Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-01-2012, 11:03 PM   #31
oolalaa
I eat cheese
 
oolalaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 968
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

I pretty much agree with your thoughts on taking Duncan over KG. Outside of Duncan's post game, I've also preferred Duncan's shot blocking. What set him apart vs some who block more shots than him is that he wouldn't bike on fakes and had such great timing that he was pretty much the best in the league at blocking shots flatfooted. But he had more athleticism than people remember and could jump and block shots when he had to. He was just a very smart defensive anchor who would protect the basket and wouldn't reach in and pick up stupid fouls.


Well said, especially the bolded - that was another one of Timmy's underrated commodities.

Quote:
Well, Iverson's actual FG% was 38.9% in the postseason which was low for me to not consider efficiency. And it's one of the problems I have because Iverson was streaky. But it did work in best of 7 series where he'd also go off and have big games. Which is probably why Philly had back to back 7 game series. A streaky shooter can be effective in the playoffs.

Of course, scoring clearly favors Iverson, but Garnett impacted the game in so many ways other than scoring, we're still seeing him do that in his mid 30's in Boston. His defense and rebounding made big differences, and those are aspects of the game that you don't really get anything from Iverson in, partially due to size and position. And Garnett still gives you quite a bit offensively between his passing, scoring, drawing more defensive attention than his teammates, setting screens ect.

And you're certainly not alone in this belief, so I understand where you're coming from, but Garnett's all around game in his prime makes it tougher for me to pick Iverson over him.

FG% is an insultingly bad stat for perimeter players who shoot a lot of threes I actually think it should be banned form ANY and ALL basketball discussion that ever takes place, and those that do use it should be sent to prison for a minimum of 12 months without parole It's insulting because we have a stat that takes into account the extra value of making 3s, as opposed to 2s - eFG% (Essentially a combination of FG% and 3P%). Calling Jason Kidd a 40% shooter for his career, for example, is just flat out wrong. He was taking 4/5 3s a game in his prime and making a good percentgae of them. That translates to a .462 eFG% over his career - still below par but not "abominablly horrendous" like so many have claimed and held against him.


And regarding Garnett's "impact"....That's the thing though, I think his actual impact on a basketball court is overrated. Granted, it's not entirely logical - he is one of the most "talented" all round big men in history - but not everything necessarily has to make sense (being a more all round player doesn't always mean you're a better player, either). For an MVP winner, his team success in his first 12 years in the league was a little pitiful, and I simply refuse to believe we can pin all of that on a bad organisation and teammates. The greats TRANSFORM franchises. KG, rather emphatically, did NOT transform Minny. By the end of his tenure there, they were back to where they started before they drafted him.

His fans will point to '08 and shout from the rooftops "Look! See! The season he gets a good team he wins a championship!". Whilst I don't doubt that he was their best player, and that he changed the "culture" of the team, I do think it was a 1a/1b scenario with Pierce. It would be highly unfair to put KGs '08 ring along side any of Duncan's and claim they are equals.

Anyway, I should probably cease this Kevin Garnett vendetta I've got going on before it goes too far. It's not healthy

Quote:
Thanks, I've enjoyed the discussion.

Likewise. I'll give you some 'rep', even though you don't exactly need any

Last edited by oolalaa : 07-01-2012 at 11:32 PM.
oolalaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2012, 11:09 PM   #32
Unstoppabull
High School Varsity 12th Man
 
Unstoppabull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Your House
Posts: 722
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Well composed list, since the edit, can't really nitpick
Unstoppabull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 12:14 AM   #33
Boston C's
Local High School Star
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,796
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

great list... i feel like in 2005 though ray should have been number 10 what he and the sonics accomplished that yr was amazing and his playoff performances were pretty impressive to boot
Boston C's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 01:45 AM   #34
G.O.A.T
Scott Hastings Fan
 
G.O.A.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 5,646
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

@ Shaqattack3234

Same formula as before...I've edited my own top ten (based on most "significant/important" season) and tried to fit to your criteria, based on a players overall skill level and how they adjusted/fit into the team/system they played on/in that season. In parenthesis, I put where they were on my list with my criteria (if it varied).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

2001
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Allen Iverson
6.Vince Carter
7.Chris Webber
8.Tracy McGrady
9.Jason Kidd
10.Gary Payton
11.Karl Malone
12.Ray Allen
13.Paul Pierce
14.Dirk Nowitzki
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Rasheed Wallace
18.Antonio McDyess
19.David Robinson
20.Jamal Mashburn
21.Michael Finley
22.Dikembe Mutombo
23.Glenn Robinson
24.Peja Stojakovic
25.Jerry Stackhouse

My 2001 top 20

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Iverson
4. Kobe
5. Garnett (6)
6. Webber (5)
7. McGrady
8. Kidd (9)
9. Carter (10)
10. Malone (12)
11. Payton
12, Sheed
13. Allen (8)
14, Pierce (13)
15 Dirk
16. Mashburn (ur)
17. Francis (ur)
18. G. Robinson (ur)
19. Finley (ur)
20. Marbury (ur)

And now a few questions/comments.

1) Where's the love for Roscoe?
-We're going to have consistent disagreements on where Rasheed ranks, so lets get to the bottom of it. Would you really trade (not considering the make-up of the team otherwise) a prime Rasheed for Allen, Pierce, Francis or Marbury? He is the only big man and the only guy who could play D out of the group, seems like a no-brainer. Sure Sheed's were down, but in fact he played for two of the most balanced contending teams in NBA history throughout his prime. The '99-'03 Blazers and '04-'08 Pistons were all about sharing the wealth. Every coach and every teammate will tell you that Sheed's impact goes way beyond the stat sheet.

2) Iverson/Kobe what gives?
-Yes, Kobe is the greater player and every year after this it was clear Kobe was a level above AI. But for this season Iverson was the MVP, led a team to the Finals and played as well or better than Bryant (I think a good deal better) while shouldering a much larger burden. Kobe isn't top three yet.

3) Vinsanity!
- Carter at six too high. I can see an argument over everyone but Webber. No way was he better than C-Webb. I have him much lower (as usual) I never bought into Vince and I consider his career to have proven me right. I can't see him above Kidd at any point either (though this is the closest year and I have them 9/10) Kidd always did so much more to help his team win than VC.

4) More love for the Big Dog
- It was Robinson's career year and he was right there with Allen at that point. Averaged like 22-7-4 that year and shot well. Had the best mid-range jumper in the league. In the playoffs Allen was clearly the man, but throughout the season they shared clutch duties.

5) Starbury?
- Was he so talented that big numbers on a 20-win team let you crack the top-15? Especially with what we know now? I know you'll explain well.


Great list as usual, tell me where I went wrong.
G.O.A.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 03:31 AM   #35
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,585
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
I remember, he had a hell of a season but 7th best that season is a little too high don't you think? DO you have Darrell Armstrong that high for him leading the Magic to a 41-41 record in 2000?
no i don't. bo outlaw was alot closer to darrell armstrong than carlos arroyo was to andrei kirilenko.
Quote:
This fool did not just say that BEN WALLACE was better than Kobe Bryant in 2004.

This guy didn't just say AK47 was a better player than Kobe Bryant in 2006, the year he went full schizo on the NBA.

You did NOT just say Billups was better than Yao in 2009.

You think Baron Davis was better than Dirk in 2008?

What NBA were you watching? In what universe was Baron Davis better than Dirk??? I'm sorry man, hate to make fun of posters, but I really, truly, believe your list is so ****ed that you should just be banned based off pure idiocy.

And that's being kind.
who is this schmuck? were you even born in 2008?
Quote:
One thing I've noticed with your rankings including your 90's ones, is that you sometimes give too much credit to the 2nd option on championship teams and rank the 2nd option as the second best player in the NBA such as Kobe in 2000, Robinson in '99 and Pippen in '91, '92 and '96. It's extremely rare that a team has 2 players you can even argue as the top 2 in the league, and the 2000 Lakers certainly aren't one of them. I can see the argument for Kobe at 2 in 2001, I was somewhat tempted to put him there based on his playoff run when he was the 2nd best player in the playoffs. And by that point people were regularly calling Shaq and Kobe the 2 best players in the league. But outside of '01 Shaq/Kobe, there are only a few years I can see an argument for a team having the 2 best players such as maybe '86 Bird/McHale, and maybe '11 Lebron/Wade. But I don't think a team has ever actually had the 2 best players in the league.
nah i don't give too much credit, i give just the right amount of credit. to be the second best player on a championship team takes alot of commitment, you do afterall, play the game to win championships so it takes alot of individual sacrifice. guys that win as a second best player could easily be more dominant in a less successful team..and not only that, you have to gel with different ego's, coaches, and schemes. kobe showed what he could do in the defining moments of those playoffs, the trail blazers series, and when shaq was fouled out in the finals, he took those moments and proved to the world that he was the second best player on the planet.
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 04:50 AM   #36
Pointguard
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Pointguard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 7,659
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234
2000
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kevin Garnett
4.Alonzo Mourning
5.Karl Malone
6.Chris Webber
7.Grant Hill
8.Gary Payton
9.Jason Kidd
10.Kobe Bryant
11.Vince Carter
12.Allen Iverson
13.David Robinson
14.Eddie Jones
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Ray Allen
17.Michael Finley
18.Rasheed Wallace
19.Penny Hardaway
20.Scottie Pippen
21.Reggie Miller
22.Latrell Sorewell
23.Terrell Brandon
24.Sam Cassell
25.Dikembe Mutombo
Great list. List like these, at least when they are highly accurate like GOAT's recent list, are to be applauded for being on point and well researched. I have small deviations. I'd switch Kobe and Iverson along with Stephon and Eddie Jones. Rasheed was ok but I wouldn't have him over Dikembe. In fact I wouldn't have Rasheed in there. I would have replaced him with Antoine Walker.


