PDA

View Full Version : Hollinger's Top Ten Players of the Decade



JordansBulls
12-31-2009, 07:38 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-091231





We have one day left in the decade, and I've saved the best for last: Today I'm introducing my list of the 10 best players of the decade.

By "best," I mean the ones that did the most to put their teams in position to win games. Championships matter, obviously, but players aren't responsible for selecting their teammates (in most cases), so to me the building blocks of championships are just as important.

And by using these criteria, I should emphasize that it's different from "most famous," "most memorable" or "most entertaining." Allen Iverson, for instance, would easily crack the top five based on those criteria, but fell short of making this top 10. He won one fairly questionable MVP, his fame never matched his impact on the standings and his output faded late in the decade.

Finally, to be clear, we are measuring only what a player did from Jan. 1, 2000, to Dec. 31, 2009. Tim Duncan's championship in 1999, for instance, carries no weight here.

Besides Iverson, a few other notable players didn't make the list either, and along with Iverson I'll introduce them as my five-man honorable-mention team. Tracy McGrady had one of the best four-year runs in NBA history from 2001 to 2005, but his body couldn't shoulder such a load in the latter half of the decade. Ditto for Chris Webber, who might be much higher on the list had he not wrecked his knee in the 2003 playoffs. Manu Ginobili's accomplishments overseas (a Euroleague title, a gold medal and a world championship stolen by bad refs and a bad ankle) augment a fairly strong half-decade in the NBA, but don't quite push him into the top 10.

Finally, Jason Kidd, for all his defensive impact, was a far less potent offensive player than his fans would prefer to admit. He never cracked the top 10 in player efficiency rating, and only once did he even come close. (Ironically, that was not the year he finished second in the MVP voting, but the year after. He blew away all his career highs in the most important categories, led his team to the Finals and finished ninth in the MVP race. I don't get award voting sometimes.).

With that said, let's introduce my top 10 players of the decade:

Pierce
Pierce

10. Paul Pierce
He didn't have the blow-up years players like McGrady, Vince Carter or Gilbert Arenas did, but he was phenomenally consistent and durable. Pierce kept his PER in the 20 range all decade, was a much better defender than most high-scoring wings and, of course, was the MVP of the 2008 NBA Finals.

He never made first-team All-NBA and never should have, but his body of work across the entire decade puts him on this list.

Wade
Wade

9. Dwyane Wade
You can make a strong argument for ranking Wade higher given his two historic performances, the first coming in the 2006 Finals (which I've argued was the best Finals effort in history) and the second coming with his brilliant play in 2008-09. But major gaps litter his record: a pair of 51-game seasons due to injuries and a brief résumé before 2006.

On a 2005-2014 All-Decade team five years from now he'd probably crack the top three or four, but on this list his body of work is too limited to rate higher than ninth.

Billups
Billups

8. Chauncey Billups
The only player on this list to make seven straight conference finals, Billups wasn't a bit player on any of those teams; he consistently posted PERs in the low 20s and added solid defense at the point. In terms of hardware, he won the 2004 Finals MVP, and would have taken home a second if Detroit had hung on to a second-half lead in Game 7 of the 2005 Finals against San Antonio.

Billups also started for eight straight 50-win teams, including one in Minnesota. While he failed to garner the same appreciation his contemporaries did this decade -- just four All-Star teams and three All-NBA teams -- only one player has a stronger case as point guard of the decade.

Nash
Nash

7. Steve Nash
While I'm dubious about Nash's two MVP awards, one can't deny he's one of the best offensive players in history. He never won the big prize this decade, but his teams went to three conference finals in a difficult Western Conference. And despite his perceived frailty he also proved durable, playing at least 70 games in every full season this decade.

Nash's strongest case, however, lies in the dazzling offensive efficiency numbers his teams posted. While he never lacked for help, his teams led the league an amazing eight times. Most notably, his 2003-04 Dallas team was the best offense in history.

James
James

6. LeBron James
LeBron has two principal shortcomings that keep him out of the top five on this list. The first, the lack of a championship ring, is likely to be remedied at some point in the next several years. The second, however, is that his track record is half a decade shorter than the other guys'.

While James' 2008-09 regular season included the best PER ever by a player not named Jordan and marked his second straight season leading the league, he had only three MVP-contender seasons and two others that were All-NBA worthy. That pales beside the players above him on this list, so he'll have to settle for sixth.

Nowitzki
Nowitzki

5. Dirk Nowitzki
Nowitzki's résumé lacks only an NBA title for validation; the Dwyane Wade Show in 2006 and a knee injury in 2003 eliminated his best chances. (Side note: Don't forget that fadeaway he hit over Shaq in Game 5 in Miami before the foul call on Wade). Otherwise, he won one MVP award and had three other seasons that were MVP-caliber. He also made the All-NBA team nine years despite a surplus of quality players at his position.

Additionally, Nowitzki's teams won at least 50 games every full season this decade, capped by 67 in 2006-07; that's a feat only Tim Duncan can match.

