TNT's 'NBA Player of the Decade' vote

[duncan228]

TNT's 'NBA Player of the Decade' vote (http://sportsmediablog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/11/tnts-nba-player-of-the-decade.html)
Barry Horn

I'm not really sure why TNT is doing this. After all, it has to be Tim Duncan, who has helped the Spurs to three NBA titles since the start of the 2000-01 season doesn't it?

Kobe Bryant had Shaquille O'Neal as a co-pilot early in the decade and Dywane Wade and the referees helping him and LeBron James hasn't won a title. So where's the drama?

Here's TNT's game plan: "The 'NBA Player of the Decade' nominees will be selected through a vote by TNT's NBA announcers and unveiled during the 'TNT All-Decade NBA' show on NBA All-Star Saturday Night. Fans can vote on the All-Decade player until Sunday, Feb. 14 when it will be announced prior to TNT's exclusive coverage of the 2010 NBA All-Star Game."

That game, I will remind you, will be played at Cowboys Stadium.

Here, via news release, is the rest of what TNT is thinking.

TNT Unveils 'TNT All-Decade NBA' Showcase to Determine NBA's Greatest in the Past 10 Years

Network to Debut Nominees Each Thursday; Fans to Select Winners on NBA.com

TNT, home of Thursday night exclusive doubleheaders and the 2010 NBA All-Star Game, announced today a weekly showcase of nominees in 13 categories for its 'TNT All-Decade NBA' list which will include the top performances, games and moments throughout the 2000's. The network will announce one category's nominees each week on TNT's Emmy® Award-winning Inside the NBA beginning this Thursday, Nov. 19 when it unveils the nominees for 'Individual Performance: NBA Playoffs'. Following TNT's announcement of the nominees, fans can vote on NBA.com for whom they think should win. The 'TNT All-Decade NBA' winners will be announced in a special one-hour show airing during TNT's exclusive coverage of NBA All-Star Saturday Night on Feb. 13 at 5 p.m. (ET).

NBA.com will launch a 'TNT All-Decade NBA' mircosite that will feature clips of each nominee and a compilation of data and statistics. Following the announcement of the nominees and input from TNT's studio team of Ernie Johnson, Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith, fans can then re-watch the clips on NBA.com and place their vote. Voting will remain open from the time the nominees are announced until the winners are unveiled during NBA All-Star Weekend in Dallas. Each category will feature six nominees as determined by Turner Sports.

The 'TNT All-Decade NBA' Categories:

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs

2 - November 26: Playoff Game

3 - December 3: Playoff Dunk

4 - December 10: Playoff Defense

5 - December 17: Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs

6 - December 31: Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs

7 - January 14: Playoff Series

8 - January 21: Individual Performance: Regular Season

9 - January 28: Buzzer Beater: Regular Season

10 - February 4: Regular Season Posterization

11 - February 8: All-Star Game Play

12 - February 11: All-Star Saturday Night Dunk

13 - February 12: Player of the Decade

[JamStone]

I'd say it's a toss-up among Tim, Shaq, and Kobe.

I'd probably give the edge to Tim, but I wouldn't discount Kobe.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs - Lebron against Detroit in 2007, game 5.

2 - November 26: Playoff Game - Suns vs. Spurs 2008 game 1

3 - December 3: Playoff Dunk - Shaq dunk game 7 2000 vs. Portland

4 - December 10: Playoff Defense - 2004 Pistons

5 - December 17: Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs - Bell vs. Kobe

6 - December 31: Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs - .4 second Fisher shot

7 - January 14: Playoff Series - 2008 Bulls vs. Celtics

8 - January 21: Individual Performance: Regular Season - Kobe 81 points

9 - January 28: Buzzer Beater: Regular Season - There's not really one that stands out.

10 - February 4: Regular Season Posterization -

11 - February 8: All-Star Game Play - who cares?

12 - February 11: All-Star Saturday Night Dunk - who cares?

13 - February 12: Player of the Decade - Tim Duncan

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I'd say it's a toss-up among Tim, Shaq, and Kobe.

I'd probably give the edge to Tim, but I wouldn't discount Kobe.

According to Lakerfan logic it's Robert Horry since he has more rings than any of those guys this decade.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Duncan didn't have a 3 year disaster period like Kobe did from 2005-2007. That's why he gets the edge.

[endrity]

I disagree on the series, Celts and Bulls was nice but it's hard to say a first round series between what were essentially to average-to-good teams was the best.

I say Spurs-Mavs 06 is still by far the best of the decade, and really high on all time as well.

Second is Kings - Lakers 02, great quality, great drama, and the controversy that still surrounds it.

[JamStone]

Duncan didn't have a 3 year disaster period like Kobe did from 2005-2007. That's why he gets the edge.

There are counter-arguments to many points for either side.

Kobe helped the Lakers get to two more Finals that they lost. Kobe also dominated more so offensively in scoring.

Also, I wouldn't call 2005-07 a 3 year disaster. Maybe 2004-05, but the following two years for Kobe to take those Lakers teams to the playoffs was far from disaster. The talent on those rosters was glaringly poor. Could they have done better? Possibly. And, game 7 of the 2006 playoffs against the Suns obviously sticks out as a low point in Kobe's immaturity and as a leader. But, I still wouldn't call it a disaster.

I wouldn't disagree that Tim has the edge. I said as much in my first post. He has two League MVPs and one more Finals MVP. He's also the "nice guy" so fewer people hate him like they hate Kobe.

I simply said I wouldn't discount Kobe.

[sook]

Shaq has been non existant since 06, thats only half of a decade.

Toss up between jelly bean and timmy, can't go wrong either way

[endrity]

I say Tim, but I wouldn't be shocked if Kobe wins. I agree on Shaq though, incredible, unguardable, most powerful force to ever play the game, but for only the first half of the decade.

[FromWayDowntown]

I disagree on the series, Celts and Bulls was nice but it's hard to say a first round series between what were essentially to average-to-good teams was the best.

I say Spurs-Mavs 06 is still by far the best of the decade, and really high on all time as well.

Though my team (obviously) lost that series, I have to agree that that series should win this category. Bulls/Celtics had lots of overtimes and some chippiness, but I'm not sure it lacked the wall-to-wall competitiveness that Mavs/Spurs had in 2006.

That series in 2006 had a 2 point Game 1, a Mavs blowout in Game 2, a 1 point Mavs win in Game 3, an overtime in Game 4, a 2 point Game 5, a 6-7 point Spurs win in Game 6, and an epic comeback (followed by a fatal error) to force overtime in Game 7. I got to attend 5 of the games in person and remember feeling a strange sort of contentment, tinged with disappointment (of course) after Game 7. I knew that I had seen two extremely good basketball teams give it their all for 7 games and two overtimes, with neither team ever really having any breathing room, even in the games that they won. It truly seemed like every possession of Games 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7 was do-or-die. It was truly epic basketball.

It featured Duncan and Dirk each playing at an incredible level and step-up performances by role players on both sides at various points in the series. It featured a nearly-completed rally from down 3-1 and an ultimate game decided in some of the most dramatic plays of the decade.

Had the Mavs won the title that season, I have no doubt the series would have defined those playoffs. I still think that had that series featured LA against either the Spurs or the Mavs and followed the same course, there's no doubt it would be proclaimed by pundits everywhere to be the premier series of this decade.

I really think there are only 4 viable candidates in this category: '09 BOS/CHI; '06 DAL/SA; '02 LAL/SAC; and '00 LAL/PRT. Obviously, I know which one I would vote for.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

the following two years for Kobe to take those Lakers teams to the playoffs was far from disaster.


Maybe it wasn't a "disaster", but it sure as hell doesn't count for anything. No one is ever remembered for their ability to take a roster full of scrubs to the playoffs and then lose in the first round.

[Darrin]

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs - Lebron against Detroit in 2007, game 5.

That is not the best individual performance.

How about Allen Iverson's 54 in a comeback victory on the Raptors in '01 to even the series at 1 apiece?

How about Wade's 36 points, 10 rebounds, 5 assists, 4 steals and 3 blocks in Game six of the '06 NBA Finals?

Tim Duncan's 21 points, 20 rebounds, 10 assists, and 8 blocks in Game six of the '03 Finals?

How about Dirk Nowitzki's 37 points, 15 rebounds, and tremendous clutch play against the Defending-Champion 63-win San Antonio Spurs in San Antonio? Remember, the Mavs had never won a playoff series against the Spurs...ever.

I'm nominating a couple of Pistons here for the hell of it. Ben Wallace in game 5 of the '04 Finals--18 points, 22 rebounds, and 3 steals. And with the Pistons in a 3-2 series hole to the 8th-seeded Orlando Magic, not having won a road playoff game since 1997, Mr. Big Shot is crowned with his nickname, dropping 40 and breaking Bill Laimbeer's 3-point shot record he set in game 2 of the 1990 NBA Finals.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I disagree on the series, Celts and Bulls was nice but it's hard to say a first round series between what were essentially to average-to-good teams was the best.

I say Spurs-Mavs 06 is still by far the best of the decade, and really high on all time as well.

Second is Kings - Lakers 02, great quality, great drama, and the controversy that still surrounds it.


I probably said that series cause it was more fresh in my mind, but you're right, that series was way better and more competitive.

[Nathan Explosion]

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs - Lebron against Detroit in 2007, game 5.

2 - November 26: Playoff Game - Suns vs. Spurs 2008 game 1

3 - December 3: Playoff Dunk - Shaq dunk game 7 2000 vs. Portland

4 - December 10: Playoff Defense - 2004 Pistons

5 - December 17: Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs - Bell vs. Kobe

6 - December 31: Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs - .4 second Fisher shot

7 - January 14: Playoff Series - 2008 Bulls vs. Celtics

8 - January 21: Individual Performance: Regular Season - Kobe 81 points

9 - January 28: Buzzer Beater: Regular Season - There's not really one that stands out.

10 - February 4: Regular Season Posterization -

11 - February 8: All-Star Game Play - who cares?

12 - February 11: All-Star Saturday Night Dunk - who cares?

13 - February 12: Player of the Decade - Tim Duncan

Best playoff performance has to be Game 6 2003 Finals. I leave you the stat line.

21 pts 20 reb 10 ast 8 blks. Total domination on the biggest stage in the clinching game. That's the best playoff game of the decade. I'll let you all figure out who the player was (as if it's really hard to figure it out).

[Darrin]

Best playoff moment:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v214/axanodus/oly_full.jpg


"Bang!"

[Darrin]

Best playoff performance has to be Game 6 2003 Finals. I leave you the stat line.

