Undisputed best player in the league

[JN61]

Curry was never the best player in the world. Stop this nonsense.

Exactly. LeBron was and he sonned Curry in 2016 finals...

[JN61]

lol at curry and kobe fans trying to convince everyone else that they were the "undisputed" best players, not realizing how ridiculous that is. That there exist people who argue it with reasonable objective data kinda undermines the whole undisputed part.

Kobe/Steph fans don’t know what “undisputed” means clearly.

Fans think their favourite childhood star is the best player. Shocker.

[triple_threat]

I'm a big Curry fan and I have Lebron ahead for most of the prime years. But not the unanimous MVP year. That year Curry was the best player in the league, even over Lebron. It was an amazing season.

Come on man stop lying to yourself that narrative was squashed in the playoffs and finals when lebron clearly proved himself as the best. Same thing when Durant won mvp, rose won mvp, etc., it came back to lebron when it mattered most.

So I guess Lebron can't be undisputed MVP in 2009 or 2010 then, since his team didn't win a championship?

Winning the championship isn’t a prerequisite to being the best player. There are countless examples like Lebron in 15 and 18

[WarriorGM]

Come on man stop lying to yourself that narrative was squashed in the playoffs and finals when lebron clearly proved himself as the best. Same thing when Durant won mvp, rose won mvp, etc., it came back to lebron when it mattered most.

So I guess Lebron can't be undisputed MVP in 2009 or 2010 then, since his team didn't win a championship?

Winning the championship isn’t a prerequisite to being the best player. There are countless examples like Lebron in 15 and 18

LeBron wasn't the best player in 2015 or 2018. Only in the media's and his fans' heads.

[SashimiLover]

How many player we can say were at some point of their careers considered the best (almost) unanimously (no Hickman BS, you always find contrarians)

Mikan
Russell
Alcindor
jordon
LeBron
I think are pretty clear

I think we can add Shaq e maybe even Hakeem.
Not an expert if the 50s, maybe Pettit?
There was some incredible hype for Duncan in 1999, I remember, does it count?

Duncan 1999 wasn't the clear best player in the league (he wasn't even the clear best player on his team), but Duncan 2003-2007 was generally considered the best player. It's just a matter of how close to unanimous you have to get.

Shaq in the 1999-2002 range was considered the best player in the league. Certainly 2001 Shaq.

LeBron held the best player in the league status for a long time. He stopped fully trying in the regular season so he didn't win (or often seriously compete for) regular season MVP awards but was still the best player. Even as a Warrior fan, the debate was whether the Warriors had enough better team around Curry to overcome LeBron and his custom team.

As LeBron has faded there has been some arguements for Giannis. IMO he's been generally considered the best player the last few years, but not to the extent of Duncan, much less some other guys here.

Similarly Bird was generally considered the best player for several years but I don't see it getting to near unanimous levels.

In short, your original list (with some arguments against Russell), plus Shaq and Duncan.

Great post.

Some might say KG peaked at least as high or higher than Duncan. Im not sure how Hakeem was widely viewed in 1994 and 1995, but it seems his domiance arguably resembles that of Shaq's peak years...

[LAL1947]

It's extremely rare to be the undisputed best player in the league. Here are the only seasons I came up with (post shotclock):

1963 Bill Russell
1965 Bill Russell
1967 Wilt Chamberlain
1971 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
1980 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
1984 Larry Bird
1986 Larry Bird
1991 Michael Jordan
1992 Michael Jordan
2000 Shaquille O'Neal
2003 Tim Duncan
2012 LeBron James
2013 Lebron James

Some of the other seasons (like 1961 Russell, 1968 Wilt, 1972 Kareem, 1987 Magic, 1996 Jordan, 2004 Garnett, 2007 Duncan, 2009 James) are quite clear to me, but they are not undisputed.

Kobe definitely was more of an undisputed best player between 2005-06 and 2007-08 than Duncan was at any time between 1998-2010. When Duncan won the MVP/Title/FMVP in 2002-03, everybody gave him his deserved props for being the player who had performed the best in that 1 season... but not everybody was thinking about him as the clear-cut best player in the world. How could they? For a year or two after 2002-03, there was always the feeling or question in everyone that if Shaq got back in shape, he could go back to rag-dolling Duncan again. Kevin Garnett was right up there with Duncan and had what you would describe as "higher peaks" than Duncan in 2003-04 and 2004-05... and everyone knew Kobe was that guy! Most teams used to employ "Kobe-stoppers". Even the Spurs game-planned more for Kobe than any other team ever game-planned for Duncan.

