after the all star game EJ revealed who the fans voted between 6 players in kobe lebron shaq duncan nash and kg for best player of the decade and they voted 54% for kobe 17% lebron 13% shaq then duncan cant remember the rest. But personally i think kobe definitely isnt number 1 he should be 3rd kobe was not that good the whole decade or dominant, the last 5 years sure but not the whole decade shaq and duncan one of the 2 should have one it they were the best at their positions this whole decade won multiple championships and changed the game of basketball as we know it and also lebron 17% he didnt even play the whole this is why fans should not vote for titles and trophys they should have actual players and coaches and legends vote for things likes this just like they do with mvp and six man of the year
well shaq started falling off around the half way point. In the 2006 finals he only averaged 13 points when the heat won the tital and he hasn't been anywhere near the best in the league since. I think it comes down to duncan or bryant. You could make a great case for either one of them, but you cant act like it is a travesty to go with bryant who has been to the finals 6 times in the last decade which is twice as many as duncan. Kobe has been the best sg in the league pretty much every year this decade except maybe iverson or tmac out playing him for a season each.
1. Shaq - The player of the decade in my opinion. Four championships. One scoring title. One reg season MVP. Three Finals MVPs. Three All-Star game MVPs. You can argue for Duncan, but he wasn't as dominate as Shaq was.
2. Duncan - Three titles in this past decade. Two NBA MVPs. Two Finals MVPs in this past decade. All-Star starter every year of the past decade. He was an All NBA First Team defender for most of the decade too. Still 2nd to Shaq though.
3. Kobe - Had a great decade and ended it with a championship with him as the man, but he's 3rd on this list. If the Lakers would've beat Boston in 2008, it would've been a tougher choice.
4. Nash - Two MVPs, though I think Kobe was robbed.
5. KG - Had an amazing decade with one reg season MVP, DPOY and Championship, but most of it was spent in Minnesota where we know the story.
6. LeBron - He's had a great career so far, but he just got drafted in 2003. He'll be the player of the next decade.
Duncan will never be truly apperciated....
Kobe, though, won a well deserved honor...Cant argue with that pick
Personally,I just got sick to my stomach when I went to vote and A.I. wasn't on the list...I never voted, and honestly I dont give a flyin fnuck...People need to start respecting this guy, I mean come on...Very disappointed
No Iverson ???
Do you guys seriously think Iverson is even in the same league as those six guys? I mean, you could make a better case for Lebron being the player of the decade than you could Iverson, and he was only drafted in 2003. But seriously what has Iverson done outside his first few years in the NBA besides cause drama? He has been a great player at times, and an amazing one on some occasions, but in the top six of the last decade? I think not.
" but in the top six of the last decade? I think not"
Shows how much you now about basketball. If you think there are six players better than Iverson in the past ten yrs you are surely delusional
9. I might even make a case here for Kidd.
Im pretty sure every one of these players have better achievments than iverson over the past ten years even though two of them were drafted in 2003...
Quite honestly...Only three-4 players above are in the same league as A.I.(Kobe, Shaq, LeBron, and probably Duncan)
Unlike everyone, it seems, I dont judge players on career achievements...Name one reason why Wade is better than Iverson other than he lucked into a ring? Bet anyone on here they cant make me a believer...
I understand that you really like Iverson, but come on...
Iverson does not make his team better, has not made his team better, and never will. Sure he can put up great numbers, but so can a lot of guys in the NBA, the only reason Iverson is even in the conversation is because he is very very good at putting up great numbers, he is one of the very best at that ever; but he does not do what it takes to be considered a truly amazing player, make more than just yourself look good.
i would put iverson in over dirk or wade. He only started really struggling like the last 2 seasons. And before that he was dominant and i think he should have had 2 mvps.
My top 10 would go:
1-kobe bryant. Arguably the best perimiter player each and every season last decade. All defensive team evey year i think except like once. 6 trips to the finals. Should have 2 mvps awards. Not one bad season in entire decade.
2-tim duncan. 3 titles. great defensive player. Not one bad season, but he has slipped in recent years.
3-Shaq. Would easily win this if you stopped like 3 or 4 years ago. Most dominat player first couple years. But by time the lakers went to the 2004 finals, kobe had become team mvp and the last 3 seasons shaq has not won a single playoff series.
4-LeBron. despite late start to decade, he has taken the legue by storm and has been a mvp candidate year in and out.
5-garnett. great player on both ends and won a tital, but i think the 4 above him have all had a greater impact.