21 pts 20 reb 10 ast 8 blks. Total domination on the biggest stage in the clinching game. That's the best playoff game of the decade. I'll let you all figure out who the player was (as if it's really hard to figure it out).

The comeback. Stephen Jackson. D-Rob's last game. Duncan's dominance.

[endrity]

Best Moment candidates:
- Horry against the Kings
- Shaq's dunk
- 0.4
- Dirk's and 1
- LBJ dunk against the Celtis, without regard for human life!!
- Kobe against Suns!

[BullsDynasty]

That is not the best individual performance.

How about Allen Iverson's 54 in a comeback victory on the Raptors in '01 to even the series at 1 apiece?

How about Wade's 36 points, 10 rebounds, 5 assists, 4 steals and 3 blocks in Game six of the '06 NBA Finals?

Tim Duncan's 21 points, 20 rebounds, 10 assists, and 8 blocks in Game six of the '03 Finals?

How about Dirk Nowitzki's 37 points, 15 rebounds, and tremendous clutch play against the Defending-Champion 63-win San Antonio Spurs in San Antonio? Remember, the Mavs had never won a playoff series against the Spurs...ever.

I'm nominating a couple of Pistons here for the hell of it. Ben Wallace in game 5 of the '04 Finals--18 points, 22 rebounds, and 3 steals. And with the Pistons in a 3-2 series hole to the 8th-seeded Orlando Magic, not having won a road playoff game since 1997, Mr. Big Shot is crowned with his nickname, dropping 40 and breaking Bill Laimbeer's 3-point shot record he set in game 2 of the 1990 NBA Finals.

Or how about Derrick Rose's rookie performance in Game 1 of the first round playoffs vs Celtics with 36 points 11 assists and 5 rebounds.

[TheMACHINE]

Best playoff performance has to be Game 6 2003 Finals. I leave you the stat line.

21 pts 20 reb 10 ast 8 blks. Total domination on the biggest stage in the clinching game. That's the best playoff game of the decade. I'll let you all figure out who the player was (as if it's really hard to figure it out).

Its easy to figure out since someone already mentioned it above.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

lol bitter Pistonfan



That is not the best individual performance.

How about Allen Iverson's 54 in a comeback victory on the Raptors in '01 to even the series at 1 apiece?

Iverson: 54 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 turnovers against a mediocre 47 win team that might not even make the playoffs in today's NBA.

James: 48 points (while taking 6 less shots than A.I. did), 9 rebounds, 7 assists and 2 turnovers against 53 win team that would have run train on the 2001 Eastern conference.


How about Wade's 36 points, 10 rebounds, 5 assists, 4 steals and 3 blocks in Game six of the '06 NBA Finals?

Just out of curiosity, why did you not mention Wade's 35 points on 76.5% shooting, 8 rebounds, 4 assist, 2 steal, 1 block 4 turnover performance against the 64 win Pistons? Oh I forgot, cause you're probably too butthurt to achknowledge that.

48 points, 9 rebounds, 7 assists, 2 steals and 2 turnovers is more impressive than 36 points, 10 rebounds, 5 assists, 4 steals, 3 blocks and 5 turnovers, especially when one had a player on his team who was constantly getting double teamed and drawing attention away from him. Also, maybe it's just me, but it's pretty hard to call something a performance of the decade when a player doesn't score at least 40 points.


Tim Duncan's 21 points, 20 rebounds, 10 assists, and 8 blocks in Game six of the '03 Finals?

I don't know, that's pretty impressive when it was done against the daunting front line of Jason Collins and Kenyon Marin. I'd be surprised if that's even in the discussion.


How about Dirk Nowitzki's 37 points, 15 rebounds, and tremendous clutch play against the Defending-Champion 63-win San Antonio Spurs in San Antonio? Remember, the Mavs had never won a playoff series against the Spurs...ever.

If we're gonna factor in the franchise's history, then the fact Lebron's performance got Cleveland into its first ever NBA finals trumps the fact Dallas had never beaten SA. Again, Dirk's performance was no more clutch than Lebron's, and he led a way better supporting cast than Lebron did.


I'm nominating a couple of Pistons here for the hell of it. Ben Wallace in game 5 of the '04 Finals--18 points, 22 rebounds, and 3 steals. And with the Pistons in a 3-2 series hole to the 8th-seeded Orlando Magic, not having won a road playoff game since 1997, Mr. Big Shot is crowned with his nickname, dropping 40 and breaking Bill Laimbeer's 3-point shot record he set in game 2 of the 1990 NBA Finals.

Yeah I'm just gonna ignore this.

[Darrin]

Yeah I'm just gonna ignore this.

I'll do the same to your sophmoric response.

[ambchang]

I am really confounded by the amount of Kobe love. He has won one title as the lead of an absolutely loaded team, and there is little to no question that a Dwayne Wade or a LeBron James in the exact same situation would have won the 09 championship, or perhaps even the 08, but he continuously gets tossed into the debate of best player of the decade.

There really are only two candidates, Shaq and Duncan. Shaq because of his absolute dominance (or perceived dominance) for the first 4 years, and Duncan because of his prolonged excellence.

Kobe's peak was no where near as high as either of them, and the duration in which he dominated was shorter than either of them.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Best playoff moment:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v214/axanodus/oly_full.jpg


"Bang!"


Aw how cute you can post a picture of someone hitting a shot over the Suns.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/81417089.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1934B869679A269F9CC2A26BFFA512CB9A8 26FD13ED7B73D4BC

I can play this game too.

[redzero]

Aw how cute you can post a picture of someone hitting a shot over the Suns.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/81417089.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1934B869679A269F9CC2A26BFFA512CB9A8 26FD13ED7B73D4BC

I can play this game too.

FISSION MAILED

Fix it.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I'll do the same to your sophmoric response.


What's sophomoric is blind bias against any player's performance against Detroit.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

FISSION MAILED

Fix it.


I tried to find the actual shot, he knows what I'm referring to.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Best playoff performance has to be Game 6 2003 Finals. I leave you the stat line.

21 pts 20 reb 10 ast 8 blks. Total domination on the biggest stage in the clinching game. That's the best playoff game of the decade. I'll let you all figure out who the player was (as if it's really hard to figure it out).


Congrats to Duncan, he managed to dominate Kenyon Martin and Jason Collins.

[Trainwreck2100]

lol timt thomas

[Darrin]

Aw how cute you can post a picture of someone hitting a shot over the Suns.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/81417089.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1934B869679A269F9CC2A26BFFA512CB9A8 26FD13ED7B73D4BC

I can play this game too.

Both were great moments, but I think the Suns-Lakers series was much more entertaining.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Both were great moments, but I think the Suns-Lakers series was much more entertaining.


My bad, I thought your goal was to just remind a Suns fan of a bad moment. I agree the Suns-Lakers series was more entertaining, more drama and hate.

[Darrin]

My bad, I thought your goal was to just remind a Suns fan of a bad moment. I agree the Suns-Lakers series was more entertaining, more drama and hate.

It's an NBA discussion board. Why would I come to a Spurs site as a Pistons fan to target the Suns posters?

:downspin:

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

As impressive as Duncan's stat line was, competition and expectations are a factor. Duncan dominated a weak ass team that was only in the finals because they happened to be the highest quality piece of shit in the 2003 EC. He was supposed to wreck them. Lebron was going up against a superior, well rounded team he was supposed to be several years away from beating.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

It's an NBA discussion board. Why would I come to a Spurs site as a Pistons fan to target the Suns posters?

:downspin:

Cause you were arguing with one :lol

[baseline bum]

My picks

1. Individual Game: NBA Playoffs
LeBron James, game 5, 2007 ECF

2. Playoff Game
Game 5 Spurs/Pistons, 2005 Finals

3. Playoff Dunk
McGrady riding Shawn Bradley like a horse in the 2004 playoffs

4. Playoff Defense
2004 Pistons murdering the Pacers in the ECF and then not allowing LA to do shit on them in the Finals.

5. Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs
Shaq and Kobe in the 2004 Finals

6. Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs
Robert Horry, game 4, 2002 WCF

7. Playoff Series
Mavs/Spurs 2006 WCSF

8. Individual Performance: Regular Season
Kobe Bryant's 81 points against Toronto in 2006

9. Buzzer Beater: Regular Season
Kobe Bryant forces OT in Portland, 2004

10. Regular Season Posterization
Amare Stoudemire over Michael Olowokandi, 2003

11. All-Star Game Play
McGrady's alley-oop to himself off the backboard

12. All-Star Saturday Night Dunk
Andre Iguodala from behind the backboard

13. Player of the Decade
Tim Duncan

[baseline bum]

Since there was no best series (individual), I'll add:

14. Best individual series
Dwayne Wade, 2006 ECF Miami/Detroit

[baseline bum]

I take it back... after reading FWD's post, I have to agree that Mavs/Spurs 06 WCSF was the best series of the decade, even though it didn't decide a championship like 02 Lakers/Kings or 00 Lakers/Blazers did.

[HarlemHeat37]

I'll take Duncan over Kobe all day, but I understand the argument for the Rapist..if it comes down to a fan vote though, nobody has any chance at beating Kobe..his cult is creepy and devoted..

[JamStone]

I am really confounded by the amount of Kobe love. He has won one title as the lead of an absolutely loaded team, and there is little to no question that a Dwayne Wade or a LeBron James in the exact same situation would have won the 09 championship, or perhaps even the 08, but he continuously gets tossed into the debate of best player of the decade.

How loaded were the Lakers last year really? There is a lot of talent, but once you get past Kobe and Pau, they're a lot of role players. Even Bynum to an extent because he was once again not 100% for the playoffs. Odom has never been an all star. Ariza broke out, but that's in great part because he was playing with Kobe. Kobe had an all star sidekick. Hello, most championship teams did too. Shaq had Kobe and Wade. Tim has had, in his title runs, David Robinson, Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili. Wade had Shaq. You're going to discredit Kobe leading his team to a title saying they were absolutely loaded? Who was more loaded? Last year's Lakers or 2008 Boston Celtics? For that matter, which team is more loaded? Last year's Lakers or the 2005 Spurs? That Spurs team to me was more loaded than last year's Lakers. Tony Parker had become a bonafide star, Ginobili was still relatively healthy and was in his peak and could have won Finals MVP, Horry was more clutch than anyone not named Kobe on the Lakers last year, and Bruce Bowen was still a defensive stopper. Kobe's Lakers last year were loaded because of Kobe. It was because of him. Don't take away from Kobe just because you want to hate on him. One could argue that Duncan has only led the Spurs once to a title run in 2003 in this decade, if you look at what Manu did in 2005 and Tony did in 2007. But no one dare make that comment. It's as ridiculous as your suggestions that that's what Kobe did. Kobe did as much as Shaq in 2001 and 2002 to win those two titles. It's disheartening that Kobe haters refuse to give him props for those two titles.



There really are only two candidates, Shaq and Duncan. Shaq because of his absolute dominance (or perceived dominance) for the first 4 years, and Duncan because of his prolonged excellence.

Kobe's peak was no where near as high as either of them, and the duration in which he dominated was shorter than either of them.

Kobe's peak was greater simply because he's a 6'6 perimeter player dominating a game that has been dominated by big men since its inception. Very few "smaller" players have dominated the game like Kobe has. There's Michael and Oscar. Even guys like Magic and Bird and LeBron are 6'8 and much bigger and stronger for their position. After Michael and Oscar and Kobe and Dr. J, you find very few who have dominated the game like them. But your list of NBA big men who have dominated the game is long. From Mikan to Bill and Wilt to Kareem to Moses to Hakeem and David to Shaq and Duncan. It's always going to be more impressive for a guard to dominate the game than a 7-footer with strength and some skill who will shoot 60% from the field.

If LeBron is the best player in the league now (which I do believe) and has been for the last couple seasons, Kobe was the best player in the league since about 2001-2007, no shorter dominance than either Shaq or Tim.

[JamStone]

6. Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs
Robert Horry, game 4, 2002 WCF

Great choice and I don't think anyone would fault it. But, I'm curious if any Spurs fan would seriously consider "0.4" or if all of you just completely "misremember" that and keep it out of your memory banks. Lol. 0.4 actually came to mind before that Horry shot.

[baseline bum]

Great choice and I don't think anyone would fault it. But, I'm curious if any Spurs fan would seriously consider "0.4" or if all of you just completely "misremember" that and keep it out of your memory banks. Lol. 0.4 actually came to mind before that Horry shot.

It's a tough call between 0.4 and Horry's shot, but Horry's shot saved a dying Lakers team and capped off one of the greatest comebacks I have ever seen. Fisher's shot was certainly way harder, but wasn't the season-saver Horry's was (I think that LA team was more than capable of climbing out of a 3-2 hole with one game at Staples against the Spurs that year, but no way they were winning 3 straight vs the Kings with 2 in Sacramento after being trashed both games at Staples).

[Walt Kowalski]

1. Individual Game: NBA Playoffs
Manu Ginobili 39 points 2005 Game 5 against Seattle - he came off the bench and played 36 minutes, if you take his stats and project them over 48 minutes, it beats any other playoff performance. If not for Popovich he would have had 50+ in that game.
2. Playoff Game
Hornets vs. Spurs game 7. Manu's last game when he was healthy. In a must win game, Manu's killer instinct took over and won. He played so hard and killed so hard that he injured an ankle that still hurts him today.

3. Playoff Dunk
Dunks are all hype, Manu is just a winner. He knows what it takes to win, just look at his winning history. He wins games.

4. Playoff Defense
2005 Pistons. Any other defense, Manu averages 40+ PPG in the finals. THAT's how good he was in 2005.

5. Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs
The disgusting injustice and robbery of the 2005 finals MVP from Manu

6. Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs
Manu Ginobili, game 1 vs. Phoenix 2008

7. Playoff Series
2005 Spurs vs. Pistons. The San Antonio Manu Ginobili's were victorious over the Detroit team-with-really-classy-fans who understand how good Manu was in 2005

8. Individual Performance: Regular Season
Manu's 48 performance in an overtime victory over the Suns in overtime that went to overtime because Amare Stoudemire did pushups

9. Buzzer Beater: Regular Season
If Manu cared about the regular season it'd be him.

10. Regular Season Posterization
See #3.

11. All-Star Game Play
Whoever wins this is irrelevant because the only reason Manu doesn't is because Popovich brings him off the bench and doesn't let him play big minutes.

12. All-Star Saturday Night Dunk
See #3.

13. Player of the Decade
Manu Ginobili (look at his Euroleague achievements), he's just a winner

[baseline bum]

You forgot Manu's dunk against Ben Wallace in game 7. That should have been on the list.

[Walt Kowalski]

You forgot Manu's dunk against Ben Wallace in game 7. That should have been on the list.


No, dunks don't matter. Winning does. Manu = winner.

[HarlemHeat37]

One could argue that Duncan has only led the Spurs once to a title run in 2003 in this decade, if you look at what Manu did in 2005 and Tony did in 2007. But no one dare make that comment. It's as ridiculous as your suggestions that that's what Kobe did. Kobe did as much as Shaq in 2001 and 2002 to win those two titles. It's disheartening that Kobe haters refuse to give him props for those two titles.

I think it's stupid to discredit Kobe for the 2001/2002 titles, since he clearly had a massive part, but I don't see how you're comparing it to the Duncan titles in the way that you're doing it..Tim was a clear best player in all 3 of the titles this decade, he received constant double teams, and he also anchored an elite defense, which was the main reason we won titles..that seems to be the part everybody forgets when they mention Manu and Tony in 2005 and 2007..this was a defense-first team, so Duncan had to be the best player on BOTH ends for this team to succeed as we did..

While Kobe DOES deserve a lot of credit for being dominant in those title runs AND being a great closer, he did a lot of work with less attention from the defense compared to Shaq and Duncan..Shaq was double and triple teamed throughout those runs, everybody was scared of him, there was a reason he was considered the most dominant player in the game..

I don't see how Duncan shouldn't get MORE credit than Kobe does for his titles as the 1a/#2 option, since Tim was the clear best player for all of the title runs..I'm not discrediting Kobe, just saying..

I do agree with you about Kobe's title last year..absolutely deserves a lot of credit, and I highly disagree with anybody that talks about how stacked the Lakers were..great team and support, but nothing historic..


If LeBron is the best player in the league now (which I do believe) and has been for the last couple seasons, Kobe was the best player in the league since about 2001-2007, no shorter dominance than either Shaq or Tim.

I consider Kobe to be the best player in the NBA from 2005-2006 up until 2007-2008..I can see arguments for him in 2003, 2009, and even now, but nothing otherwise, at least IMO..Duncan and Shaq have much stronger arguments from 2000 until 2005, especially factoring in his meltdown in 2004 and his relatively poor season in 2005..

[BullsDynasty]

Re: TNT's 'NBA Player of the Decade' vote
My picks

1. Individual Game: NBA Playoffs
LeBron James, game 5, 2007 ECF

2. Playoff Game
Game 1 Spurs/Phoenix, 2008 1st Round

3. Playoff Dunk
Baron Davis Dunk on Kirilenko 2007 WCSF

4. Playoff Defense
2005 Finals, 2 of the League's best defensive teams squaring off.

5. Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs
Shaq and Kobe in the 2004 Finals

6. Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs
Derek Fisher Buzzer beater 2004 WCSF

7. Playoff Series
Bulls/Boston 2009 1st Round

8. Individual Performance: Regular Season
Kobe Bryant's 81 points against Toronto in 2006

9. Buzzer Beater: Regular Season
2008 Rasheed Wallace Steal then halfcourt buzzer beater to force OT vs Nuggets

10. Regular Season Posterization
Vince Carter over Alonzo Mourning 2005

11. All-Star Game Play
Michael Jordan first allstar game as a wizard/Last Career Allstar and hitting that "Would have been" the Game winning shot

12. All-Star Saturday Night Dunk
Jason Richardson between the legs reverse dunk 2003

13. Player of the Decade
Tim Duncan

[himat]

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs - Lebron against Detroit in 2007, game 5.

2 - November 26: Playoff Game - Suns vs. Spurs 2008 game 1

3 - December 3: Playoff Dunk - Shaq dunk game 7 2000 vs. Portland

4 - December 10: Playoff Defense - 2004 Pistons

5 - December 17: Individual Drama: NBA Playoffs - Bell vs. Kobe

6 - December 31: Buzzer Beater: NBA Playoffs - .4 second Fisher shot

7 - January 14: Playoff Series - 2008 Bulls vs. Celtics

8 - January 21: Individual Performance: Regular Season - Kobe 81 points

9 - January 28: Buzzer Beater: Regular Season - There's not really one that stands out.

10 - February 4: Regular Season Posterization -

11 - February 8: All-Star Game Play - who cares?

12 - February 11: All-Star Saturday Night Dunk - who cares?

13 - February 12: Player of the Decade - Tim Duncan

Great list.

For the regular season buzzer beater....

Kobe's game winning fadeaway three in the last game of the season in 2004 against the Portland Trailblazers. That win got them the Pacific Division championship. Btw he also hit a game tying 3 with one second remaining in the 4th quarter in the same game.

Here it is. This was absolutely ridiculous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfB3d1FjhCc

[ChrisRichards]

I'd say it's a toss-up among Tim, Shaq, and Kobe.

I'd probably give the edge to Tim, but I wouldn't discount Kobe.
LOL dont be an idiot. Duncan has more MVP's than Kobe this decade. Its Duncan all the way lol.

[Killakobe81]

I agree with those that discount Shaq in the debate. Hewas dominant for MOST of the FIRST 5 years of this decade a supporting player the rest ... this debate BEGINS with Duncan and ends with Kobe. I would give the Kobe the edge but could not be bitter if it went to Duncan either ...Shaq was like Hakeem dominant for too short of time ...at his best he was more dominant OFFENSIVELY than Kobe or Duncan but i still feel they are BOTH better all around players and winners ...

[Killakobe81]

LOL dont be an idiot. Duncan has more MVP's than Kobe this decade. Its Duncan all the way lol.

Nash has two MVP's as well so does he deserve more praise?

IMHO the factors are dominant talent or skill, rings, stats and MVP's last. Kar; malone has MVP's and better stats than Duncan as well but Duncan is way better than Karl ...

[Killakobe81]

And i also disagree on playoff shot. Derek's was great. BUT Horry's (vs. SAC) was crtical to winning a title AND it also helped deny SAC from a title ...no way SAC doesnt win that series with a 3-1 lead ...and SAcramento is PROBABLY the NBA champs ...plus the camera angles on that shot is well AMAZING!! Watch the staples center erupt as one as it goes down ....

[HarlemHeat37]

If we're just looking at the actual shot and the circumstances, it has to be Fisher's..no question..

Horry's shot vs. Detroit was one of the best ever, but what made it so great was the performance as a whole..

[Killakobe81]

If we're just looking at the actual shot and the circumstances, it has to be Fisher's..no question..