This is one problem with looking back at things retrospectively and trying to make things fit what you want to see, you end up ignoring prevailing perceptions from that time... perceptions that existed for a very real reason. Between 2002-03 and 2004-05, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe were equals in the eyes of most, but Duncan had the most favorable situation of the three from 2002-03 onwards so won the most in that time.

Personally, I also think it's nuts that you consider Duncan in 2006-07. The Spurs had a GREAT overall TEAM with three stars (not so common in those days)... but Kobe was the best player in the world then. Duncan had also slowed down and transitioned to playing more defense. The Spurs had no business winning the title that season too. They ROBBED the Suns of the title that year. Completely robbed them, taking out Steve Nash like that... getting Amar'e Stoudamire suspended in the aftermath for the pivotal game 5. It should be the biggest asterisked title in all of NBA history IMO. We don't give the Spurs enough shite for that because it was "quiet, boring, ole Timmy"... but the Spurs robbed Steve Nash of what should have been his first NBA ring. Hope Duncan is sending Nash flocks of turkeys every Christmas to make up for it.

[70sFan]

Kobe definitely was more of an undisputed best player between 2005-06 and 2007-08 than Duncan was at any time between 1998-2010. When Duncan won the MVP/Title/FMVP in 2002-03, everybody gave him his deserved props for being the player who had performed the best in that 1 season... but not everybody was thinking about him as the clear-cut best player in the world. How could they? For a year or two after 2002-03, there was always the feeling or question in everyone that if Shaq got back in shape, he could go back to rag-dolling Duncan again.

Are you aware that Duncan won the MVP the season before?

Duncan was seen as the rival for Shaq in 1999-03 period.

Kevin Garnett was right up there with Duncan and had what you would describe as "higher peaks" than Duncan in 2003-04 and 2004-05... and everyone knew Kobe was that guy!

Kobe as the guy in 2004 or 2005? You're getting better and better

Most teams used to employ "Kobe-stoppers". Even the Spurs game-planned more for Kobe than any other team ever game-planned for Duncan.

Yeah, teams game-planned so much for Kobe in 2003 when he played next to Shaq... Meanwhile Duncan was doubled and tripled all the time during that period.

By the way, Kobe was better offensive player than Duncan. I never denied that.

This is one problem with looking back at things retrospectively and trying to make things fit what you want to see, you end up ignoring prevailing perceptions from that time... perceptions that existed for a very real reason. Between 2002-03 and 2004-05, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe were equals in the eyes of most, but Duncan had the most favorable situation of the three from 2002-03 onwards so won the most in that time.

There is nothing favorable about Duncan's situation in 2003 or 2004. Kobe wasn't seen on Duncan/KG level until 2006.

Personally, I also think it's nuts that you consider Duncan in 2006-07. The Spurs had a GREAT overall TEAM with three stars (not so common in those days)... but Kobe was the best player in the world then. Duncan had also slowed down and transitioned to playing more defense.

Bolded part is 100% true... and so what? What's the difference how you impact the game, as long as you impact the game like the best player in the league?

The Spurs had no business winning the title that season too. They ROBBED the Suns of the title that year. Completely robbed them, taking out Steve Nash like that... getting Amar'e Stoudamire suspended in the aftermath for the pivotal game 5. It should be the biggest asterisked title in all of NBA history IMO. We don't give the Spurs enough shite for that because it was "quiet, boring, ole Timmy"... but the Spurs robbed Steve Nash of what should have been his first NBA ring. Hope Duncan is sending Nash flocks of turkeys every Christmas to make up for it.

That's completely pointless and unnecessary shot. Duncan didn't make Amare suspended.

The series was tied at 2-2 before game 5. We have no idea who would have won game 5 with Amare available. Suns also had Amare back in game 6 and they lost.

Unlike you, I don't discredit Kobe's 2002 ring for WCF conspiracy theories.

