the Heat after he got a ring. You'd never see half an effort from Duncan.

[Ockham]

When it comes to the Shaq-Duncan debates, two items are often given far less weight than they should: team winning percentage and defense.

Duncan has the edge on both. And when it comes to defense, it's not even close. In fact, if Duncan is selected for the All-Defensive team this year, first or second team, he'll have more selections than anyone in the history of the NBA. (He's currently tied for first with Kareem and Bobby Jones.)

If "defense wins championships," shouldn't the fact that you're one of the greatest defenders of all time count for a whole lot in these debates? And if winning is the goal, shouldn't the fact that your team wins more often than any other team in any of the four "major" sports count for a lot as well?

[mrspurs]

When it comes to the Shaq-Duncan debates, two items are often given far less weight than they should: team winning percentage and defense.

Duncan has the edge on both. And when it comes to defense, it's not even close. In fact, if Duncan is selected for the All-Defensive team this year, first or second team, he'll have more selections than anyone in the history of the NBA. (He's currently tied for first with Kareem and Bobby Jones.)

If "defense wins championships," shouldn't the fact that you're one of the greatest defenders of all time count for a whole lot in these debates? And if winning is the goal, shouldn't the fact that your team wins more often than any other team in any of the four "major" sports count for a lot as well?

Well said

[honestfool84]

This message is hidden because mrspurs is on your ignore list.


i love it.
sorry.

[phyzik]

anyone with a lick of common sense knows its TD by far...

Shaq isnt even in contention with all the coat-tail riding he has done for the past few years.

[Ghazi]

Dirk

[Xylus]

If you just look at those stats, it looks like Shaq and Duncan are pretty damn even. They both have won the same amount of championships, they've both been MVP's in the regular season and in the Finals (several times), they have very comparable scoring, rebounding, and defensive numbers.

I'd still give the edge to Duncan for one reason:

Consistency.

In 11 years, Duncan has 11 All-NBA, 11 All-Defensive...1 for every year he's been in the league. He's consistently made an impact in the playoffs, year after year. Shaq's getting up there in age, and it has showed in recent years.

[wijayas]

For the decade I'd put it into a two-way tie between Shaq and Duncan.

Duncan has been far more consistent in the later years but Shaq simply dominated in the early 00's.

If either Shaq or Duncan gets another ring, that will break the tie in my mind.

Shaq, besides being a freak of nature himself, always enjoys another freak of nature sidekick: Penny, Kobe and Dwayne. The same cannot be said of Duncan.

Duncan rules...:toast

[Rohirrim]

I can just imagine Duncan @ his retirement press conference ending on a keynote

"Oh, and Shaq, tell me how my ass tastes."

[wijayas]

It's a tossup between Duncan or Shaq....pick one. I think Duncan has been more consistent but I think Shaq at his peak was better.

We are talking about MVP for the decade, not MVP for the peak years. So, I hear you... Duncan is by far much more consistent. He is the MVP for the decade.

ALso if you look at FINALS winning percentage, only Duncan among active players can claim an unblemished 4-for-4 record (4 Finals, 4 Championships). Only MJ is better at 6-for-6!

Shaq is 4-for-6. Kobe is 3-for-4.

[Sean Cagney]

Dirk.

NO way in hell....... He has 0 :lobt2:

[Rohirrim]

GOAT for his position + lacking a team-killing ego = Automatic scoreboard.

[ehz33satx]

Who defines a decade as starting on an 8? But yes this is clearly a setup for Duncan.


98 to 08 is 10 years, 10 years equals 1 decade. Not too hard to figure out.

[z0sa]

Shaq is 4-for-6. Kobe is 3-for-5.

FIFY

[Avitus1]

Timmy!!

[Ghazi]

This isn't "set up for Duncan"... it's fair to begin in 1998 because it's the "post Jordan era".

[dirk4mvp]

NO way in hell....... He has 0 :lobt2:


Are you serious?

[IronMexican]

Shaq.

[SpurSupremacist]

It's Duncan easily, and I'll tell you why. This is what separates Duncan from Shaq: he won a ring without a second superstar on his team. In LA, even though he was clearly the man, he still had Kobe. And by the way, Kobe being on this list is a joke. In Miami, he had D-Wade. He was no longer 'the man' on that team, either. Duncan took a whole lot of mediocre level players to the promised land in 2003. Anyone who thinks Robinson was still a superstar or even a star in 2003 is either A) nuts or B) a homer.

[dirk4mvp]

It's Duncan easily, and I'll tell you why. This is what separates Duncan from Shaq: he won a ring without a second superstar on his team. In LA, even though he was clearly the man, he still had Kobe. And by the way, Kobe being on this list is a joke. In Miami, he had D-Wade. He was no longer 'the man' on that team, either. Duncan took a whole lot of mediocre level players to the promised land in 2003. Anyone who thinks Robinson was still a superstar or even a star in 2003 is either A) nuts or B) a homer


lol, irony

[SpurSupremacist]

lol, irony

Have any evidence to back that up? Well, I didn't think so.

[JamStone]

Duncan by miles......

Duncan, but not by miles.

Shaq has a decent argument. Problem is his "decade" since 1998 is about a 6 or 7 year decade because his decline started around 2005.

But, his accomplishments are right on par with Duncan and his dominance when he still was at the top of his game was greater. That helps off set the decline a little bit.

But, that said, it's Duncan for sure. Again, just not by miles or a landslide or any other term to suggest it's lopsidedly in Duncan's favor over Shaq.

[dirk4mvp]

Have any evidence to back that up? Well, I didn't think so.



It's Duncan easily, and I'll tell you why. This is what separates Duncan from Shaq: he won a ring without a second superstar on his team. In LA, even though he was clearly the man, he still had Kobe. And by the way, Kobe being on this list is a joke. In Miami, he had D-Wade. He was no longer 'the man' on that team, either. Duncan took a whole lot of mediocre level players to the promised land in 2003. Anyone who thinks Robinson was still a superstar or even a star in 2003 is either A) nuts or B) a homer.


lol, irony

lol, Duncan, easily.

[wijayas]

FIFY

You are right! Thanks!!! :toast

[samikeyp]

If you just look at those stats, it looks like Shaq and Duncan are pretty damn even. They both have won the same amount of championships, they've both been MVP's in the regular season and in the Finals (several times), they have very comparable scoring, rebounding, and defensive numbers.

I'd still give the edge to Duncan for one reason:

Consistency.

In 11 years, Duncan has 11 All-NBA, 11 All-Defensive...1 for every year he's been in the league. He's consistently made an impact in the playoffs, year after year. Shaq's getting up there in age, and it has showed in recent years.

:toast

[K-State Spur]

Agreed on Duncan - but not by as much as some make it out to be.

The one thing that separates MJ from any of today's stars is that while some of their offensive numbers are comparable - Mike took the opponent's best perimeter scorer EVERY single night. Kobe, Wade, and Lebron are typically (not always) matched up with lesser offensive threats so that they can "rest" (relatively speaking) on defense. Whenever you see them make a great defensive play, it's typically when they've gone into *rover* mode. Scoring 30/night is a bit more impressive when MJ was expelling all kind of energy chasing Reggie Miller all over the floor on the other side of the court.

Taking that into account, Duncan is the perfect representative for the post MJ era. Of the guys in consideration, he's the only one who consistently dominated both ends of the floor. Shaq has never been much a defender, he just eats up space on that end of the floor (sometimes in a good way). Kobe is in Bruce's class defensively when he wants to be, but those moments are few and far between.

[Jayem]

Who defines a decade as starting on an 8? But yes this is clearly a setup for Duncan.exactly. so every year we should have best of the decade discussions? cause you can claim its the end of a decade every year. LOL "Best of Decades" are defined on the 10s... 2000-2010. which would mean shaq has the edge over duncan with championships so far.

[StoneBuddha]

[QUOTE=K-State Spur;2976229]

The one thing that separates MJ from any of today's stars is that while some of their offensive numbers are comparable - Mike took the opponent's best perimeter scorer EVERY single night. Kobe, Wade, and Lebron are typically (not always) matched up with lesser offensive threats so that they can "rest" (relatively speaking) on defense. Whenever you see them make a great defensive play, it's typically when they've gone into *rover* mode. Scoring 30/night is a bit more impressive when MJ was expelling all kind of energy chasing Reggie Miller all over the floor on the other side of the court.

QUOTE]

They never had to hide MJ on defense but I do remember Pippen guarding the best perimeter play a lot.

[K-State Spur]

They never had to hide MJ on defense but I do remember Pippen guarding the best perimeter play a lot.

If size was an issue, Pippen took that coverage (i.e. MJ was too small to handle Magic in his first finals appearance).

[angelbelow]

Dunc!

[PM5K]

It's pretty obvious who the best guy was, especially when you consider that two guys on the list PLAYED TOGETHER...

[Thomas82]

Would Duncan have been a better matchup against Hakeem in the prime Magic years? He may have been since he was more polished coming in.

Would Shaq have been as good as Tim coming into the San An situation? I don't think so. Tim provided that polished game, while Shaq would have replicated what D. Rob gave.

As far as overall performance, Shaq has an awesome peak, but so does Timmy. Tim never had Kobe, although he had (has) two all star calibur guards. It almost seemed destined for Shaq to get his fourth with the Gino foul etc. But nevermind that.

Since they both have an incredible intro, and prime resumes, we have to go to post both to get a proper eval in my opinion. To be fair, they had a head to head match up. We all know who won that match up. That would be Mr. Wake Forest himself. Until further notice, I think Duncan is up by a hair.

I would have loved to have seen that.

[Summers]

http://popculturespot.com/ProductImages/2007/timmypost.gif

http://www.coolpl8z.com/pl8z/final/coolpl8z_658914.jpg

[Thomas82]

Well on a Spurs board of course Tim will win, but Tim did all of his achivements on his own. He was the only superstar on his team since about 2001. Kobe and Shaq won a three-peat because they played together.


Yes, Tim Duncan has done more with less than those two.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Kobe shouldn't even be in this conversation.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Tim has the edge. I've never heard Tim say stupid stuff like, "I need my touches if you want me to protect the rim."

[Thomas82]

Tim has the edge. I've never heard Tim say stupid stuff like, "I need my touches if you want me to protect the rim."

I'm still just as dumbfounded as I was when I first heard Shaq say that.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I'm still just as dumbfounded as I was when I first heard Shaq say that.

I'm not cause plenty of big men have that dumb mentality, the fact Duncan doesn't have it is a reason why he's my favorite player.

[sonic21]

1 duncan
2 shaq
3 dirk
4 kobe

:tu

[Man In Black]

I'm Cool with Tim being the best player at his position...ever.

[PM5K]

I know this is an old thread, but an easy answer:

When two of the guys on the list of three played together, and still haven't accomplished more than the other guy.....

[m33p0]

I know this is an old thread, but an easy answer:

When two of the guys on the list of three played together, and still haven't accomplished more than the other guy.....
awesome post!:lol:lmao:toast

[timaios]

1998-2008 is not a decade

A decade is a 10-year period.

1998-2007 is a decade.
1999-2008 is a decade.

1998-2008 is a 11-year period.

[m33p0]

1998-2008 is not a decade

A decade is a 10-year period.

1998-2007 is a decade.
1999-2008 is a decade.

1998-2008 is a 11-year period.
a year is a length of time. any term that is used to describe measurement starts with 0. and since the starting time is 1998, it has to be given a value of 0. so,
1998-1999 is year 1,
1999-2000... year 2,
...
2007-2008 is year 10.