2001
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Allen Iverson
6.Vince Carter
7.Chris Webber
8.Tracy McGrady
9.Jason Kidd
10.Gary Payton
11.Karl Malone
12.Ray Allen
13.Paul Pierce
14.Dirk Nowitzki
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Rasheed Wallace
18.Antonio McDyess
19.David Robinson
20.Jamal Mashburn
21.Michael Finley
22.Dikembe Mutombo
23.Glenn Robinson
24.Peja Stojakovic
25.Jerry Stackhouse
What does AI have to do? He carried that team unlike very few others. He just kept coming unlike any player ever in the game. You could not stop him. He's top three. Shooting percentage wasn't great but stoping him was impossible. Glenn Robison, wow, forgot about him.


2002
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Chris Webber
7.Jason Kidd
8.Paul Pierce
9.Dirk Nowitzki
10.Allen Iverson
11.Gary Payton
12.Jermaine O'Neal
13.Steve Nash
14.Vince Carter
15.Ray Allen
16.Rasheed Wallace
17.Ben Wallace
18.Elton Brand
19.Karl Malone
20.Baron Davis
21.Stephon Marbury
22.Peja Stojakovic
23.Michael Jordan
24.Shawn Marion
25.Sam Cassell

What Kidd did that year was off the hook. He took a last place team and totally converted the worst team to make it to the finals ever. No experience, no talent, nobody scoring 15ppg, nobody getting 8 or more rebounds, nobody getting steals or blocks, all had bad career shooting percentages, were bad from the FT line - Kidd should be top three. He took a nobody team and made them believers.
Pointguard is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 05:41 AM   #37
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,992
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by oolalaa
FG% is an insultingly bad stat for perimeter players who shoot a lot of threes

I disagree because I think FG% helps show consistency better, and it tells you simply how many shots a player usually makes out of how many they take. I like looking at both stats.

Quote:
For an MVP winner, his team success in his first 12 years in the league was a little pitiful, and I simply refuse to believe we can pin all of that on a bad organisation and teammates. The greats TRANSFORM franchises. KG, rather emphatically, did NOT transform Minny. By the end of his tenure there, they were back to where they started before they drafted him.

Well, I don't think there was all that much he could, there wasn't a single year from '99-'04 when KG's teams lost to a team they should've beaten. Whether it was the Spurs in '99 and '01, The Blazers in '00, the Mavs in '02 or the Lakers in '03 and '04.

The 1 year in Minnesota that he had a chance to contend was '04, and he did, but Sam Cassell got injured.

Quote:
His fans will point to '08 and shout from the rooftops "Look! See! The season he gets a good team he wins a championship!". Whilst I don't doubt that he was their best player, and that he changed the "culture" of the team, I do think it was a 1a/1b scenario with Pierce. It would be highly unfair to put KGs '08 ring along side any of Duncan's and claim they are equals.

It was arguably 1.A/1.B offensively, though I think you could make the case that Garnett was their 1st option that year, he was their playoff scorer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
1) Where's the love for Roscoe?
-We're going to have consistent disagreements on where Rasheed ranks, so lets get to the bottom of it. Would you really trade (not considering the make-up of the team otherwise) a prime Rasheed for Allen, Pierce, Francis or Marbury? He is the only big man and the only guy who could play D out of the group, seems like a no-brainer. Sure Sheed's were down, but in fact he played for two of the most balanced contending teams in NBA history throughout his prime. The '99-'03 Blazers and '04-'08 Pistons were all about sharing the wealth. Every coach and every teammate will tell you that Sheed's impact goes way beyond the stat sheet.


Sheed was lower for 2 reasons. because he seemed to just have a meltdown in the playoffs, and had a terrible series.

And Sheed's team also underachieved greatly. Anything less than a championship was considered a disappointment with this team. They were still considered by many to be the most talented team in the league.

They went 30-11 over the first half of their season, which is more what you'd expect, but went just 20-21 the rest of the way, and it's tough to excuse a team with this much talent being under .500 for half a season.

For example, compare the team Steve Francis had in Houston, and they only finished 5 games behind Portland with nowhere near as much talent.

I like what Sheed brings to a team when he keeps his temper under control, but for the higher rankings on the list, I favor players who I think will carry a team, and play like superstars. Particularly Ray Allen this year who broke out in a way with his playoff run and at least reached borderline superstar status.

Quote:
2) Iverson/Kobe what gives?
-Yes, Kobe is the greater player and every year after this it was clear Kobe was a level above AI. But for this season Iverson was the MVP, led a team to the Finals and played as well or better than Bryant (I think a good deal better) while shouldering a much larger burden. Kobe isn't top three yet.