6-nash. He was barely an all-star first part of decade before showing up in phoenix thus he drops, but he has been one of the all time great pg's
7-iverson. great player who could take over games. Should have 2 mvp's
that sounds about right. But it's all very debateable of course.
and i can totally see why mike would put iverson ahead of both nash and KG, you really can't argue with that feeling at all. I guess i would just like to have seen more wins from iverson.
I can totally see why someone would be upset that Iverson wasn't one of the six, but whoever actually thinks they would have VOTED for IVERSON definitely needs a slap in the head.
This guy was good up until... Probably his second last season in Philly. Then he kinda fell off the radar. He fell out of that top tier of players. Being great for half a decade doesn't get you a top 6 mention when you've really had significant playoff success during one season only.
Sorry, dude. I don't buy that....
put that 4 on any team with a player that, in your eyes, "makes his teammates better" and then well see what they do.....
Wades team right now is lightyears better than A.I.'s "team"...
And they are barely a 500 team....
He is supposedly, making his teammates better
i wouldn't say wade's current team is better then that sixer squad. Snow, Mckie, Hill, Mutombo and George lynch were all elite defenders. Bryant said at that time that snow was the best defensive player in the game. All those guys did the dirty work while iverson got to carry the offense.
But,ll, On offense, you CAN NOT tell me that A.i. didn't make them better...NONE of them could create a shot for themselvs, and they had probably 1 shooter, who was inconsistent....Snow was one of the worst shooters at the pg spot ever...Lynch was a player that needed to be set up around the hoop or he was virtually just there for the hell of it, McKie was a spot up shooter and below avg scorer, and Mutombo cleaned up their messes... without A.I. that team would score 55 points total in a game...They'd lose by 40 every game
And wades team....
Oneal is a good shotblocker and rebounder on D
Chalmers is a pesky perimeter defender
Beasley is a dud on D
and Richardson can just strait up defend on th perimeter and dow low
Not bad defensively at all....Plus, probably all 4 of those guys can create their own shot...Not one of A.I. teammates could..
by all means mikenike, i agree with yout that Iverson was great. I could see him being ranked as high as 4th. Depends on if you hold it against lebron for sitting out the first 3 years. And with KG, Nash and Iverson, you could argue those guys in any order honesttly. Truth be told, before nash showed up in phoenix, he and iverson would never be discussed in the same category.
As for iverson making his teammates better, i'm not so sure about that. He actually benefitted from playing with them as much as anything. He was able to go one on one and take all the shots he wanted and completley dominate the ball because of those other guys all being great role players who could do all the other things. Any great player would have struggled playing alongside iverson because he was not good sharing the spotlight. Stackhouse, Coleman, Glenn Robinson, Toni Kukoc, Keith Van Horn, all of those declined in production by playing with iverson. AI needed his own team to be at his best and one that could defend since he was never gtreat defensively.
I quit...If you guys watched him play you'd know the deal...
Anyways , Iverson nmight be done permanently. His kid is seriously seriously sick...A HEART INFECTION...doctors have no clue what to do...and God forbid something happens...this could really be the last time we see him play
peace out llperez...Nice debate for today..felt good
Quit the hate for Kobe. The Black Mamba is probably among the top 10 of all-time, and in this decade, he is def. #1. He's dropped 81, been a mainstay on a team that rebuilt to eventually become NBA champs with him leading the squad. He completely changed his style of play once he had players he felt he could win with. I used to hate Kobe, but I am a big fan of his now. He is the most clutch player in recent memory and hands down the #1 of this decade. Shaq is great and was a dominate force down low in the early 2000s but tailed off (still respectable though) while Kobe is still going strong. Kobe's also one of the best defenders in the league so he's gettin it done in all phases of the game.
I missed the debate, but I think AI should have been the point guard of the decade.
When they 1st announced the candidates..I said i wouldn't have a compliant if either Shaq, Kobe or Duncan was named player of the decade..You can make a case for all 3...But As in just about everything these days, popularity also has a say in the voting...That's why Kobe comes out ahead..But the earlier part of the decade Shaq was unstoppable..I honestly think he should've won the MVP award the 1st year Nash won it..The last 3 years he's been on the decline...That's whut stops him from being voted the decade's best..Duncan has 3 rings this decade..But he has the personality of a dead roach...But people who know & follow basketball know how great he is..I think after those 3 ..You have to put Lebron at number 4 ..I know he just came into the league in 2003..But he's made such a major impact..Like no other...He came into the NBA as the most hyped player ever and hasn't disappointed...
