http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_(decade)The 2000s, usually pronounced "two thousands",[citation needed] was a decade that began on January 1, 2000, and ended on December 31, 2009.
The decade generally continued the technological and socioeconomic changes that started in the 1980s and accelerated in the 1990s. These changes had ended during the Great Recession. Globalization had accelerated in the 1990s after the fall of Communism and continued to be a force in the 2000s. Geopolitically, the century opened with the United States enjoying an economic peak that bestowed hegemonic political and military preeminence.
The growth of the Internet was one of the prime contributors to globalization during the decade, making it possible for people to interact with other people, express ideas, introduce others to different cultures and backgrounds, use goods and services, sell and buy online, and research and learn.[1][2][3][4][5]
The economic growth of the 2000s had considerable environmental consequences, raised demand for diminishing energy resources,[6][7] and was still shown to be vulnerable as demonstrated during the Global Financial Crisis of the late 2000s.[8]
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010sThe 2010s, pronounced "twenty-tens"[1] or "two thousand (and) tens",[2][3][4][5] is the current decade, which began on January 1, 2010, and will end on December 31, 2019.
There Was No Year Zero
Simple logic and the ability to count will tell you when a new decade or millennium begins and end. A decade is ten years. Since there was no year zero, ten years is year 1 to 10 and a new decade starts at year 11. In other words, the last decade was 2001 to 2010. We are heading into the end of the decade, not the start of new one.
Deuce slapping 0 Per par
Those are only offensive stats.
Because the common calendar starts with year 1, its first full decade is the years 1 to 10, the second decade from 11 to 20, and so on.[5] So while the "2000s" comprises the years 2000 to 2009, the "201st decade" spans 2001 to 2010.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decade
Much like his idol Kirby, all Stat cares about is scoring, that's well-established
There's a problem in using different terminology; saying "in the 2000s" is saying 2000 - 2009, but saying "that decade" is saying 2001 - 2010. So, if you consider a "player of the decade" in Jordan's heyday comment, technically you're referring to the years of 1991 - 2001, however if you say "best player of the 90's" you're talking about 1990 to 1999.
We're less than 4 years in, nigalow.
The Current decade started in 2011, dip .
Dat Duncan defense doe
2010s started in 2010
There is no 2010s, there is ONE 2010..
It must really hurt to know you're not only going to miss the playoffs again, but that the reward for doing so will be insufficient to change your path for next season as well. You need to bring your A game here, son, you don't have any room for error.
There is no 2010s, there is ONE 2010
Happy now Batman?
I've lost interest in the Lakers right now so its like do I care? Once next year comes and Kobe's back then I'll care again.
Im a Kobe fan 0
So no spurfan is gonna address this? All I see is deflection
They can dish it but they cant take it.
It still says "Lakers" under your user name, and you still push "Kobe" like you're one of his mistresses. You're still liable.
Kobe is one of the greatest volume scorers in nba history nobody ever denied that. Not sure why OP is so defensive about it
A) source please. Not like you've never posted wrong stats
B) so Kobe scored more than Duncan. Is that some kind of surprise? It's like Duncan has more 4th quarter rebounds than Kobe. It's re ed.
C) Duncan was always the focus of the defense, especially the 4th. Kobe's but a receipient of shaq double teams.
^Shaq was triple teamed too. Making things that much easier for Kobe.
http://stats.nba.com/leaguePlayerGen...rowsPerPage=25
Choose the fillers.
Kobe outscored Duncan by a lot though and was more efficient. It wasn't even close for most. Don't act like it doesn't matter.
Kobe wasn't just a recipient of Shaq double teams but its funny that you say that because the biggest difference between the two was the 2008 series with no Shaq.
Last edited by Deuce Bigalow; 03-22-2014 at 12:34 PM.
The Kobe sucking by the OP is amusing
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