I've explained Kobe vs Iverson, and it's not a difficult choice for me. I think Kobe did just about everything better. While Iverson was certainly among the best perimeter scorers, I think Kobe was already even better due to his size and much more reliable jump shot. He had similar ability as a volume scorer, but could score much more efficiently, and do so more within the flow of a conventional offense. He had the talent to be a first option on just about any other team, but had to be a second option and the team's primary playmaker in the playoffs, and still did that extremely well and gave the team 1st option production. I don't see Iverson fitting in as well when he's not the man, and I don't see any superior ability to be the man. In other words, I think that Kobe was capable of doing what Iverson did, but I don't think Iverson was doing what Kobe did. And was what Iverson did more significant than Kobe winning a title on a team with the best postseason record in NBA history?

Bryant also rebounded the ball extremely well for a guard, which was another advantage you get with Kobe's size. He averaged over 7 rebounds per game in those playoffs despite playing with Shaq who was averaging over 15 boards, and Horace Grant, who even at 35, remained a strong rebounder.

And finally, Kobe was on the all-defensive second team, and actually deserved it back then. This is yet another advantage you get with Kobe over Iverson.

The only case I personally see for Iverson is if you put Kobe lower due to his selfish play and attitude in the first 2-3 months of the regular season, but I think that has to be overlooked due to his exceptional play in the playoffs. He not only became arguably the greatest second option ever in those playoffs, but he had a playoff run better than quite a few first options on championship teams.

Kobe played his best basketball from an all around standpoint outside of his 2008 season during that playoff run considering playmaking, scoring, defense and rebounding. Here's Phil Jackson talking about Kobe's playmaking that year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Jackson
"I think it's the best that I've ever seen a player of mine play with an overall court game. I'm asking him to do so much, and he's accomplishing it. I never asked Michael to be a playmaker. That's the greatest player that I've ever had, that I could consider the greatest player in the game, and I never asked him to be a playmaker in those terms. I asked him to be playmaker when he was doubled or tripled. But Kobe has to set up the offense, to advance the ball, to read the defense, to make other players happy, and he's doing a great job of that."

Quote:
3) Vinsanity!
- Carter at six too high. I can see an argument over everyone but Webber. No way was he better than C-Webb. I have him much lower (as usual) I never bought into Vince and I consider his career to have proven me right. I can't see him above Kidd at any point either (though this is the closest year and I have them 9/10) Kidd always did so much more to help his team win than VC.


Webber and Carter were very close, I like Webber's all around game better, but he had such a weak playoff run, and this was a problem throughout his career. I'm not sure that there's ever been a player of that caliber who has been a bigger choker. And this is coming from someone who was always a fan of Webber because I really enjoyed watching him play.

Carter on the other hand went in the opposite direction in the playoffs, and was living up to the superstar label, particularly after Oakley called him out in the Knicks series. He went back and forth with AI in that series, and was lighting up a phenomenal defensive team as well as a very good individual defender in Aaron McKie.

To be honest, I think the gap between Iverson and Carter is far too big on your list. I don't think you get that much more with one over the other. Iverson is my choice for intangibles such as heart, toughness and stamina. I just think they were in the same tier that particularly year.

As far as Carter vs Kidd, well, Kidd was definitely more well rounded as the top passer in the league, one of the best defensive guards, and arguably the best rebounding guard.

But Kidd's jump shot was still a weakness, and he didn't have a particularly strong playoff series. Carter had his best full season, and was really seen as one of the premier stars in the league due to his play in this season and these playoffs. I definitely think Carter was doing a lot for his team at this point carrying them to a 47-35 record despite them going 2-5 without him.

Quote:
4) More love for the Big Dog
- It was Robinson's career year and he was right there with Allen at that point. Averaged like 22-7-4 that year and shot well. Had the best mid-range jumper in the league. In the playoffs Allen was clearly the man, but throughout the season they shared clutch duties.


I liked Robinson's mid-range game and his whole skill set in that area including his post game, but he was one-dimensional other than being a decent rebounder. He was also a terrible defender. He was as much of the first option as Ray Allen, but I didn't have any doubt who the superior player was. I think a ranking in the 20-25 range is fair for Robinson considering he's only going to give you scoring, and while he does that very well, most of the players ahead are more complete players, and many are fairly close as scorers.

Quote:
5) Starbury?
- Was he so talented that big numbers on a 20-win team let you crack the top-15? Especially with what we know now? I know you'll explain well.


Hard to say, I wasn't entirely sure, but the farther you get down the list, the tougher the decisions get. He had superstar ability, and superstar numbers, but the negatives keep him from that status.

However, I had him at 15 in 2000, and I don't see any real decline, the Nets dropped from 31 to 26 wins largely because Marbury missed 7 more games than '00, Kerry Kittles was out for the season and Keith Van Horn missed 31 more games than the previous season.

