NBA Player of the Decade

[Superman]

Honestly, I really don't think Ginobili is any better than Lamar. Lamar is a 19 & 10 guy if he starts being the #2 or #3 guy. He is also a mismatch for many teams with his speed at this height. Parker, I still say he won't be an all star if he didn't play with TD.

You can say Kobe always had Shaq for the first half of the decade and it helped him get buckets and stats during the yrs before his prime. Its a tough debate but for me, it comes down to the fact that for half the decade, Shaq was the best player on kobe's team. The next 3 yrs after shaq, it was a no playoff season and 2 1st round exits. thats 8 yrs of the 10 while TD has been consistently in top form and has his team in championship hunt every yr. If anyone can challenge TD for this, I really only see Shaq since he was so dominate during his prime yrs.

Oh really? He's never done that in his 11 year career. Closest he ever came was 2003-04, 17ppg/10rpg, and that was with Miami. He was a starter for four years with the Lakers, and he had a couple of 15/10 years, but never 19/10. So where are you getting that from? He's been known as an underachiever his entire career. I'm not insinuating that the guy is rubbish and isn't valuable to a team; the Lakers went through great pains to keep him in LA this offseason, so he obviously has value to them.

And Parker and Ginobili have value to the Spurs, and have played significant roles on those championship teams. Again, Parker actually has a Finals MVP. I'm not going to concern myself with whether the man would be an All-Star without Duncan; Duncan is in the discussion as the greatest power forward ever to play in the NBA. He's the most consistently great player since he's come into the league. But Parker has done what he's done. Same with Ginobili. And before Gasol, I think if you take the Lakers #2 and #3 and compare them with Parker and Ginobili, most would take Parker and Ginobili.

Regarding the Shaq/Kobe Lakers, it was clearly Shaq's team, but the general consensus was that Kobe was the best player on the team, and maybe in the league. Especially in '03/'04, when Shaq practically took the first quarter of the year off with various injuries. Having such a dominant player on his team definitely helped Kobe, but it probably held his numbers down more than it helped them. Maybe his percentages were higher than they would have been, but he was playing second fiddle because the team was built to feed Shaq.

 

[Superman]

Duncan's teammates stick around and want to be part of his team. And Duncan doesn't mind sharing the spotlight...

You're free to disagree, especially since this is just a poll to gauge how people think. For a lot of people, though, "Player of the Decade" obviously means something more than just stats.

How many players have left the Lakers because of Kobe? The only one of note is Shaq, and five years after the split, the debate has taken a noticeable shift in Kobe's favor. There's no arguing that he hasn't been a bad teammate at times; I acknowledged that already. And it's not ancient history, either. Just two years ago he was ripping Andrew Bynum and demanding a trade.

I don't think that means that he's not the best player of the decade, though. He's spent the better part of the decade as the best player in the NBA. He's won four championships and an MVP. I'm not a fan of the guy, but I just can't argue against him. And the arguments for Tim Duncan are pretty much all specious knocks on Kobe Bryant, which is the reason I'm arguing in his favor. It's not about stats at all. Don't know what that has to do with anything.

 

[AleksandarN]

i voted for lebron... though duncan and shaq were the guys who made this decade of basketball what it was. 2 dominate big men who combined for 8 consectutive trips to the nba finals 2000-2007, 3 mvps, 7 championship rings, 5 finals mvps and combined for only 1 missed trip to the playoffs. shaq didnt make it last year with the suns...

but lebron is the best player to play basketball this decade not named michael jordan so i voted for him.

What has Lebron done in the last decade to justify your vote for player of the decade?

 

[VF21]

How many players have left the Lakers because of Kobe? The only one of note is Shaq, and five years after the split, the debate has taken a noticeable shift in Kobe's favor. There's no arguing that he hasn't been a bad teammate at times; I acknowledged that already. And it's not ancient history, either. Just two years ago he was ripping Andrew Bynum and demanding a trade.

I don't think that means that he's not the best player of the decade, though. He's spent the better part of the decade as the best player in the NBA. He's won four championships and an MVP. I'm not a fan of the guy, but I just can't argue against him. And the arguments for Tim Duncan are pretty much all specious knocks on Kobe Bryant, which is the reason I'm arguing in his favor. It's not about stats at all. Don't know what that has to do with anything.

So, bottom line, you vote for Kobe and I vote for Duncan. Since we know each other well enough to know neither of us is likely to change our minds on this issue, I'm going to just agree to disagree.

 

[KiNgMyC]

Hard to say it, but I got to give it to Kobe, and it wasn't even close.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I voted for Tim Duncan. That wasn't hard for me to say at all...

 

[Vlade4GM]

Definitely Kobe.

