It's April 22, 2024, 11:17:48 PM
now you just doin too much lol
1998/99: After MJ retired Shaq was the most dominant and best player for 4-5 straight years. forget iverson, kobe or even duncan. then the lakers split up and kobe got better and Shaq regressed after 2 years in miami (and his 4th title).2003-2006: You could say the best player was Kobe, Duncan or Garnett. I know NIK will sit there and tell you Steve Nash should be on this list but I can't justify it.2007: Lebron enters his prime and is the best player2014: Lebron is struggling and now people are wondering if Curry or Anthony could take that throne. Durant is still young too but he'll always be 2nd place until he wins a ring.
look where KG was in the MVP voting before saying stupid things about KG1999-00 NBA 0.337 (2)2000-01 NBA 0.122 (5)2001-02 NBA 0.013 (12)2002-03 NBA 0.732 (2)2003-04 NBA 0.991 (1)yeah nobody thought he was the best
Quote from: Hack Brodenheimer on December 31, 2014, 08:18:37 PMlook where KG was in the MVP voting before saying stupid things about KG1999-00 NBA 0.337 (2)2000-01 NBA 0.122 (5)2001-02 NBA 0.013 (12)2002-03 NBA 0.732 (2)2003-04 NBA 0.991 (1)yeah nobody thought he was the best Except no one thought him better than Shaq, Duncan or Kobe. Maybe a couple of people. And let's see results, Nash won MVP trophies over Kobe, and even you have a hard time putting Nash over Kobe. So all we know, KG got Kobe's votes post 2003. And the results are this...playoffs:1997, 3 game sweep to Houston1998, 3-2 lost to Seattle1999, 3-1 lost to San Antonio2000, 3-1 lost to Portland2001, 3-1 lost to San Antonio2002, 3 game sweep to Dallas, which wasn't as good as the Dallas today2003, 4-2 lost to Lakers2004, 4-1 win over Denver, 4-3 over Sacramento, 4-2 lost to Lakers2005-2007, didn't see the playoffs again. KG had one great year, and before that he produced average results. Results don't lie. Most superstars by themselves get to the second round at least a couple of times. KG just couldn't cut the mustard. And you are talking to someone who wanted the Lakers to trade for him, look up my history with KG. I like him. But he just wasn't up to snuff to be up there with Shaq, Kobe, Duncan.
Quote from: Sccit on December 31, 2014, 07:23:27 PMnow you just doin too much lolBut you know it's true... LOL... that late 00's was hard to narrow it down, all three of those players were always finding ways to lead their teams to the finals. Quote from: Hack Brodenheimer on December 31, 2014, 07:31:18 PM1998/99: After MJ retired Shaq was the most dominant and best player for 4-5 straight years. forget iverson, kobe or even duncan. then the lakers split up and kobe got better and Shaq regressed after 2 years in miami (and his 4th title).2003-2006: You could say the best player was Kobe, Duncan or Garnett. I know NIK will sit there and tell you Steve Nash should be on this list but I can't justify it.2007: Lebron enters his prime and is the best player2014: Lebron is struggling and now people are wondering if Curry or Anthony could take that throne. Durant is still young too but he'll always be 2nd place until he wins a ring.First off, Garnett doesn't belong on this list, ESPECIALLY between 2003-2006. He only led his team out the first round once in his career. Even superstars on their own, with no help usually get out the first round. And you can semi-justify Nash, he did win 2 MVP's, but it's common knowledge that those MVP's should have gone to Bean but the NBA was still mad at him for whatever happened in that hotel room.2007, LeBron enters his prime, but he was NOT the best player in the league. If I recall, Kobe was winning titles, and with a good team but it was a traditionally built team. As in, it's the same kind of team that many superstars have to win titles. You had the star, Kobe, #2 man, Pau, utility man, Odom, big shot guy, Fisher, always hurt guy who can contribute when healthy, Bynum, and defensive specialist, Ariza/Artest. It's not like Kobe had 2 other superstars with him. And even when LeBron had 2 other superstars, they only won 2 out of 4 titles. That's 3 bona fide superstars, losing to traditionally built teams. Anyways, LeBron was in no way better than Kobe from 2007-2010. The only way you can think that is if you are trolling. Awe son of a bitch, I feel for your damn trolling on New Years Eve. I should just wake up my wife, have sex and then deal with this in the morning. 2014. LeBron is struggling because he's off them 'roids. I started listening to Bay Area sports radio this football season to get Raider news and follow the Harbaugh saga. One thing I love about the Bay, they have no problems talking about LeBron and 'roids. It's down right funny. They have been getting on him hard to leaving Miami and Biogenesis and then losing all kinds of weight in Cleveland. Anthony isn't taking the crown, but this might be the year that we see someone new take it. But in 1999 we all thought the next NBA champion would be the one to take the crown, and the Spurs won but then the Lakers just dominated the next 3 years and we all knew that the 1999 title was just a fluke. Once Kobe started to reach his prime, well enough in 2000 and then fully in 2001, that no one can stop the Lakers. So I am not putting too much into who wins this title. I'll hold judgment for a few years.
