Player of The Decade?

[NYKnick87]

So basically all of these guys who write about and watch basketball for a living, and who have picked Kobe as player of the decade are morons?

Yes.

[xxRoyalexx]

Kobe is the Player of the Decade, end of.

[NYK 455]

Kobe is the Player of the Decade, end of.

Based on what? Rings as a second option? The media? The fans? Hype?

[sp6r=underrated]

So basically all of these guys who write about and watch basketball for a living, and who have picked Kobe as player of the decade are morons?

No, they just made the incorrect decision.

[xxRoyalexx]

Kobe is the Player of the Decade, end of.

Based on what? Rings as a second option? The media? The fans? Hype?

4 Championships since the beginning of the Decade, a Regular Season MVP and Finals MVP, 12 time NBA All Star, 3 time All Star MVP, 2 Scoring Titles, and he's been featured on an All-Defensive Team 9 Times. He came out of Highschool and not only disproved the critics but lived up to the Hype, and has had phenomenal numbers throughout his entire career. Not only is Kobe one of the most consistent to ever play the game but he's also one of the most entertaining, just like Michael Jordan. Because at the end of the day it's arguable that Magic, Larry, Kareem, etc are all better than MJ despite the rings and numerous accolades. But you know what sets him apart from the rest? He was the MOST entertaining, and that's not to say that Magic wasn't fun to watch because he was. But the countless buzzer beaters, crossovers, gravity defying moves and clutch moments in general that Jordan had are ridiculous and could really ignite a crowd, and even beat out Magic's fancy lay ups and genius passing. Kobe is just like that. Duncan's got the accolades but in my opinion he's just not iconic enough to deserve the Title. I know it's a shallow way to look at it but it's the truth.

EDIT: With that being said, Kobe and Shaq are the two best candidates for POTD. They both have the Accolades and are both very iconic, entertaining, figures because of the things they did on the Court.

[NYK 455]

Kobe is the Player of the Decade, end of.

Based on what? Rings as a second option? The media? The fans? Hype?

4 Championships since the beginning of the Decade, a Regular Season MVP and Finals MVP, 12 time NBA All Star, 3 time All Star MVP, 2 Scoring Titles, and he's been featured on an All-Defensive Team 9 Times. He came out of Highschool and not only disproved the critics but lived up to the Hype, and has had phenomenal numbers throughout his entire career. Not only is Kobe one of the most consistent to ever play the game but he's also one of the most entertaining, just like Michael Jordan. Because at the end of the day it's arguable that Magic, Larry, Kareem, etc are all better than MJ despite the rings and numerous accolades. But you know what sets him apart from the rest? He was the MOST entertaining, and that's not to say that Magic wasn't fun to watch because he was. But the countless buzzer beaters, crossovers, gravity defying moves and clutch moments in general that Jordan had are ridiculous and could really ignite a crowd, and even beat out Magic's fancy lay ups and genius passing. Kobe is just like that. Duncan's got the accolades but in my opinion he's just not iconic enough to deserve the Title. I know it's a shallow way to look at it but it's the truth.

EDIT: With that being said, Kobe and Shaq are the two best candidates for POTD. They both have the Accolades and are both very iconic, entertaining, figures because of the things they did on the Court.

It's not about who's the most iconic or entertaining, it's about who's the best player of this decade. And it should be between Shaq and Duncan.

[xxRoyalexx]

Kobe's without a doubt one of the best of the decade also.

[jdizzle72]

Kobe is player of the decade since the gap between kobe being better than shaq at the end of the decade is way greater than the gap between shaq being better than kobe at the beginning of the decade.

[NYK 455]

Kobe's without a doubt one of the best of the decade also.

There is no doubt Kobe was one of the best players of the decade, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But he's clearly behind Duncan and Shaq in terms of accolades and play. He's ahead of KG in accolades, but wasn't as good as him either. I have him at 4.

[Dat Pass]

Kobe's without a doubt one of the best of the decade also.

There is no doubt Kobe was one of the best players of the decade, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But he's clearly behind Duncan and Shaq in terms of accolades and play. He's ahead of KG in accolades, but wasn't as good as him either. I have him at 4.

Hahaha.. Wait, let me get this straight..

Kobe isnt as good as Duncan or Shaq because of Finals MVPs and being a "2nd option" for most of his success. But now your putting KG ahead of Kobe? A guy that has only been out of the 1st round twice his entire career? And never won a ring until he was teammed up with 2 HOF'ers?

The hypocrisy is so amusing. And by amusing I mean blatantly ignorant.

[gswhoopsman]

I don't really see how Shaq can be player of the decade give how much he fell off at the tail end. The player of the decade has to be dominant through the WHOLE decade, and Shaq fell of the map for the last 3 years of it. I'd say he''s easily the best player IN the decade peakwise, but not the player of the decade.

Coming down to Duncan and Kobe, and I'd have to go with Duncan, but just barely; I think the gap between him and kobe during the beginning of this decade is pretty understated. Yes Kobe is making up for it during the tail end of this decade, but I think Duncan still gets him. And though it may be unfair, Kobe's "second player" status during the threepeat, even if its more a myth, does hurt him in this debate; its largely revisionist perspective that elevates him to 1b status.

That being said, its no travesty to take Kobe over Duncan, and I think Kobe will finish over Duncan on the all time list.

[NYK 455]

Kobe's without a doubt one of the best of the decade also.

There is no doubt Kobe was one of the best players of the decade, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But he's clearly behind Duncan and Shaq in terms of accolades and play. He's ahead of KG in accolades, but wasn't as good as him either. I have him at 4.

Hahaha.. Wait, let me get this straight..

Kobe isnt as good as Duncan or Shaq because of Finals MVPs and being a "2nd option" for most of his success. But now your putting KG ahead of Kobe? A guy that has only been out of the 1st round twice his entire career? And never won a ring until he was teammed up with 2 HOF'ers?

The hypocrisy is so amusing. And by amusing I mean blatantly ignorant.

Clever. Anyway, Duncan and Shaq aren't just better because of accolades, but that fact they were much better players. KG and Kobe is close, KG was a better player and also has a ring as the man, but Kobe's 3 rings as a second option do mean something. I'd give the nod to KG.

[D Nice]

I'm not sure what's more comical - Shaq being player of the decade despite being of little to no consequence the past 4 seasons, or Duncan's peak "destroying" Kobe's.

Any defensive separation Duncan enjoyed being 7 feet tall is offset by the offesnive advantages Kobe enjoys as a 6'6 guard. By position (PF and SG) they were close to, if not THE best at their spot (both offensively and defensively) over extended periods of time, but saying one is significant better than the other is silly. Duncan has a slight edge over Kobe 00-05, and Kobe's got a clear advantage 06-10. The only way Shaq deserves mention if the decade we measure him by is 95-05.

Duncan has consistency by a hair, Kobe had longevity by a hair (meaning I'll take a young 3-Peat Kobe over an aged Duncan, but Duncan hasn't had seasons as poor as Kobe's 04/05 campaigns), so it's a tough comparison. If you value consistently being a contender, I'd go with Tim. If I want the guy who I feels gives me the best chance of getting my team over the hump given comparable talent, I'm taking Kobe.

Revisionist history might be the most overused term here, but some people really need to purchase some tape of the Western Conference playoff battles from earlier this decade - Kobe was often our BEST player in the series' that REALLY mattered (Sactown, SA, etc). Yes, his #s in the finals dipped playing with Shaq, but that can easily be attributed to his multiple injuries coupled with the weakness of eastern conference centers. Finals performace would be the biggest reason I'd take Duncan though, he's been a rock pretty much every time he's been there (though he was relatively contained one-on-one by Sheed).

As for the numbers/MVP arguments...do you guys ACTUALLY believe that Kobe's numbers didn't suffer because of Shaq? All of the people claiming Shaq "opened up" things for Kobe obviously rarely watched Laker games back then. While once in a while Shaq's man would stay glued to him and leave a clear path for Kobe, more often than not Shaq was in the way, clogging the lane AND taking touches away from Kobe. A juxtaposition of Kobe's scoring numbers with/without Shaq, as well as the entire 03 campaign should be sufficient evidence.

And what's with all these Knick fans being Kobe haters? NYK455 might have separated himself from the pack of Kobe haters with this thread.

Anyway, Duncan has never really been overshadowed by a teammate at any point in his career, so I can see why the majority would pick him. But if Kobe gets another ring this year then I'd hope that gives him a clear separation as PoTD, he'd have 5 rings in the decade to Duncan's 3, including a re-peat and a 3-peat.

[Dat Pass]

There is no doubt Kobe was one of the best players of the decade, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But he's clearly behind Duncan and Shaq in terms of accolades and play. He's ahead of KG in accolades, but wasn't as good as him either. I have him at 4.

Hahaha.. Wait, let me get this straight..

Kobe isnt as good as Duncan or Shaq because of Finals MVPs and being a "2nd option" for most of his success. But now your putting KG ahead of Kobe? A guy that has only been out of the 1st round twice his entire career? And never won a ring until he was teammed up with 2 HOF'ers?