[Stribor]

How many player we can say were at some point of their careers considered the best (almost) unanimously (no Hickman BS, you always find contrarians)

Mikan
Russell
Alcindor
jordon
LeBron
I think are pretty clear

I think we can add Shaq e maybe even Hakeem.
Not an expert if the 50s, maybe Pettit?
There was some incredible hype for Duncan in 1999, I remember, does it count?

Duncan 1999 wasn't the clear best player in the league (he wasn't even the clear best player on his team), but Duncan 2003-2007 was generally considered the best player. It's just a matter of how close to unanimous you have to get.

Shaq in the 1999-2002 range was considered the best player in the league. Certainly 2001 Shaq.

LeBron held the best player in the league status for a long time. He stopped fully trying in the regular season so he didn't win (or often seriously compete for) regular season MVP awards but was still the best player. Even as a Warrior fan, the debate was whether the Warriors had enough better team around Curry to overcome LeBron and his custom team.

As LeBron has faded there has been some arguements for Giannis. IMO he's been generally considered the best player the last few years, but not to the extent of Duncan, much less some other guys here.

Similarly Bird was generally considered the best player for several years but I don't see it getting to near unanimous levels.

In short, your original list (with some arguments against Russell), plus Shaq and Duncan.

Great post.

Some might say KG peaked at least as high or higher than Duncan. Im not sure how Hakeem was widely viewed in 1994 and 1995, but it seems his domiance arguably resembles that of Shaq's peak years...

In my opinion I would just throw out the Russell because of strong Wilt contending. Shaq, perhaps, but I think Mikan, Alcindor and Jordan were on other level compared to league at their time, and LBJ is just a bit bellow them cause I feel his undisputability had a bit shorter window then theirs. Tim, I would say was the best in 2003-2007 but I am afraid Shaq and Kobe were strong contenders in the minds of to much of the audience to really call him unanimous.

[LAL1947]

Kobe definitely was more of an undisputed best player between 2005-06 and 2007-08 than Duncan was at any time between 1998-2010. When Duncan won the MVP/Title/FMVP in 2002-03, everybody gave him his deserved props for being the player who had performed the best in that 1 season... but not everybody was thinking about him as the clear-cut best player in the world. How could they? For a year or two after 2002-03, there was always the feeling or question in everyone that if Shaq got back in shape, he could go back to rag-dolling Duncan again.

Duncan was seen as the rival for Shaq in 1999-03 period.

Nope, just not true. Shaq was the undisputed king of the jungle in that time. Everyone saw how he ragdolled Robinson and Duncan together. We can't un-see it, even if you want us to.

Kevin Garnett was right up there with Duncan and had what you would describe as "higher peaks" than Duncan in 2003-04 and 2004-05... and everyone knew Kobe was that guy!

Kobe as the guy in 2004 or 2005? You're getting better and better

Yep, EVERYONE knew that Kobe was that guy. "That guy" means that guy who is something special and different from the rest. He gave Pop nightmares in 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 (when he could have been named MVP instead of Duncan, and nobody would have blinked an eye), and 2003-04. Pop was employing Bruce Bowen for the sole purpose of stopping Kobe in many of those years. Last I checked, 2000-2003 is before 2004 and 2005.

You're the one who is "getting better and better" with your retrospective re-telling of these stories, considering you weren't even around to have a perspective of how players and coaches felt. So puh-lease spare me the sanctimony.

Most teams used to employ "Kobe-stoppers". Even the Spurs game-planned more for Kobe than any other team ever game-planned for Duncan.

Yeah, teams game-planned so much for Kobe in 2003 when he played next to Shaq... Meanwhile Duncan was doubled and tripled all the time during that period.

Lol, what?? Duncan was constantly double and triple teamed? I think you have the wrong guy, Mister. You're mixing him up with Kobe.

This is one problem with looking back at things retrospectively and trying to make things fit what you want to see, you end up ignoring prevailing perceptions from that time... perceptions that existed for a very real reason. Between 2002-03 and 2004-05, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe were equals in the eyes of most, but Duncan had the most favorable situation of the three from 2002-03 onwards so won the most in that time.

There is nothing favorable about Duncan's situation in 2003 or 2004.

