Reply With Quote
Why do you say "never MVP"? Kobe won MVP during 2007-08 regular season.
How does that make sense?
Not to take anything away from Kobe generally speaking. He is a top two-way player, a first ballot HOF and a monster in the clutch.
But, he was the 2nd best player on most of his championship teams. And it took him being on the most talented team in the NBA to win another championship after that point. Pau is arguably the more efficient scorer, and should probably be getting more touches that kobe today.
I think that Shaq cratered too early this decade to give it to him. The detroit and Celtics teams did not win enough. And Duncan is past his prime the last couple of years, and the media never gave Duncan's teams the love they did the lakers.
Therefore, Kobe by default.
Last edited by spursfaninla; 05-20-2010 at 12:33 PM.
Why do you say "never MVP"? Kobe won MVP during 2007-08 regular season.
Loss of time is often linked to alien abduction
I don't know in what saucer he was in during the 07-08 season, but it must have been a saucy one.
Its really an odd place for Kobe to take stage for this honor, but the same could be said for either Shaq or Duncan because all three players combined have won the most championships and MVP's combined this decade so its three way IMO, I mean gone were the day where one player like Jordan or Russell had a unanimous run, those days are gone simply because the level of talent has also increased. Shaq has dominated, Duncan was steady and Kobe in between years had a a great mix of both. Kobe was fairly consistent this decade minus 04-05. He had 2 scoring les, numerous ALL NBA and Defensive selections. Had an MVP and Finals MVP and uis arguably the best offensive player of his generation. At this point, he's also on pace to reach the NBA Finals 7 times. 7 guys.
But is it enough to put him over Duncan's 2 MVP's and 3 les? Or Shaq's 3 Final MVP's? absolutely not, but he had a better story considering how Kobe defied the odds when he parted ways with Shaq. When Shaq was declining and Timmy and the Spurs are being knocked out in the WC series, Kobe was surging.
The first half of the decade really belonged to Shaq, but the second IMO belongs to Kobe, his offensive domination followed by his MVP, NBA championship and Finals MVP and heroic Olympic performance puts him on top. With the media, its always about what have you done for me lately.
my bad. But one mvp does not change that several other guys had just as much, if not more success; shaq and duncan. Lebron got mvp 2 times over kobe, as did nash.
Neither of the last 2 won championships, but Kobe had more talented teams in doing so.
Nash and Lebron had as much talent. They just fail to deliver when it matters.
Kobe was also efficient during their three peat run. I could never understand using Gasol's efficiency to minimize Kobe's importance yet never apply the same logic for Shaq for having Kobe.
Kobe was the best closer against Sacramento, Portland and even in some Spurs games. When coaches were using the hack-a-shaq strategy, Kobe was forced to facilitate and win the games for Lakers offensively.
Just for clarity, Duncan has 4 les, 3 Finals MVPs and the 2 League MVPs.
Im confused with how people are counting the decade. Should it be 2000-2010 or 1999-2009?Just for clarity, Duncan has 4 les, 3 Finals MVPs and the 2 League MVPs.
BTW, im well aware of it, I just dont want to go further into details.
Just for clarity, Duncan has 4 les, 3 Finals MVPs and the 2 League MVPs.
timmy would be player of the decade if he was in LA
I think you answered your own question.
None of the above. Decade is the NBA season ending 2000 -2009
also..you're being unfair to 3-peat Kobe if you want to give Gasol so much love.
Timmy would have been Kobe's 2nd fiddle had he been in LA
lame
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