Horry's shot vs. Detroit was one of the best ever, but what made it so great was the performance as a whole..

Forgot about that one (Horry vs. detroit) but that tied the game right? It did not win it IIRC ... Fish was great it even prompted a rule change ...but Horry's did what Fish's did tired a series but Horry's shots vs. SAC and Detroit led to titles ...

[HarlemHeat37]

Ya, Horry's shot did win the game..it wasn't at the buzzer though..

[ginobili's bald spot]

Maybe it wasn't a "disaster", but it sure as hell doesn't count for anything. No one is ever remembered for their ability to take a roster full of scrubs to the playoffs and then lose in the first round.

Lets not forget that Duncan and the Spurs got bounced in the first round last year. To make matters worse it was to a lower seed.

[Xylus]

It's an NBA discussion board. Why would I come to a Spurs site as a Pistons fan to target the Suns posters?

:downspin:

I don't know, Darrin, why would you?

[Chieflion]

Looking all these moments, I must say it has been a great decade of NBA basketball.

[LnGrrrR]

I know either Horry or Fisher will get it, but what about TD's 3? It blew me away that he took, and made, that shot.

[Darrin]

Looking all these moments, I must say it has been a great decade of NBA basketball.

Agreed. And it's like having a precious, hidden gem because the entire country is sold on the fact that the 1980s and 1990s were better and are stuck in the conversations of last decade still.

[exstatic]

1 - November 19: Individual Game: NBA Playoffs - Lebron against Detroit in 2007, game 5.
Nope. Duncan, Game 6 2003 Finals. He was within 2 blocks of a QUAD double in the mother fucking FINALS.

[exstatic]

Congrats to Duncan, he managed to dominate Kenyon Martin and Jason Collins.

Uh, are you forgetting Mutombo, the best shot blocker in history? Oh, and that was pre-micro-fracture KMart, a pretty fair defender.

To be honest, it didn't matter who you put on Duncan during those B2B MVP seasons.

[Sportstudi]

Nope. Duncan, Game 6 2003 Finals. He was within 2 blocks of a QUAD double in the mother fucking FINALS.

True. And I don't give a f*** about the players he faced there (the names where mentioned earlier in the thread). In the finals you don't play against scrubs, period!

I have to admit though that LBJ's performance against Detroit was quite nice.

[Sportstudi]

Uh, are you forgetting Mutombo, the best shot blocker in history? Oh, and that was pre-micro-fracture KMart, a pretty fair defender.

To be honest, it didn't matter who you put on Duncan during those B2B MVP seasons.

Just a side note: Mutombo as the best shot blocker in history? Well, he was awesome there, absolutely no doubt about that! Just great! But I have to admit, my favourite concerning the best shot blockers is not a HoF (and likely never will be), but these videos are just awesome:

Welcome to the block party (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIYjXXvZrsI)
Manute Bol Mix (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gpya5OTOnM)
Best statline ever (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWg5boXIqQI)
Blocked Skyhook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZWnuQbaGjM)

About the latter one: I know that's really debateable if it's goaltending or not. IMO, it's on the edge and I don't want to judge it. As you all know, for goaltending the ball has to be on its way down. The refs didn't call it (I assume). But nevertheless, if you are 7'7 and you have a 10 ft wingspan, you can block almost everything including the skyhook.

Nice articles as well:

Sports Illustrated (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/magazine/06/26/where.manute/index.html)
Philly about Bol (http://www.nba.com/sixers/features/drive_manute_bol_070807.html)
NBA about Bol after retirement (http://www.nba.com/sixers/features/manute_bol_060822.html)

Btw, he has by far the best block pct ever...
Career (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/blk_pct_career.html)
Single season (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/blk_pct_season.html)

Sorry for that insertion :toast

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Uh, are you forgetting Mutombo, the best shot blocker in history?


He played 10 minutes in that game.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

True. And I don't give a f*** about the players he faced there (the names where mentioned earlier in the thread). In the finals you don't play against scrubs, period!


The exception being the 1999-2003 Eastern conference. Are you saying Jason Collins isn't a scrub?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

To be honest, it didn't matter who you put on Duncan during those B2B MVP seasons.


Apparently it did matter against the Lakers in 2002.

[sabar]

99% of NBA players can't get close to a quad-double against scrubs let alone elites. The defenders do not diminish Duncan's performance. Most big men would struggle to get 20 points and 20 boards, let alone toss in double digit assists and more than a couple blocks.

[ambchang]

How loaded were the Lakers last year really? There is a lot of talent, but once you get past Kobe and Pau, they're a lot of role players. Even Bynum to an extent because he was once again not 100% for the playoffs. Odom has never been an all star. Ariza broke out, but that's in great part because he was playing with Kobe. Kobe had an all star sidekick. Hello, most championship teams did too. Shaq had Kobe and Wade. Tim has had, in his title runs, David Robinson, Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili. Wade had Shaq. You're going to discredit Kobe leading his team to a title saying they were absolutely loaded? Who was more loaded? Last year's Lakers or 2008 Boston Celtics? For that matter, which team is more loaded? Last year's Lakers or the 2005 Spurs? That Spurs team to me was more loaded than last year's Lakers. Tony Parker had become a bonafide star, Ginobili was still relatively healthy and was in his peak and could have won Finals MVP, Horry was more clutch than anyone not named Kobe on the Lakers last year, and Bruce Bowen was still a defensive stopper. Kobe's Lakers last year were loaded because of Kobe. It was because of him.

The 2009 Lakers team was probably one of the most loaded teams in the last decade or so if you take away the top player (as in only counting the supporting cast).

00-02 Lakers – Kobe and role players. The 3rd best player on those teams was probably Robert Horry or Derek Fisher.

03 Spurs – Very balanced team, but really role players, stars past their primes (Robinson, Willis), or players not hitting their primes (Ginobili, Parker).

04 Pistons – No one superstar, but an extremely balanced team that is filled with talent throughout.

05 Spurs – Parker was most definitely not a bonafide star, that was Ginobili. Parker was still inconsistent and prone to mistake. Ginobili was fantastic though. His role was comparable to Gasol of the 09 Lakers, but then the 09 Lakers had Odom, Bynum (who sucked in the Finals) and Ariza.

06 Heat – Shaq and a bunch of scrubs.

07 Spurs – Parker was shining, Ginobili was still good. Bowen was amazing. This is probably comparable to 09 Lakers in terms of supporting cast. But then again, Duncan, though still effective, was past his prime by that point.

08 Celtics – Loaded throughout, Garnett, Allen and Rondo was most definitely better than the 09 supporting cast. But then, nobody is putting Pierce in as the best player of the decade.

09 Lakers – Gasol was a top 3 center, Bynum, though he sucked, offered another low post option for the Lakers. Odom, as inconsistent as he was throughout his career, was a versatile PF who causes mismatches for all the teams. This is a monstrous frontline, no team in the league that year, or in the last 10 years, can really put out three productive big men on the court at the same time who could play together. Ariza was fantastic, and as his season with the Rockets showed so far, he has talent (though his huge drop in FG% is pretty much expected). This was a loaded team like the 04 Pistons, a great starting five that is balanced throughout.


Don't take away from Kobe just because you want to hate on him. One could argue that Duncan has only led the Spurs once to a title run in 2003 in this decade, if you look at what Manu did in 2005 and Tony did in 2007. But no one dare make that comment. It's as ridiculous as your suggestions that that's what Kobe did. Kobe did as much as Shaq in 2001 and 2002 to win those two titles. It's disheartening that Kobe haters refuse to give him props for those two titles.

Funny thing is, I love the Kobe. I appreciate the way he plays, but the fact is, he never achieved the level of dominance that Shaq and Duncan did at their primes, nor has he kept it for as long. I am sure Kobe would be a great player in the next couple of years to keep his dominance to at least the same length as Shaq, or even Duncan, but it is unlikely he would ever hit as high a peak as those two did.

Manu didn’t carry that 05 team, he was instrumental. His role in that 05 team was what Kobe was from 00 to 02. Extremely good, probably one of the best in the league, but clearly a 2nd banana to Duncan. Same with Parker, yes he won the MVP, but there was no question that the offense and defense revolved around Duncan in those two years, just like the 00-02 Lakers teams revolved around Shaq. Kobe didn’t do as much as Shaq did in 01 and 02, he was a sidekick, like Pippen was a sidekick to Jordan, or McHale was a sidekick to Bird. The whole Lakers system was built around Shaq those years, and there wasn’t really any questions about it. Kobe was great, but you can’t argue Kobe was a better player than Shaq throughout the decade when a huge chunk of his accomplishments were being a sidekick to Shaq. If Pippen led a team to a championship and won an MVP without Jordan, he still wouldn’t be better than Jordan, if McHale won a championship and won an MVP without Bird, he still wouldn’t be better than Bird. If Ginobili won a championship and won an MVP without Duncan, he still wouldn’t be better than Duncan. If Parker won a championship and won an MVP without Duncan, he still wouldn’t be better than Duncan.


Kobe's peak was greater simply because he's a 6'6 perimeter player dominating a game that has been dominated by big men since its inception. Very few "smaller" players have dominated the game like Kobe has. There's Michael and Oscar. Even guys like Magic and Bird and LeBron are 6'8 and much bigger and stronger for their position. After Michael and Oscar and Kobe and Dr. J, you find very few who have dominated the game like them. But your list of NBA big men who have dominated the game is long. From Mikan to Bill and Wilt to Kareem to Moses to Hakeem and David to Shaq and Duncan. It's always going to be more impressive for a guard to dominate the game than a 7-footer with strength and some skill who will shoot 60% from the field.

You can’t say a player is better because he is smaller. There is no handicap. The way basketball is, it’s easier for big men to dominate, and that is just the way it is. It may be more impressive, and certainly rare for guards and forwards to dominate, but it doesn’t make those players better.

By that logic, Nate Archibald should be in the best player ever debate, because he’s barely 6 ft tall and led the league in scoring and assists.


If LeBron is the best player in the league now (which I do believe) and has been for the last couple seasons, Kobe was the best player in the league since about 2001-2007, no shorter dominance than either Shaq or Tim.

Kobe was a sidekick in 01-03, there wasn’t really any questions about it. He wasn’t even the best player on his team those three seasons. In 04, with him “leading” his team, the Lakers received a royal buttkicking by the Pistons, despite the fact that the 04 team was loaded.