Duncan had the best coach in the league, the best FO in the league, and the best quality in depth on his roster. KG and Kobe would have killed to trade places with him and enjoy that stability and quality roster for their full primes. Well, they wouldn't have wanted to move to San Antonio but in their own cities. Kobe lost the 3 best years of his prime (26, 27, 28) to having a historically horrible roster. KG lost many of his too, when Minnesota screwed themselves with the Joe Smith scandal.

Kobe wasn't seen on Duncan/KG level until 2006.

Kobe only seen on Duncan/KG level from 2006 onwards? That's hogwash, lol. What you're doing here is telling us now what you would have wanted us to have believed back then... to fit your Timmy-loving desires... but it just isn't true.

Duncan/KG/Kobe were all viewed as being on the same tier of player between 2002-03 and 2004-05... with Duncan rightfully getting a little more props for the Spurs 2 titles in 2002-03 and 2004-05. Then in 2005-06 Kobe just went to a different level.

The Spurs had no business winning the title that season too. They ROBBED the Suns of the title that year. Completely robbed them, taking out Steve Nash like that... getting Amar'e Stoudamire suspended in the aftermath for the pivotal game 5. It should be the biggest asterisked title in all of NBA history IMO. We don't give the Spurs enough shite for that because it was "quiet, boring, ole Timmy"... but the Spurs robbed Steve Nash of what should have been his first NBA ring. Hope Duncan is sending Nash flocks of turkeys every Christmas to make up for it.

That's completely pointless and unnecessary shot. Duncan didn't make Amare suspended.

The series was tied at 2-2 before game 5. We have no idea who would have won game 5 with Amare available. Suns also had Amare back in game 6 and they lost.

You know who says stuff like this? The ones who benefited from the cheating, not the ones who were cheated. The Suns had the Spurs on the run in Game 4. Everybody who was watching knew it, and the Spurs players on the court looked like they knew it too. Then Robert Horry took out Nash (perhaps, on prior team orders). Amar'e Stoudamire got suspended for nothing. Without that robbery, the Spurs weren't beating the Suns. The Suns had the momentum and would've won Games 5 and 6.

Without this stolen title, you have no leg to stand when claiming Duncan as the best player in 2006-07... which is the point of me bringing it up.

Unlike you, I don't discredit Kobe's 2002 ring for WCF conspiracy theories.

Well, you could try... and you would fail... because that 2002 SAC-LAL Q4 was not even close to this robbery.

[LAL1947]

A point I have neglected to bring up... let us NEVER forget that in 2004, Tim Duncan was CAPTAIN of the ONLY USA Men's Basketball Team that DID NOT WIN a Gold Medal since 1992, and since the Olympics started allowing professional athletes... while he was supposedly the "undisputed" best player in the league.

Kobe missed the 2004 Olympics with the scandal... and it needed him to rejoin the team and get them back on the right track as Champions of the World.

[Rapsin6]

Op’s original post is undisputed. The fact that there are so many disputes about the early 2000’s means there was no one during that period. Currently there is no undisputed best player because you will get plenty of argument between Giannis and Jokic and soon Luka will join the convo. For me, the only guys that have little argument would be Lebron in the early 2010’s until Curry made that disputed, Shaq in the early 2000’s, Jordan pretty much his entire career, KAJ pre Magic/Bird, and I don’t know enough to comment about eras before them.

[Dangit]

Bird Definitely was the best player in the nba before Jordan exploded

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Op’s original post is undisputed. The fact that there are so many disputes about the early 2000’s means there was no one during that period. Currently there is no undisputed best player because you will get plenty of argument between Giannis and Jokic and soon Luka will join the convo. For me, the only guys that have little argument would be Lebron in the early 2010’s until Curry made that disputed, Shaq in the early 2000’s, Jordan pretty much his entire career, KAJ pre Magic/Bird, and I don’t know enough to comment about eras before them.

yeah, this thread somehow is self explanatory because if you start a discussion about someone being the best or not it negates it being undisputed.
Moreover, let me clarify one thing: to be really "undisputed" you need some continuity. Even if I say "in a given moment" you must have a reached a certain level of excellent to have already convinces almost everyone at that point.
I don't know about Bird in the mid 80s, maybe, as I think Magoc was seen as inferior before 85. I guess we can say that for Shaq during the threepeat (even if I am not so sure he was that so clearly, using hindsight, but at the time it was the consensus) and MAYBE Duncan in 2003, considering how great he had been up to that point.
Russell I thought about his first few years, not sure if Pettit was big enough to contend such title.