He was probably the best scoring point guard in 2001, and he did have talent and skills as a playmaker despite his scoring mentality. But given that particular team, I don't see a real problem with his approach.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 11:46 AM   #38
oolalaa
I eat cheese
 
oolalaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 968
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

Well, I don't think there was all that much he could, there wasn't a single year from '99-'04 when KG's teams lost to a team they should've beaten. Whether it was the Spurs in '99 and '01, The Blazers in '00, the Mavs in '02 or the Lakers in '03 and '04.

The 1 year in Minnesota that he had a chance to contend was '04, and he did, but Sam Cassell got injured.


You can say EXACTLY the same thing about Carmelo Anthony. In fact, barring Garnett's MVP, both Melo's and KG's first 8 NBA seasons are REMARKABLY similar.

Season after season, Melo and KG were leading their teams to 1st round playoff exits. Every single year they were underdogs.

The one year Minnesota were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. The one year Denver were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. Both made the western conference finals.

Now, I'm not for a second saying that Melo is as good as KG but I'm going to guess that you don't even think Melo is in the same stratosphere. Why not? Couldn't Melo have got very close to a title playing with a Gasol (To replace Pierce), RayRay, Rondo and Perkins?
oolalaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 12:41 PM   #39
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,992
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unstoppabull
Well composed list, since the edit, can't really nitpick

Yeah, I'm still not sure about Gasol vs Yao in '09. It's pretty tough considering Yao faced more defensive attention, and was stronger, but Gasol was more mobile and versatile who passed the ball better. And Pau could handle lower passes better and fronting him wasn't nearly as effective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointguard
Rasheed was ok but I wouldn't have him over Dikembe. In fact I wouldn't have Rasheed in there. I would have replaced him with Antoine Walker.

Antoine? Definitely don't know about that one. Never liked Walker much, particularly his shot selection. I thought Sheed was more effective offensively due to his length, athleticism and unstoppable turnaround, and in 2000, a lot of his game was in the low post. And defensively, it's no contest, Sheed was one of the best defensive big men. Sheed didn't carry a superstar's offensive burden, and didn't have to playing on the deepest and most talented team, and he's not higher because of that. Well, not because he was on a team where he didn't have to, but because he never proved willing to take that burden consistently, despite the talent.

Quote:
What does AI have to do? He carried that team unlike very few others. He just kept coming unlike any player ever in the game. You could not stop him. He's top three.


I think putting AI top 5 is showing respect. Shaq and Duncan are out of reach for him, imo. Kobe was just a more well rounded player, imo, who did what Iverson did best at least as well, and was a team that didn't require as much of a specialized cast and could succeed in more roles, imo. Because he was more of a conventional player. KG is the most debatable, but I know you know how good Garnett was from your posts about him, so Iverson is only behind the best of the best. I did boost him for what he did in '01, as you can see, he's several spots higher than where he is in any other year.

Quote:
What Kidd did that year was off the hook. He took a last place team and totally converted the worst team to make it to the finals ever. No experience, no talent, nobody scoring 15ppg, nobody getting 8 or more rebounds, nobody getting steals or blocks, all had bad career shooting percentages, were bad from the FT line - Kidd should be top three. He took a nobody team and made them believers.

Kidd did have a great year, though I thought he was even better in '01. His season was one of the more memorable ones, at least top 4 in that regard, but aside from the 2 obvious guys Shaq and Duncan, I'm definitely not comfortable saying he was a better player than Kobe or KG. And McGrady was extremely close to Kobe at that time, imo with the difference being Kobe's championship and play late in games during the playoffs. His defense also helped his case over McGrady.

Webber is the guy I'd consider putting Kidd over the most, but I thought Webber was a more talented and dominant player due to his scoring in addition to being the best passing big man. And he was on a title contender, and the playoffs weren't as big of a problem, he maintained a high ranking like in 2000 because I wouldn't exactly call him disappointing in the '02 playoffs, at least not compared to some of his other years, with the exception of his free throw shooting.

Kidd did transform the Nets, but there are several reasons why I'm not as amazed. 1 is the quality of the Eastern Conference. Another is that the Nets were the best defensive team statistically, and while Kidd was an excellent defensive guard who was part of that, and probably had an additional part in that due to setting up his teammates for easy baskets and keeping them involved offensively(which many agree causes players to play harder defensively), and Kidd's presence had the team more confident in winning games, there's only so much credit he can take since it takes a lot to be ranked number 1 defensively. As far as one guy taking credit defensively, I've almost only really seen centers/big men and coaches be able to change a defense so dramatically.

Kidd didn't have the best shooters, or guys who excelled at creating their own shots, but he had some athletic finishers who ran the floor well and complemented Kidd, good size and some good role players.