O'Neal
O'Neal

4. Shaquille O'Neal
I have some misgivings about putting him this low because of his astronomic peak value: For the first three years of the decade, he was one of the three greatest players in history. The rest of his decade, however, wasn't nearly as impressive.

He won another championship and made four more All-NBA first teams, but he wasn't as durable (missing at least 15 games six different times) or as consistent (loafing through his last year and a half in Miami) as the other players on this list. He should have been first, in other words, but I can't put him higher than fourth.

Bryant
Bryant

3. Kobe Bryant
Bryant is unquestionably the most memorable player of this decade, not to mention the most watchable. He's not the best, though. He won one MVP award and four rings, but was only the lead dog on one of the championship teams, and in terms of PER he has more in common with Nowitzki than the other players in the top five.

Though it's been common to hear people say he's the best player in the league, thumb through his résumé and it's hard to pinpoint a single season in which you could prove that was true. Subjectively, one can also say he didn't understand how to constructively channel his insatiable competitiveness until the final two or three years of the decade.

That he outranks Shaq and all but two other players is a testament to his consistency -- including seven top-5 MVP finishes -- and tenacity. Few star guards have defended better, especially in big moments. He made the All-Defense team every year but one.

Garnett
Garnett

2. Kevin Garnett
Unfairly lampooned for not leading a deeply flawed Minnesota team past the likes of L.A. and San Antonio, Garnett showed what he can do with some better help around him after he was traded to Boston. He led the league in PER in back-to-back seasons in Minnesota, but didn't get a single MVP vote the second year because his supporting cast was so bad.

In Boston, he proved his defensive dominance by leading one of the greatest defensive teams in history to a title. He made the All-Defense team every year of the decade, was a first-team pick eight times and won the defensive player of the year award in 2008; had he been traded to Boston a few years earlier he probably would have won the award a few more times.

Since I presume I'll need to defend this ranking to the larger world, I'll add two more facts. First, it will no doubt shock readers to learn that Garnett's career playoff PER is better than Bryant's and, in fact, ranks in the top 10 in post-merger history; his primary shortcoming in Minnesota wasn't a lack of mettle in the clutch, it was that he couldn't fire Kevin McHale. Second, recall that the one time this decade Garnett and Bryant met as the alpha males on their respective teams, Garnett's side rolled.

Duncan
Duncan

1. Tim Duncan
Perhaps the unsexiest superstar in league history, Duncan proved monotonously, predictably, devastatingly effective while earning two MVPs, three championships, seven first-team All-NBA selections, seven first-team All-Defense nods, and seven top-5 MVP finishes. He won at least 53 games every year of the decade, and no player this decade won a title with anywhere near as little help as he had in 2003; only one teammate averaged more than a dozen points, 20-year-old Tony Parker at 15.5.

Duncan didn't have any stratospheric seasons, but he consistently played at an MVP level the entire decade. For several players above I recounted how many MVP-contender seasons they had; in Duncan's case, it was all of them. Nobody writes flowing prose about him because of how he played, but there's only one choice for Player of the Decade.

A couple more All-Decade awards

Coach of the Decade: (tie) Gregg Popovich and Phil Jackson

Rookie of the Decade: Chris Paul, 2005-06

Sixth Man of the Decade: Manu Ginobili

Defensive Player of the Decade: Ben Wallace

Decade All-Defensive Team:
C: Wallace
PF (tie): Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett
SF: Ron Artest
SG: Bruce Bowen
PG: Jason Kidd

bigsams50
12-31-2009, 07:43 PM
Lovin KG at number 2

Toenail Clipper
12-31-2009, 07:45 PM
lol

cmellofan15
12-31-2009, 07:46 PM
Paul Pierce? Not the worst pick, but not the best one.

GoatMilk
12-31-2009, 07:48 PM
honorable mention Manu Ginobili?

SLAM has a better list.

10. Kidd
9. Wade
8. Nash
7. Iverson
6. Dirk
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
2. Duncan
1. Kobe

I hate Hollinger. he's way to technical and loves stats too much. He should be a baseball writer

RaptorsFanatic
12-31-2009, 07:50 PM
I think that is an okay list, I would have to argue for Wade. Cmon, he has to be more impactful than that in this decade.

ManRam
12-31-2009, 07:51 PM
If you take his opening into consideration, I don't think it's a bad list at all.

"players aren't responsible for selecting their teammates". Interesting list.

JordansBulls
12-31-2009, 07:52 PM
Top 3 should be Duncan, Shaq and Kobe. All have a case as well.

And Billups shouldn't be ahead of Wade nor Pierce. Billups really didn't even come around until 2004 and didn't even make the allstar team until 2006.

ManRam
12-31-2009, 08:03 PM
Top 3 should be Duncan, Shaq and Kobe. All have a case as well.

And Billups shouldn't be ahead of Wade nor Pierce. Billups really didn't even come around until 2004 and didn't even make the allstar team until 2006.

Um. Wade didn't come into the league until 03-04. That year, I think Billups won this little award called the FINALS MVP. Billups definitely wins the longevity battle over Wade. I think Pierce should be ahead of Billups though, but it's close. Billups' defense, and being "Mr. Big Shot" means a lot.

Using his criteria...

1. Tim Duncan
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. LeBron James
7. Steve Nash
8. Paul Pierce
9. Chauncey Billups
10. Dwayne Wade

DerekRE_3
12-31-2009, 08:04 PM
Um. Wade didn't come into the league until 03-04. That year, I think Billups won this little award called the FINALS MVP. Billups definitely wins the longevity battle over Wade. I think Pierce should be ahead of Billups though, but it's close. Billups' defense, and being "Mr. Big Shot" means a lot.

Using his criteria...

1. Tim Duncan
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. LeBron James
7. Steve Nash
8. Paul Pierce
9. Chauncey Billups
10. Dwayne Wade

I'll take a Finals MVP over an all star appearance all day. The All Star Game is a joke anyways.

B.JenningsMVP
12-31-2009, 08:05 PM
honorable mention Manu Ginobili?

SLAM has a better list.

10. Kidd
9. Wade
8. Nash
7. Iverson
6. Dirk
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
2. Duncan
1. Kobe

I hate Hollinger. he's way to technical and loves stats too much. He should be a baseball writer

I'm feelin' it

balla4life22
12-31-2009, 08:06 PM
Paul Pierce? Not the worst pick, but not the best one.

Paul Pierce has been one of the most consistent stars this decade. he won a championship and made it to a couple conference finals. BTW Gucci Mane is a jokee

prodigy
12-31-2009, 08:10 PM
Garnett has Zero titles yet he's ahead of O'neal and kobe? fail!!

Teeboy1487
12-31-2009, 08:16 PM
Garnett has Zero titles yet he's ahead of O'neal and kobe? fail!! Painfully, he has one, but I agree with your post. He should not be ahead of Kobe or Shaq.

Lakersfan2483
12-31-2009, 08:18 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-091231

Kobe, Shaq and Duncan are the top 3 from the decade, his list is wrong as usual.

Lakersfan2483
12-31-2009, 08:19 PM
honorable mention Manu Ginobili?

SLAM has a better list.

10. Kidd
9. Wade
8. Nash
7. Iverson
6. Dirk
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
2. Duncan
1. Kobe

I hate Hollinger. he's way to technical and loves stats too much. He should be a baseball writer

Slam's list is better with the exception of where they have Wade, I have Wade behind Dirk.

1-800-STFU
12-31-2009, 08:20 PM
Garnett has Zero titles yet he's ahead of O'neal and kobe? fail!!

Oops there.

I'd put Garnett 4, Shaq 2, and Kobe 3. Otherwise I agree with this list.

JordansBulls
12-31-2009, 08:52 PM
Garnett has Zero titles yet he's ahead of O'neal and kobe? fail!!

Garnett won a title in 2008.

Also I wouldn't put him above the others either, however he is one of 3 players all time who has a MVP and a DPOY in his career

LAKERMANIA
12-31-2009, 09:03 PM
I cant believe Garnett is #2 best player in the decade..

top 3 is Shaq, Kobe and Duncan not in any order... other than that, I am surprised Lebron wasnt put #1, so I like the list..

Chronz
12-31-2009, 09:42 PM
honorable mention Manu Ginobili?

SLAM has a better list.

10. Kidd
9. Wade
8. Nash
7. Iverson
6. Dirk
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
2. Duncan
1. Kobe

I hate Hollinger. he's way to technical and loves stats too much. He should be a baseball writer

No thanks Ill pass on SLAMS streetball mentality, Id much rather go for analytical rankings. Not seeing why Pierce is rated below Billups though I dont know how hes factoring wins into all this.

SteveNash
12-31-2009, 11:53 PM
Top 3 should be Duncan, Shaq and Kobe. All have a case as well.

And Billups shouldn't be ahead of Wade nor Pierce. Billups really didn't even come around until 2004 and didn't even make the allstar team until 2006.

Agree with top 3. KG rated way too high.

As for Billups, why shouldn't be be rated higher. He has more win shares. Billups even has more win shares than Wade since 2003 when Wade entered the league.

BradyIsTheMan12
12-31-2009, 11:57 PM
Shaq should be number one, was unstoppable in LA and has won 4 titles

rabueed
01-01-2010, 12:03 AM
I thought we couldn't quote ESPN insider articles on this forum?

Correct me if i'm wrong...

dodie53
01-01-2010, 12:35 AM
I'll take a Finals MVP over an all star appearance all day. The All Star Game is a joke anyways.

me too.