[timaios]

a year is a length of time. any term that is used to describe measurement starts with 0. and since the starting time is 1998, it has to be given a value of 0. so,
1998-1999 is year 1,
1999-2000... year 2,
...
2007-2008 is year 10.

You're wrong.

[m33p0]

You're wrong.
a child born on october 1998... how old is the child by december of that year? a year later, how old is the kid? ten years after?

whenever you deal with measurements, you always start with 0.

[timaios]

a child born on october 1998... how old is the child by december of that year? a year later, how old is the kid? ten years after?

whenever you deal with measurements, you always start with 0.

Seriously, open a dictionnary.

[m33p0]

Seriously, open a dictionnary.
:sleep you're one "n" too many.

[Old School 44]

Duncan easily, but I still don't understand why many insist he did it alone.
Sure he was the anchor, but he played with some very good players.

[timaios]

:sleep you're one "n" too many.

I am good in maths not in english, i learned it on the internet...

If you don't have a dictionary...
http://www.yourdictionary.com/decade

[m33p0]

Duncan easily, but I still don't understand why many insist he did it alone.
Sure he was the anchor, but he played with some very good players.
the only franchise-level player duncan has ever played with was drob. 2003, tim was basically on his own.

[m33p0]

I am good in maths not in english, i learned it on the internet...

If you don't have a dictionary...
http://www.yourdictionary.com/decade
from your dictionary and math skills, what is the defiinition of a year?

[timaios]

from your dictionary and math skills, what is the defiinition of a year?

2001 = 1 year = january 1 to december 31
2002 = 1 year = january 1 to december 31
2003 ... etc
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

2001-2010 = 10 years

[dogzofwar]

I will go with Timmy and I truly believe this would never be questioned if Tim wasn't such a unselfish player. Tim is the only superstar I know that will completely sacrifice his own numbers for the betterment of the team. How many times has Tim passed out from the post to a more open teammate when he could have taken a shot for himself? I have no doubt that if he really really wanted....Tim could play 40 minutes a game and average 30pt & 15rebs (maybe not 40 now a days but definitely the first 6-7 years).

[m33p0]

2001 = 1 year = january 1 to december 31
2002 = 1 year = january 1 to december 31
2003 ... etc
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

2001-2010 = 10 years
by your definition, a year is a measure of time... it is a period approximately 365 days long. calendar year is defined by the period from january 1 to december 31. unfortunately, nba season doesn't start on january 1, does it? so in effect, one nba season encompasses parts of 2 succeeding calendar years.

[Old School 44]

the only franchise-level player duncan has ever played with was drob. 2003, tim was basically on his own.

You don't think Tony & Manu are franchise level players?
Not saying they were franchise level in 2003, but Tony, Manu and even Jack weren't scrubs. It justs seems as if the others get no credit.

[m33p0]

You don't think Tony & Manu are franchise level players?
Not saying they were franchise level in 2003, but Tony, Manu and even Jack weren't scrubs. It justs seems as if the others get no credit.
THEY'RE NOT SCRUBS! they are superstars! but franchise level? only Manu can have that claim especially the way he played in '05.

[Old School 44]

Ok...so Tim really wasn't "on his own" after David left.

[timaios]

by your definition, a year is a measure of time... it is a period approximately 365 days long. calendar year is defined by the period from january 1 to december 31. unfortunately, nba season doesn't start on january 1, does it? so in effect, one nba season encompasses parts of 2 succeeding calendar years.

A decade is a group of ten years.
A year is from january 1 to december 31. A "calendar" year.

What you describe is called a season.
A decade is not a group of ten seasons.

The word "decade" is a very specific term.

[dogzofwar]

[QUOTE=timaios;3133772]A decade is a group of ten years.
A year is from january 1 to december 31. A "calendar" year.



I am sorry but a year is 365days plus some change....period. My birthday is in July and guess what happens exactly one [U]year[U] later...yep birthday. A decade is simply 10 consecutive years...no matter what the start date is.

The Chinese would definitely argue about your start and end dates as well. :downspin:

1998 season started in October. A decade would go until October 2008.

The bigger picture is Tim Duncan has been the MVP in the post-Jordan era....the rest is semantics.

[m33p0]

A decade is a group of ten years.
A year is from january 1 to december 31. A "calendar" year.

What you describe is called a season.
A decade is not a group of ten seasons.

The word "decade" is a very specific term.
one word: birthdays.

[iggypop123]

how is it even a decade? a decade is every 10 years meaning it should be from 2000-present

[m33p0]

how is it even a decade? a decade is every 10 years meaning it should be from 2000-present
it's like saying it has to be eggs in order for something of 12s to be a dozen.
a decade is ten years. that's all there is to it.

[Obstructed_View]

For the decade I'd put it into a two-way tie between Shaq and Duncan.

Duncan has been far more consistent in the later years but Shaq simply dominated in the early 00's.

If either Shaq or Duncan gets another ring, that will break the tie in my mind.

Except for the two years that Duncan won MVP.

[wildbill2u]

For the decade I'd put it into a two-way tie between Shaq and Duncan.

Duncan has been far more consistent in the later years but Shaq simply dominated in the early 00's.

If either Shaq or Duncan gets another ring, that will break the tie in my mind.

Shaq dominated by changing the game by using brute force against his opponents without regard to the rules. His go-to offensive move was to push his defender out of the way with his left arm while dunking with his right. I don't know what game he was playing, but it wasn't basketball.

Why did the refereees let him get away with it?

KA-ching! Ka-ching! The league needed a new star to replace Jordan and keep the cash registers ringing.

By the way, they don't let him get away with as much nowadays since his star has faded.

[timaios]

one word: birthdays.

A 10th year birthday is the beginning of a new decade.
9 years 364 days 23 hours 59 min 59s ... is a decade.
10 years 0d 0h 0m 0s... is the start of a second decade.

[Rogue]

Duncan led dreamteam VI to lose thrice in Athens and got the bronze in 04.
while
Kidd led dreamteam VII to get the gold medal last summer.

Kidd has done Much more for our nation than Duncan has, so kidd deserves the MVP of the past decade.

Kidd has lost NO game to any other national team, what about duncan? :lol Kidd is inarguably the best basketball player on this planet.

[Galileo]

Kobe shouldn't even be in this conversation.

I agree that Kobe trails far behind.

Duncan is # 1 and Shaq is # 2.

For those with short memories, remember that Shaq only made 1st team, all-NBA ONCE in his first 7 seasons.

Duncan was already better than Shaq by his second season, when Shaq was a 7 year veteran.

[NFGIII]

Who defines a decade as starting on an 8? But yes this is clearly a setup for Duncan.

Yeah, and including 11 years instead of 10!


It's a tossup between Duncan or Shaq....pick one. I think Duncan has been more consistent but I think Shaq at his peak was better.


Yeah, sadly, Shaq at his peak was embarassingly good. I remember turning off the TV during some of those Spurs playoff losses midway through the 3rd quarter. The look on DRob's face said it all too. He and his 70 yr old back wasn't going to stop the Diesel...

Have to agree, also. Duncan is much more consistent but Shaq was a monster in the paint. During the 3-peat he was unstopable. But his weight finally got to his knees and he is a shell of his former self.

[Obstructed_View]

It's not a surprise that non-Spurs fans would forget that two of the three Laker titles came in seasons where one of the top two scorers for the Spurs was out injured, but I expect a little more from Spurs fans. Either admit that you weren't a fan back then or stop helping to rewrite history with your ignorance.

[TwinTowers]

Shaq, besides being a freak of nature himself, always enjoys another freak of nature sidekick: Penny, Kobe and Dwayne. The same cannot be said of Duncan.

Duncan rules...:toast

I was getting ready to pick Shaq, but you're making a great point... Duncan has been way more consistent than Shaq too.