Kidd raising his game to almost 20 ppg with 8 rpg and 9 apg in the playoffs was impressive, though because scoring wasn't what he looked to do, but recognized what his team needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oolalaa
You can say EXACTLY the same thing about Carmelo Anthony. In fact, barring Garnett's MVP, both Melo's and KG's first 8 NBA seasons are REMARKABLY similar.

Season after season, Melo and KG were leading their teams to 1st round playoff exits. Every single year they were underdogs.

The one year Minnesota were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. The one year Denver were favourites to advance past the 1st round they did so. Both made the western conference finals.

Now, I'm not for a second saying that Melo is as good as KG but I'm going to guess that you don't even think Melo is in the same stratosphere. Why not? Couldn't Melo have got very close to a title playing with a Gasol (To replace Pierce), RayRay, Rondo and Perkins?

Melo did have a lot of talent around him in '09 and '10. His team had a comparable amount of talent to any team in the league. But in '10, they seemed affected by Karl leaving the team because of cancer, so I'll give them a pass for that. But even the '08 team had a considerable amount of talent.

Melo is actually my favorite current player, and to answer your question, I'm imagine Gasol, Melo, Allen, Rondo and Perkins would at least contend.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shep
nah i don't give too much credit, i give just the right amount of credit. to be the second best player on a championship team takes alot of commitment, you do afterall, play the game to win championships so it takes alot of individual sacrifice. guys that win as a second best player could easily be more dominant in a less successful team..and not only that, you have to gel with different ego's, coaches, and schemes. kobe showed what he could do in the defining moments of those playoffs, the trail blazers series, and when shaq was fouled out in the finals, he took those moments and proved to the world that he was the second best player on the planet.

He did have big clutch moments, trust me I remember, the game-winning jumper in game 2 vs the Suns, the game-saving block vs Sabonis in game 3 in the WCF, his game 7 vs Portland in general, and OT of game 4 vs Indiana.

But a few big moments do not make him a better player than guys like Duncan, Garnett and Mourning. Despite Kobe being an elite perimeter defender, his impact with his on the ball defense couldn't approach that of these 3 big men. Plus, Duncan and Garnett were more effective offensive players at that point. Mourning had also become more polished offensively and more poised and had a much more efficient scoring season while scoring nearly as much as the primary focus of opposing defenses.

Webber and Malone were also clearly the superior offensive players, while Webber was also arguably the best passing big man in the league, Malone was an excellent post defender and both impacted the game more as rebounders since they were big men.

Onto to the perimeter players, Hill was more efficient and more well rounded. He had the better scoring season while receiving more defensive attention with his improved jumper, and was also the better decision maker and playmaker. Payton was closer since Kobe had surpassed him defensively by that point, and Payton had developed a habit of chucking in addition to holding the ball, but he was clearly the superior playmaker, and actually had the more impressive scoring season.

Hill- 25.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, 3.2 TO, 1.4 spg, 48.9 FG%, 34.7 3P%(0.5 3PM)
Payton- 24.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 8.9 apg, 2.7 TO, 1.9 spg 44.8 FG%, 34 3P%(2.3 3PM)
Kobe- 22.5 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 4.9 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.6 spg, 46.6 FG%, 31.9 3P%(0.7 3PM)

Kidd is the closest, I had Kobe over him for a long time, but I have to go with Kidd due to his basketball IQ and ability to make his teammates better, though his injury makes it extremely close.

Again, Kobe's clutch moments were memorable, but that doesn't make up for the significant gap in impact between Kobe, and most of these players, the big men in particular. Many wouldn't even take prime Kobe over Duncan, who was in his prime in 2000. Much less 2000 Kobe.

Kobe was still developing, maturing and learning how to be a consistent facilitator while also learning how to incorporate his individual talent into the team concept.

There's no way anyone is taking 2000 Kobe if they're building a team for a single season over pretty much any of these players.

Last edited by ShaqAttack3234 : 07-02-2012 at 01:04 PM.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 01:17 PM   #40
Bigsmoke
Death Before Dishonor
 
Bigsmoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CHICAGO
Posts: 17,186
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

I dont really like Kobe but i know he should be higher than Wade in 2009
Bigsmoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 01:33 PM   #41
oolalaa
I eat cheese
 
oolalaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 968
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

Melo did have a lot of talent around him in '09 and '10. His team had a comparable amount of talent to any team in the league. But in '10, they seemed affected by Karl leaving the team because of cancer, so I'll give them a pass for that. But even the '08 team had a considerable amount of talent.

Melo is actually my favorite current player, and to answer your question, I'm imagine Gasol, Melo, Allen, Rondo and Perkins would at least contend.


