Kobe at #15 is all you need to know ...Don't mind he has Duncan higher than Kobe but Duncan should be over Shaq ...ANYONE that argues diffrent loses credibilty IMHO ...
I'd say it's a tie between Duncan and Kobe. I have to penalize Shaq in all things because he should've been the best player of all time and he underachieved greatly considering what his potential was. Kobe has the same # of rings and maximized his talent. Kobe is GREATER than Shaq.
I can get behind that, although I would say Team of the Decade is more of a tie between LA and San Antonio. The Spurs were certainly more consistent, while the Lakers had a three year drop off after the Shaq trade. The Lakers did win a fourth le with a very different team than the first three championships, so I think that counts for something as well, the ability to win with a different nucleus. I don't really count the lockout season as part of the past decade.
It's definitely not a travesty that Kobe won it. He's been consistently great and definitely deserves it just as much as Shaq or Duncan.
The travesty is LeBron finishing 2nd. He's #4 at best.
Kobe and Duncan should be the only ones in the discussion. Shaq hasn't been much of a force since 2006. You also have to give Kobe credit for gaining the reputation as one of the best while playing next to the biggest attention- not named Dennis Rodman the game has seen in some time (Shaq). Kobe's numbers over the decade are staggering as well.
That said, Tim's got just as much of an argument. Kobe's got him in the ring department, but Duncan also has two Finals MVPs to Kobe's 1. He's also got 2 league MVPs (back to back no less) to Kobe's 1 and better combined all-league accolades (a blanket statement borrowing from some of the posts above).
In pure individual accolades, Duncan has been noted as either the best player in the league or the best player on a championship team more times than Kobe has in the past decade. I think that gives him a slight edge over Kobe. I don't think there's an argument either way to say Kobe is vastly ahead of Duncan or vice versa...
IMO, Duncan wins it, but Kobe is ahead of Shaq. Shaq didn't do enough after the 2004-2005 season to be up there with Kobe or Tim for this decade. That's partially due to age, and that's partially due to poor conditioning. Last year was bitter sweet for Shaq in the sense that it showed he has a few good years left, but it makes you wonder how good Shaq could have been if he was in that kind of shape his entire career.
I'm not so sure. Garnett played in Minnesota during the Tim Duncan Era and the Kobe/Shaq era. Hard to win a le when you are going against two great teams considered the best teams of the decade.
When Garnett played with legitimate talent, he got the Wolves close to beating the Lakers in the Western Conference Finals. He and Pierce teamed to impressively beat a Laker team in the finals that everyone had all but crowned.
Util Dirk wins a le, hard to say he is better than Garnett, especially when he plays on a talented team, one that Mark Cuban will consistently spend high into the luxury tax to keep compe ive.
I agree. If you penalize Lebron for only playing have the decade, then you have to penalize Shaq for only playing dominantly for half the decade.
/thread
Kobe is obviously the player of the decade. Spurs fan still in denial. Time to get over it and move on with your lives.
What I've admired about guys like Tim Duncan is that he's kept himself in great shape his ENTIRE career. So when I think of Shaq, I think of a guy that got lazy entirely too early in his career. The rings calmed his offseason efforts in staying on top of his fitness and it shows. He became fatter, slower, less agile and more importantly less effective pretty quickly. A guy that big could have really made the most of his career if he would have really increased his offseason efforts to keep his body in shape the older that he became.
But hey. He's got plenty of NBA hardware and NBA accolades. More than I'll ever have.
I think it's Duncan too. But those of you quoting Charles Barkley saying fans who voted for Kobe are basically stupid, I think that's kind of funny. Because Barkley said the player of the decade was Shaq, and I think that's even more ridiculous then Kobe. In fact, didn't all of the TNT analysts but Ernie Johnson say it was Shaq? Those TNT guys are pretty dumb for that too. I agree with the notion it can't be Shaq because he basically stopped being an elite player after the 2004-05. So, he was dominant for half the decade, pretty good for another couple, and pretty much a role player for the other three or so seasons.
At least with Kobe, he was an elite player all 10 seasons in this decade. Even with Duncan, he kind of fell off a little bit the last 1 or 2 seasons. He's still pretty good and is playing well this year, but he's fallen off arguably the last 3 seasons. So, at least with Kobe, he's been at that very elite level for every season this decade.
I'd personally go with Duncan, but I don't think it's that bad for someone to think it's Kobe. And, again for those who like to cite Charles for calling fans stupid for choosing Kobe, I think he's worse for thinking it's Shaq.
The TNT show agreed that its either Shaq or Duncan. When Ernie said he picked Duncan thats when Barkley said "well its either A or B" and before that they were talking about how it comes down to just those two.
They all were asked if they had to pick who would it be, and they all said Shaq except for Ernie. They tip-toed around it for the most part and said Shaq or Duncan, but when asked to choose, they said Shaq, except for Ernie.
I'm saying for me personally, it's stupid even to consider Shaq because it was only half of the decade when he was dominant.
Kobe has been in the lottery this decade; Tim has not.
Its too bad Timmay narrowly missed out on those Quadruple Doubles... Would have been a bigger talking point to compare to Kobe's 81. Even those near misses, however, were damn impressive.
Timmay has been the best overall in the decade.
This season counts for this decade too. If the Spurs don't make the playoffs (not saying they won't, but if they don't) and if the Lakers win another le, would that change your mind?
Don't you know? The decade ended in 2009.
The same Kobe who took him 7 years to win another le and over the past 10 years included 2 first round exits and not even qualifying for the Playoffs one year? Hmm...
Yes, the same Kobe that quit on his team.
I am ok with Kobe winning that stupid and meaningless poll, but there are only 8% who voted for Duncan, LeBron finished 2nd. Duncan finished 4th behind Shaq. I wouldn't call the casual fans and voters stupid, they are just uninformed because Duncan doesn't get as much exposure against Kobe, LeBron and Shaq. And seeing how Kobe has more fans than Duncan, it isn't a suprise.
Amen. I agree whole-heartedly. Take it one step further if Shaq played lets say 2001 to 2006 anywhere close to his MVP season he would of been player of the decade and in thediscussion of best player post-MJ ...
i would give him my vote ...
aside from superior awards and consistency, Duncan never bailed on his team when times were rough, or asked to be traded, or stirred up drama or raped a white in colorado, or missed the playoffs ever, or lead a mediocre team 3 seasons in a row.
Agree with conclusion but the reasoning is horse ...
Duncan got the Spurs to the playoffs every year in the 2000s. How many times did the Spurs get out of the first round? How many times did the Spurs get to the WCF and the Finals? When Kobe divorced Shaq, the Lakers missed the playoffs and had a losing record that season. Those things right there would have to put Duncan head of the Kobe in my opinion. Besides, Duncan isn't a show off. Duncan is a humble player. He only cares about winning. He could care less about points, breaking records, winning awards, raping white girls, etc...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote