Who's the best player in the NBA right now?

[Loftin]

Right now, who's the best player in the NBA?

[Loftin]

Oh, and I forgot: this poll is assuming that everyone is 100% healthy.

[blackgloves]

I vote Tim Duncan. though most of you will think Im voting for Tim because im a Spurs fan. What Tim does is unlike anyone else on that list. He scores, rebounds, he blocks shots, draws double teams and come the playoffs hes the best guy on the court. hes won championships, hes made big shots you name it. In the finals he had 8 blocks, and then 9 this year in one game of the playoffs. Hes a freaking machine. the only thing he doesnt do well is free throws and this year he seems to be doing well at the stripe.

[blackgloves]

Oh, I forgot and dont know how I missed this. But he makes the players around him better, and thats very important.

[Loftin]

I picked LeBron, simply because there is nothing in basketball that he cannot do. Look at the Cavs, and then ask yourself how they made the conference finals. Only LeBron could do that. Kobe can't get his very similar band of misfits out of the first round.

[PinetarAg]

Oh, I forgot and dont know how I missed this. But he makes the players around him better, and thats very important.

Thats why I picked Nash...makes everyone better. Without him where would the Suns be..probably a borderline playoff team fighting for the 8th spot.

I almost picked Lebron because of what Loftin said....but the lack of a killer instinct in him puts Nash ahead

[Loftin]

Thats why I picked Nash...makes everyone better. Without him where would the Suns be..probably a borderline playoff team fighting for the 8th spot

He's my second choice. The only drawback is that his size (or lack thereof) makes him a defensive liability.

[Vlyrock]

I voted Tim Duncan. He is the heart and soul of the Spurs...they didn't miss a beat when Robinson retired and he's going to retire as one of the greatest players of all time in the NBA.

Lebron has done well, but he hasn't done enough (in my books) to be considered the best in the NBA right now. Just because they're in the Eastern Conference Finals doesn't mean anything...the Eastern Conference as a whole is terrible and Lebron hasn't done much in terms of late game heroics or carrying his team (he passed up the Game 1 shot).

If you want to go on what they did this year (and where there teams went), then you can make a legitimate case for Baron Davis of Golden State. Overall though, if I could start my team with one player, it'd be TD.

[Loftin]

he passed up the Game 1 shotDoes anyone remember game 6 of the 1993 NBA Finals? Michael Jordan drove to the basket, drew extra defenders, and hit a wide open role player on the outside. That role player was John Paxson, who ended up making the series-winning 3.

LeBron had the ball in the final seconds, drew extra defenders, and hit a wide open Donyell Marshall. He did the right thing.

[CHHS_Aggie]

Lebron hands down.

[s_murph12]

Dirk, he was the MVP afterall.

[AustinAG07]

Tim Duncan. Black gloves said it perfectly.

He plays in a small market and isnt very flashy so he doesnt get as much attention as others but his rings speak for themselves. Plus, scoring forwards and guards are a dime a dozen in the NBA right now, but big men are very rare and valuable. I think you could trade TMAC, Lebron, Wade, Arenas and many others for each other and thier teams would not be affected too much. Duncan is irreplacable.

[blackgloves]

Lebron hands down.


Lebron doesn't have the playoff experience that Duncan and some of the others have. Hes the most athletic guy yes. And he may very well go down as the greatest of all time (possibly) Today though, if you're in Game 7 of the Finals, you can put one guy on your team, you gotta go Tim Duncan

hes been there done that and proved to everyone

[The Massacre]

ron artest

[blackgloves]

ron artest


I think he has 2 votes now!

:rep:

[PinetarAg]

Kobe Bryant has more votes than Nash??? Wtf...I thought the question was "who is the best player in the NBA right now", not "Who is the best ball hogging scorer"

How the hell is Bryant a better player than Nash...

[PinetarAg]

The Suns were 29-53 and no playoffs the year before Nash came over (that was with Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, Marion, Barbosa).

Then the next year they get Nash and go 62-20 and have been doing great ever since.

[CHHS_Aggie]

The Suns were 29-53 and no playoffs the year before Nash came over (that was with Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, Marion, Barbosa).

Then the next year they get Nash and go 62-20 and have been doing great ever since.


Nash is stellar in the regular season and the first or second playoff series. Then he just falls apart, he gets tired and can't keep the run and gun going. He did it in Dallas and he's doing it in Phoenix.

[Dustin00whoop]

Like Loftin said, Lebron does it all! I think Timmy is 2nd!

[Loftin]

3 votes for Kobe? Really? I almost didn't even put him on the poll!