Bullsfan22
01-01-2010, 12:48 AM
Duncan
Shaq
kobe

Toenail Clipper
01-01-2010, 12:54 AM
Shaq should be number one, was unstoppable in LA and has won 4 titles

no, he was only great throughout the first half.
therefore, it's just a toss up between Duncan and Kobe for first and Shaq for third.

_KB24_
01-01-2010, 12:56 AM
It's Hollinger, what do you expect :shrug:

Not having Iverson their is pitiful along with KG above Kobe & Shaq :facepalm:

still1ballin
01-01-2010, 02:03 AM
Hollinger is funny

blastmasta26
01-01-2010, 02:34 AM
it depends how you define the "top players" it could mean top scorers, top defenders or top energy guys. I think reggie evans could be the "top player" in the nba because of his amazing tenacity he brings to the court night in and night out. He makes other people around him better. Am I right or am I right?????
No.

KobeIs
01-01-2010, 02:37 AM
oh god. good laugh hollinger. this why i'm not an espn insider

HuRRiCaNeS324
01-01-2010, 03:05 AM
Im not a Dirk hater, i just don't he has accomplished that much other than his MVP (and if the MVP was decided after the playoffs we would have a different winner after that huge upset)

10. Kidd
9. Dirk
8. Iverson
7. Wade
6. Nash
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
2. Duncan
1. Kobe

Hawkeye15
01-01-2010, 03:40 AM
I am personally fine with Hollinger's rankings, but I would have no problem with someone putting Kobe #2 due to important games played. I am still partial to KG though

Hawkeye15
01-01-2010, 03:42 AM
basically, this will turn into Laker fans crapping on KG. When in reality, he was given crap for teammates, and produced top 15 all time numbers.

abe_froman
01-01-2010, 03:55 AM
basically, this will turn into Laker fans crapping on KG. When in reality, he was given crap for teammates, and produced top 15 all time numbers.

will?...read the first 2 pages

personally i wouldnt have kg at 2.but it isnt that laughable to think he's top 3 either..maybe its because he played for minny,and stuck on some pretty bad teams.if you go back and take a look at it,i think many would be surprised at just how good he really was(your probably thinking,well he was good,but not that good...but yes he was that good)

JNA17
01-01-2010, 04:38 AM
Since when did people care what holligner thinks now a days? He's the biggest dumb *** on ESPN.

JNA17
01-01-2010, 04:39 AM
basically, this will turn into Laker fans crapping on KG. When in reality, he was given crap for teammates, and produced top 15 all time numbers.

classic t-wolves fan excuse when in reality there teammates were actually good.

LakersIn5
01-01-2010, 07:02 AM
10. Billups
9. Dirk
8. IWade
7. Nash
6. Iverson (27.8 PPG for the decade, 1 MVP, 1 Finals Appearance, alot of ASG appearance and scoring titles)
5. LeBron
4. Garnett
3. Shaq
1/2. Kobe/Duncan

what has lebron done that AI hasnt done? except for unfair reasons like average 7 rpg and 1.5 bpg cuz lebron is a SF. AI is a guard

ChiSox219
01-01-2010, 11:10 AM
Battier's defense > Artest's

m26555
01-01-2010, 11:28 AM
Garnett has Zero titles yet he's ahead of O'neal and kobe? fail!!
He has one, but it's good to know that you can count. Also, switch Garnett with either Shaq or Kobe earlier in the decade, and he would have four rings, too.

m26555
01-01-2010, 11:29 AM
classic t-wolves fan excuse when in reality there teammates were actually good.
:laugh:

Who? Troy Hudson? Wally Szczerbiak? Radoslav Nesterovic?

The ONE year he actually had good teammates in 03-04, Cassell got hurt before the WCF, so Garnett had to spend most of the series playing POINT GUARD because Hudson was also injured.

Like I said earlier; give Garnett the supporting casts that Kobe or Shaq had (pretty much they had each other) or the the ones that Duncan had, and he'd have the most rings of the decade.

Whether you like it or not, Garnett IS, in fact, one of the top two best all-around players of the 2000s.

NYMetros
01-01-2010, 12:52 PM
Since when did people care what holligner thinks now a days? He's the biggest dumb *** on ESPN.

Yeah, I agree. I hate how he relies on numbers and stats. Stats aren't as important in basketball as they are in other sports like baseball. It's like Hollinger doesn't even watch basketball, he just uses cold-hard numbers. To be a basketball fan you actually have to watch the games.

Here's my top 10 though.

1. Tim Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe
4. Nash
5. Garnett
6. Iverson
7. LeBron
8. Dirk
9. Wade
10. Kidd

Kakaroach
01-01-2010, 01:15 PM
Here's mine, and yeah I've never valued anything Hollinger has said.

1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe
4. Garnett
5. Iverson
6. Nash
7. Dirk
8. LeBron
9. Wade
10. Kidd

Chad Feldheimer
01-01-2010, 02:06 PM
putting Garnett above Kobe, Shaq or Duncan is laughable.

barreleffact
01-01-2010, 02:07 PM
where is mike james???

petski
01-01-2010, 02:22 PM
Jason Kidd at PG for the NBA ALL Defensive Team is funny.

Hawkeye15
01-01-2010, 02:56 PM
classic t-wolves fan excuse when in reality there teammates were actually good.

Marbury/Googs/KG were too young. They all left or were hurt. Terrell Brandon suffered a career ending ankle injury 15 games after they let Billups walk. Wally? Hudson? Which teammates are you referring to???? Cassell and Spree put forth effort one year, and you saw that yes, the WOlves were an elite team. The following year, Cassell was too worried about his contract, and Spree decided to call in sick.
To what teammates are you referring to? Please enlighten me.

KG had 6 straight 20-10-5 season, passing Larry Bird. Top 20 in scoring, rebounding, and blocks by the time he is done, easily. Didn't miss games, has a ring, one of the top 5 defensive big men of the decade.

Hawkeye15
01-01-2010, 02:59 PM
the KG bashing is unreal. He was an MVP, the most efficient player in the NBA every year thru his prime basically, whether you want to measure it in PER, Efficiency, whatever. Rebounding crowns, led the NBA in points in 2004, 1st team all defense numerous years, DPOY award.
Get over the hatred for his antics. He did them when you guys were saying, "Oh, poor KG, stuck in Minnesota with no support". The only thing that has changed now is his team is kicking the **** out of yours

albertc86
01-01-2010, 03:08 PM
By "best," I mean the ones that did the most to put their teams in position to win games. Championships matter, obviously, but players aren't responsible for selecting their teammates (in most cases), so to me the building blocks of championships are just as important.

First of all, I don't think KG should be ranked higher than Kobe or Shaq. Secondly, wasn't KG the guy that all NBA experts criticized for being timid when a game was on the line? KG was a beast, no doubt, but does one ring warrant the second slot? I don't think so. I'm not bashing KG because his regular season accolades speak for themselves.

SteveNash
01-01-2010, 05:57 PM
what has lebron done that AI hasnt done? except for unfair reasons like average 7 rpg and 1.5 bpg cuz lebron is a SF. AI is a guard

Shot over 47% from the field which LeBron has done every year since his sophomore year.


KG had 6 straight 20-10-5 season, passing Larry Bird. Top 20 in scoring, rebounding, and blocks by the time he is done, easily. Didn't miss games, has a ring, one of the top 5 defensive big men of the decade.

KG put up big stats because he was it for the team having to do everything inflating his stats compared to other players.

While I won't argue that KG had great teammates (he obviously didn't). A better player (Duncan, Shaq) would have done more with what KG had.

_KB24_
01-01-2010, 07:21 PM
the KG bashing is unreal. He was an MVP, the most efficient player in the NBA every year thru his prime basically, whether you want to measure it in PER, Efficiency, whatever. Rebounding crowns, led the NBA in points in 2004, 1st team all defense numerous years, DPOY award.
Get over the hatred for his antics. He did them when you guys were saying, "Oh, poor KG, stuck in Minnesota with no support". The only thing that has changed now is his team is kicking the **** out of yours


I hate to agree with you, but good response. Did he really lead the league in scoring in 04??

Verbal Christ
01-01-2010, 08:41 PM
hey chron what you think about your boy getting shafted and only making the honorable mention team? maybe they should have only made a half-decade team.

Bruno
01-01-2010, 10:50 PM
At the end of the day, an "all-decade" list is just not that important. This generation of players will be judged by what they have done from the 90's, through the 2000's and up until they retire in the 2010's. Yeah the decades over, but it really takes a few years to step back, and look at the ripple effects of what these guys accomplished in the 2000's, and how it effected the rest of the league around them to judge them most accurately.


I still laugh at the fact that people actually pay money to read his articles.

amos1er
01-01-2010, 10:58 PM
This list is a joke and Hollinger should be barred from writing anything basketball related for the rest of his life.

Only a homerish child would put Garnet ahead of Kobe and Shaq. His laker hating bias sure shined through on this one.

Kobe: Four titles, One MVP, One Finals MVP

Shaq: Four titles, One MVP, Three Finals MVP's

Garnet: One title, One MVP, 0 Finals MVP's :facepalm:

Give me a ****ing break Hollinger...your a disgrace and a joke.

Hawkeye15
01-02-2010, 12:16 AM
I hate to agree with you, but good response. Did he really lead the league in scoring in 04??

he led in total points and total rebounds.

JordansBulls
01-02-2010, 01:51 AM
I hate to agree with you, but good response. Did he really lead the league in scoring in 04??

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_yearly.html

Chronz
01-02-2010, 02:33 AM
hey chron what you think about your boy getting shafted and only making the honorable mention team? maybe they should have only made a half-decade team.
Shafted? I dont see a shaft, and if it was a half decade team then Tmac would definitely be in the top 3.

Chronz
01-02-2010, 02:34 AM
This list is a joke and Hollinger should be barred from writing anything basketball related for the rest of his life.