Fair enough. I'll leave it at that.
oolalaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 06:49 PM   #42
G.O.A.T
Scott Hastings Fan
 
G.O.A.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 5,646
Default 2002 Response

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234
2002
1.Shaquille O'Neal
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Kevin Garnett
5.Tracy McGrady
6.Chris Webber
7.Jason Kidd
8.Paul Pierce
9.Dirk Nowitzki
10.Allen Iverson
11.Gary Payton
12.Jermaine O'Neal
13.Steve Nash
14.Vince Carter
15.Ray Allen
16.Rasheed Wallace
17.Ben Wallace
18.Elton Brand
19.Karl Malone
20.Baron Davis
21.Stephon Marbury
22.Peja Stojakovic
23.Michael Jordan
24.Shawn Marion
25.Sam Cassell


My top 20 in terms of level of play in 2002 (Season significance ranking in parenthesis)

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. Garnett (6)
5. McGrady (7)
6. Kidd (4)
7. Webber (5)
8. Dirk (9)
9. Pierce (8)
10. Iverson
11. Carter (15)
12. Payton (11)
13. Sheed (14)
14. J. O'Neal (12)
15. Jordan (ur)
16. Malone (ur)
17. Allen (ur)
18. Nash (ur)
19. B. Davis (ur)
20. Wallace (13)

1) Was it more Kidd's team success or Webber's slight athletic decline that allowed the 1994 ROTY to surpass the 1993 winner?

2) Did you feel that Steve Nash was better than Carter, Allen and Rasheed in 2002, or is that in retrospect once we saw what he could be as an alpha player?

3) Why isn't Jordan higher? The level he was playing at before the injury was borderline top 10 in the league. I have him at 15 based on his level of play when healthy. I just don't see Allen, Nash, Baron Davis, Marbury or Elton Brand playing at the same level. Bascially just give me your thoughts on the season MJ was having through 50-some games.

4) Who was more talented in 2002, Rasheed or Jermaine O'Neal? What would you have done if you were Portland the previous off-season?

5) Why does Carter fall so far this season? I agree that 2001 was his best season, but had he declined so much so fast in your opinion?
G.O.A.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2012, 08:29 PM   #43
The Iron Fist
Great college starter
 
The Iron Fist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,541
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnax1
Good list, but here's a couple of my bigger disagreements
01 Kobe should not be that high. I can't see him carrying AI's 01 team as far as Iverson did
So Kobe can't take a team as far with the coach,6th man and defensive player of the year, coming out of the east?
The Iron Fist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 05:31 AM   #44
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,992
Default Re: 2002 Response

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
1) Was it more Kidd's team success or Webber's slight athletic decline that allowed the 1994 ROTY to surpass the 1993 winner?

Well, I have Webber over Kidd. I thought Webber played the second best ball of his career in '02. 2000 was the absolute best I've seen Webber play as far as a combination of skills, athleticism, aggressiveness and his improved FT shooting.

Quote:
2) Did you feel that Steve Nash was better than Carter, Allen and Rasheed in 2002, or is that in retrospect once we saw what he could be as an alpha player?

Can't say what Nash did after hurts him, but I tried not to consider it. However, he had an excellent season in '02, a real breakout year, and was now considered one of the elite point guards. Among the elite scoring point guards and among the elite passers and shooters in the league already by that point. I remembered '02 as his breakout year, and probably his best as a Mav. He played very well in the playoffs, and was having a monster year before the Van Exel trade. Good enough to get on the all-nba 3rd team. Prior to the Van Exel trade, Nash was averaging 19.5 ppg, 7.8 apg, 2.9 TO, 48.8 FG%/45 3P%/89.5 FT%.

I'll explain Carter below since you brought him up specifically.

Allen also missed the playoffs with one of the more talented teams in the East. Don't remember a decline in his play, but it caused me to drop him from '02, particularly without the playoff run in '01 which got him a higher ranking.

Quote:
3) Why isn't Jordan higher? The level he was playing at before the injury was borderline top 10 in the league. I have him at 15 based on his level of play when healthy. I just don't see Allen, Nash, Baron Davis, Marbury or Elton Brand playing at the same level. Bascially just give me your thoughts on the season MJ was having through 50-some games.


Yeah, I thought about that, but he ended up only playing around 50 healthy games or so because he wasn't really able to produce after he tried coming back from the knee injury, iirc. And his game was more or less limited to mid-range jumpers at this point since he didn't have the athletic ability of the younger shooting guards and small forwards, or the same stamina. I do think that there were some intangibles in play there.

I disagree that he was borderline top 10 before the injury, though. More like 15-20 range had he stayed healthy, imo.

A little tough for me to overlook the efficiency. 22.9 ppg on 22.1 FGA and 41.6 FG% with almost no threes. And even before his injury, 24.6 ppg on 23.5 FGA and 42 FG%.

I think he was much more impressive watching him than those numbers suggest, but I'm not going to completely disregard them. He did have an elite mid-range game, but his game depended on how much he had in his legs that night.