[70sFan]

Nope, just not true. Shaq was the undisputed king of the jungle in that time. Everyone saw how he ragdolled Robinson and Duncan together. We can't un-see it, even if you want us to.

If you remember those years, you should remember Duncan finishing in MVP voting higher in 5 of 6 seasons during 1999-04 period.

If you remember those years, you should remember Duncan outplaying Shaq h2h in 3 of 5 series during that period (1999, 2002, 2003).

If you remember those years, you should remember that Spurs limited Shaq to his worst stats of the entire prime:

1999-03 Shaq in RS: 28.0/11.9/3.3 with 2.8 tov and 57.5 FG%, 54.8 FT% and 58.5 TS%
1999-93 Shaq vs Spurs in the playoffs: 24.3/13.2/2.6 with 3.1 tov and 51.1 FG%, 56.4 FT% and 53.6 TS%

Or maybe you watched highlights during that time.

Yep, EVERYONE knew that Kobe was that guy. "That guy" means that guy who is something special and different from the rest. He gave Pop nightmares in 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 (when he could have been named MVP instead of Duncan, and nobody would have blinked an eye), and 2003-04. Pop was employing Bruce Bowen for the sole purpose of stopping Kobe in many of those years. Last I checked, 2000-2003 is before 2004 and 2005.

I never said Kobe wasn't special, he definitely was and of course he gave Spurs a lot of problems.

You're the one who is "getting better and better" with your retrospective re-telling of these stories, considering you weren't even around to have a perspective of how players and coaches felt. So puh-lease spare me the sanctimony.

Don't worry, I'm well aware of how coaches and media thought of Duncan and Kobe. It was all about Shaq vs Duncan in 1999-03, not Kobe.

Lol, what?? Duncan was constantly double and triple teamed? I think you have the wrong guy, Mister. You're mixing him up with Kobe.

Are you denying that Duncan was doubled? Seriously? I hope that wasn't your intent...

Kobe was doubled, but far less often with Shaq than after O'Neal left.

Duncan had the best coach in the league, the best FO in the league, and the best quality in depth on his roster. KG and Kobe would have killed to trade places with him and enjoy that stability and quality roster for their full primes.

Yeah, in contrast Kobe had to deal his horrible coach and FO. Phil Jackson was nobody!

Kobe lost the 3 best years of his prime (26, 27, 28) to having a historically horrible roster.

We're not talking about 2005-07 here. Kobe had better situation than Duncan in 2001-04 period.

Kobe only seen on Duncan/KG level from 2006 onwards? That's hogwash, lol. What you're doing here is telling us now what you would have wanted us to have believed back then... to fit your Timmy-loving desires... but it just isn't true.

Duncan/KG/Kobe were all viewed as being on the same tier of player between 2002-03 and 2004-05... with Duncan rightfully getting a little more props for the Spurs 2 titles in 2002-03 and 2004-05. Then in 2005-06 Kobe just went to a different level.

Which is backed up by countless of evidences... right? Kobe was never a real MVP candidate during that period going by voters for example. He was never seen as better than Shaq either.

Without this stolen title, you have no leg to stand when claiming Duncan as the best player in 2006-07... which is the point of me bringing it up.

Yeah, I don't have things like RAPM, raw on/off, Spurs success in RS and eye test to back it up. Not at all, I only count rings.

Are you unfamiliar with my criteria, or are you doing that on purpose?

Well, you could try... and you would fail... because that 2002 SAC-LAL Q4 was not even close to this robbery.

I won't try, because I won't go down to your level.

[LAL1947]

Nope, just not true. Shaq was the undisputed king of the jungle in that time. Everyone saw how he ragdolled Robinson and Duncan together. We can't un-see it, even if you want us to.

If you remember those years, you should remember Duncan finishing in MVP voting higher in 5 of 6 seasons during 1999-04 period.

If you remember those years, you should remember Duncan outplaying Shaq h2h in 3 of 5 series during that period (1999, 2002, 2003).