Only a homerish child would put Garnet ahead of Kobe and Shaq. His laker hating bias sure shined through on this one.

Kobe: Four titles, One MVP, One Finals MVP

Shaq: Four titles, One MVP, Three Finals MVP's

Garnet: One title, One MVP, 0 Finals MVP's :facepalm:

Give me a ****ing break Hollinger...your a disgrace and a joke.
How is KG suppose to win a finals MVP when hes only been on a team good enough to make the Finals once?

Your pretty much hating

ink
01-02-2010, 03:33 AM
I think his list is pretty good actually. Duncan should definitely be at the top of any list from this decade. KG at #2 is bold, but I'll go along with it. His impact on both the Wolves and Celtics was phenomenal.

kblo247
01-02-2010, 03:55 AM
If you take his opening into consideration, I don't think it's a bad list at all.

"players aren't responsible for selecting their teammates". Interesting list.

You damn sure are when you take the league's biggest contract

KG doesn't belong in the same category as Kobe/Tim/Shaq since they spent the decade winning over multiple lotto trips, all but 2 first round exits, and disappearing late in games despite being the highest paid player in the league

ldc62
01-02-2010, 05:32 AM
Top 5: Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, KG, Dirk

barreleffact
01-02-2010, 05:45 AM
You damn sure are when you take the league's biggest contract

KG doesn't belong in the same category as Kobe/Tim/Shaq since they spent the decade winning over multiple lotto trips, all but 2 first round exits, and disappearing late in games despite being the highest paid player in the league

so you want him to not have signed that contract? any business man would taken the max he can get. look at shard. you cant control what your gm offers you or doesnt do nor wat players are available for trade. i dnt think he is worthy of being 2nd and i do think he the best 2nd opotion(shrinks in the clutch) player in history. but this whole contracrt debate is rediculous. stop *****in about ppls contracts when they SHOULD have signed em. money over glory IMO(unless glory leads to more money of course)

LA_Raiders
01-02-2010, 05:47 AM
lol,

1 Kobe
2 Shaq
3 TD

nuff said

ink
01-02-2010, 05:48 AM
Just read Hollinger's article. His rationale for each of the placements is rock solid IMO. I don't question any of his picks and it's not like I'm a Hollinger fan. I just think he makes his case well for every selection.

barreleffact
01-02-2010, 05:50 AM
he has a case for everyone. thats correct. he's just wrong. but as much as i hate to admit it i like the fact that he put billups on the list. billups had talent obviously but it was a good choice considering all their accomplishments.

kblo247
01-02-2010, 09:26 AM
so you want him to not have signed that contract? any business man would taken the max he can get. look at shard. you cant control what your gm offers you or doesnt do nor wat players are available for trade. i dnt think he is worthy of being 2nd and i do think he the best 2nd opotion(shrinks in the clutch) player in history. but this whole contracrt debate is rediculous. stop *****in about ppls contracts when they SHOULD have signed em. money over glory IMO(unless glory leads to more money of course)

Shard went to a loaded team and was replacing an overpaid guy who hadn't put in work for years in Hill

KG signed that deal with an expansion franchise who people didn't want to play for because they were an expansion team, in a city where basketball wasn't popular since the MPLS days, who had a cloud over it thanks to the Joe Smith scandal, and whose young stud PG bad mouthed them.

They are worlds apart as KG basically killed what last little chance they had to lure one guy (money) besides he and Wally's play to say oh this is a nice situation and city.

He ****ed himself and the team over. Management went with the deal at the time because they were a fledgling team looking to have their own franchise player.

barreleffact
01-02-2010, 10:42 AM
garnett was arguably the best player in basketball. he should have been payed like the best.

IrespectNumber3
01-02-2010, 02:57 PM
Anyone who doesn't think Shaq and Kobe aren't 1 and 2 are foolish

JordansBulls
01-02-2010, 03:29 PM
Anyone who doesn't think Shaq and Kobe aren't 1 and 2 are foolish

Yeah because Tim Duncan has done less right?:rolleyes:

IrespectNumber3
01-03-2010, 11:32 AM
Yeah because Tim Duncan has done less right?:rolleyes:

Tim Duncan, Shaq and Kobe have all accomplished the same amount of rings. Kobe did all that Plus dropped 81 in a game...All of the amount of scoring and clutchness that Kobe has had is ridiculous. Tim Duncan has accomplished alot too, but you can't say Timmy is better then Kobe and Shaq.

barreleffact
01-03-2010, 11:47 AM
tim duncan has been better than shaq as far as consistency for the decade. shaq had a higher peak and 1 more ring for the decade but you can argue timmy as well

JayW_1023
01-04-2010, 01:15 PM
Where is Kidd? Two finals appearances...a team with no post presence whatsoever. I love Nash and Billups, but Kidd is right there.