I think the way I mapped it out was the most efficient ... generations aren't every 5 years. the end of a decade is a good cut off.
Great players needs good players around them to succeed, besides KGs best year in Minnesota his best teammate was fucking Wally. Big surprise KG advances in the playoffs when their shitty front office finally brought in some good players (Cassell, Sprewell)
Quote from: Sccit on January 01, 2015, 01:10:51 PMI think the way I mapped it out was the most efficient ... generations aren't every 5 years. the end of a decade is a good cut off.The difference is that the NFL likes to do the team of decades thing. The NFL is more of a team sport and it's easier to do decades. And almost every fan can say who the team of each decade is. 60's, Packers, 70's, Steelers, 80's, 49ers, 90's, Cowboys, 2000's, Patriots, 2010's, not known yet but more than likely either the Seahawks or the Packers. The NBA is a little different though.The NBA is all about which player dominates. Since Stern took over, he switched the narrative from teams to individual players. So in the 60's you had the Celtics, in the 70's you basically had the ABA because no NBA team really dominated once the league over expanded and then lost half their players to the ABA. The 80's went originally from being Lakers/Celtics to being all about Magic/Bird because of Stern's new approach. The 90's was all Jordan, with Hakeem in there when Jordan retired for a year and a half. The early 2000's was all about Kobe/Shaq, the late 2000's was about the Duncan and fundamental basketball with the whole Rivalry reborn of Kobe vs. the Celtics Big 3. The early 2010's is all about LeBron James and the Heatles vs. the whole league. The NBA does eras based off stories, players and narratives rather than just decades. It's just marketed differently than the NFL. I do think for fans, decades is easier, but the league will always find a way add LeBron's era and make people remember it. UNLESS someone exposes LeBron's PED use. In that case, I think the league will vilify LeBron and throw him under the bus since it's the only sports league without a PED problem right now.Quote from: Citizen-Y on January 01, 2015, 01:02:54 PMGreat players needs good players around them to succeed, besides KGs best year in Minnesota his best teammate was fucking Wally. Big surprise KG advances in the playoffs when their shitty front office finally brought in some good players (Cassell, Sprewell)You forget Marbury who averaged 17ppg and 9apg, and Joe Smith, Terrell Brandon was very key in the late 90's averaging 17ppg and 9apg, Malik Sealy was also key, Wally was actually the 3rd option for a while, Chauncey Billups spent a year there in his prime, all before Sam and Spree came to the team. What's more striking than KG not being able to get out the first round is how quickly he declined. In 2004, he was the MVP, by 2006 he dropped to only 22ppg, still getting 13rpg, but at 29 you start to see his production go down. He was almost like LeBron is now, such a physical force, but once that starts to deplete a little you start to see him need even more help. Part of KG's problem in the playoffs, and this was talked about at exhausting levels in MN, was that he got TOO excited for big moments. Almost to the point that people started to wonder if he was too amped up for games. A big part of that was he was a very intense player, so the bigger the moment, the more pressure, the more pressure he put on himself. Many in MN were wondering if he needed to be a second option in playoff time because he wasn't built for the big moments. Of course once he got to Boston, he was over 30, he was the second option behind Paul Pierce, and he was the intense role player instead of the main guy who put too much on himself to preform. And there is nothing wrong with that, that should have always been KG's role. But this is also why I don't put him as such a great player, someone who's up there with Kobe, Duncan, hell even Pierce. I put Pierce over KG in a heartbeat.