Here's my list of players of the decade
I don't know how anyone can disagree with Kobe being the player of the decade. He is and there is no doubt in my mind that this was voted correctly. Come on now, 81 points in a game? That itself is history in the making. When was the last time we've seen anyone score the way Kobe has. From 2000-2010, Kobe has been killing it in this league and is still doing so. The only 3 guys I can see being put in the conversation of Kobe is, Duncan, Shaq and KG. The only reason why Duncan and Shaq isn't consider up there is because the past 3 years, they have not been as dominate as they were in their prime, face it, their getting old but still doing the dirt. KG was killing it here in the twin cities just couldn't beat the Lakers at the time and then McKale messed up the entire team with no 1st round draft picks.
Iverson, comon now, PRACTICE? Love the guy but I don't see him as player of the decade because he hasn't won anything yet. He was on the Nuggest team that had a lot of talent but didn't do much there. They didn't even make the playoffs one year. Comon now. Be real with yourself if you think Iverson is the player of the decade when no one even wanted this guy this year. I don't care how good you think you are, if you can't play on a team and get along, you are not going any where in this league. There is no I in team but an I in Iverson.
I don't think it's even arguable that he's the best player of the decade. The only reason he was voted as the best by the fans is because of the same reason his jersey is the number one seller... Popularity... I think what separates Shaq and Duncan from him is postseason, specifically NBA Finals, success.
For the first three and a half years of the decade, Shaq was the most dominant force in the world. He was unstoppable... You bascially had to double and triple team him. He was in the same conversation as MJ and Wilt as the most dominate ever. He had no equal. In 2000, he came just one vote short of becoming the first unanimous MVP in NBA history.
During the Lakers' three year title run, it was Shaq's team. As great of a perimeter player as Kobe was, he played 2nd fiddle to Shaq. Shaq won the Finals MVP during each of their titles, making him and MJ the only players to win it three consecutive years. As a Pacers fan, I'll never forget the 43 and 15 he put up against us in the 2000 NBA Finals. He averaged 38 and 17 for the series. We didn't have an answer for him, so we resorted to "Hack-a-Shaq" and sent him to the free-throw line 39 times in one of the games. I don't think a lot of you remember just how dominate Shaq was during that three year title run, especially during the postseason and NBA Finals. He's in serious elite company when it comes to postseason and Finals domination.
No disrespect to Kobe, but he hasn't performed well in the NBA Finals, except in 2009. Kobe only has one Finals MVP and only one 40 point Finals game, which both came in 2009.
- In the 2000 NBA Finals vs the Pacers, he played just OK and only had one great game. He averaged under 20 for the series.
- In the 2004 NBA Finals vs the Pistons, other than game two, Kobe played terrible. He was bascially shut down single handedly by Prince and was held below 40%. He shot 38% and settled for the jumpshot the entire series. He also averaged 4 turnovers and shot 17% from 3-point. Shaq on the other hand averaged 27 and 11, and put up two monster games... He just didn't have the help considering Malone was injured, Billups was blasting Payton and Kobe didn't show up.
- In the 2006 playoffs vs the Suns, the Lakers blew a 3-1 series lead and Kobe was held SCORELESS in the 2nd half of game seven, the most important half of the season.
- In the 2008 NBA Finals vs the Celtics, with Kobe as their leader and Gasol as his 2nd option (can't use the he didn't have a team excuse), Kobe was held to 40% shooting. The Lakers blew a 24 point lead and lost in game four. They lost by 39 points in game seven (I think the largest margest of defeat in a deciding game in NBA history). Kobe shot 7-22, 1 assists, 3 rebounds, 4 turnovers and ZERO points in the 4th quarter in game seven.
You can say what you want about Shaq declining in 2006, but he still averaged 23 and 11 during the regular season and won a ring.
i would have to rate kg ahead of bron it would be
Kobe - was Duncan ever declared best player in the nba at any point of the decade? no. kobe was.
KG- he carried that t-wolves team who had Latrell Sprewell and Sam Cassel ?? and if you say well Lebron did that with the Cavs, KG was in the WEST when he had to get past hella teams we all know the east is inferior as far as teams go.
Was Duncan ever declared the best player in the NBA at any point of the decade?
Huh? He won two NBA MVP's back to back... Two of them when Shaq was in his prime... That's how great Duncan was in 2002 and 2003. Three NBA Championships and two NBA Final MVP awards. The Spurs actually elliminated the Lakers in 2003 and I'd say Duncan was arguably the best all around player in the league that season.