 

[AriesMar27]

What has Lebron done in the last decade to justify your vote for player of the decade?

he's the best player to play this decade... he doesnt have any rings but he did go to finals all by himself at the age of 22 and won and mvp at 24... kobe cant say that. hell i cant think of a single active player that can say that. duncan is the closest player that i can think of.

 

[AriesMar27]

Thats 3 finals MVP for Duncan. Don't forget the 12 All Defensive Teams.

only 2 finals mvps this decade... the first was in 1999, we're talking about 2000-09...

 

[est.1999]

Supe, I'd really like to hear your explanation on how kobe could have possibly been the best player on the lakers when they won earlier this decade and shaq was a monster. You say shaq may have held back kobes stats, may be true, but why don't we take shaq off that squad, let Kobe average 34-35 points a game, have no rings and we won't be discussing him in this thread.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

MVP:
Kobe Bryant - 1
Tim Duncan - 2
LeBron James - 1
Kevin Garnett - 1
Shaquille O'Neal - 1
Dwyane Wade - 0
Allen Iverson - 1
Steve Nash - 2
Dirk Nowitzki - 1

DPOY:
Kobe Bryant - 0
Tim Duncan - 0
LeBron James - 0
Kevin Garnett - 1
Shaquille O'Neal - 0
Dwyane Wade - 0
Allen Iverson - 0
Steve Nash - 0
Dirk Nowitzki - 0

Finals MVP:
Kobe Bryant - 1
Tim Duncan - 2
LeBron James - 0
Kevin Garnett - 0
Shaquille O'Neal - 3
Dwyane Wade - 1
Allen Iverson - 0
Steve Nash - 0
Dirk Nowitzki - 0

Finals appearances:
Kobe Bryant - 6
Tim Duncan - 3
LeBron James - 1
Kevin Garnett - 1
Shaquille O'Neal - 5
Dwyane Wade - 1
Allen Iverson - 1
Steve Nash - 0
Dirk Nowitzki - 1

Finals won:
Kobe Bryant - 4
Tim Duncan - 3
LeBron James - 0
Kevin Garnett - 1
Shaquille O'Neal - 4
Dwyane Wade - 1
Allen Iverson - 0
Steve Nash - n/a
Dirk Nowitzki - 0

Finals won as #1 offensive option:
Kobe Bryant - 1
Tim Duncan - 2
LeBron James - 0
Kevin Garnett - 0
Shaquille O'Neal - 3
Dwyane Wade - 1
Allen Iverson - 0
Steve Nash - n/a
Dirk Nowitzki - 0

Finals winning percentage:
Kobe Bryant - .667
Tim Duncan - 1.000
LeBron James - .000
Kevin Garnett - 1.000
Shaquille O'Neal - .800
Dwyane Wade - 1.000
Allen Iverson - .000
Steve Nash - n/a
Dirk Nowitzki - .000

All-NBA:
Kobe Bryant - 10
Tim Duncan - 10
LeBron James - 3
Kevin Garnett - 8
Shaquille O'Neal - 8
Dwyane Wade - 4
Allen Iverson - 5
Steve Nash - 6
Dirk Nowitzki - 9

All-Defense:
Kobe Bryant - 9
Tim Duncan - 10
LeBron James - 1
Kevin Garnett - 9
Shaquille O'Neal - 3
Dwyane Wade - 2
Allen Iverson - 0
Steve Nash - 0
Dirk Nowitzki - 0

Playoff appearances:
Kobe Bryant - 9
Tim Duncan - 10
LeBron James - 4
Kevin Garnett - 7
Shaquille O'Neal - 9
Dwyane Wade - 5
Allen Iverson - 7
Steve Nash - 8
Dirk Nowitzki - 9

Based on this data, I say that Tim Duncan wins by any reasonably objective criteria. Certainly, a convincing case could be made for Kobe Bryant, but anyone who says that it's "not even close" is either a) lying, b) doesn't know what he's talking about, or c) has never heard of Tim Duncan.

 

[Andriod_KiNg]

Hurts to say, but Kobe, he has proven that he can lead a team.

Also I will hate the Memphis Grizzles for the rest of my life for "giving" them Gasol.

 

[AleksandarN]

he's the best player to play this decade... he doesnt have any rings but he did go to finals all by himself at the age of 22 and won and mvp at 24... kobe cant say that. hell i cant think of a single active player that can say that. duncan is the closest player that i can think of.

I disaggree with that. Lebron was not the best player this decade. Maybe the last couple years but not before that. And 2 and 3 years do not make a decade. Tim and Kobe are the only ones that are the players of decade. Lebron has no business in this. Heck Shaq was the better for longer in the last decade then Lebron and even he is not in the running by many because like Lebron his dominance has not last the whole decade where as Kobe and Tim have.