Quote from: M Dogg™ on January 02, 2015, 09:22:51 AMQuote from: Sccit on January 01, 2015, 01:10:51 PMI think the way I mapped it out was the most efficient ... generations aren't every 5 years. the end of a decade is a good cut off.The difference is that the NFL likes to do the team of decades thing. The NFL is more of a team sport and it's easier to do decades. And almost every fan can say who the team of each decade is. 60's, Packers, 70's, Steelers, 80's, 49ers, 90's, Cowboys, 2000's, Patriots, 2010's, not known yet but more than likely either the Seahawks or the Packers. The NBA is a little different though.The NBA is all about which player dominates. Since Stern took over, he switched the narrative from teams to individual players. So in the 60's you had the Celtics, in the 70's you basically had the ABA because no NBA team really dominated once the league over expanded and then lost half their players to the ABA. The 80's went originally from being Lakers/Celtics to being all about Magic/Bird because of Stern's new approach. The 90's was all Jordan, with Hakeem in there when Jordan retired for a year and a half. The early 2000's was all about Kobe/Shaq, the late 2000's was about the Duncan and fundamental basketball with the whole Rivalry reborn of Kobe vs. the Celtics Big 3. The early 2010's is all about LeBron James and the Heatles vs. the whole league. The NBA does eras based off stories, players and narratives rather than just decades. It's just marketed differently than the NFL. I do think for fans, decades is easier, but the league will always find a way add LeBron's era and make people remember it. UNLESS someone exposes LeBron's PED use. In that case, I think the league will vilify LeBron and throw him under the bus since it's the only sports league without a PED problem right now.Quote from: Citizen-Y on January 01, 2015, 01:02:54 PMGreat players needs good players around them to succeed, besides KGs best year in Minnesota his best teammate was fucking Wally. Big surprise KG advances in the playoffs when their shitty front office finally brought in some good players (Cassell, Sprewell)You forget Marbury who averaged 17ppg and 9apg, and Joe Smith, Terrell Brandon was very key in the late 90's averaging 17ppg and 9apg, Malik Sealy was also key, Wally was actually the 3rd option for a while, Chauncey Billups spent a year there in his prime, all before Sam and Spree came to the team. What's more striking than KG not being able to get out the first round is how quickly he declined. In 2004, he was the MVP, by 2006 he dropped to only 22ppg, still getting 13rpg, but at 29 you start to see his production go down. He was almost like LeBron is now, such a physical force, but once that starts to deplete a little you start to see him need even more help. Part of KG's problem in the playoffs, and this was talked about at exhausting levels in MN, was that he got TOO excited for big moments. Almost to the point that people started to wonder if he was too amped up for games. A big part of that was he was a very intense player, so the bigger the moment, the more pressure, the more pressure he put on himself. Many in MN were wondering if he needed to be a second option in playoff time because he wasn't built for the big moments. Of course once he got to Boston, he was over 30, he was the second option behind Paul Pierce, and he was the intense role player instead of the main guy who put too much on himself to preform. And there is nothing wrong with that, that should have always been KG's role. But this is also why I don't put him as such a great player, someone who's up there with Kobe, Duncan, hell even Pierce. I put Pierce over KG in a heartbeat. good post about KG, but i still think that a generation has to be over the span of a decade, at least.it would be sad to see lebron remembered for bein a part of the heatles instead of a solo artist with supporting players.....but if durant wins a ring in the 10s, it'll be his generation, and lebron's team-hopping will end up backfiring.
Home
Help
Login
Register
Print
