Dwyer: 10 best NBA players of the decade

[BrickJames]

What is "best"? 

Kobe is easily the most skilled player of the past decade, followed by Duncan.

Something tells me Allen, TMac and Wade shouldn't be on this list, but I don't feel like thinking of the people that do, over the course of the decade.

Actually

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Nash
KG
Kidd
Pierce
Lebron
Billups
Dirk

[Fafnir]

What is "best"? 

Kobe is easily the most skilled player of the past decade, followed by Duncan.

Something tells me Allen, TMac and Wade shouldn't be on this list, but I don't feel like thinking of the people that do, over the course of the decade.

Actually

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Nash
KG
Kidd
Pierce
Lebron
Billups
Dirk

I think skill is less relevant than production.

[BrickJames]

What is "best"? 

Kobe is easily the most skilled player of the past decade, followed by Duncan.

Something tells me Allen, TMac and Wade shouldn't be on this list, but I don't feel like thinking of the people that do, over the course of the decade.

Actually

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Nash
KG
Kidd
Pierce
Lebron
Billups
Dirk

I think skill is less relevant than production.

Kobe has 4 rings this decade, and Duncan 3.

Shaq also has 4.

Should Duncan be third?   One could make the argument.

When one talks about "production", I assume you are going with statistical production.  A big man is going to have more rebounds/blocks/stats than the most dynamic wing player to ever play the game.

It does not necessarily mean his impact is as great.

People are going to argue forever about the ranking.  I think the posters on this board think Kobe-Duncan-Shaq are 1-2-3, in some order.

KG is definitely not top 3.  Nor do TMac/Allen/Wade deserve to be on the list.

[Fafnir]

What is "best"? 

Kobe is easily the most skilled player of the past decade, followed by Duncan.

Something tells me Allen, TMac and Wade shouldn't be on this list, but I don't feel like thinking of the people that do, over the course of the decade.

Actually

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Nash
KG
Kidd
Pierce
Lebron
Billups
Dirk

I think skill is less relevant than production.

Kobe has 4 rings this decade, and Duncan 3.

Shaq also has 4.

Should Duncan be third?   One could make the argument.

When one talks about "production", I assume you are going with statistical production.  A big man is going to have more rebounds/blocks/stats than the most dynamic wing player to ever play the game.

It does not necessarily mean his impact is as great.

People are going to argue forever about the ranking.  I think the posters on this board think Kobe-Duncan-Shaq are 1-2-3, in some order.

KG is definitely not top 3.  Nor do TMac/Allen/Wade deserve to be on the list.

Depends on what stats you look at. Michael Jordan is the most dynamic wing player to ever play the game. He also has better stats than anyone else. So  your argument is flat out false.

Unless you're just looking at the box score. Which would tell me you don't understand more useful measures of production.

Kobe couldn't take his team anywhere without an all-star big man. To hold it against Garnett that he played with garbage team mates is myopic.

[BrickJames]

OK, so Kobe not playing winning a ring without a big man makes him drop lower on the list, but not Wade?

And KG having a crappy team but putting up good numbers makes him higher up?  Why not Dirk?  Or Sheed even?

MJ v Kobe - those two are the exact same player.  Not even relevant to the argument.  Other than you hating on Kobe for no good reason other than personal distaste.

Define "production" formally a la Hollinger and come up with an actual list of your own and try to convince me if you want.   Otherwise, I'll use my eyes.

Kobe is the best player of the past decade.

[drza44]

Kobe has 4 rings this decade, and Duncan 3.

Shaq also has 4.

Should Duncan be third?   One could make the argument.

Wouldn't this same line of logic say that Jordan and Pippen both have 6 rings, while Bird has only 3, so Bird would be third out of that grouping?  It has to be about more than just rings, especially if you're talking a group of great players getting rings on the same team.

When one talks about "production", I assume you are going with statistical production.  A big man is going to have more rebounds/blocks/stats than the most dynamic wing player to ever play the game.