Not only was he in the best player in the league conversation, he put himself in the best power forward of all-time conversation.
Duncan is the best power forward ever..but I think Jason Kidd was robbed of that MVP award...when he came in 2nd to Duncan..Kidd took a team that had been known for decades of losing and made them respectable
I thought the same thing and had a debate with Llperez22 a few weeks ago about that lol. I don't think Kidd was robbed. Duncan just had an even better season. He averaged 24 pts, 13 rebs, 4 assists and 3 blocks that season... And was named to both the first All-NBA and All-Defensive teams.
The Spurs knocked the Lakers, who were the three time defending champs, out of the playoffs and then they beat Jason Kidd's Nets in the Finals.
Not only was he the MVP that season, he was arguably the best all around player in the league. I don't think Duncan gets all of the respect he deserves because he's a boring player lol.
I think Duncan was the player of the decade. He is the only player to consistently play amazing basketball as the best player on his team for the entire decade. He has multiple championships and MVP's to show for it, and he is still playing great. He has not really declined and is probably the best PF to ever play the game of basketball. He did all of this with no drama off the court, no rants about the opposing teams or insults to other players. He just took care of business.
You can say what you will about Shaq, but he has declined enough over the past 3 years to barely nudge him out of the conversation, he to me would come in a close 2nd just due to his sheer dominance when he played.
Kobe has definitely made himself a name and has actually been just as consistent over the past decade, it’s just that he was not the one leading his team those first years with the Lakers, he did not fully reach his potential as a team leader until a few years into the decade, which is why I have him just a little bit behind Shaq.
how do u guys put lrbron on this list at all hes the player of the next decade and as said ;last night kobe is the player of the last 5 years
I can't argue with that at all. I don't have a problem with Duncan being #1. You made excellent points why he should be. Other than being a "boring" player, Duncan has quietly and consistently been dominate during this decade. I don't think he gets the credit he deserves because he wasn't as exciting as Kobe, Shaq, A.I., or even VC or T-Mac.
Shaq was so dominate at the beginning of the decade though that I placed him at the top. For the first three and a half - four years, he literally couldn't be defended. You had to double/triple team him or "Hack-a-Shaq" foul him. During those years, regular and postseason, he put himself in the same breath as MJ and Wilt as being the most dominate/unstoppable force ever. Kobe's 81 was historic, but Shaq's 61 point and 23 rebound game in 2000 wasn't too shabby. During his championship season with Miami, he still averaged 23 and 11 that season. Shaq is an old guy... He was drafted in 1992, so his decline in the later year's of this decade was inevitable. He's still been steady though for a soon to be 38 year old. For a man of his size and who's taking the pounding he has, to play almost 20 seasons is amazing. He nearly dominated two full decades.
You also made another excellent point about Kobe that I forgot to make, which is he didn't become a legit team leader until a few seasons ago. He didn't really start making his teammates better until two-three seasons ago.
Then your list would be who?
Some of the guys on the list had a year or two not worth mentioning, and since Lebron has done just as much as anyone since he was drafted, why should he not be on the list of at least the top 7 or 8?
Tezo: let me be a still slightly bitter Kings fan... :) ...stupid shaq...*grumbles*
Clyde ..how can u not place lebron in the top 10? I mean dude came into the nba with so much hype..More than jordan, magic and shaq...Most guys would've folded .but he showed so much maturity
it's tough to pick, but I'm going with Duncan as player of the decade. Kobe's success on leading a team to the finals in the last two years was only possible due to Pau gasol being traded there. Otherwise, we would have seen more post seasons of lakers exiting the first or second round.
kobe, duncan, shaq all have 4 rings...and arguably have lead their teams to getting these rings.
and to go over what tezo said, I completely agree with you about Shaq. You can bash him for his later years, but in 2004 he was the only presence in that finals team.
Also, Miami would have never gotten further without the shaq trade. Thank god he landed there, my favorite player in the world (d-wade!) got his ring!
tezo, to say you don't think it was kobe is fine and totally understandable. To say it is not even close is absurd. Kobe was second fiddle to shaq during the first 3 years, but so would every other playin the league have been. It's not like kobe was just sitting in the corner waiting for the ball from Shaq. Teams were doing everything they could to stop kobe, and He was putting about 25-30 points with 6 and 6 each of those seasons and was all defensive first team and took all the big shots down the stretch. Before shaq left LA, it had clearly become both of their teams. In the 7 seasons since, shaq has probably had one season that was better then kobe in 2005. In the last 3 years, he has been a shell of himself and has not won a single playoff series while kobe has only continued to get better and lead the lakers to 2 straight finals.