05 to 07, the Lakers didn’t do that well, and most of that was because the supporting cast was horrible. However, you can’t dismiss the Game 7 where Kobe was passing up shots to send a message. Great players don’t do that, great players don’t allow their games to lose just to show who’s boss. In fact, from 05 to 07, Kobe wasn’t even all that close in MVP voting. He finished 3rd in 07 voting, but only received 2 out of 129 votes, in 06, he got 22 out of 129 votes, finishing 4th, in 05, he didn’t even finish in the top 15 (less votes than PJ Brown? WTH?). In fact, in the last ten years, Kobe Bryant was only a legitimate MVP candidate twice, maybe thrice.

I absolutely do not get how LeBron being the best player now would equate to Kobe being the best from 01 to 07. The only reason people started arguing Kobe as the top player in the last decade was BECAUSE of 08 (MVP), and 09 (championship), 01 to 07 was dominated by Duncan and Shaq.

[JamStone]

Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, Derek Fisher, Trevor Ariza, injured Andrew Bynum

versus

Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Brent Barry


I'd take the Spurs supporting cast. Horry, Bowen, and Barry all shot over 42% from three-point range in the 2005 playoffs, collectively (95-for-218) 43.6%. If you're going to pimp Ariza for playing fantastic, then you qualify the Spurs three point shooters in 2005 as maybe the best three point shooting NBA champs in the history of the NBA playoffs. Manu shot 44% from three point range for the playoffs as well. Four rotation guys taking a lot of three pointers and all shooting over 42% from long distance? You want to talk about loaded?

Tiny Archibald led the league in scoring and assists for ONE SEASON. If he kept that type of scoring and assists throughout his career and was responsible for multiple championships, he would be in the discussion for greatest players ever. He was more of a 19 ppg / 8 apg guy the rest of his career. And, the one championship he won, he was the fifth best player on his team. You're really going to argue that? Kobe has dominated the league for around a decade or more. Not just one season. Multiple champion, perennial all star, all NBA performer, all NBA defender, league MVP, and Finals MVP. And, your argument is about Tiny Archibald's one great season???

We're comparing greats like Tim and Kobe who are multiple title winners and guys that have done it their whole careers. The fact that Kobe dominates at his size is something you should take into consideration. Because it's not done often. And, there's absolutely an argument that his peak is greater because of that.

Magic was a sidekick to Kareem in the early 80s and it didn't prevent him from being viewed as the best or one of the best players in the league. Only people who want to minimize Kobe's greatness tag him with a "sidekick" label. Kobe often led that team more so than Shaq. Shaq was absolutely great and dominant. But, after the 1999-2000 season, that Laker squad was as much Kobe's as it was Shaq's. Kobe often led in field goal attempts. He would be the one who would facilitate the offense late in games. He was the closer. I go back to Kareem and Magic. Kareem was the leading scorer on the Lakers for Magic's first 7 seasons there. But, that was still Magic's team. Kareem was the superstar and legend, and Magic was the young phenom. But, there was no mistaking who led that team. Same thing with Kobe and Shaq. Kobe haters refuse to accept or acknowledge that.

What is this talk about MVP voting??? I don't care how great a player is, you don't get MVP votes unless your team is a top 5 team in the league. You just don't. For Kobe to get any votes from 2005-07 shows how great a player he is. Get out of here with that mess. In 2004-05, the Lakers went into the lottery. No player from a lottery team is going to get MVP votes, genius.

From 2001-09, here is where Kobe finished in MVP voting: 9th, 5th, 3rd, 5th, n/a, 4th, 3rd, won MVP, 2nd

And here are Tim's finishes in MVP voting: 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 4th, 7th, 11th

Pretty comparable. Tim averages a 4.44th place finish. Kobe averages a 4th place finish, although that doesn't include 2004-05 where he didn't finish in the top 15 at all.

You see, Kobe had one season where the Lakers traded Shaq and they had transition that brings him down in the evaluation. Everything else is very competitive between him and Duncan. In fact, we can even look at their playoff performances since and including the 2001 playoffs.

Tim Duncan:
23.5 ppg
13.0 rpg
3.7 apg
2.63 bpg
49.9% FG

Kobe Bryant:
28.7 ppg
5.2 apg
5.8 rpg
1.68 spg
45.6% FG

Both outstanding stats for each. Like I said, it's a toss-up.

But, here's where you might be surprised about each helping his team to win.

Duncan-led Spurs' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 82-52 (61.2% winning precentage)
Kobe-led Lakers' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 83-42 (66.4% winning percentage)

Kobe's Lakers actually do better in the playoffs than Duncan's Spurs overall.


LeBron being the best player does not equate to Kobe being the best player from 2001-07. I merely mentioned LeBron to bring a cut off date to when Kobe had been surpassed as the best player in the league. In 2000-01, Kobe averaged 28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg. He was already dominating the league at that point. You want to call him a sidekick, what other sidekick was averaging 28/5/5?

You missed a whole lot of NBA basketball this decade if you think Kobe is being mentioned as one of the decade's best players only because of the 2008 MVP and last year's championship.

[ambchang]

Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, Derek Fisher, Trevor Ariza, injured Andrew Bynum

versus

Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Brent Barry


I'd take the Spurs supporting cast. Horry, Bowen, and Barry all shot over 42% from three-point range in the 2005 playoffs, collectively (95-for-218) 43.6%. If you're going to pimp Ariza for playing fantastic, then you qualify the Spurs three point shooters in 2005 as maybe the best three point shooting NBA champs in the history of the NBA playoffs. Manu shot 44% from three point range for the playoffs as well. Four rotation guys taking a lot of three pointers and all shooting over 42% from long distance? You want to talk about loaded?

Wow, so Ariza production = 3 Spurs players. I don’t know about you, but that is saying Ariza, by himself was as good as 3 Spurs players. If that doesn’t spell how the Lakers bench was clearly better, I don’t know what does. In other words, if you put Ariza, Gasol, Odom and Fisher on the floor, and the Spurs put Parker, Ginobili, and 2 of Horry, Bowen and Barry on the floor, you have Gasol = Ginobili, Odom = Parker, Ariza = 1.5 x 2 of Horry/Bowen/Barry, and the Lakers still have one up with the Fisher production. So net, you have 50% improvement of a Horry/Bowen/Barry + a Fisher, seems like a pretty clear win on the Lakers front.

In all seriousness though, the 05 team was positively the best supporting cast Duncan ever had, but then Duncan also won with an underwhelming (at least on paper) 03 team and an 07 team. Kobe’s absolute best is about the worst of Duncan’s prime with two bum ankles.


Tiny Archibald led the league in scoring and assists for ONE SEASON. If he kept that type of scoring and assists throughout his career and was responsible for multiple championships, he would be in the discussion for greatest players ever. He was more of a 19 ppg / 8 apg guy the rest of his career. And, the one championship he won, he was the fifth best player on his team. You're really going to argue that? Kobe has dominated the league for around a decade or more. Not just one season. Multiple champion, perennial all star, all NBA performer, all NBA defender, league MVP, and Finals MVP. And, your argument is about Tiny Archibald's one great season???

I wasn’t going to argue that, you were. Archibald was small, he should be given a handicap. Even better, Mugsy Bogues was even smaller, let’s go for Spud Webb and Earl Watson too. They were small.

If you don’t agree with this, then you don’t agree with how Kobe should be considered more dominant because he was small. I don’t care how small he was, if he was dominating at 6’6”, he was dominating at 6’6”, it wouldn’t make him better if he was 6’5”, or 6’4”, or the size of a midget. His accomplishments were his accomplishments. It could make them more impressive, but it doesn’t make it better.


We're comparing greats like Tim and Kobe who are multiple title winners and guys that have done it their whole careers. The fact that Kobe dominates at his size is something you should take into consideration. Because it's not done often. And, there's absolutely an argument that his peak is greater because of that.

Like I said, it was certainly rarer, but it doesn’t make it better. His peak is his peak, doesn’t matter what size he is. Nate Archibald was 1st team all NBA 3 times and 2nd team twice, he averaged an insane amount of points at the early part of his career as a 6’1” PG. I am not going to say that his achievements were more than it actually was because of his size.

Serving chocolate milk in a bar is rare, doesn’t make it a better bar, nor does it make it better chocolate milk.


Magic was a sidekick to Kareem in the early 80s and it didn't prevent him from being viewed as the best or one of the best players in the league. Only people who want to minimize Kobe's greatness tag him with a "sidekick" label. Kobe often led that team more so than Shaq. Shaq was absolutely great and dominant. But, after the 1999-2000 season, that Laker squad was as much Kobe's as it was Shaq's. Kobe often led in field goal attempts. He would be the one who would facilitate the offense late in games. He was the closer. I go back to Kareem and Magic. Kareem was the leading scorer on the Lakers for Magic's first 7 seasons there. But, that was still Magic's team. Kareem was the superstar and legend, and Magic was the young phenom. But, there was no mistaking who led that team. Same thing with Kobe and Shaq. Kobe haters refuse to accept or acknowledge that.

Kobe was no Magic during 00-02, Magic won Finals MVP in 1980, Kobe never did in 00-02 Magic won two championships with Kareem as the clear sidekick, and arguably three (85), Kobe never won a championship with Shaq as his sidekick, in fact, he was partly responsible for that not happening (yes, Shaq had a bigger share of all that drama). Magic had more MVP votes than Kareem from 82 onwards, and the Lakers won 4 championships during that time. Kobe won one championship when he had more MVP votes than Shaq, Shaq won 3.


What is this talk about MVP voting??? I don't care how great a player is, you don't get MVP votes unless your team is a top 5 team in the league. You just don't. For Kobe to get any votes from 2005-07 shows how great a player he is. Get out of here with that mess. In 2004-05, the Lakers went into the lottery. No player from a lottery team is going to get MVP votes, genius.

And Kobe was the best player from 05 to 07 because he led his team to missing the playoffs once and getting kicked out of the 1st round twice? How was that dominant?

BTW, players who missed the playoffs but received MVP votes:
Allen Iverson – 05 to 06
PJ Brown – 04 to 05 (I will never understand this one)
Andrei Kirilenko – 03-04

You get pretty much pity votes, but you don’t get zero votes every time you miss the playoffs. In fact, Kobe got zero votes in 05 because he was a PR disaster that year, and pissed off the whole voting group.


From 2001-09, here is where Kobe finished in MVP voting: 9th, 5th, 3rd, 5th, n/a, 4th, 3rd, won MVP, 2nd

And here are Tim's finishes in MVP voting: 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 4th, 7th, 11th

Pretty comparable. Tim averages a 4.44th place finish. Kobe averages a 4th place finish, although that doesn't include 2004-05 where he didn't finish in the top 15 at all.