It does not necessarily mean his impact is as great.

Generally when one talks about stats production these days, it isn't limited to any one category like rebounds/blocks (generally big man advantages) or assists/steals (usually little guy advantages).  There are enough stats out there that look more in-depth that you can usually draw a decent picture of a modern player's impact.

People are going to argue forever about the ranking.  I think the posters on this board think Kobe-Duncan-Shaq are 1-2-3, in some order.

KG is definitely not top 3.  Nor do TMac/Allen/Wade deserve to be on the list.

Of course, I disagree strenuously.  I have accepted that KG won't be ranked with/ahead of Duncan or Shaq until he gets a bit more hardware, but I definitely put him solidly ahead of Kobe.

[BrickJames]

Wouldn't this same line of logic say that Jordan and Pippen both have 6 rings, while Bird has only 3, so Bird would be third out of that grouping?  It has to be about more than just rings, especially if you're talking a group of great players getting rings on the same team.

I actually agree with you.  I was using this, anecdotally, poking at Faf's referral to 'production' but not defining it.  Producing what?  I think overall skill, stats, and rings need to be all factored in.  Which is why I think Kobe is and has been better than KG over the past decade.

Of course, I disagree strenuously.  I have accepted that KG won't be ranked with/ahead of Duncan or Shaq until he gets a bit more hardware, but I definitely put him solidly ahead of Kobe.

Why?  What did he do with a crappy team that Kobe didn't?  Won a MVP - sure - but Kobe got jobbed on more than one occassion.

Anything else?

[Fafnir]

OK, so Kobe not playing winning a ring without a big man makes him drop lower on the list, but not Wade?

And KG having a crappy team but putting up good numbers makes him higher up?  Why not Dirk?  Or Sheed even?

MJ v Kobe - those two are the exact same player.  Not even relevant to the argument.  Other than you hating on Kobe for no good reason other than personal distaste.

Define "production" formally a la Hollinger and come up with an actual list of your own and try to convince me if you want.   Otherwise, I'll use my eyes.

Kobe is the best player of the past decade.

Okay I don't think you're going to give me a fair shake, don't stick straw men up there.

Players should be judged for themselves, not by their teams. Besides Dirk and Sheed have been on many very good teams. KG has been on three, one that went to the WCF and the two years with the C's.

As for Kobe = MJ, that's just patently ridiculous! Take a look here.

Kobe does almost everything worse than Jordan. He scores less, he assists less, he misses more, he turns it over more, he gets to the line less, he rebounds less, he gets fewer steals, he gets fewer blocks, and he even makes fewer of free throws.

The only thing Kobe does better is shoot three pointers and he takes slightly fewer shots.

And then you consider defense.....

[Fafnir]

Wouldn't this same line of logic say that Jordan and Pippen both have 6 rings, while Bird has only 3, so Bird would be third out of that grouping?  It has to be about more than just rings, especially if you're talking a group of great players getting rings on the same team.

I actually agree with you.  I was using this, anecdotally, poking at Faf's referral to 'production' but not defining it.  Producing what?  I think overall skill, stats, and rings need to be all factored in.  Which is why I think Kobe is and has been better than KG over the past decade.

Of course, I disagree strenuously.  I have accepted that KG won't be ranked with/ahead of Duncan or Shaq until he gets a bit more hardware, but I definitely put him solidly ahead of Kobe.

Why?  What did he do with a crappy team that Kobe didn't?  Won a MVP - sure - but Kobe got jobbed on more than one occassion.

Anything else?

Production is helping your team win, KG has done a lot more for that than Kobe.

I never said there was a single measure, I just said your aesthetic view of his "skill" is a poor measure.

It takes more skill to hit a turn around bank shot than dunk the ball, and I'd rather a player get a dunk every time.

[BrickJames]

OK, so Kobe not playing winning a ring without a big man makes him drop lower on the list, but not Wade?

And KG having a crappy team but putting up good numbers makes him higher up?  Why not Dirk?  Or Sheed even?

MJ v Kobe - those two are the exact same player.  Not even relevant to the argument.  Other than you hating on Kobe for no good reason other than personal distaste.

Define "production" formally a la Hollinger and come up with an actual list of your own and try to convince me if you want.   Otherwise, I'll use my eyes.

Kobe is the best player of the past decade.

Okay I don't think you're going to give me a fair shake, don't stick straw men up there.

Players should be judged for themselves, not by their teams. Besides Dirk and Sheed have been on many very good teams. KG has been on three, one that went to the WCF and the two years with the C's.

As for Kobe = MJ, that's just patently ridiculous! Take a look here.

Kobe almost everything worse than Jordan. He scores less, he assists less, he misses more, he turns it over more, he gets to the line less, he rebounds less, he gets fewer steals, he gets fewer blocks, and he even makes fewer of free throws.

The only thing Kobe does better is shoot three pointers and he takes slightly fewer shots.

And then you consider defense.....

Put Jordan in the league from '97-'09 and Kobe from '85 to '96 and something tells me the statistical production would be much more on par than your claiming (not that it's that far off to begin with).


Your KG vs Kobe argument...as I said many times, it's more than just skill.  It's a combination of skill, stats, and postseason success, among other things.  Talk about straw man arguments...jeez.

[BrickJames]

Production is helping your team win, KG has done a lot more for that than Kobe.

Really?  Based on your same stats finder, over a 12 year period, KG has contributed to 10 more wins than Kobe.  http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&=g&p1=garneke01&y1=2008&=b&p2=bryanko01&y2=2009&=&=

The opacity of win share formula is something to debate about to begin with - I don't have the stats to back it up but something tells me that it's conveniently omitted less tangible things like clutch production.

In any case, I don't think its a "lot more" of a difference.

[Fafnir]

OK, so Kobe not playing winning a ring without a big man makes him drop lower on the list, but not Wade?

And KG having a crappy team but putting up good numbers makes him higher up?  Why not Dirk?  Or Sheed even?

MJ v Kobe - those two are the exact same player.  Not even relevant to the argument.  Other than you hating on Kobe for no good reason other than personal distaste.

Define "production" formally a la Hollinger and come up with an actual list of your own and try to convince me if you want.   Otherwise, I'll use my eyes.

Kobe is the best player of the past decade.

Okay I don't think you're going to give me a fair shake, don't stick straw men up there.

Players should be judged for themselves, not by their teams. Besides Dirk and Sheed have been on many very good teams. KG has been on three, one that went to the WCF and the two years with the C's.

As for Kobe = MJ, that's just patently ridiculous! Take a look here.

Kobe almost everything worse than Jordan. He scores less, he assists less, he misses more, he turns it over more, he gets to the line less, he rebounds less, he gets fewer steals, he gets fewer blocks, and he even makes fewer of free throws.

The only thing Kobe does better is shoot three pointers and he takes slightly fewer shots.

And then you consider defense.....

Put Jordan in the league from '97-'09 and Kobe from '85 to '96 and something tells me the statistical production would be much more on par than your claiming (not that it's that far off to begin with).


Your KG vs Kobe argument...as I said many times, it's more than just skill.  It's a combination of skill, stats, and postseason success, among other things.  Talk about straw man arguments...jeez.

Where did I ever accuse you of just using skill? I said even putting "skill" in there is silly.

You actually never mentioned all those other things though Brick when I responded. You mention rings and skill. Then you say big men have an inherent advantage .(which they do, big men are the most important need of a team)

Insert Quote
What is "best"?

Kobe is easily the most skilled player of the past decade, followed by Duncan.

Something tells me Allen, TMac and Wade shouldn't be on this list, but I don't feel like thinking of the people that do, over the course of the decade.

Kobe has 4 rings this decade, and Duncan 3.

Shaq also has 4.

Should Duncan be third?   One could make the argument.

When one talks about "production", I assume you are going with statistical production.  A big man is going to have more rebounds/blocks/stats than the most dynamic wing player to ever play the game.

It does not necessarily mean his impact is as great.

Only later do you add more factors in, responding to drza44 not me.

[Fafnir]

Production is helping your team win, KG has done a lot more for that than Kobe.

Really?  Based on your same stats finder, over a 12 year period, KG has contributed to 10 more wins than Kobe.  http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&=g&p1=garneke01&y1=2008&=b&p2=bryanko01&y2=2009&=&=

The opacity of win share formula is something to debate about to begin with - I don't have the stats to back it up but something tells me that it's conveniently omitted less tangible things like clutch production.

In any case, I don't think its a "lot more" of a difference.

Its not my stat finder, I was using to to point out that your view that MJ = Kobe is ridiculous.

BBall Reference isn't my website.

Besides even using that 150.6 - 138.8 doesn't equal 10.

[BrickJames]

OK, I should have been more clear.

Kobe is easily the most skilled player.

I also think he's the best player, not 'easily', and also not strictly because he's the most skilled.

Better?

And 11.8 wins, literal Larry.  Fine.  That significance of someone's opaque statistical formula has convinced me that KG is better than Kobe over the past decade.  Well played.

[drza44]

Of course, I disagree strenuously.  I have accepted that KG won't be ranked with/ahead of Duncan or Shaq until he gets a bit more hardware, but I definitely put him solidly ahead of Kobe.

Why?  What did he do with a crappy team that Kobe didn't?  Won a MVP - sure - but Kobe got jobbed on more than one occassion.

Anything else?

I agree with the point in your first paragraph, that you should look at total package and not just count rings.  As far as the question I've quoted, it really depends on how in depth you want to go.  I'll start with the stats since that is in theory objective, and then we can go to the anecdotal arguments from there if this discussion continues.

Let's start with something you said in a previous post: "Define "production" formally a la Hollinger and come up with an actual list of your own and try to convince me if you want. "  The thing is, using any 1 stat like Hollinger does leads to errors because all stats have holes/problems and relying on any 1 is dangerous.  That's why I like to look at several with overlapping strengths/weaknesses, and if several tell the same story it gets more convincing.

Back to KG and Kobe...KG wins literally every advanced stat battle with Kobe that I can find.  I mean, all of them.  The two major schools of thought for advanced stats are to either come up with composite scores based off box score stats (i.e. individual production) or to look at how the team is impacted by one player's presence (i.e. individual impact).

Box score production: Over the last decade KG leads Kobe in PER (Hollinger), win shares (basketball-reference.com), wins produced (KG #1 overall in last decade, dberri.wordpress.com), wins above replacement player (KG #1 overall in 2000s, Kevin Pelton Basketball Prospectus), etc. (there are others, but you get the idea).  All are calculated differently, all emphasize different skill sets a bit differently than others, and PER is even criticized by over-emphasizing points scored which benefits Kobe...but KG still leads him for that stat as well.  I haven't seen a single box score stat where Kobe measures out ahead of KG for the decade.

Impact production: I am actually a bit more partial to these stats, because they are concerned with how much a player contributes to team benefit and not at all about what numbers he puts up as an individual.  Over the last decade KG measures out #1 among all players in adjusted +/-, and he has the best on-court/off-court +/- scores of any player since 82games started keeping track of it in 2002-03.

Bottom line, statistically, KG both produced more in the box scores and had a larger individual impact on his teams winning than Kobe did over the last decade.  And not even in a disputed way, as it's a clean sweep for every one that I can find.  I'm assuming that you'll want to take this beyond just stats, and if so I'm glad to respond to that as well, but statistically it's pretty much a KG blowout.