 

[AriesMar27]

I disaggree with that. Lebron was not the best player this decade. Maybe the last couple years but not before that. And 2 and 3 years do not make a decade. Tim and Kobe are the only ones that are the players of decade. Lebron has no business in this. Heck Shaq was the better for longer in the last decade then Lebron and even he is not in the running by many because like Lebron his dominance has not last the whole decade where as Kobe and Tim have.

thats true to an extent, but the same could be said for kobe... he wasnt the man until 2005.... he was the sidekick, shaq was the man. even parker won a finals mvp with duncan, kobe cant say the same with shaq. the only player that has been the man the entire time has been duncan. but my choice was lebron because he is the best player to play this decade. he hasnt even played a decade so that isnt fair to use that against him. the same thing goes for shaq but in the opposite way, he has been dominant since '92 and didnt fall off until 2007. the heat in 2005 were a good team, they won a ring in 2006. though wade won finals mvp shaq proved that he could still put a team over the top. after shaq and wade, the next best player on that team was antoine walker.

i agree that duncan has pretty much owned this decade, but lebron is the best player to play this decade and he hasnt even hit his prime yet. kobe has only been kobe since 2006... 2 first round exits at the hand of the suns and then he got pau gasol.

 

[Superman]

Supe, I'd really like to hear your explanation on how kobe could have possibly been the best player on the lakers when they won earlier this decade and shaq was a monster. You say shaq may have held back kobes stats, may be true, but why don't we take shaq off that squad, let Kobe average 34-35 points a game, have no rings and we won't be discussing him in this thread.

That's absolutely true, but the opposite holds as well. Take Kobe off of the 2000-2002 Lakers and they don't win anything either. The team was built around Shaq. Other than Kobe, it was a bunch of jump shooters who knew how to play smart defense and could hit big shots in the playoffs. It was Shaq's team; he made it go, he was the engine, and Kobe was an accessory. But talentwise, Kobe was the best player on the team. (I think that's partly due to Shaq's lack of motivation to be the best. If not for his laissez-faire attitude, he could have been the most dominant player of all time. Alas.)

 

[Superman]

MVP:
Kobe Bryant - 1
[B]Tim Duncan - 2[/B]
LeBron James - 1
Kevin Garnett - 1
Shaquille O'Neal - 1
Dwyane Wade - 0
Allen Iverson - 1
Steve Nash - 2
Dirk Nowitzki - 1

Based on this data, I say that Tim Duncan wins by any reasonably objective criteria. Certainly, a convincing case could be made for Kobe Bryant, but anyone who says that it's "not even close" is either a) lying, b) doesn't know what he's talking about, or c) has never heard of Tim Duncan.

The MVP number is really the only one that would sway my opinion. Finals wins and winning percentages and playoff appearances certainly add to Duncan's resume, and maybe I shouldn't say that it's not even close (though it's not close in my mind, the man has had a damn fine decade), but those things can't be done with a good supporting cast. And when you're taking Kobe's Lakers vs. Duncan's Spurs, it's obvious that Duncan has had a better supporting cast overall. This point is especially valid when you knock Kobe for not winning anything until Gasol came along; Duncan didn't win anything without All Star caliber talent on his team either.

I'm especially concerned with not taking the Spurs achievements or the Lakers shortcomings and turning them into "Duncan's achievements" or "Kobe's shortcomings." I don't think that's a fair way to determine who was/is the better player.

Now, if we're saying that Duncan has had a better decade, as far as achievements and all that is concerned, then sure, I can dig that. But if you're asking me who the best player of the decade was, then I'm going to pick Kobe.

 

[est.1999]

Yeah but Kobe got to play with gasol. If Jerry west doesn't get his dirty greasy hands all over that deal there's no rafter hanging in staples. Duncans star sidekicks were drafted and I think both were 2nd round picks. And both were guards. Duncan has always made that team go. Shaq made the lakers of the early part of the decade go and when he was gone it was a no playoff year(reke is putting us in a similar situation-shows alot doesn't it?) and 2 first round exits. It wasn't til gasol was elegally handed to them that everything changed.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

The MVP number is really the only one that would sway my opinion. Finals wins and winning percentages and playoff appearances certainly add to Duncan's resume, and maybe I shouldn't say that it's not even close (though it's not close in my mind, the man has had a damn fine decade), but those things can't be done with a good supporting cast. And when you're taking Kobe's Lakers vs. Duncan's Spurs, it's obvious that Duncan has had a better supporting cast overall.

I don't buy this at all: for six out of the last ten years, Bryant has had a WAY better team around him than Duncan has. The team that Bryant has had around him for the last two and a half years have been better than any team Duncan has ever been on, except for 2002-2003, and Shaq in his prime was better than any two players that Duncan has ever played with, including David Robinson. Even the year that Bryant didn't make the playoffs, he had Caron Butler and Lamar Odom; only once has Duncan ever had teammates that good (and, if you're asking, no, I don't think that Tony Parker is as good as Caron Butler).