First off, we are talking about different competition, second, as you said, Kobe didn’t even finish in the top 15. You can’t just dismiss that. 3rd, you said Kobe was the best from 01 to 07, the MVP comparison between the two clearly refutes that.


You see, Kobe had one season where the Lakers traded Shaq and they had transition that brings him down in the evaluation. Everything else is very competitive between him and Duncan. In fact, we can even look at their playoff performances since and including the 2001 playoffs.

Tim Duncan:
23.5 ppg
13.0 rpg
3.7 apg
2.63 bpg
49.9% FG

Kobe Bryant:
28.7 ppg
5.2 apg
5.8 rpg
1.68 spg
45.6% FG

Both outstanding stats for each. Like I said, it's a toss-up.

This is extremely misleading. The paces of the two teams were very different. Duncan’s stats, even on the slower paced team, is better than Kobe (23/13/4/3 > 29/5/6/2) 2nd, the sample sizes are very different. And once again, you are simply dismissing times when Kobe didn’t do as well, it’s almost like rewarding him for being on a crappy team.


But, here's where you might be surprised about each helping his team to win.

Duncan-led Spurs' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 82-52 (61.2% winning precentage)
Kobe-led Lakers' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 83-42 (66.4% winning percentage)

Kobe's Lakers actually do better in the playoffs than Duncan's Spurs overall.

This is even more misleading. This is discounting the fact that a) Kobe played as sidekick to Shaq during his most dominant stretch, b) dismissing the year the Lakers didn’t even make the playoffs, c) talking about two different eras against very different competition, and d) dismissing the contributions of either’s supporting casts.

In other words, these records are meaningless.

Besides, if you want to count playoff records, how can you even assert Kobe being the best in 05-07? You have to be consistent in your approach, and Jamstone, you are much better than this.


LeBron being the best player does not equate to Kobe being the best player from 2001-07. I merely mentioned LeBron to bring a cut off date to when Kobe had been surpassed as the best player in the league. In 2000-01, Kobe averaged 28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg. He was already dominating the league at that point. You want to call him a sidekick, what other sidekick was averaging 28/5/5?

Kevin McHale averaged 26/10/3 and 2blks in 86-87, shooting 60.4% from the field, and 84% from the line. Yet he was a CLEAR sidekick to Bird.

Pippen averaged 21/7/5 in 92, shooting 51% from the field. Again, as a sidekick.

Magic Johnson was doing 22/8/8 in 81 to Kareem’s sidekick.

Dr. J was doing 22/7/4 to Malone’s sidekick.

Stockton was throwing in 13+ assists with 17+ ppg 3 years in a roll as Malone’s sidekick (although I would argue Malone was putting up 31 ppg as Stockton’s sidekick)

Besides, what does it matter? Because in that same season, Shaq was throwing in 29/14/4, and leading the league in FG%. He average 30 and 15 in the playoffs as the clear cut alpha male on that team. Shaq was so ridiculously dominating those few years people were prematurely mentioning him in the same breath as Hakeem, Wilt and Kareem, just like how Kobe supporters are putting him in the same sentence as Jordan.


You missed a whole lot of NBA basketball this decade if you think Kobe is being mentioned as one of the decade's best players only because of the 2008 MVP and last year's championship.

Funny that was exactly what I was thinking, because it seemed like you missed the early part of the 00’s by even suggesting Kobe was building his legacy back in the early part of the millennium. He sure didn’t hurt it by being one of the best players in the league during that time, but he was no Shaq or Duncan either.

Finally, I understand that you, as a Pistons fan, is trying to drum up Kobe and make him comparable to Jordan, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe can’t even be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Jordan > Shaq and Duncan. So you try to at least make Kobe > Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe > Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to Jordan.

[ginobili's bald spot]

Finally, I understand that you, as a Pistons fan, is trying to drum up Kobe and make him comparable to Jordan, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe can’t even be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Jordan > Shaq and Duncan. So you try to at least make Kobe > Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe > Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to Jordan.

Finally, I understand that you, as a Spur fan, is trying to downplay Kobe and make him comparable to Pippen, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe is be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Kobe > McHale and Pippen. So you try to at least make Kobe < Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe < Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to McHale.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

And i also disagree on playoff shot. Derek's was great. BUT Horry's (vs. SAC) was crtical to winning a title AND it also helped deny SAC from a title


If not for Fisher's shot, San Antonio has a decent chance at a 2003-2005 three-peat. All the jokes Lakerfan likes to make about SA not being able to repeat wouldn't happen if not for D-Fish's shot.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Duncan-led Spurs' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 82-52 (61.2% winning precentage)
Kobe-led Lakers' record in the playoffs from 2001 to present: 83-42 (66.4% winning percentage)

Kobe's Lakers actually do better in the playoffs than Duncan's Spurs overall.


2001 and 2002, they were Shaq's Lakers. They became Kobe's Lakers in 2003 (the year they stopped winning championships).

[ambchang]

Finally, I understand that you, as a Spur fan, is trying to downplay Kobe and make him comparable to Pippen, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe is be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Kobe > McHale and Pippen. So you try to at least make Kobe < Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe < Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to McHale.

If I have a hidden agenda in saying that Kobe < Shaq or Duncan, I would be saying Kobe < Shaq or Duncan? That really isn't all that hidden, is it?

[JamStone]

I won't make this a quote and post-quote and post marathon. I'll just respond to a few of the points and only quote parts I think are necessary...

You're doing a good job trying to twist what I wrote though. I didn't say Ariza equated to the Spurs three point shooters. I said if you give him credit, give credit to Duncan's supporting cast, specifically his three point shooters in 2003. Don't twist what I say. Earlier you said Kobe's team last year was loaded. It wasn't. After Gasol, they had a bunch of role players. Ariza played well. He's also a second round draft pick that two teams basically gave away and the Lakers didn't even re-sign for the MLE. Stop sucking on his dick like he's the next LeBron James.

The Lakers team last year was very good. It wasn't loaded. Gasol isn't a top 3 center, by the way, as you claimed earlier. Not last year, not now.

I was never going to argue anything about Tiny Archibald. You brought him up. My point was to mention how Kobe's greatness is more impressive because he's a 6'6 perimeter player and not a 7-footer, and he still dominated the game. You even admitted it's more impressive yourself. Bringing up Archibald or Spud Webb or whoever is not pertinent to my point at all, unless they dominated the way Kobe and Duncan have dominated. There's another point you're trying to twist inaccurately.

Kobe put up 28/5/5 in 2000-01. You can go down in the history books and probably only find a handful of players that did that. That was dominating. He wasn't Magic. They're not the same type of player. But, he was special and great and dominant in his own way even as early as 2000-01. Who puts up 28/5/5? Not even Magic did that, not once in his career. That's Michael, Oscar, LeBron territory. Your memory is skewed with bias. Kobe was dominating the league in 2000-01 and he had already taken control of the Lakers. Shaq was still the superstar, but that was more Kobe's team than it was Shaq's.

Kobe was the best player in the league from 2005-07, yes. He just wasn't on a great team. Michael had already become the best player in the league in 1986-87 when his Chicago Bulls were 40-42 and swept from the playoffs. Oscar Robertson had already established himself as one of the top 2 players in the league by 1962-63 on a 42-38 Cincinnati team.



You get pretty much pity votes, but you don’t get zero votes every time you miss the playoffs. In fact, Kobe got zero votes in 05 because he was a PR disaster that year, and pissed off the whole voting group.

You said it right there. Pity votes. PR disaster. Kobe didn't get MVP votes in 2004-05 because nobody pitied him after his Colorado scandal and people thinking he got Shaq traded. It wasn't because he wasn't the best player in the league. It was because of PR. Thanks for expounding on that point.



First off, we are talking about different competition, second, as you said, Kobe didn’t even finish in the top 15. You can’t just dismiss that. 3rd, you said Kobe was the best from 01 to 07, the MVP comparison between the two clearly refutes that.

As you just stated, Kobe didn't get MVP votes in 2005 because he was a PR disaster. It wasn't because he wasn't the best player in the league. Add to that my point that you don't get MVP votes when you're on a lottery team (or if you do, it's stupidity as you mentioned PJ Brown getting an MVP vote), and there you have it.

I don't dismiss 2005. You were the one who brought up MVP voting. I listed their places in MVP voting to show you that it was actually pretty close. If Duncan has the advantage in the first 4-5 seasons of the decade, Kobe has the advantage the last 4 seasons. But, the difference in the advantage of each guy isn't that much at all, 2005 notwithstanding.


This is extremely misleading. The paces of the two teams were very different. Duncan’s stats, even on the slower paced team, is better than Kobe (23/13/4/3 > 29/5/6/2) 2nd, the sample sizes are very different. And once again, you are simply dismissing times when Kobe didn’t do as well, it’s almost like rewarding him for being on a crappy team.

So let me get this straight. You don't want to give Kobe any props for dominating as a perimeter player, but you want to qualify Duncan's stats because of pace and tempo? I hear you hypocrisy, loud and clear. Here, have a glass of chocolate milk. It makes this bar that much better.

It's arguable at best to say Duncan's stats are better than Kobe's. Again, I'm the one claiming it's a toss-up. You saying Duncan's stats are better smells of extreme bias.

Next, how is the sample sizes too different? Those are the playoff stats of each player from 2001 playoffs on. Duncan 134 playoff games this decade. Kobe 125 playoff games this decade. How is that sample size too different? That's a pretty similar sample size.


This is even more misleading. This is discounting the fact that a) Kobe played as sidekick to Shaq during his most dominant stretch, b) dismissing the year the Lakers didn’t even make the playoffs, c) talking about two different eras against very different competition, and d) dismissing the contributions of either’s supporting casts.

Take what you want from it. Those are the statistical facts of Kobe and Duncan in this past decade, the previous 9 post seasons. You want to twist it and spin it, you're welcome to do so. Bottom line is that Kobe's teams have fared better in the playoffs this past decade. The "sidekick" is getting tiring, but will again be addressed shortly.

It does dismiss the year the Lakers didn't make the playoffs in 2004-05. Those are PLAYOFF records. If the Lakers didn't make the playoffs, they don't have a playoff record for that season. More chocolate milk?

How different were the eras??? We're talking about 2001 playoffs to 2009 playoffs for each player. Why are you mentioning two different eras and two different competition for the same time frame??? Are you actually reading what you write? Would you like me to put that glass of chocolate milk in the microwave to warm it up?



Kevin McHale averaged 26/10/3 and 2blks in 86-87, shooting 60.4% from the field, and 84% from the line. Yet he was a CLEAR sidekick to Bird.

Pippen averaged 21/7/5 in 92, shooting 51% from the field. Again, as a sidekick.