Hawkeye15
01-04-2010, 01:28 PM
Just read Hollinger's article. His rationale for each of the placements is rock solid IMO. I don't question any of his picks and it's not like I'm a Hollinger fan. I just think he makes his case well for every selection.

careful, rationale is a bad word on PSD. You will get called a hater for using this.

fresh prince
01-04-2010, 02:54 PM
This list is a joke and Hollinger should be barred from writing anything basketball related for the rest of his life.

Only a homerish child would put Garnet ahead of Kobe and Shaq. His laker hating bias sure shined through on this one.

Kobe: Four titles, One MVP, One Finals MVP

Shaq: Four titles, One MVP, Three Finals MVP's

Garnet: One title, One MVP, 0 Finals MVP's :facepalm:

Give me a ****ing break Hollinger...your a disgrace and a joke.

BUT BUT....KG Had a higher PER!

Hollinger is a tool.. Whats even more funny is the whole give KG Kobe or Shaq's supporting cast and he would have 4 rings too argument..

That needs to stop.. Give me A Rods Money then while were at it...

JordansBulls
01-04-2010, 05:51 PM
Tim Duncan, Shaq and Kobe have all accomplished the same amount of rings. Kobe did all that Plus dropped 81 in a game...All of the amount of scoring and clutchness that Kobe has had is ridiculous. Tim Duncan has accomplished alot too, but you can't say Timmy is better then Kobe and Shaq.

How could I not?

He has more overall accolades than the 2 of them. More league mvp's and more finals mvp's.

Well the same as Shaq.

Chronz
01-04-2010, 06:20 PM
BUT BUT....KG Had a higher PER!

Hollinger is a tool.. Whats even more funny is the whole give KG Kobe or Shaq's supporting cast and he would have 4 rings too argument..

That needs to stop.. Give me A Rods Money then while were at it...

If you had A-Rods money youd be just as rich as he is

ps

PER : Careers / Playoffs
KG : 23.7 / 23.2
Duncan : 25.1 / 26.1

For the decade:

KG: 25.3 / 23.9
Duncan: 25.5 / 26.6

So what were you saying?

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 06:26 PM
Originally Posted by fresh prince
BUT BUT....KG Had a higher PER!

Hollinger is a tool.. Whats even more funny is the whole give KG Kobe or Shaq's supporting cast and he would have 4 rings too argument..

That needs to stop.. Give me A Rods Money then while were at it...
If you had A-Rods money youd be just as rich as he is

ps

PER : Careers / Playoffs
KG : 23.7 / 23.2
Duncan : 25.1 / 26.1

For the decade:

KG: 25.3 / 23.9
Duncan: 25.5 / 26.6

So what were you saying?

So he was being sarcastic.
And you didn't get it.

fresh prince
01-04-2010, 06:27 PM
I dont subscribe to PER. Its majorly flawed just like everything else Hollinger spits.

Titles in the decade:

Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Duncan: 3
KG: 1

That's all I'm saying..

JordansBulls
01-04-2010, 06:30 PM
I dont subscribe to PER. Its majorly flawed just like everything else Hollinger spits.

Titles in the decade:

Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Duncan: 3
KG: 1

That's all I'm saying..

You have to include more than just titles.

Otherwise the list would look like this:

Horry: 5
Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Fisher: 4
Duncan: 3

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 06:33 PM
You have to include more than just titles.

Otherwise the list would look like this:

Horry: 5
Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Fisher: 4
Duncan: 3

C'mon man, be realistic now,
We are all super nba fans here.

lorenz00
01-04-2010, 06:42 PM
ducan then kobe then shaq

fresh prince
01-04-2010, 06:58 PM
You have to include more than just titles.

Otherwise the list would look like this:

Horry: 5
Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Fisher: 4
Duncan: 3

Come on dude Horry and Fish are role players..

At the end of the day winning is the most important thing when it comes to dissecting the great players.. The Raw numbers and actual data are more valuable than any estimate based formula a kook like Hollinger could ever conger up..

This statement in Hollinger's argument pretty much sum up how out of touch the guy is:

On Kobe Bryant:


"Though it's been common to hear people say he's the best player in the league, thumb through his résumé and it's hard to pinpoint a single season in which you could prove that was true."

I mean Really? Whats crazy is i think he actually believes this stuff

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 07:00 PM
ducan then kobe then shaq

Shaq > duncan and kobe.
The fact that he brought two different franchises a titile has to help his case more.
Also, i wonder what the Spurs record was against Shaq's Lakers heads up in the playoffs and the regular season.

fresh prince
01-04-2010, 07:18 PM
Shaq > duncan and kobe.
The fact that he brought two different franchises a titile has to help his case more.
Also, i wonder what the Spurs record was against Shaq's Lakers heads up in the playoffs and the regular season.

It's not pretty..

Whats even more telling is Kobe's numbers during those Spurs series especially in the Playoffs..

He avg almost 35 ppg a game one series.. And over 30 in 2 others..

He was with out a doubt the Lakers best player against San Antonio during those years when the Spurs were without a doubt the biggest threat in the NBA to the Dynasty..