As for finals success, kobe only had one poor finals performance and that was against detroit. He didn't play great against boston, but thelakers were not even predicted to make the playoffs that season they were missing 2 starters and still got as far as they did.
You bring up his going scoreless in game 7 against phoenix and how he let the lakers lose a 3-1 lead. But kobe dropped 50 in game 6 which they almost won, that was not his fgault. In game 7 he had almost 30 in the first half and thalkers were down by about 17. He tried to play passive in the third quarter and they went down by 25. He then sat most the 4th because the game was a blowout. I suppose he could have jacked up more shots if the critics would have liked, but he put kwame, smush, luke and odom on his back and a had great season and series.
fact is shaq never won at any point in his career until he had superstar help in guys like kobe and wade to get him over the top. How many times was he swept early in his career before kobe become a superstar? How has he done in recent years without wade? To act like shaq did things himself is silly.
As for kobe being voted on popularity, sure he has a lot of fans. He has a lot of haters too who would vote for anyone but him throughout the country, so i think that probably evens out. He was voted in by over 50% apparently. I would not say it isn't even close even if i did disagree with him winnning.
d-grizzly. So kobe does not get much credit for having to have pau, but you give duncan credit because he apparently he didn't have all-stars like parker and manu? It's funny because pau never won a playoff series before kobe, but now he carried kobe? And shaq was not the only presence on that 2004 team.
people might say Duncan was the greatest pf of all time, so what that doesnt mean he was the POD, if you ask people who they think it is, of the top of everyone's head they would say Kobe, Lebron, Shaq, maybe KG.
Duncan off the top of the head is and was rarely tlaked about as POD, its always Bron, Kobe, Shaq
the only people that bring duncan to light is the analysts
mallstax, people on this topic have been giving him plenty of due. I ranked him second.
i have no problem with him , i ranked him second too , im just saying if you asked an average fan on the street who was the POD, they would say Kobe, shaq, bron, im just saying. but like i said this my top 5
now if i had a starting five of the POD's it be Nash,Bryant,James,KG,Duncan and Dirk as my 6th man
People don't talk about Duncan because he wasn't as exciting as those other guys. Look at what he's done and tell me he shouldn't be taken seriously as being the best player of the decade.
Llperez22... You don't think Kobe played poorly vs Boston in the 2008 NBA Finals? He shot 40% from the field and was outplayed by Paul Pierce... The Lakers lost game seven by 39 points... 131-92 and Kobe didn't score a point in the 4th quarter. LeBron and the Cavs played Boston tougher in the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals and his supporting cast was worse than Kobe's.
You can make whatever excuses you want for Kobe during that Phoenix series... All I know is he didn't score in the entire 2nd half in the deciding game of the series.
I never said Shaq did it by himself, but he was clearly the man on those championship teams. Shaq was the most dominate player in the league, one of the most dominate in NBA history, for the first 3-4 seasons of the decade. He was even more dominate in the postseason and NBA Finals. Three NBA Finals MVPs... Only he and Jordan has done that.
Kobe didn't even start making his teammates better and become a legit leader until about two or three seasons ago. In my opinion, I don't think it's even arguable that Kobe is the best player of the decade. He wasn't as dominate as Shaq or Duncan in the postseason, especially the NBA Finals. He's played poorly in two NBA Finals appearances. That's just my opinion.
kobe did a lot for his teammates when they won those first few titles from 2000-2002, so i disagree completley he wasn't a team player. He didn't play slefish until the team was going through rebuilding mode. It's funny that he was a good teammate when he had shaq, rice, horry, fox, fisher etc... then he was a bad teammate when he had kwmae, smush, odom, atkins, mihm, then he became a good teammate again when he had pau, bynum, ariza etc... I guess you can only do what you have around you. As for the boston series, he struggled, but they were doubling him throughout that series and clogging the lanes. He was not even gaurding pierce, radmanovic was most the time. But fair enough, he did struggle in that series, but not so much so that i would say it tainted his legacy or anything. He wasn't that bad. And shaq was out in the first round already.
And it's not excuses about that phoenix series. He was great scored over 30 a game and carried the lakers into game 7. But despite having a great first half in game 7, the suns were the better team. Kobe tried to get his teammates involved in the second half to switch it up, and they then went down by 25 and it was blow out city. KObe didn't even play like the last 7-8 minutes of the game and he only took 3 shots in the second half. The game before he dropped 50. Kobe did what he could and the suns were the better team.