Magic Johnson was doing 22/8/8 in 81 to Kareem’s sidekick.

Dr. J was doing 22/7/4 to Malone’s sidekick.

1. The Celtics didn't win a championship in 1986-87. Moreover, in the playoffs, Kevin McHale's scoring dropped to 21 ppg while Bird averaged 27 ppg. In the 2001 and 2002 playoffs, Kobe averaged 28 ppg while Shaq averaged 29.4 ppg. McHale was much more a sidekick, while Kobe was much more a co-go-to-guy.

2. Pippen never averaged anywhere near what Jordan did in scoring, and Pippen never had the ball at the end of close games in his hands. Kobe almost always had the ball in his hands at the end of close games in the playoffs.

3. Magic wasn't Kareem's sidekick in 1981. He stopped being a sidekick after the 1980 NBA Finals. That's why you mentioning him now actually helps my argument. Thanks. More chocolate milk.

4. When the Sixers won the 1983 title, Julius Erving was every bit the man on that team as Moses was. That's a great comparison actually to help prove my point. Julius actually was a top 3 MVP candidate in 1980, 81, and 82 right behind Moses. Julius was considered the greatest or one of the greatest players in the league in the early 1980s before Magic and Bird emerged as the two best for the rest of that era. That's why you can be the greatest player in the league and play with another great player like Julius did with Moses and some detractors will call you the "sidekick." Thanks for reminding us of Julius and Moses. That's a perfect example.

5. Stockton was a sidekick. Stockton was never viewed as one of the greatest players in the league, not a top 5 player in the league at any rate.

The same time Shaq was dropping 30/15, Kobe was putting up 29 ppg, 7 rpg, and 6 apg in the 2001 playoffs. Those are not "sidekick" stats. I dare you to find any "sidekick" putting up those types of numbers in the playoffs. The guys you mentioned above didn't put up those numbers. You won't find any other "sidekick" putting up 29/7/6 in the playoffs. You won't.



Finally, I understand that you, as a Pistons fan, is trying to drum up Kobe and make him comparable to Jordan, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe can’t even be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Jordan > Shaq and Duncan. So you try to at least make Kobe > Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe > Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to Jordan.

WTF with the "Pistons fan" comment??? Kobe will never be as great as Jordan. Jordan has absolutely nothing to do with any of my comments. You've fallen off the deep end. Did you spike your chocolate milk?

[Allanon]

Finally, I understand that you, as a Spur fan, is trying to downplay Kobe and make him comparable to Pippen, and there is absolutely no way you can do that if Kobe is be the best player of the 00’s, when everybody and their grandmother knows that Kobe > McHale and Pippen. So you try to at least make Kobe < Shaq and Duncan to make your hidden agenda more plausible. But the sad part is, you can’t even say that Kobe < Shaq or Duncan, and you can never compare him to McHale.

You're talking to one of the biggest Kobe haters on this site, no amount of logic or reasoning will change this, believe me.

And don't worry Kobe Haters, he's not even a vote option for this first category of voting. Your hate is safe for now. :lol

"VOTE 1 - BEST PERFORMANCE: PLAYOFFS"

http://www.nba.com/alldecade/vote1/

[Pero]

Great choice and I don't think anyone would fault it.

I would. That shot wasn't made by Horry, but by three stooges who didn't know when the second quarter was finished.

[ginobili's bald spot]

LOL ambchang


LOL biased butthurt spurfans



http://i45.tinypic.com/5ydelw.jpg

[BullsDynasty]

LOL ambchang


LOL biased butthurt spurfans



http://i45.tinypic.com/5ydelw.jpg

All this shows is that Lakers fans have more trolls than any other fanbase on Spurstalk.....

[spursfan1000]

Tim Duncan is no doubt the player of the decade...im not being baised.

[ginobili's bald spot]

All this shows is that Lakers fans have more trolls than any other fanbase on Spurstalk.....

It's not a spurstalk poll you dumb shit. :lol It's an ESPN poll.

[BullsDynasty]

Congrats to Duncan, he managed to dominate Kenyon Martin and Jason Collins.

No he dominated the Nets.....

[ambchang]

I won't make this a quote and post-quote and post marathon. I'll just respond to a few of the points and only quote parts I think are necessary...

You're doing a good job trying to twist what I wrote though. I didn't say Ariza equated to the Spurs three point shooters. I said if you give him credit, give credit to Duncan's supporting cast, specifically his three point shooters in 2003. Don't twist what I say. Earlier you said Kobe's team last year was loaded. It wasn't. After Gasol, they had a bunch of role players. Ariza played well. He's also a second round draft pick that two teams basically gave away and the Lakers didn't even re-sign for the MLE. Stop sucking on his dick like he's the next LeBron James.

Since when have I even remotely compared Ariza to anyone of the caliber of LeBron James, but Ariza was able to defend, shoot, and score at the rate of a Barry + Horry, he wasn't as great a defender was Bowen was, but he was at least close.

None of the role players showed as much talent as Ariza did. Ariza was the clear 4th, or even 5th player on the Lakers. Any teams of the last decade didn't have a 4th and 5th option as talented as Ariza, with the exception of maybe the 08 Celtics and 04 Pistons. Not coincidentally, none of the lead players in those two teams were remotely close to going in the player of the decade discussion.



The Lakers team last year was very good. It wasn't loaded. Gasol isn't a top 3 center, by the way, as you claimed earlier. Not last year, not now.

Dwight Howard, Yao Ming, and who else?


I was never going to argue anything about Tiny Archibald. You brought him up. My point was to mention how Kobe's greatness is more impressive because he's a 6'6 perimeter player and not a 7-footer, and he still dominated the game. You even admitted it's more impressive yourself. Bringing up Archibald or Spud Webb or whoever is not pertinent to my point at all, unless they dominated the way Kobe and Duncan have dominated. There's another point you're trying to twist inaccurately./quote]

Stay consistent with your approach. You didn't say Kobe's accomplishments were more impressive, you said "Kobe's peak was greater simply because he's a 6'6 perimeter player dominating a game that has been dominated by big men since its inception." By the same rationale, Nate Archibald's accomplishments should be viewed as "greater". I am saying the opposite, I don't care how tall you are, your accomplishments are your accomplishments. Dominating as a 6'6" player is definitely rarer and even impressive, but it's not greater.

[QUOTE=JamStone;3854818]Kobe put up 28/5/5 in 2000-01. You can go down in the history books and probably only find a handful of players that did that. That was dominating. He wasn't Magic. They're not the same type of player. But, he was special and great and dominant in his own way even as early as 2000-01. Who puts up 28/5/5? Not even Magic did that, not once in his career. That's Michael, Oscar, LeBron territory. Your memory is skewed with bias. Kobe was dominating the league in 2000-01 and he had already taken control of the Lakers. Shaq was still the superstar, but that was more Kobe's team than it was Shaq's.

Michael at his dominating peak wasn't putting up 28/5/5, he was putting up 35/6/6, or 32/8/8. Oscar was putting up 30/12/11. Lebron was putting up 31/7/7, or 30/8/7 in the same era as Kobe. Besides, Kobe's peak wasn't even 28/5/5, he was putting up 35/5/5 a couple of years later. Jerry West was putting up 31/7/6, and the guy was only 6'2", make him the greatest ever (though West was most certainly great)/



Kobe was the best player in the league from 2005-07, yes. He just wasn't on a great team. Michael had already become the best player in the league in 1986-87 when his Chicago Bulls were 40-42 and swept from the playoffs. Oscar Robertson had already established himself as one of the top 2 players in the league by 1962-63 on a 42-38 Cincinnati team.

Your memory is skewing history. Jordan was considered the best individual talent during the late 80's, but Magic and Bird was still the face of the league back then. The sole reason was because Jordan was viewed as a ballhog and cannot operate in a team concept. It wasn't until Jordan broke through in the early 90's, along with the Lakers decline that he wrestled the best player of the league title from Magic. And in 62-63, Wilt and Russell was still dominating the league. Petitt and Baylor was also one of the top players of the league. THe Big O was one of the top 5, but clearly as the top 2?


You said it right there. Pity votes. PR disaster. Kobe didn't get MVP votes in 2004-05 because nobody pitied him after his Colorado scandal and people thinking he got Shaq traded. It wasn't because he wasn't the best player in the league. It was because of PR. Thanks for expounding on that point.

As you just stated, Kobe didn't get MVP votes in 2005 because he was a PR disaster. It wasn't because he wasn't the best player in the league. Add to that my point that you don't get MVP votes when you're on a lottery team (or if you do, it's stupidity as you mentioned PJ Brown getting an MVP vote), and there you have it.


I never said image and politics never got in the way of voting, it was you who said no-playoff players NEVER get MVP votes, and it's been proven that is not true.


I don't dismiss 2005. You were the one who brought up MVP voting. I listed their places in MVP voting to show you that it was actually pretty close. If Duncan has the advantage in the first 4-5 seasons of the decade, Kobe has the advantage the last 4 seasons. But, the difference in the advantage of each guy isn't that much at all, 2005 notwithstanding./quote]

You didn't even count the year where he didn't get voted in to the average. His standing would have dropped significantly if he finished in #15 and you factored in the results. That was simply rewarding him for being in a PR disaster that year.


[QUOTE=JamStone;3854818]So let me get this straight. You don't want to give Kobe any props for dominating as a perimeter player, but you want to qualify Duncan's stats because of pace and tempo? I hear you hypocrisy, loud and clear. Here, have a glass of chocolate milk. It makes this bar that much better.

How is that hypocrisy? It would be hypocrisy if I dismissed Kobe's accomplishments because of factors that do not affect them. By factoring in pace and tempo, you level the field. A student getting 95/100 is more impressive than a student getting 96/120, the student getting a 96/120 simply had more opportunities for a higher grade. A student who is 6'6" getting 95/100 accomplished exactly the same as a student who is 6'11" getting 95/100.


It's arguable at best to say Duncan's stats are better than Kobe's. Again, I'm the one claiming it's a toss-up. You saying Duncan's stats are better smells of extreme bias.

24/13/4/2.6 is better than 28/5/5/1.6. Which one would you take?



Next, how is the sample sizes too different? Those are the playoff stats of each player from 2001 playoffs on. Duncan 134 playoff games this decade. Kobe 125 playoff games this decade. How is that sample size too different? That's a pretty similar sample size.

My apologies, I meant different set of opponents in the sample. Their games were weighted differently in which Kobe had most of his games at the beginning and end of 00's, whild Duncan had a heavier weight in the middle. And they played against very different opponents. I can't just take these stats and run with them, you have to normalize them.