That said you cant go wrong with Duncan @ #1. He was the most consistent in terms of always having an elite team this decade. IMO

Duncan, Kobe or Shaq in any order is really the only acceptable answer for player of the decade.

Chronz
01-04-2010, 07:47 PM
So he was being sarcastic.
And you didn't get it.

Sarcasm can still be accurate, he was trying to poke fun at hollinger by using his own stuff against him.


I dont subscribe to PER. Its majorly flawed just like everything else Hollinger spits.

Titles in the decade:

Kobe: 4
SHAQ: 4
Duncan: 3
KG: 1

That's all I'm saying..
Then you havent really said anything at all

And its a shame you think its flawed, there is so much you could learn from PER.

runforrestrunx9
01-04-2010, 08:07 PM
wheres AI?

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 08:10 PM
PER is garbage.
Kevin Martin is not better than Carmelo.
Greg Oden is not better than Dwight Howard.
Not in America, Not on Earth, And especially not on the moon.

Chronz
01-04-2010, 08:11 PM
PER is garbage.
Kevin Martin is not better than Carmelo.
Greg Oden is not better than Dwight Howard.
Not in America, Not on Earth, And especially not on the moon.
LOL at you thinking that just proved anything other than you not knowing how to apply PER to a statistical analysis.

Chronz
01-04-2010, 08:12 PM
wheres AI?

In honorable mention crew, props

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 08:19 PM
LOL at you thinking that just proved anything other than you not knowing how to apply PER to a statistical analysis.

Enlighten me Pal!

fresh prince
01-04-2010, 08:30 PM
The Biggest Flaw in PER lies in the VA and EWA wins assessment metrics.. They are based on fictitious 12th men and Estimates..

Aside from the totally subjective arbitrary weight given to an offensive statistic.. This is why PER = Russian to me.

1. VA Value Added is the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce. Value Added = ([Minutes * (PER - PRL)] / 67). PRL (Position Replacement Level) = 11.5 for power forwards, 11.0 for point guards, 10.6 for centers, 10.5 for shooting guards and small forwards

2. EWA Estimated Wins Added is Value Added divided by 30, giving the estimated number of wins a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" would produce.

Such a joke.. And Magically if you notice these 2 areas are where Hollingers boy Lebron has the largest statistical advantage.. Coincidence? I think not

JJ_JKidd
01-04-2010, 09:10 PM
What a stat whore! No love for JKidd damn! And KG over Shaq and Kobe?!?! What a sick F!

cRaTeR
01-04-2010, 09:12 PM
The Biggest Flaw in PER lies in the VA and EWA wins assessment metrics.. They are based on fictitious 12th men and Estimates..

Aside from the totally subjective arbitrary weight given to an offensive statistic.. This is why PER = Russian to me.

1. VA Value Added is the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce. Value Added = ([Minutes * (PER - PRL)] / 67). PRL (Position Replacement Level) = 11.5 for power forwards, 11.0 for point guards, 10.6 for centers, 10.5 for shooting guards and small forwards

2. EWA Estimated Wins Added is Value Added divided by 30, giving the estimated number of wins a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" would produce.

Such a joke.. And Magically if you notice these 2 areas are where Hollingers boy Lebron has the largest statistical advantage.. Coincidence? I think not

Even though i don't care for straight up stats either, i'll take them over the PER bafoonery everytime.

I trust my eyes rather than someone else stat formulas everytime.

dibacco59
01-04-2010, 09:35 PM
11. Robert Horry

ko8e24
01-04-2010, 10:42 PM
Hollinger=tool


plain and simple


/thread

JordansBulls
01-05-2010, 12:19 AM
The Biggest Flaw in PER lies in the VA and EWA wins assessment metrics.. They are based on fictitious 12th men and Estimates..

Aside from the totally subjective arbitrary weight given to an offensive statistic.. This is why PER = Russian to me.

1. VA Value Added is the estimated number of points a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" (for instance, the 12th man on the roster) would produce. Value Added = ([Minutes * (PER - PRL)] / 67). PRL (Position Replacement Level) = 11.5 for power forwards, 11.0 for point guards, 10.6 for centers, 10.5 for shooting guards and small forwards

2. EWA Estimated Wins Added is Value Added divided by 30, giving the estimated number of wins a player adds to a team’s season total above what a "replacement player" would produce.

Such a joke.. And Magically if you notice these 2 areas are where Hollingers boy Lebron has the largest statistical advantage.. Coincidence? I think not

If it was a bad stat, then top 2-3 players yearly wouldn't lead in it.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_yearly.html

SteveNash
01-05-2010, 12:39 AM
If it was a bad stat, then top 2-3 players yearly wouldn't lead in it.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/per_yearly.html

Paul Davis, Ryan Bowen and Trey Gilder (who?) lead the league in PER so far this year.

RaptorsFanatic
01-05-2010, 12:42 AM
lol