Dwyer: 10 best NBA players of the decade

[KCattheStripe]

I'll just put it this way, the NBA owes Shaq  a huge debt of gratitude for keeping the NBA in the national spotlight in the post - Jordan (2nd Retirement) until the 2003 class was ready to dominate.

[CelticG1]

I just can't put Shaq at 1,2, or 3 when half of this  deacade in my opinion he hasn't even been a top 20 player. So even if he is number 1 player for the first 5 years of the decade i don't think you can put him at 1,2,3. I think guys like kobe, duncan, and KG have all been pretty much a top 5 player in each year over the past decade.

[xmuscularghandix]

I just can't put Shaq at 1,2, or 3 when half of this  deacade in my opinion he hasn't even been a top 20 player. So even if he is number 1 player for the first 5 years of the decade i don't think you can put him at 1,2,3. I think guys like kobe, duncan, and KG have all been pretty much a top 5 player in each year over the past decade.

Is Shaq top 3 for the 90's then? Becuase he's gotta be for that.

[Celtics1990]

Will Solomon should absolutely be on this list, just sayin.

[CelticG1]

I just can't put Shaq at 1,2, or 3 when half of this  deacade in my opinion he hasn't even been a top 20 player. So even if he is number 1 player for the first 5 years of the decade i don't think you can put him at 1,2,3. I think guys like kobe, duncan, and KG have all been pretty much a top 5 player in each year over the past decade.

Is Shaq top 3 for the 90's then? Becuase he's gotta be for that.

I don't know. I don't exactly have a list in front of me of players from 1990-2000. Obviously his best years were from 1995-2005 and he would be number one on that list for that 10 years. Do you think that Shaq has been a top 10 player in the league for each of the past 5 years or do you just think that Shaq's dominance for the first 5 years automatically puts him in the top 3?

[Celtics17]

This may be a little late in the thread but did someone say that Kobe was as good of a player as MJ? Ha, ha ha. Sorry but Ha Ha Ha, man, I needed a good laugh. You must not have seen MJ play. I know Kobe is darn good but come on. That is about the equivalent of saying that Shaq was a better center then Wilt.

Also, surely you cant think that KG is a better offensive player then Kobe is? I mean, so what about PER ratings and all that stuff. If you need 10 points in the fourth quarter of the 7th game of the finals to win, who would you rather have doing the scoring? Give me Kobe in that situation any day and I can't stand him. Allen Iverson certainly was far from the most efficient scoring player but man, the guy could flat out score the ball.

[jambr380]

1. Duncan- dominant with championships
2. KG- dominant, but loses tiebreaker to Duncan
3. Kobe- dominant, but with help to start decade
4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade
5. Lebron- soon to move up this list
6. Kidd- consistently the best all around pg
7. Nash- 2 MVPs and very good throughout decade
8. Pierce- consistently excellent
9. Nowitzki- loses championship tiebreaker to Pierce
10. Allen- I agree with Quinn here.

...with Iverson, Wade, and TMAC looking in. I understand the rationale behind Dwyer's picks and I may be looking like a homer here, but the whole world didn't call KG, Pierce, and Allen 'the big three' for nothing. It was because of their reputations.

[KCattheStripe]

4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade

He had two bad , injury years  where he wasn't at least a 17 and 7 player. This past year he was an 18 and 8 player. in 2006 he was still a 20 10 guy. Was he as dominant after 2006? No. But he is still exceptionally productive. I think its ludicrous that Shaq's biggest problem is that he set the bar too high for himself.

[ben]

sigh

1.  Shaq
2.  Tim Duncan
3.  Kevin Garnett
4.  Iverson
5.  Pierce
6.  Kobe
7.  Nash
8.  Kidd
9.  Allen
10.Nowitzki

[CelticG1]

4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade

He had two bad , injury years  where he wasn't at least a 17 and 7 player. This past year he was an 18 and 8 player. in 2006 he was still a 20 10 guy. Was he as dominant after 2006? No. But he is still exceptionally productive. I think its ludicrous that Shaq's biggest problem is that he set the bar too high for himself.

I think Kobe, KG, And Duncan were dominant close to the level Shaq was for all 10 years. I think that seperates them from Shaq because as you said Shaq had a few seasons where he was injured or just wasn't putting up great numbers (for a superstar standard). I'm nitpicking but you have to do that when deciding something like this. I think Shaq is probably better than all of those guys in his prime but these last few years Shaq just hasn't been an exceptionally productive player where the other guys IMO have been

[KCattheStripe]

4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade

He had two bad , injury years  where he wasn't at least a 17 and 7 player. This past year he was an 18 and 8 player. in 2006 he was still a 20 10 guy. Was he as dominant after 2006? No. But he is still exceptionally productive. I think its ludicrous that Shaq's biggest problem is that he set the bar too high for himself.

I think Kobe, KG, And Duncan were dominant close to the level Shaq was for all 10 years. I think that seperates them from Shaq because as you said Shaq had a few seasons where he was injured or just wasn't putting up great numbers (for a superstar standard). I'm nitpicking but you have to do that when deciding something like this. I think Shaq is probably better than all of those guys in his prime but these last few years Shaq just hasn't been an exceptionally productive player where the other guys IMO have been

You look at Shaqs numbers from the start of the Decade, they're significantly better than those 4, enough to buy him 2 bad years and still be in the top 2.

[CelticG1]

4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade

He had two bad , injury years  where he wasn't at least a 17 and 7 player. This past year he was an 18 and 8 player. in 2006 he was still a 20 10 guy. Was he as dominant after 2006? No. But he is still exceptionally productive. I think its ludicrous that Shaq's biggest problem is that he set the bar too high for himself.

I think Kobe, KG, And Duncan were dominant close to the level Shaq was for all 10 years. I think that seperates them from Shaq because as you said Shaq had a few seasons where he was injured or just wasn't putting up great numbers (for a superstar standard). I'm nitpicking but you have to do that when deciding something like this. I think Shaq is probably better than all of those guys in his prime but these last few years Shaq just hasn't been an exceptionally productive player where the other guys IMO have been

You look at Shaqs numbers from the start of the Decade, they're significantly better than those 4, enough to buy him 2 bad years and still be in the top 2.

I'm trying to look right now and  I just don't see it as much as you. Shaq's first few years were very dominant but not as far off from KG's best years of the decade. If you take KG's 3 best years and match them with shaq's basically the numbers are pretty even. Shaq scored more and blocked more while Garnett rebounded more dished out more assists and got more steals

He also turned the ball  over less,commited less fouls, and played in 26 more games than shaq did. I'm looking at O'neals first three seasons of the decade and KG's from '02-'-03 through to '04-'05. Arguably both their best seasons of the decade

[KungPoweChicken]

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.

Duncan won with a lot less talent around him than what Shaq and Kobe had. Does that count for nothing?

[KCattheStripe]

4. Shaq- not as good as first half of decade

He had two bad , injury years  where he wasn't at least a 17 and 7 player. This past year he was an 18 and 8 player. in 2006 he was still a 20 10 guy. Was he as dominant after 2006? No. But he is still exceptionally productive. I think its ludicrous that Shaq's biggest problem is that he set the bar too high for himself.

I think Kobe, KG, And Duncan were dominant close to the level Shaq was for all 10 years. I think that seperates them from Shaq because as you said Shaq had a few seasons where he was injured or just wasn't putting up great numbers (for a superstar standard). I'm nitpicking but you have to do that when deciding something like this. I think Shaq is probably better than all of those guys in his prime but these last few years Shaq just hasn't been an exceptionally productive player where the other guys IMO have been

You look at Shaqs numbers from the start of the Decade, they're significantly better than those 4, enough to buy him 2 bad years and still be in the top 2.

I'm trying to look right now and  I just don't see it as much as you. Shaq's first few years were very dominant but not as far off from KG's best years of the decade. If you take KG's 3 best years and match them with shaq's basically the numbers are pretty even. Shaq scored more and blocked more while Garnett rebounded more dished out more assists and got more steals

He also turned the ball  over less,commited less fouls, and played in 26 more games than shaq did. I'm looking at O'neals first three seasons of the decade and KG's from '02-'-03 through to '04-'05. Arguably both their best seasons of the decade

Also Zero rings and got all those numbers with an entire offense running through him. Shaq split offensive sets with Kobe.

[KCattheStripe]

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.

Duncan won with a lot less talent around him than what Shaq and Kobe had. Does that count for nothing?

It one of the two reasons I'd accept Duncan over Shaq. The other is Duncan's freakish consistency.  However, if you ask me who the better player is , I'd still take Shaq any day of the week.