Take what you want from it. Those are the statistical facts of Kobe and Duncan in this past decade, the previous 9 post seasons. You want to twist it and spin it, you're welcome to do so. Bottom line is that Kobe's teams have fared better in the playoffs this past decade. The "sidekick" is getting tiring, but will again be addressed shortly.

So you are the person who wants to say that I am being a hypocrite by factoring in pace?

This is belly-bursting level of hilarious, as you are somehow claiming that records have no bearing on how good a player in early on in the post because teammates matter, and now, you are saying that Kobe is better than Duncan because his teams performed better in the playoffs?

To top it off, you are totally ignoring the year Kobe missed the playoffs all by itself? Horry had an astounding record in the playoffs as well, and I am sick of talking about him being a sidekick, put Horry in the debate.


It does dismiss the year the Lakers didn't make the playoffs in 2004-05. Those are PLAYOFF records. If the Lakers didn't make the playoffs, they don't have a playoff record for that season. More chocolate milk?

You are confused now, records don't matter in best player debates, stay in the lane, which one is it? Records matter, or do they not matter? Or let me guess, height matters. Seems like you are the only one claiming better chocolate milk in the bar, not me.


How different were the eras??? We're talking about 2001 playoffs to 2009 playoffs for each player. Why are you mentioning two different eras and two different competition for the same time frame??? Are you actually reading what you write? Would you like me to put that glass of chocolate milk in the microwave to warm it up?

Have you watched the NBA the last 10 years? The NBA has changed the rules to allow faster perimeter play the last 10 years, the game has been changed a huge lot.

And keep drinking your chocolate milk in that bar of yours, it tastes a lot better for you.


1. The Celtics didn't win a championship in 1986-87. Moreover, in the playoffs, Kevin McHale's scoring dropped to 21 ppg while Bird averaged 27 ppg. In the 2001 and 2002 playoffs, Kobe averaged 28 ppg while Shaq averaged 29.4 ppg. McHale was much more a sidekick, while Kobe was much more a co-go-to-guy.

What does winning the championship has to do with anything about being a sidekick? Teams that don't win championships can't have sided kicks? But if you want to twist and turn your argument as you please, sure, McHale averaged 24.7 ppg in the 86 playoffs, the year the Celtics won a championship, and Bird averaged 25.9 ppg, or are you now going to argue that Bird is an inch shorter, he was definitely the lead?


2. Pippen never averaged anywhere near what Jordan did in scoring, and Pippen never had the ball at the end of close games in his hands. Kobe almost always had the ball in his hands at the end of close games in the playoffs.

Proof?


3. Magic wasn't Kareem's sidekick in 1981. He stopped being a sidekick after the 1980 NBA Finals. That's why you mentioning him now actually helps my argument. Thanks. More chocolate milk.

Kareem was still the man until the mid 80's. In 1981, Magic was almost ran out of town because it was perceived he fired his coach. He was known as Tragic Johnson for botching a play.


4. When the Sixers won the 1983 title, Julius Erving was every bit the man on that team as Moses was. That's a great comparison actually to help prove my point. Julius actually was a top 3 MVP candidate in 1980, 81, and 82 right behind Moses. Julius was considered the greatest or one of the greatest players in the league in the early 1980s before Magic and Bird emerged as the two best for the rest of that era. That's why you can be the greatest player in the league and play with another great player like Julius did with Moses and some detractors will call you the "sidekick." Thanks for reminding us of Julius and Moses. That's a perfect example.

Dr. J was at the tail end of his dominance, and he was most definitely a sidekick to Moses.

What is even better? They are not even on the same bloody team in 80, 81 and 82! It was 83 and Moses did 25/15 to Dr. J's 22/7, Dr. J was the clear sidekick those years, and it's an indication that a superstar CAN work as a sidekick at a different part of their careers.



5. Stockton was a sidekick. Stockton was never viewed as one of the greatest players in the league, not a top 5 player in the league at any rate.

Sure, but he was still a sidekick. Since when do you have to be a top 5 player in the league to have a sidekick?


The same time Shaq was dropping 30/15, Kobe was putting up 29 ppg, 7 rpg, and 6 apg in the 2001 playoffs. Those are not "sidekick" stats. I dare you to find any "sidekick" putting up those types of numbers in the playoffs. The guys you mentioned above didn't put up those numbers. You won't find any other "sidekick" putting up 29/7/6 in the playoffs. You won't.

McHale with his 25/9/3 comes pretty close. And no, I can't find those sidekick stats because Kobe was the best sidekick in the history of the league.



WTF with the "Pistons fan" comment??? Kobe will never be as great as Jordan. Jordan has absolutely nothing to do with any of my comments. You've fallen off the deep end. Did you spike your chocolate milk?

If the chocolate milk was spiked, it would be better, because that would be like Bailey's. But it's not, and it's still just chocolate milk, no matter how tall the glass is, or where I am having it.

[spursncowboys]

Duncan didn't have a 3 year disaster period like Kobe did from 2005-2007. That's why he gets the edge.

THe ones making the decisions hangs out in LA. It's going to be Kobe. I disagree and think it should be Timmeh.

[Darrin]

My picks

1. Individual Game: NBA Playoffs
LeBron James, game 5, 2007 ECF

:bang

I have this game and I just watched it to compare it to some of these other performances. It was a parade to the free-throw line, and while he was 'unconscious' he had an airball when there was no defender there to slap his hand or the ball. He was clutch, he made big shots at key moments, but this was not a night where he was a hot hand. This was not a night where he controlled the game. He drew a bunch of fouls in the last 6 minutes of the fourth and the entire 1st overtime. Anytime the ball went anywhere else, the Cavs were shut down. They had no choice.

If that's his best game, then Lebron James is simply a dunk machine created and hyped by the media. If I were James, I would set the record straight because it goes to my credability of what I actually can do.

[Sotongball21]

Duncan got me into watching basketball.
Need I say more?

[Chieflion]

I will go with Kevin Garnett's game 7 in the NBA Western Conference Semifinals against the Sacramento Kings. It was an elimination game and Garnett came up big. As league MVP, he showed up and kicked some ass. And I hate Garnett. 32 points and 21 rebounds. He got 13 rebounds straight for the Wolves and carried the Wolves to the Conference Finals.

[Culburn369]

Duncan got me into watching basketball.
Need I say more?

You liked watchin' Duncan babysit David Robinson, eh? It was adorable.

[wanggi]

0 & 54 & Fake NBA Champions.

[Spurs Brazil]

Just voted for TD against the Nets

[TDfan2007]

Apparently it did matter against the Lakers in 2002.

It didn't...Tim owned that entire Laker team and put the Spurs in a position to win every game. That series was much closer than 4-1 indicates. Almost every game was decided in crunch time.

At the end of games, Phil would just send double and triple teams to Timmy every play and make his teammates beat them. Phil's strategy worked. He did the same thing in 2004 and to an extent in 2008.

But yeah back to the main point. Tim took a giant doo doo all over the Shaq and Horry in that series.

Here are some exact quotes from the game 5 recap:

"In last year's sweep in the conference finals, LA humiliated San Antonio, winning by an average of 22 points. This year, the wins came by an average of six points, with all of them decided in crunch time."

"Once again, Duncan was phenomenal. The NBA Most Valuable Player made 11-of-23 shots and 12-of-14 free throws, adding four assists and two blocks. And once again, he did not have enough help. "

[TDfan2007]

Tim has my vote for player of the decade, but Kobe's not too far behind. He hasn't had as much success as Tim being the leader of his team, but his numbers, unparalleled footwork and skill for a perimeter player, countless amazing performances in pressure situations, and ridiculous will to win can't be overlooked.

Shaq was the leader of those teams in 2000-2004, but Kobe played a huge role, a much bigger role than any #2 option (not "sidekick") that I've ever seen.

In 2002, the Spurs were on pace to win just about every game until Kobe took over in the 4th.

In 2004 many people point to game 5 as the series changing game, but most forget that the Spurs were on their way to a 3-1 series lead by halftime of game 4. In the second half of that game Kobe went apeshit for over 40 points and the Lakers tied the series.

In 2009, with Pau getting dominated by Tim and the rest of his teammates other than Vujacic (go figure) playing like absolute shit, Kobe pretty much single-handedly beat us. He absolutely slaughtered us in the 4th quarter of those games.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that Tim is the best of this decade, but Kobe's not far behind...at all.

Tim simply gets the edge as a better leader, proven winner, and better performer in the finals.

[red strike 07]

Lol @ Dirk getting dissed by TNT and not being included in the poll for Best Playoff performance in a game

50pts against the Suns in Game 5 of the WCF...Mavs were trailing entering the 4th qtr Dirk took over the game and outscored the Suns the NBA's most potent offense that season in that season

[Sportstudi]

I will go with Kevin Garnett's game 7 in the NBA Western Conference Semifinals against the Sacramento Kings. It was an elimination game and Garnett came up big. As league MVP, he showed up and kicked some ass. And I hate Garnett. 32 points and 21 rebounds. He got 13 rebounds straight for the Wolves and carried the Wolves to the Conference Finals.

Garnett is a douche, but that game was huge. No doubts here.

[Danny.Zhu]

I disagree on the series, Celts and Bulls was nice but it's hard to say a first round series between what were essentially to average-to-good teams was the best.

I say Spurs-Mavs 06 is still by far the best of the decade, and really high on all time as well.

Second is Kings - Lakers 02, great quality, great drama, and the controversy that still surrounds it.

Agreed.

[LakeShow]

Found this interesting. Tell the truth, is this true?

VBIZZLE123 (http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/VBIZZLE123) (Yesterday at 9:27 PM)
Report Violation (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/_/id/4018/nba-highlights-decade#) Any1 who says the Spurs were the team of the decade need to check that at the door because they only had 3 showings in the finals Lakers 6. I live in San Antonio and even we know it down here.

[Culburn369]

...probably the new & improved Bowen posting incognito.

[LakeShow]

:lol

[SpurOutofTownFan]

i am really confounded by the amount of kobe love. He has won one title as the lead of an absolutely loaded team, and there is little to no question that a dwayne wade or a lebron james in the exact same situation would have won the 09 championship, or perhaps even the 08, but he continuously gets tossed into the debate of best player of the decade.

There really are only two candidates, shaq and duncan. Shaq because of his absolute dominance (or perceived dominance) for the first 4 years, and duncan because of his prolonged excellence.

Kobe's peak was no where near as high as either of them, and the duration in which he dominated was shorter than either of them.

this