If you remember those years, you should remember that Spurs limited Shaq to his worst stats of the entire prime:

1999-03 Shaq in RS: 28.0/11.9/3.3 with 2.8 tov and 57.5 FG%, 54.8 FT% and 58.5 TS%
1999-93 Shaq vs Spurs in the playoffs: 24.3/13.2/2.6 with 3.1 tov and 51.1 FG%, 56.4 FT% and 53.6 TS%

Or maybe you watched highlights during that time.

You really think that Duncan was an equal rival to Shaq between 1998-99 and 2001-02? Why don't you write to your fellow Spurs fan, Skip Bayliss, and ask him? He's probably the biggest Spurs fan in the media... and even he wouldn't say this. Only Tim Duncan’s mom and you would.

Stats are not everything. The game is played on the court, not in tables or rows or columns. Shaq was more dominant on the court. Was Duncan more skilled and more efficient? Sure... but we cannot forget Shaq's ability to overpower everyone with his size.

Lol, what?? Duncan was constantly double and triple teamed? I think you have the wrong guy, Mister. You're mixing him up with Kobe.

Are you denying that Duncan was doubled? Seriously? I hope that wasn't your intent...

Kobe was doubled, but far less often with Shaq than after O'Neal left.

You specifically said, "Duncan was constantly double and triple teamed". My intent was to point out that you were exaggerating. So are you taking that statement back now?

Both Shaq and Kobe were double and triple teamed when they were the #1 option on their teams, more than Duncan ever was, over the course of their careers.

Duncan had the best coach in the league, the best FO in the league, and the best quality in depth on his roster. KG and Kobe would have killed to trade places with him and enjoy that stability and quality roster for their full primes.

Yeah, in contrast Kobe had to deal his horrible coach and FO. Phil Jackson was nobody!

Pop was the best coach at that time and we had a great one in Phil, no problem there.

Here's the problem... which you’re conveniently ignoring:
- Spurs FO was much better than our FO.
- Spurs drafting in the 2000s was better than our drafting.
- Duncan's rosters > everyone else's rosters, when looking at the 2000-2010 decade overall.

Kobe lost the 3 best years of his prime (26, 27, 28) to having a historically horrible roster.

We're not talking about 2005-07 here. Kobe had better situation than Duncan in 2001-04 period.
.

No, he did not. Shaq was a toxic, lazy oaf in his last 2 seasons with LA, and our depth was weak for most of 2000-01 to 2003-04.

The reason I mention 2005-07 is because Kobe was 26, 27, 28 years old in these years... while 2003-05 is when Duncan was 26, 27, 28 years old. These are the three best years of their primes... which Duncan got to enjoy to the fullest with a quality #2 in Parker, a quality #3 in Ginobili... and excellent depth in Bruce Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Malik Rose, Brent Barry, Hedo Turkoglu, Glenn Robinson, Brent Barry, Rasho Nesterović, etc. While Kobe's were wasted with those crappy rosters.

Timmy always had rosters that were 8-10 deep with quality between 2002-03 and 2004-05, and even afterwards… while others sure as heck didn't.

Kobe only seen on Duncan/KG level from 2006 onwards? That's hogwash, lol. What you're doing here is telling us now what you would have wanted us to have believed back then... to fit your Timmy-loving desires... but it just isn't true.

Duncan/KG/Kobe were all viewed as being on the same tier of player between 2002-03 and 2004-05... with Duncan rightfully getting a little more props for the Spurs 2 titles in 2002-03 and 2004-05. Then in 2005-06 Kobe just went to a different level.

Which is backed up by countless of evidences... right? Kobe was never a real MVP candidate during that period going by voters for example. He was never seen as better than Shaq either.

Well, where is your countless evidence that says otherwise??

I have even given you a quote by Nash’s own coach, Mike D’Antoni, from 2005-06 that says, “Kobe is the best player in the world and it’s not close. He is utterly dominant”. Since Nash was gifted the MVP that season, I think D’Antoni’s opinion is quite relevant to this question.

So there's no confusion, here's what I'm saying... Shaq was undisputed king of the jungle between 1999-2002. Everyone else was below him. The first tier below him consisted of Duncan, KG, Kobe. When Shaq dropped off in 2002-03, these three guys were considered the best in the world. Garnett had a higher peak than Duncan in both 2003-04 and 2004-05... but we give this 2002-03 2004-05 period to Duncan because of his superb 2002-03 season and because his Spurs won the titles in 2003 and 2005.

