Was Dwyane Wade considered the best player in the NBA any YR

[Doctor MJ]

No player is clearly the best in the league if they lose in round 1. Now this is not saying you can't be the best losing in round 1, but no way hell are you clearly the best.

so if a player literally played on a team of him and d-leaguers he couldnt be the best?

I don't buy it

Well, I'll go with him on the point I think he's making. That guys might be the best in the league, but if a guys team isn't winning, then you have to expect there to be some debate.

One thing that helps Wade in this regard for me is that we've already seen him lead a team to a title - so this isn't a case of a guy who can't make use of the talent around him.

[Jimmy76]

No player is clearly the best in the league if they lose in round 1. Now this is not saying you can't be the best losing in round 1, but no way hell are you clearly the best.

so if a player literally played on a team of him and d-leaguers he couldnt be the best?

I don't buy it

Well, I'll go with him on the point I think he's making. That guys might be the best in the league, but if a guys team isn't winning, then you have to expect there to be some debate.

One thing that helps Wade in this regard for me is that we've already seen him lead a team to a title - so this isn't a case of a guy who can't make use of the talent around him.

I can see there being an argument because of the lack of wins

but I can't see there being no case at all

if Jordan left the Bulls in 91 for the Nuggets (20 wins that season) is he suddenly a worse player? That team is probably a first round exit (they gave up 130ppg on average).

[JordansBulls]

No player is clearly the best in the league if they lose in round 1. Now this is not saying you can't be the best losing in round 1, but no way hell are you clearly the best.

Sort of like Michael Jordan in 1986-1987.

Averaged 37.1/5.2/4.6 during the regular season, and was promptly swept out of the playoffs by the Celtics, even though he put up 35.7/7.0/6.0 in the series.

Definitely not the best player in the league that year.

Go back and read what was written.

I never said he was clearly the best, but that he has a great case for being the best especially since he led the league in scoring, PER and Win Shares.

[JordansBulls]

No player is clearly the best in the league if they lose in round 1. Now this is not saying you can't be the best losing in round 1, but no way hell are you clearly the best.

so if a player literally played on a team of him and d-leaguers he couldnt be the best?

I don't buy it

Well, I'll go with him on the point I think he's making. That guys might be the best in the league, but if a guys team isn't winning, then you have to expect there to be some debate.

Yes, basically there is no hands down best player if they don't make the playoffs or lose in round 1.

[jman23]

He obviously was, who was better? Shaq I'm guessing? I think his impact and presence on the team was huge, especially throughout the eastern conference playoffs, but he missed a good amount of games that season, and was on the slight decline.

No,Shaq should have won MVP that season not Nash.

[RichardB]

I don't think he was ever considered the best, but maybe he was considered the most explosive, for what its worth.

[JordansBulls]

He obviously was, who was better? Shaq I'm guessing? I think his impact and presence on the team was huge, especially throughout the eastern conference playoffs, but he missed a good amount of games that season, and was on the slight decline.

No,Shaq should have won MVP that season not Nash.

Why should Shaq have won it?