I'm not even arguing that shaq was easily the winer if you take this poll 3 or 4 years ago. But you have to include the whole decade. And Kobe was a whole lot closer to shaq in the first half the decade then shaq has been to him in the scond half. Playing mediocre ball for a third of the decade and causing the suns to actually digress as a team needs to be taken into account. WHile kobe dealt with a rebuilding phase during the decade, shaq just jumped from one contender to another to another and never had to deal with rebuilding.
Obviously it is at the very least a close argument, which is all i was trying to get you to admit, but apparently you think it was not close which puts you in the minority.
I've never thought Kobe was a very good teammate or leader until a few seasons ago.
Kobe shot 40% from the field vs Boston. Pierce checked Kobe game four, primarily in the 4th quarter, and shut him down. From an impact standpoint, Pierce outplayed Kobe that series. He not only scored, he also got his teammates involved. He averaged over six assists for the series and had ten in the deciding game. He was the MVP of the Finals. Kobe played only slightly better vs Boston than he did vs Detroit in 2004.
Shaq being out of the first round in 2008, has nothing to do with how dominate he was the first 3-4 years of the decade... During the regular season and the postseason. He had no competition. No equal. He was in the same breath as MJ and Wilt in terms of dominance. LOL... Kobe was not close to Shaq in terms of dominance the first half of this decade!
I think you're funny saying Shaq jump from contender to contender... Miami was NOT a contender before Shaq got there.
Say what you want about Shaq's decline, but he has the same amount of titles as Kobe the 2nd half of the decade.
miami had got to the second round before shaq got there, and that was with wade as a rookie. By the time they won the title, wade was all-nba and they added guys like payton, walker, haslem and zo. Like I said, SHaq never went through a rebuilding phase. And shaq was dominant, but he needed kobe as well.
Pierce did out play kobe, i never said he didn't but pierce was also mostly siganl covered and kobe was getting surrounded every time he put the ball on the floor. If the lakers locked in on pierce the way the celtics locked in on kobe, then pierce would have had no where near the numbers he did.
Kobe won the award, so like i said, if you think it was not even close, then you are in the minority. In fact many others on this very thread who are not even kobe fans agree he was ahead of shaq.
in the finals, shaq was the lakers only presence. it was an awful deal and we've discussed this before.
Kobe and shaq with the load of talent surrounding them won 3 rings. and then something happend, the chemistry of the lakers started falling a part and the lakers started getting old.
Duncan has been a consistant machine, outstanding leader, and great team player for the spurs since day 1. He led the spurs to beating your lakers in 03 to advance and so on....I also considered that their last good year until pau joined the lakers. Duncan also put them on his back in 2005 against the pistons, game 7, second half, down 9...timmy comes out like the player of the decade would to win a championship...against a team that beat your lakers with a stacked team (granted malone was injured)
When parker(2001 1st round 28th pick) won his 1st ring with duncan, he was only 3 years in and people still considered him raw as far as anything outside the paint. I will give you that ginobli had time to mesh, but Parker, when he was a rookie, came into what was considered the lakers best years until now.
I stand by what I believe, Kobe is lucky to have landed one of the best powerfowards entering his prime while duncan/parker/ginobli learned to mesh together to win multiple titles.
d-grizzly, i'm not arguing kobe is more deserving then duncan. But your statement "kobe getting to the last 2 finals was only possible because of getting pau" is pretty weak. That is why i brought up duncan having manu and parker. No great player wins without help, so to say duncan is better and using gasol as ammunition against kobe is a weak argument, in my humble opinion.
also, lakers were first place in the west before they traded for pau.
I made a clear argument. timmy has meshed with parker and ginobli since 1999(ginobli) and 2001(parker) and kept the chemistry intact.
and i argue back that it's not weak. i've explained it once and i'll do it again, kobe would not have advanced back to the finals without pau. You can go ahead and tell me that the lakers were first but bynum did have a season ending injury that year, and the lakers would have had another early post season exit
okay, and tim duncan would have never won a title without all-stars around him. so therefore he is not first. See how that sounds?
d-grizzly, i'm not even trying to argue with you man. If you think it is duncan that is fine, and i wouldn't waste time debating that. I put him second. I just saw your comment about kobe not being able to reach the finals without pau like that was some kind of proof he is not as good as duncan, and i have to seriously question that logic. Especially since kobe had the lakers in first place before pau and pau had never gotten out of the first round in his career. Did kobe need pau? Of course, but every great player needs help. It's all good though.