Allen was more athletic by that point and shot the ball so much better making him a much more efficient scorer than MJ, and didn't miss as many games.

Elton Brand hadn't really developed his jump shot which would take his game to the next level in '06, but he was a strong post player and inside player, who rebounded very well, blocked a lot of shots and contributed defensively, and scored very efficiently. Not only that, but he had thew Clippers in playoff contention late into the season, probably until March, iirc. The Clippers had young talent, but Lamar Odom only played 29 games that year due to the suspension and also various injuries.

Nash was one of the easier ones for me as one of the best passing and scoring point guards, and one of the best pure shooters on a team that almost won 60 games, and he had some strong playoff performances as well.

Baron's ranking was due in large part to leading the Hornets with Mashburn out half the year, and also his breakout performance in the playoffs, when he started looking like a star.

Marbury is the guy I'm thinking about moving down the most. He got there on talent, but his team did underachieve. But a coaching change can do that. Their record was much better before Skiles stepped down, and while Phoenix did have talent, they seemed to lack the big men to compete in the West.

Not all of them would've been ranked ahead of him had MJ stayed healthy.

Quote:
4) Who was more talented in 2002, Rasheed or Jermaine O'Neal? What would you have done if you were Portland the previous off-season?

Both were very talented, and I never thought either fully achieved their potential, I'd say that Rasheed was more talented, but I think that Jermaine gave his team just about as much.

Jermaine gave you more rebounding and shot blocking, without the temper and other problems.

Quote:
5) Why does Carter fall so far this season? I agree that 2001 was his best season, but had he declined so much so fast in your opinion?

His habit of settling for jumpers got worse, he missed a significant amount of games, and Toronto had that great stretch late in the season without him.

The positive was his playmaking improved. He was at 25.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.4 apg, 2.7 TO, 1.7 spg, 42.8 FG%, 37.5 3P%(2.1 3PM) before his first injury and Torotno was a respectable 28-21(28-20 with Carter).

But missing 22 regular season games as well as sitting out Toronto's playoff series dropped him a few spots lower than he would have been. He ends up 14th, as opposed to 12th in 2000 when he had a better season, and didn't miss a game. He was more skilled in '02, but more aggressive and motivated in 2000.

You've given me some things to think about though, if I do make some revisions, there will be a few in particular that I'm thinking about.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2012, 01:09 PM   #45
G.O.A.T
Scott Hastings Fan
 
G.O.A.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 5,646
Default Re: The top 25 players from 2000-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaqAttack3234

2003
1.Tim Duncan
2.Kevin Garnett
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Tracy McGrady
5.Kobe Bryant
6.Jason Kidd
7.Dirk Nowitzki
8.Allen Iverson
9.Chris Webber
10.Paul Pierce
11.Jermaine O'Neal
12.Ray Allen
13.Ben Wallace
14.Steve Nash
15.Stephon Marbury
16.Steve Francis
17.Gary Payton
18.Peja Stojakovic
19.Jamal Mashburn
20.Shawn Marion
21.Rasheed Wallace
22.Allan Houston
23.Karl Malone
24.Michael Jordan
25.Sam Cassell

my (adjusted) top 20 for 2003 as I still try and properly apply your criteria

1. Duncan
2. Garnett
3. Shaq
4, McGrady
5. Kobe
6. Kidd
7. Dirk
8. Iverson
9. Webber
10. Pierce
11. J. O'Neal
12. Wallace
13. Nash
14. Mashburn
15. Sheed
16. Allen
17. Francis
18. Marion
19. Malone
20. Payton

1) Simpatico - We're lockstep 1-11. That's kind of scary. As I go through each season, the way you do this makes more and more sense. What were the toughest decisions for you in the top 11? For me KG over Shaq was very close, same with T-Mac over Kobe and Finally Webber over Pierce despite Webber's injury in the playoffs.

2) Denzel's Boy - Ray Allen a but high maybe? My thinking is the Bucks are 25-22 with Allen and 15-13 with Payton. Not seeing a big difference. Allen did make the Sonics better, but ultimately at 16-13 with Seattle they weren't anything great either, essentially playing in between where they were in 2002 and 2003. Additionally, it was Allen's worst shooting year in five seasons and yet he's ranked as high or higher than he was the previous three seasons when he also made the playoffs.

3) Monster Mash - Mashburn had his best NBA season and I have to argue for him over the likes of Peja (playoff choke, number 2 option, not better stats), Payton (down year, traded, not as good as Mash in their respective playoff series), Francis (No playoffs, more of a head case, distraction i.e your criticisms of Sheed) and Marbury, for reasons discussed below.

4) And 1...more thing - Why Marbury over Marion? To me Marion brings more to the table. He shoots as well or better, scores without needing isolation, ball screens or plays run for him, much better on ball and help defender, his rebounding has more impact than Steph's playmaking.
G.O.A.T is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:27 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy