Top 3 Players every season since 1999-2000

[EnoughSaid]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09?

[ThaSwagg3r]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09?

Yes, Wade was mediocre in the playoffs and had a first round exit while Kobe dominated all four series including the finals. It's hard not to have a guy who was 2nd in the MVP voting and the finals MVP as AT LEAST the 2nd best player in the league.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Obviously I disagree with some years but for the most part good selections. The most disagreeable thing I see on there is Nash over Garnett in 2005. I sometimes consider putting Garnett at #1 for 2005. He didn't lose much from 2004, but Nash especially has no case what so ever for being a better player than Kevin Garnett. More valuable? Sure. But a better basketball player? No way.

More talent is a different subject than better season. It's hard to call Garnett the best player in the league in 2005 when the guy didn't even make the playoffs that season. There aren't many players in NBA history who were still considered the best, top 3, or even top 5 when their team didn't even make the playoffs.

[Shep]

2000
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. tim duncan

2001
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. allen iverson

2002
1. shaquille o'neal
2. tim duncan
3. kobe bryant

2003
1. tim duncan
2. kevin garnett
3. shaquille o'neal

2004
1. kevin garnett
2. shaquille o'neal
3. tim duncan

2005
1. tim duncan
2. dwyane wade
3. kevin garnett

2006
1. dwyane wade
2. lebron james
3. dirk nowitzki

2007
1. tim duncan
2. lebron james
3. tracy mcgrady

2008
1. chris paul
2. lebron james
3. kevin garnett

2009
1. lebron james
2. dwight howard
3. kobe bryant

2010
1. lebron james
2. kobe bryant
3. pau gasol

2011
1. lebron james
2. dwyane wade
3. derrick rose

[ShaqAttack3234]

Now this one is very similar to mine. So I really like it. No major disagreements, besides maybe Kobe over Duncan in '07. Duncan was every bit as good as he's ever been in 2007 and I would not take the 07 Kobe version over him.

I disagree that Duncan was still every bit as good as he ever was. He had lost a noticeable amount of athleticism since his early 00's peak and his stamina wasn't the same. He was also near his low in free throw shooting that year.

I can see someone taking Duncan over Kobe and usually, I'd be hesitant to rank a player on a 42-40 team as the best in the league, but that wasn't a very talented team to begin with and they started off 26-15 with Kobe leading the team in a similar way to how he did in 2008. But when you have a cast that limited and almost every key player misses significant time, it's hard to expect much. Lamar Odom missed 26 games, Luke Walton missed 22 games and Kwame Brown missed 41 games. And the scoring streak he had was historically great and ended a losing streak.

I will say that Duncan still did pretty much everything you'd want a franchise big man to do. He was still probably the premier defensive player in the league, a very good rebounder, an excellent passer and one of the best post scorers.

But stamina and durability is also an advantage for Kobe. Not that Duncan had to play more minutes. But he had missed 13 games in 2004, 16 games in 2005(while playing 33 mpg) and he played 80 games and 35 mpg in 2006, but wasn't healthy that season. So I think limiting his minutes to 34 per game was probably necessary at that point.

[Ikill]

Yes, Wade was mediocre in the playoffs and had a first round exit while Kobe dominated all four series including the finals. It's hard not to have a guy who was 2nd in the MVP voting and the finals MVP as AT LEAST the 2nd best player in the league.

Wades 06 playoffs=Kobes 09 playoffs
Wades 09 season=Kobes 09 season
How can you have Kobe over Wade in both 06 and 09

[Gifted Mind]

More talent is a different subject than better season. It's hard to call Garnett the best player in the league in 2005 when the guy didn't even make the playoffs that season. There aren't many players in NBA history who were still considered the best, top 3, or even top 5 when their team didn't even make the playoffs.

You are confusing best player with best season. Overall, KG did not have as good of a season since as you said his team missed the playoffs. However, he was still nearly as good of a player as he was in 2004, with the only difference being his team got worse. Szczerbiak was their 2nd leading scorer. As a basketball player, Kevin Garnett was as good as he has ever been. Do you really think the decline from 58-24 (2004) to 44-38 (2005) was KG dropping as a player at age 27 (even though his stats didn't show any decline). Or may the 14 wins be explained by his 2 best players from the season before struggling with injuries and age.

Furthermore, though very unlikely, it's possible the best player may have missed the playoffs. Look at Kareem in the 70s, one year he missed the playoffs but no one would dare suggest he wasn't even Top 3.


It's not just about talent, even leading that team to 44 wins was commendable. The drop in the wins can be explained by his team being much worse. Garnett himself played as well as he had in all the years you ranked him Top 3.

[Gifted Mind]

I disagree that Duncan was still every bit as good as he ever was. He had lost a noticeable amount of athleticism since his early 00's peak and his stamina wasn't the same. He was also near his low in free throw shooting that year.

I can see someone taking Duncan over Kobe and usually, I'd be hesitant to rank a player on a 42-40 team as the best in the league, but that wasn't a very talented team to begin with and they started off 26-15 with Kobe leading the team in a similar way to how he did in 2008. But when you have a cast that limited and almost every key player misses significant time, it's hard to expect much. Lamar Odom missed 26 games, Luke Walton missed 22 games and Kwame Brown missed 41 games. And the scoring streak he had was historically great and ended a losing streak.

I will say that Duncan still did pretty much everything you'd want a franchise big man to do. He was still probably the premier defensive player in the league, a very good rebounder, an excellent passer and one of the best post scorers.

But stamina and durability is also an advantage for Kobe. Not that Duncan had to play more minutes. But he had missed 13 games in 2004, 16 games in 2005(while playing 33 mpg) and he played 80 games and 35 mpg in 2006, but wasn't healthy that season. So I think limiting his minutes to 34 per game was probably necessary at that point.

I may have exaggerated a little saying he was as good as he's ever been, but there wasn't a great difference. Duncan was still Duncan in 2007. And I would trust a prime Duncan over Kobe to lead my team to more wins. As you said, he was still a dominant low-post scorer (55% FG), arguably the best defender in the NBA, excellent passing skills for a bigman, still had all the intangibles, and the championship run is really the cherry on top. A complete package. To me the best player in the NBA is the player who will lead given teams to the most wins on average or get them closest to contending for the championship. And in 2007, with Duncan playing nearly as well as he ever has, I would choose Duncan as the best player in the NBA. I would choose him if I had to pick 1 player in the NBA to build around, him playing like he always has gives any decent team a chance to contend.


Let me ask you this, would you take 07 Kobe over 05 Duncan too? Because there wasn't any difference between 05 Duncan and 07 Duncan, you could make a case either way for which version of Duncan was better.

[RazorBaLade]

2000
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. tim duncan

2001
1. shaquille o'neal
2. kobe bryant
3. allen iverson

2002
1. shaquille o'neal
2. tim duncan
3. kobe bryant

2003
1. tim duncan
2. kevin garnett
3. shaquille o'neal

2004
1. kevin garnett
2. shaquille o'neal
3. tim duncan

2005
1. tim duncan
2. dwyane wade
3. kevin garnett

2006
1. dwyane wade
2. lebron james
3. dirk nowitzki

2007
1. tim duncan
2. lebron james
3. tracy mcgrady

2008
1. chris paul
2. lebron james
3. kevin garnett

2009
1. lebron james
2. dwight howard
3. kobe bryant

2010
1. lebron james
2. kobe bryant
3. pau gasol

2011
1. lebron james
2. dwyane wade
3. derrick rose

4/10 you almost trolled me

[ShaqAttack3234]

I may have exaggerated a little saying he was as good as he's ever been, but there wasn't a great difference. Duncan was still Duncan in 2007. And I would trust a prime Duncan over Kobe to lead my team to more wins. As you said, he was still a dominant low-post scorer (55% FG), arguably the best defender in the NBA, excellent passing skills for a bigman, still had all the intangibles, and the championship run is really the cherry on top. A complete package. To me the best player in the NBA is the player who will lead given teams to the most wins on average or get them closest to contending for the championship. And in 2007, with Duncan playing nearly as well as he ever has, I would choose Duncan as the best player in the NBA. I would choose him if I had to pick 1 player in the NBA to build around, him playing like he always has gives any decent team a chance to contend.


Let me ask you this, would you take 07 Kobe over 05 Duncan too? Because there wasn't any difference between 05 Duncan and 07 Duncan, you could make a case either way for which version of Duncan was better.

I probably would take 2007 Kobe over 2005 Duncan. 2007 was near Kobe's peak and in the middle of his 3 best years, while 2005 and 2007 were part of what I'd call Duncan's late prime years.

I think Kobe was capable of leading a team in 2007, the very next season he won 57 games to finish with the best record in a Western Conference that had eight teams with 50+ wins and a team that missed the playoffs with 48 wins and he got that team to the finals while beating Duncan's Spurs. In 2009, he led the Lakers to 65 wins and a title.

With Kobe's 2007 cast, I don't think you could expect much more. As I said, his second best player was Lamar Odom who never made an all-star team and missed 26 games that year, and Odom was far ahead of the Lakers 3rd best player. In fact, no other Lakers aside from Kobe and Odom could you call legitimate NBA starters. And when you consider these 2 things, that Luke Walton and Kwame Brown were key players and starters on that team, and that those 2 missed a combined 63 games, it's pretty amazing that he got the Lakers to the playoffs.

You saw Kobe excel in 2 styles that year. By leading the team early and playing a more team-oriented style to help them overachieve early, and carrying the team on his back later in the season.

[Shep]

4/10 you almost trolled me

actually its 10/10, and 36/36

[All Net]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09?

Well he was

[Bigsmoke]

Duncan ISNT the 2nd best in 2000. If so then that just tells how horrible that year was when a guys that didn't play a single game in the playoffs are the 2nd best for season and playoffs.

i have Malone as 2nd... him, KG, and Iverson were all great though. i dont know

[Bigsmoke]

Are people really putting Kobe ahead of Wade in 08-09?

Kobe by far played better in the playoffs while playing better teams and he WON the championship while being the Finals MVP

all Wade had was regular season statistics How do u shoot like 43% vs the Hawks from all teams?

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan ISNT the 2nd best in 2000. If so then that just tells how horrible that year was when a guys that didn't play a single game in the playoffs are the 2nd best for season and playoffs.

i have Malone as 2nd... him, KG, and Iverson were all great though. i dont know

The 74 games Duncan did play that year were enough to tell us that he was a better player than anyone not named Shaq. All of the qualities I mentioned about 2007 Duncan such as elite defense, great passing, great post scoring plus more athleticism, stamina, a better face up game and a solid 76% from the line that year.

23/12/3/2/1, 49 FG%, 56 TS% with elite defense.