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

[Sean Cagney]

Dirk.

NO way in ....... He has 0

[Rohirrim]

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

[ehz33satx]

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

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

[z0sa]

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

FIFY

[Avitus1]

Timmy!!

[Ghazi]

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

[dirk4mvp]

NO way in ....... He has 0

Are you serious?

[IronMexican]

Shaq.

[SpurSupremacist]

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

[dirk4mvp]

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

lol, irony

[SpurSupremacist]

lol, irony

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

[JamStone]

Duncan by miles......

Duncan, but not by miles.

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

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

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

[dirk4mvp]

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

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

lol, irony

lol, Duncan, easily.

[wijayas]

FIFY

You are right! Thanks!!!

[samikeyp]

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

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

Consistency.

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

[K-State Spur]

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

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

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

[Jayem]

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

exactly. so every year we should have best of the decade discussions? cause you can claim its the end of a decade every year. LOL "Best of Decades" are defined on the 10s... 2000-2010. which would mean shaq has the edge over duncan with championships so far.

[StoneBuddha]

[QUOTE=K-State Spur;2976229]

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

QUOTE]

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

[K-State Spur]

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

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

[angelbelow]

Dunc!

[PM5K]

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

[Thomas82]

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

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

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

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

I would have loved to have seen that.

[Summers]

[Thomas82]

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

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

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Kobe shouldn't even be in this conversation.