[Conan]

Kobe Bryant has more votes than Nash??? Wtf...I thought the question was "who is the best player in the NBA right now", not "Who is the best ball hogging scorer"

How the hell is Bryant a better player than Nash...

There was an article in the newspaper last month. It was title "Bryant still mourns after passing ball". He never passes and is a poor teammate. :rep:

[The Massacre]

is the question the best individual player or best team player? because Kobe is one hell of a basketball player

[Loftin]

is the question the best individual player or best team player? because Kobe is one hell of a basketball player

Basketball is a team sport.

Whatever benefit he brings, you also have to consider the hurt he causes his franchise by running off the good players and not making the players he has better.

If the question was "who scores the most points," Kobe wins. Since the question is "who is the best player in the NBA right now," I'd never consider him.

[The Massacre]

i have seen basketball played 1 on 1. it is not necessarily always a team sport. i think the question as is, would allow Kobe as a great individual player. he is capable of beating a majority of other players 1 on 1. if the question was "who's the most valuable player in the NBA" then i wouldn't consider him as one of the choices.

it is your question though, you define the parameters however you want. i was just inputing my 2 cents on who i thought was a good player.

[Pumchavas28]

http://www.clubspurs.com/forums/images/avatars/13837816464649827e5a4dd.gif

[Pflugerville Ag]

I picked LeBron, simply because there is nothing in basketball that he cannot do. Look at the Cavs, and then ask yourself how they made the conference finals. Only LeBron could do that. Kobe can't get his very similar band of misfits out of the first round.

I'm not arguing that with your pick of LeBron, but I think your statement about how the Cavs made the conference finals and about Kobe is not accurate. The Cavs made the conference finals b/c they are in the East. Put them in the West and they probably don't even make the playoffs. Put the Lakers in the East and they very well might be in the conference finals. You have to take into account the just how weak the East is.

[PinetarAg]

is the question the best individual player or best team player? because Kobe is one hell of a basketball player


Kobe is a great scorer (the best in the league right now) but that does not translate into the best PLAYER

[Pflugerville Ag]

This is a tough question to answer. By "best player," do you mean most talented, most valuable, etc? I answer those differently.

[Pumchavas28]

Kobe is a great scorer (the best in the league right now) but that does not translate into the best PLAYER


In that case if we are talking offense & defense, passing & doing the small things to win a game & make your team betterm then the list is very small...

[Loftin]

I'm not arguing that with your pick of LeBron, but I think your statement about how the Cavs made the conference finals and about Kobe is not accurate. The Cavs made the conference finals b/c they are in the East. Put them in the West and they probably don't even make the playoffs. Put the Lakers in the East and they very well might be in the conference finals. You have to take into account the just how weak the East is.

I don't think the difference is THAT big. The Cavs are probably good enough to be 4th or 5th in the West, and I think they'd beat Utah in a first round series and Golden State in round 2. That would still have them in the conference finals.

The West is much better than the east in that the West has 4 teams that are capable of winning it all, while the east really only has 2. However, the bottom teams in the west playoffs are no better than the bottom teams in the east playoffs.

The Cavaliers are better than the Lakers, hands down.

[PinetarAg]

In that case if we are talking offense & defense, passing & doing the small things to win a game & make your team betterm then the list is very small...

and I think Nash tops the list for that fact...yes his defense isn't hte best but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be...it is average

[Pflugerville Ag]

If the Cavs were in the West, I would put them at a 6 seed this year.

[PinetarAg]

If the Cavs were in the West, I would put them at a 6 seed this year.

I could see that too

[Pflugerville Ag]

Loftin, you do agree that the East is worse than the West, right? So if the Cavs record was only 50-32 playing in the East, how can you justify them having a better record and being the 4 seed in the West if they would have had to play a harder schedule? At best, you could assume that their record stays the same. A 50-32 record in the West is good for a 6 seed.

[Loftin]

Loftin, you do agree that the East is worse than the West, right? So if the Cavs record was only 50-32 playing in the East, how can you justify them having a better record and being the 4 seed in the West if they would have had to play a harder schedule? At best, you could assume that their record stays the same. A 50-32 record in the West is good for a 6 seed.

The Cavs wons 58% of their games against West teams this year, which is consistent with how they did against the East (only 2% less).

Teams sometimes play down to their competition in the NBA regular season. The Rockets beat the Mavs by about 30, and then lost at home to Boston.

[PinetarAg]

The Cavs wons 58% of their games against West teams this year, which is consistent with how they did against the East (only 2% less).

Teams sometimes play down to their competition in the NBA regular season. The Rockets beat the Mavs by about 30, and then lost at home to Boston.

how many games agaisnt the west did they actually play.

[Pflugerville Ag]

Just b/c they won 58% of their games doesn't mean that they would do that the entire season. Who did they play in the West? Houston won 80% of their games against the East. Dallas won 90%. Phoenix won 83%. Stats like that are not a good representation of what a team would do over an entire season.

[Loftin]

how many games agaisnt the west did they actually play.

30

[blackgloves]

Kobe Bryant has more votes than Nash??? Wtf...I thought the question was "who is the best player in the NBA right now", not "Who is the best ball hogging scorer"

How the hell is Bryant a better player than Nash...

how is he better you ask? assists are the most over rated stat in basketball. If you are one helva passer then you're great with "assists"

Bryant can score better, rebound better, and has a better turn over ratio than Nash Im sure

[The Massacre]

Kobe is a great scorer (the best in the league right now) but that does not translate into the best PLAYER

isn't the object of basketball to score points?

[Mole]

I voted for McGrady. The only problem is you don't know when your going to get T-Mac and when your going to get Tracy. If he could bring it consistantly he would be awesome.

[blackgloves]

I voted for McGrady. The only problem is you don't know when your going to get T-Mac and when your going to get Tracy. If he could bring it consistantly he would be awesome.

best athlete on the planet = McGrady
best basketball player in the world = not McGrady

not a bad choice though, I could see why you voted for him

[PinetarAg]

how is he better you ask? assists are the most over rated stat in basketball. If you are one helva passer then you're great with "assists"

Bryant can score better, rebound better, and has a better turn over ratio than Nash Im sure


and look what I wrote about the Suns before Nash and after...with the same team in place and basically just adding Nash they moved from 29 wins to 60 win....what has Kobe done....nothing on his own...once Shaq was taken away he missed the playoffs and was second tier seed.

[PinetarAg]

isn't the object of basketball to score points?


I thought it was to win......only way Kobe can win is if one of the best centers of all time is on his team....so you take your points and i'll take the W

[PinetarAg]

and has a better turn over ratio than Nash Im sure


You might want to go look that up

[blackgloves]

and look what I wrote about the Suns before Nash and after...with the same team in place and basically just adding Nash they moved from 29 wins to 60 win....what has Kobe done....nothing on his own...once Shaq was taken away he missed the playoffs and was second tier seed.

True...

But what would the Lakers and Kobe be if they had Marion and A. Stoudemire WITH Kobe?

That would make one crazy 1-2-3 punch

[Loftin]

True...

But what would the Lakers and Kobe be if they had Marion and A. Stoudemire WITH Kobe?

That would make one crazy 1-2-3 punch

That can't happen. Kobe had a great team, but fueded with Shaq and Karl Malone. He talked the owner into getting rid of Nick Van Exel and Eddie Jones when he first came to the Lakers. Kobe has proven that he can't coexist with stars. That takes away from Kobe's greatness (considerably).

Kobe is like Terrell Owens. You have to consider the things he takes away from the franchise along with the things he adds. Kobe is killing the Lakers. They have a 0% chance of ever winning a championship until he is off the team.

[Pflugerville Ag]

Bryant can score better, rebound better, and has a better turn over ratio than Nash Im sure

You're way wrong on the TO ratio. Nash's assist to TO ratio is twice as good as Kobe's.

[2%er]

LeBron IS irreplaceable so he gets my vote

[The Massacre]

I thought it was to win......only way Kobe can win is if one of the best centers of all time is on his team....so you take your points and i'll take the W

wow. that's interesting. Kobe hasn't done any winning since Shaq left the lakers? i thought they had done mediocre. wow.

and i'm pretty sure that you have to score points to win.

[blackgloves]

You're way wrong on the TO ratio. Nash's assist to TO ratio is twice as good as Kobe's.


I was talking about TO/Steal ratio

:stupid:

[PinetarAg]

wow. that's interesting. Kobe hasn't done any winning since Shaq left the lakers? i thought they had done mediocre. wow.

and i'm pretty sure that you have to score points to win.


yeah since Shaq left he has missed the playoffs, and the in the two times he made the playoffs they were #7 seeds getting bouced out of the first round both times.

Yet Nash brought a 29 win team to 60 wins...so obvisouly it takes more than being a great scorer to be a great player and win games

[blackgloves]

That can't happen. Kobe had a great team, but fueded with Shaq and Karl Malone. He talked the owner into getting rid of Nick Van Exel and Eddie Jones when he first came to the Lakers. Kobe has proven that he can't coexist with stars. That takes away from Kobe's greatness (considerably).

Kobe is like Terrell Owens. You have to consider the things he takes away from the franchise along with the things he adds. Kobe is killing the Lakers. They have a 0% chance of ever winning a championship until he is off the team.


wait wait wait... back up just a taste my brother...

WHEN... Kobe had a supporting cast they won, what 3 championships?

Im not saying Kobe is a great teamate. Im saying if he had the guys that Nash does on his squad he'd be in the same situation if not better (actually getting to the finals and probably winning it all)

[PinetarAg]

Im not saying Kobe is a great teamate. Im saying if he had the guys that Nash does on his squad he'd be in the same situation if not better (actually getting to the finals and probably winning it all)


No way...those same guys won 29 games by themselves so it isn't like they are all world (Nash makes them look that way) they needed someone put them in better situations and I don't think Kobe would do that he would command too many shots and defer as a last option

[blackgloves]

No way...those same guys won 29 games by themselves so it isn't like they are all world (Nash makes them look that way) they needed someone put them in better situations and I don't think Kobe would do that he would command too many shots and defer as a last option


Stoudemire came to the Suns when? How many years had be been in the league before Nash came there?

Im telling you, those two are really talented. I know Nash has built them up, but as good as they are now, you mix them in with Kobe and it gets SICK!

They talk about A. Stoudemire being one of the very best in the league

[Loftin]

wait wait wait... back up just a taste my brother...

WHEN... Kobe had a supporting cast they won, what 3 championships?

Im not saying Kobe is a great teamate. Im saying if he had the guys that Nash does on his squad he'd be in the same situation if not better (actually getting to the finals and probably winning it all)

THAT'S THE POINT!

It doesn't matter how good Kobe could play with all-star teammates, because he refuses to play with all-stars. Kobe has exactly what he wants in LA right now: full control of the spotlight and as many shots as he wants.

[PinetarAg]

Stoudemire came to the Suns when? How many years had be been in the league before Nash came there?

Im telling you, those two are really talented. I know Nash has built them up, but as good as they are now, you mix them in with Kobe and it gets SICK!

They talk about A. Stoudemire being one of the very best in the league


I think he came in 02 ...he was in the league for a couple seasons before Nash got there...he was rookie of the year so it is obvious he has a ton of talent...but he was still there when they won 29....

I think players than can dominte games without scoring a point are great.....I put Duncan, Lebron, Kidd, Nash, and a few others in that category....when you can score also you are among the best of the best...those guys can do all that, and Kobe can too just not as well, he is primarily a scorer and the greastest in teh game but I don't think that translates to the best player in the game...my opinion I guess not too many people agree with me....

Compare it to Acie...he made the entire team great whether he scored 8 points or 29 points....he could dominate college games without scoring...Bryant can dominate games too but only scoring he lacks the other dimensions of greatness

[AustinAggie]

In overall productivity year after year its Tim Duncan.

[blackgloves]

Pinetar:

I see your point, but disagree respectfully. Marion will most likely be traded after this season. Wherever he goes he will be a VERY solid player. If Stoudemire was traded, he too would pony up major stats.

And as I already said if Kobe, Marion and Stoude played together they would also be a force

we just wont agree on this one, but hey.... thats what forums are all about I guess. different opinions etc..

[PinetarAg]

Pinetar:

I see your point, but disagree respectfully. Marion will most likely be traded after this season. Wherever he goes he will be a VERY solid player. If Stoudemire was traded, he too would pony up major stats.

And as I already said if Kobe, Marion and Stoude played together they would also be a force

we just wont agree on this one, but hey.... thats what forums are all about I guess. different opinions etc..


agree to disagree.

I thought you voted for Duncan though? I have no problem with Duncan leading the way I can easily understand that. Its just Bryant that I don't get (and Dirk but after he embarrassed himself this postseason that was enough for me)

:rep: for a solid talk on the NBA

[The Massacre]

yeah since Shaq left he has missed the playoffs, and the in the two times he made the playoffs they were #7 seeds getting bouced out of the first round both times.

Yet Nash brought a 29 win team to 60 wins...so obvisouly it takes more than being a great scorer to be a great player and win games

so you are telling me that his team made the playoffs twice since Shaq left? i thought you said he could not win without Shaq? hummmm..... there are a ton of teams who miss the playoffs each year. i think you are mistaken about your comment that Kobe can't win without Shaq.

[PinetarAg]

wow. that's interesting. Kobe hasn't done any winning since Shaq left the lakers? i thought they had done mediocre. wow.

You think it is accpetable to the "best player in the League" to only have mediocre success. Look at Lebron's cast now (probably pretty comparable to the Lakers) and he is in the conference finals. But I guess you settle for mediocrity


and i'm pretty sure that you have to score points to win.

please offer some other evidence other than "isn't the object of basketball to score points", or the quote above ( I know those are some cold hard facts you dug up but maybe a little more could help next time). Technically I could win a game 1-0...so my defense won the game....most players in the NBA can score thats how they got to the NBA in the first place...its the ones that can dominate without scoring that are the great ones.

[WesTxAg]

not only is kobe on the all-nba 1st team, he's also on the all-nba defensive 1st team...he's a one-man team. If you can get that team to the playoffs, you're probably the best. He has one other teammate who can, on some nights, get to 20 points if needed(Odom, and that's being generous). Duncan has 4 and probably the most clutch shooter in playoff history...add it up, get back to me

[The Massacre]

You think it is accpetable to the "best player in the League" to only have mediocre success. Look at Lebron's cast now (probably pretty comparable to the Lakers) and he is in the conference finals. But I guess you settle for mediocrity

i don't settle for it.

look, you said he couldn't win without Shaq. he has been to the playoffs twice without him. you were wrong. he has won games. sorry.

i NEVER said Kobe was the best player in the NBA, i don't think.




please offer some other evidence other than "isn't the object of basketball to score points", or the quote above ( I know those are some cold hard facts you dug up but maybe a little more could help next time). Technically I could win a game 1-0...so my defense won the game....most players in the NBA can score thats how they got to the NBA in the first place...its the ones that can dominate without scoring that are the great ones.if you won the game 1-0, then you have to have someone to score that 1 point. Kobe can score. if the game was won 1-0 then i'm sure it was hard as hell to score that point. Kobe can pretty much score on anyone, so in that situation, i would take Kobe to be in that game.

again, i don't think i ever said that Kobe was the best player.

i said ron artest was. hth.

[PinetarAg]

not only is kobe on the all-nba 1st team, he's also on the all-nba defensive 1st team...he's a one-man team. If you can get that team to the playoffs, you're probably the best. He has one other teammate who can, on some nights, get to 20 points if needed(Odom, and that's being generous). Duncan has 4 and probably the most clutch shooter in playoff history...add it up, get back to me


0 MVP's ....so how can he be included in the talk about the best if he can't win the award given to the best

[The Massacre]

the only point i was making is that Kobe can win without Shaq. u said he couldn't. he has won games. that is all. no endless amount of facts are needed to show that. he has won games and been to the playoffs twice and Shaq isn't the only thing missing from those great Laker teams, either.

that's just how it is.

[PinetarAg]

side note but what does "hth" mean tro???

[The Massacre]

hope that helps. :cool:

[PinetarAg]

no team has gone 0-82 so obviosuly the top scorer for every team must be included in the best dicussion because they have won games???

You know what i meant about not winning with out Shaq...those Championships were because none of those teams had dominate big men to stop Shaq and he could do as he pleased (pacers, 76ers, and Nets).

[blackgloves]

agree to disagree.

I thought you voted for Duncan though? I have no problem with Duncan leading the way I can easily understand that. Its just Bryant that I don't get (and Dirk but after he embarrassed himself this postseason that was enough for me)

:rep: for a solid talk on the NBA

I voted for Duncan.

I was just giving my .02 cent on the Kobe vs Nash topic

[The Massacre]

no team has gone 0-82 so obviosuly the top scorer for every team must be included in the best dicussion because they have won games???

who said? you said Kobe can't win without Shaq. i said you were wrong. i never said Kobe should be in any conversation about the best player, i was refuting that one point you made.

You know what i meant about not winning with out Shaq...those Championships were because none of those teams had dominate big men to stop Shaq and he could do as he pleased (pacers, 76ers, and Nets).

no, i really didn't. otherwise i wouldn't have responded.

[PinetarAg]

ok let me spell it out for you. If the Rockets win 44-38 (brealy above .500) and are a 7 or 8 seed in the playoffs and get bounced out of the first round I would consider it a great disappointment and say we won nothing.....

Kobe has not won any playoff series...maybe I should have prefaced win with "significant"...Kobe, since Shaq left, has not had any signifcant wins and can not win any significant games without Shaq

[The Massacre]

oh, now you are saying significant wins. oh ok. qualifying it makes it sound better.

oh, and it doesn't really matter either way to me.

[centralaggie0913]

its simply duncan... he is the perfect basketball player. rarely makes mistakes. has a great mental..never misses a beat.