 

[LilMissDiva]

As we wrap up what I consider a great 10 years of NBA ball, who was the best player in your mind? Give a little bit of explanation of why?

You’ll never know how much it kills me to say this, but I have to go with Kobe Bryant.

 

[Heuge]

For the first time ever I like Duncan, because he makes a convincing argument as the player of the decade, and I dont have to and shouldnt vote for the evil l*kaer.

 

[BMiller52]

Tim Duncan - He led his team to several championships AND he managed to keep his name out of the tabloids, which is better than the other leading candidate IMHO.

cosigned!!!!

 

[AleksandarN]

Yeah but Kobe got to play with gasol. If Jerry west doesn't get his dirty greasy hands all over that deal there's no rafter hanging in staples. Duncans star sidekicks were drafted and I think both were 2nd round picks. And both were guards. Duncan has always made that team go. Shaq made the lakers of the early part of the decade go and when he was gone it was a no playoff year(reke is putting us in a similar situation-shows alot doesn't it?) and 2 first round exits. It wasn't til gasol was elegally handed to them that everything changed.

fyi Jerry West was not the GM of the Grizzles when the trade went down

 

[est.1999]

I'm gonna give you a pass on that statement Alex. But that might be the most ridiculous statement I have ever read in my life.

 

[drboiffard]

Tim Duncan - He led his team to several championships AND he managed to keep his name out of the tabloids, which is better than the other leading candidate IMHO.

That's why I don't buy the Kobe being better player thing. Much more mediatic and charismatic, of course; much better to appear nike ads, of course; more spectacular and a resemblance with Jordan, OK. But he is not better than Duncan. Duncan has been far much more effective in the court. I'd take even KG over Kobe: both KG and TD are atonishing power forwards and all-around players that are always better pieces in any team than spectacular guards who throws every damn ball they have in their hands.

 

[Superman]

Yeah but Kobe got to play with gasol. If Jerry west doesn't get his dirty greasy hands all over that deal there's no rafter hanging in staples. Duncans star sidekicks were drafted and I think both were 2nd round picks. And both were guards. Duncan has always made that team go. Shaq made the lakers of the early part of the decade go and when he was gone it was a no playoff year(reke is putting us in a similar situation-shows alot doesn't it?) and 2 first round exits. It wasn't til gasol was elegally handed to them that everything changed.

I don't see why the circumstances surrounding the trade are being hung over Kobe's head. I don't like the way it went down either, but I fail to understand why he should be penalized for it.

 

[Superman]

I don't buy this at all: for six out of the last ten years, Bryant has had a WAY better team around him than Duncan has. The team that Bryant has had around him for the last two and a half years have been better than any team Duncan has ever been on, except for 2002-2003, and Shaq in his prime was better than any two players that Duncan has ever played with, including David Robinson. Even the year that Bryant didn't make the playoffs, he had Caron Butler and Lamar Odom; only once has Duncan ever had teammates that good (and, if you're asking, no, I don't think that Tony Parker is as good as Caron Butler).

Caron Butler in 2005 was not as good as Tony Parker now or then.

During the championship run with Shaq, of course Kobe had better teammates. They also won more games and championships, even sweeping the Spurs in 2001. I was specifically comparing the Kobe-centric Lakers to Duncan's Spurs, specifically from 2005 onward.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm thinking this is a tight one...

hmmm...Mikki Moore or Kevin Ollie...Ollie or Moore....


will have to think on it

 

[NME]

I'm thinking this is a tight one...

hmmm...Mikki Moore or Kevin Ollie...Ollie or Moore....


will have to think on it

That's tough. They both merit special consideration for averaging a team per year for the whole decade. Meanwhile, slackers like Duncan and Lebron have been on how many teams each? ONE?!?

 

[Bricklayer]

That's tough. They both merit special consideration for averaging a team per year for the whole decade. Meanwhile, slackers like Duncan and Lebron have been on how many teams each? ONE?!?

I know, that was my primary consideration. I mean who am I to argue with the assessments of NBA GMs who clearly have put nearly unprecedented value (well, there was Massenburg) on Moore and Ollie? Team after team after team has eagerly competed for their services year after year. Meanwhile guys like Kobe or Duncan -- who knows? Maybe they just got lucky and landed in the one spot that would take them.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I was specifically comparing the Kobe-centric Lakers to Duncan's Spurs, specifically from 2005 onward.

Then you're still mistaken; Bryant has had better players around him for at least half that time. You can't seriously expect me to believe that you think Bryant hasn't had better players from 2007-08 onward, can you?