The hypocrisy is so amusing. And by amusing I mean blatantly ignorant.

Clever. Anyway, Duncan and Shaq aren't just better because of accolades, but that fact they were much better players. KG and Kobe is close, KG was a better player and also has a ring as the man, but Kobe's 3 rings as a second option do mean something. I'd give the nod to KG.

Shaq was the better player during the 3peat, no question about that. But Kobe has been the clear cut better player ever since. 7yrs > 3yrs. Sure Shaqs peak was impressive, but Kobe played at a pretty high level 90% of the decade. Shaq was at a high level maybe, maybe 50%.

Kobes 4 rings and 6 Finals appearances mean alot more than KG's 1 ring and 1 appearance. KG was in the top 5 for MVP voting 5x, Kobe was 7x.. KG was on the All NBA 1st team 4x in the decade, Kobe was on it 7x.

I can see an argument made for Duncan. But there is absolutely no argument that can be made for KG. And I think the argument for Shaq is a stretch.

[sp6r=underrated]

Duncan has a slight edge over Kobe 00-05, and Kobe's got a clear advantage 06-10.

LMAO at the idea Duncan's advantage during the early part of the decade was slight while Kobe has a clear advantage from 06-10.

[D Nice]

Duncan has a slight edge over Kobe 00-05, and Kobe's got a clear advantage 06-10.

LMAO at the idea Duncan's advantage during the early part of the decade was slight while Kobe has a clear advantage from 06-09.

I was talking big picture. Obviously there are individual seasons where Duncan was well ahead of Kobe in that time bracket, but Kobe outplayed Duncan heads up in the playoffs and had a superior 03 regular season campaign. Kobe, on the other hand, has been on a completely different tier from Duncan since 06.

Perhaps that was a misuse of words though. The difference wasn't meant to be porytayed as such. If the gap between Duncan and Kobe was a 3/10 in the first stretch, it'd be a 4/10 in the opposite direction for the second stretch.

[Dat Pass]

Duncan has a slight edge over Kobe 00-05, and Kobe's got a clear advantage 06-10.

LMAO at the idea Duncan's advantage during the early part of the decade was slight while Kobe has a clear advantage from 06-10.

Between 00-05 Kobe was a huge part of the Lakers winning the Western Conference (You know, the same conference Duncan's in) 4 of the 6yrs. Thats why Duncan can be said to only have a slight advantage. (Duncan was in the Top 5 MVP all 6yrs, Kobe made it 3 times)

However, between 06-10, Kobe was in the Top 5 MVP all 4 years, Duncan only made it once. There is no question Kobe has been the better player by quite a large margin for 4-5yrs now.

[D Nice]

I've also found Duncan's defensive impact to be eternally overstated. I could run down a list of 10+ bigs who have had a similar impact on that end of the court over this decade. Perhaps not for the entire 10 seasons, but guys like Sheed, Big Ben, Deke, Camby, Garnett, Howard, Shaq (00/01), etc have provided comparable defense to Timmy's.

Meanwhile offensively, the only people who compare to Kobe this decade have been Shaq, Lebron, Wade, and a peak McGrady. That's more exclusive company IMO (basically, you'd be much better off trying to replace Duncan's defense with an average 7 footer than Kobe's offense with an average wing player).

[Bgil]

There is no doubt Kobe was one of the best players of the decade, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But he's clearly behind Duncan and Shaq in terms of accolades and play. He's ahead of KG in accolades, but wasn't as good as him either. I have him at 4.

Hahaha.. Wait, let me get this straight..

Kobe isnt as good as Duncan or Shaq because of Finals MVPs and being a "2nd option" for most of his success. But now your putting KG ahead of Kobe? A guy that has only been out of the 1st round twice his entire career? And never won a ring until he was teammed up with 2 HOF'ers?

The hypocrisy is so amusing. And by amusing I mean blatantly ignorant.

Clever. Anyway, Duncan and Shaq aren't just better because of accolades, but that fact they were much better players. KG and Kobe is close, KG was a better player and also has a ring as the man, but Kobe's 3 rings as a second option do mean something. I'd give the nod to KG.

So you count KG's ring in 2008 as "the man" even though PP won the Finals MVP, led he team in scoring, and was the go to guy down the stretch,

Double standard at best, Hypocrisy at worst.

[jmb987]

KG and Kobe is close, KG was a better player and also has a ring as the man, but Kobe's 3 rings as a second option do mean something. I'd give the nod to KG.

And the worst post of the thread goes to.......

congrats on making my sig.