Duncan and KG were older than Bryant though... and when they started showing their age a little, Kobe took off to a new level in 2005-06. That 2005-06 seasons is one of the finest displays of individual offense that has ever been seen... with only MJ having better AFAIC. Kobe was undisputed best player in the league between 2005-06 and 2007-08. In 2008-09 and 2009-10, it could be disputed between him and Lebron… but Kobe won the titles in 2009 and 2010.

Without this stolen title, you have no leg to stand when claiming Duncan as the best player in 2006-07... which is the point of me bringing it up.

Yeah, I don't have things like RAPM, raw on/off, Spurs success in RS and eye test to back it up. Not at all, I only count rings.

Are you unfamiliar with my criteria, or are you doing that on purpose?

I don’t really care about your criteria as you are showing your tremendous bias for Duncan in the course of this conversation. Duncan has a stolen title in 2006-07 and wasn't even Top 3 in the world in 2006-07. That's just how it was, sorry. Kobe, Lebron, Dirk were better than him then. It can also be argued that Garnett, Nash, Wade were better.

There were even times when Ginobili was better than Duncan between 2006 and 2010. Duncan was being propped up by Ginobili and Parker, two superb players. When Kobe finally got a crew in 2007-08 that was as good as Duncan's, what happened? He dumped the Spurs out of the playoffs 4-1. He also had 3 consecutive finals and back-to-back titles. Meanwhile, the Spurs never won a title again until 2013-14.

Well, you could try... and you would fail... because that 2002 SAC-LAL Q4 was not even close to this robbery.

I won't try, because I won't go down to your level.

Yeah, sure, I believe you, lol. Anyway, the point remains... the 2006-07 Spurs title is the biggest asterisked title in modern NBA history. Tim Duncan should have retired with 4 rings. It could also have been only 3 rings if Kawhi, Parker, Ginobili had not carried them over the Heat in 2013-14.

And it might have only been 2 rings, if the hand check rule was not introduced in 2004-05. As we all know, the Detroit Pistons were constantly checking Kobe on the perimeter in 2003-04 but without the fouls being called. This is why the league introduced the hand-check rule in 2004-05, not for any other reason. If the hand-check rule was not introduced, the Pistons would have used the same defensive game-plan on Parker and Ginobili, and probably would have won the 2004-05 final too (which they only lost 4:3). Go back and check the box scores for 2004-05, Ginobili's and Parker’s points scored were a big reason why the Spurs beat the Pistons. So while you are here maligning Kobe, Duncan should be thanking Kobe Bryant for that 2004-05 ring.

[Homer38]

Bird Definitely was the best player in the nba before Jordan exploded

Magic Johnson.....

[Dangit]

Bird Definitely was the best player in the nba before Jordan exploded

Magic Johnson.....

Bird probably had the toughest road to the finals in the playoffs of any player in history multiple years.
The east was absolutely stacked and Worthy and Kareem were were a notch above McHale and Parish
The argument for Johnson could easily be made but I think Bird had the tougher road and notches him out .

[Franco]

So I guess Lebron can't be undisputed MVP in 2009 or 2010 then, since his team didn't win a championship?

Winning the championship isn’t a prerequisite to being the best player. There are countless examples like Lebron in 15 and 18

LeBron wasn't the best player in 2015 or 2018. Only in the media's and his fans' heads.

I would guess you're very comfortable with calling Kawhi the best player in the world for 2019 then

[LewisnotMiller]

I like this list, but I would squeeze Bird in between Kareem and Jordan. Bird definitely took over the reigns from Kareem during the 80's before Jordan blew up.

Yeah I thought about including Magic and Bird, but there was no clear cut better player between those 2 so I omitted them. But yeah Magic and Bird for sure as a tandem deserve to be on the list.

There has to be at least one year where you could say Magic Johnson was the better of the two.

Yep. But the argument is that Bird had a stretch where he was largely considered 'the best' by the vast majority. I think that's reasonable based on the 3 MVPs. Across their career it's much closer to a toss up. Plus you had Jordan coming in and taking over from both of them.