The 20 Best NBA Players of the 2000s

most viewed right now
 68
Image(s) inside WTF is Rick & Morty?
101 comments
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 61
Well Damn NEW VIDEO: (Preview/Snippet) Migos “Ice Tray” (Everyday Struggle)
89 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 55
NBA LaMelo could be the youngest NBA player ever at 16?
110 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 54
NBA The Original Charlotte Hornets Logo
33 comments
@sports

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 6 years ago '12        #141
Fearless Genius 72 heat pts72
space
avatar space
space
$4,255 | Props total: 740 740
 KDE21K said:
The Admiral led the league 3 years straight in PER.....funny thing is also, Kobe has also NEVER lead the league in PER either....

Funny thing about PER is that it makes Shaq look even more dominant considering how many times he lead the league...

But I have to ask you and the rest of BX, what the issue you have with PER
i wasn't glossing over the fact that kobe hasn't led the league in PER. i was just pointing out timmy's career in PER because it seemed like you were making a point for timmy by downplaying kobe's 05-06 season.

and what's my problem with PER? i mean if you look at my post and base your opinions on PER you will draw some strange conclusions like nowtizki is better than bird and olajuwon for example. jason kidd isn't considered an all star player by PER standards with the exception of 1 season in his entire career. jason kidd is a top 5 point guard of all time, possibly top 3. and don't you find it funny that the two greatest players of their era haven't led the league in this bullsh*t stat that's supposed to tell us who the best players are?

there are a lot of articles online about the flaws of PER, but i'll only bring up a few points. I'll keep it as short as i can while explaining myself properly.

PER is a biased metric. it only takes into account plays that end in an "event". an event being a steal, a fga, free throws etc. basically everything you could find on a box score. there are positive events (made shots, a.ssists, etc.) and negative events (turnovers, shots missed, etc) anyone who knows basketball there is way more to basketball than this especially on the defensive end of the floor (pressuring a ball handler, forcing an opposing player into a bad shot, etc). just an example, it will reward players who accumulate steals and blocks although they aren't good defenders. for example, iverson was a guy who was a great jumping on passing lanes and picking pockets but he wasn't a great defender by any stretch.

it's also slanted towards big men. big men inherently have higher fg% and accumulate rebounds cause they play closer to the basket and are taller. also guards are more turnover prone because they handle the ball more. that's why you see a bunch of big men leading PER overwhelmingly over perimeter players throughout the league. but no one is going to put 5 centers on the floor. you need centers and guards to win games. PER doesn't take into account your position. it basically takes raw numbers and plugs them into this formula without adjusting for position properly. a guard who shoots 50% from the field is generally more impressive than a center who does the same but PER doesn't do a good job of adjusting for that.

also it makes a.ssumptions that are off base. your efficiency is based on a per minute basis. why is that wrong? because it a.ssumes that players who have high PER's while playing limited minutes would play at the same level if they got starter minutes. no they wouldn't, they'd get tired, fatigue sets in, opposing players might key in on them more, etc. i really like to use the example from another sport in football to make this point, because i think it is simple to understand. micheal turner was averaging 6 yards an attempt during his first three years in san diego. but he was averaging a little over 50 attempts a season. you would be silly to a.ssume he would still average 6 yards if he got 250 attempts in a season. his ypc dropped dramatically when he was getting the bulk of the load in atlanta.

it also doesn't take into account your teammates. a player's production is influenced by his teammates. so this is one of many examples but i like using it: compare pippen's stats to when jordan was retired and when jordan wasn't retired to the bulls days. scottie pippen's highest PER occured when jordan was retired and by a healthy margin as well. pippen wasn't a better player while jordan was retired, but he got more touches and opportunities, and handle the ball more. your PER and player production is influenced by your teammates.

shaq is one of the most dominating forces in the history of basketball. if kobe wasn't playing with shaq during those years he could've put up even better numbers than he already did if he wasn't playing with shaq. the same could be said for shaq as well.

i could've gone on and went into more detail but that's the gist of it.




  147 - 42 STRK: 5 w in a row WIN PCT: 77% 19 (0) 
  Career: | Aug 17: 97-57, Rank #29 | Aug 16: 2-0, Rank #224 | Aug 14: 11-8, Rank #285 | Aug 13: 1-0, Rank #480 *


Last edited by Fearless Genius; 06-09-2012 at 12:19 PM..
 6 years ago '12        #142
AceBoogie 45 heat pts45
space
avatar space
space
$6,201 | Props total: 59 59
 EnlightenMe said:
i wasn't glossing over the fact that kobe hasn't led the league in PER. i was just pointing out timmy's career in PER because it seemed like you were making a point for timmy by downplaying kobe's 05-06 season.

and what's my problem with PER? i mean if you look at my post and base your opinions on PER you will draw some strange conclusions like nowtizki is better than bird and olajuwon for example. jason kidd isn't considered an all star player by PER standards with the exception of 1 season in his entire career. jason kidd might be the 2nd greatest point guard of all time (at worst he's 3rd). don't you find it funny that the two greatest players of their era haven't led the league in this bullsh*t stat that's supposed to tell us who the best players are?

there are a lot of articles online about the flaws of PER, but i'll only bring up a few points. I'll keep it as short as i can while explaining myself properly.

PER is a biased metric. it only takes into account plays that end in an "event". an event being a steal, a fga, free throws etc. basically everything you could find on a box score. there are positive events (made shots, a.ssists, etc.) and negative events (turnovers, shots missed, etc) anyone who knows basketball there is way more to basketball than this especially on the defensive end of the floor (pressuring a ball handler, forcing an opposing player into a bad shot, etc). just an example, it will reward players who accumulate steals and blocks although they aren't good defenders. for example, iverson was a guy who was a great jumping on passing lanes and picking pockets but he wasn't a great defender by any stretch.

it's also slanted towards big men. big men inherently have higher fg% and accumulate rebounds cause they play closer to the basket and are taller. also guards are more turnover prone because they handle the ball more. that's why you see a bunch of big men leading PER overwhelmingly over perimeter players. but no one is going to put 5 centers on the floor. you need centers and guards to win games. PER doesn't take into account your position. it basically takes raw numbers and plugs them into this formula without adjusting for position. a guard who shoots 50% from the field is more impressive than a center who does the same but PER doesn't do a good job of adjusting for that.

it also doesn't take into account your teammates. a player's production is influenced by his teammates. so this is one of many examples but i like using it: compare pippen's stats to when jordan was retired and when jordan wasn't retired to the bulls days. scottie pippen's highest PER occured when jordan was retired and by a healthy margin as well. pippen wasn't a better player while jordan was retired, but he got more touches and opportunities, and handle the ball more. your PER and player production is influenced by your teammates.

shaq is one of the most dominating forces in the history of basketball. if kobe wasn't playing with shaq during those years he could've put up even better numbers than he already did if he wasn't playing with shaq. the same could be said for shaq as well.

i could've gone on and went into more detail but that's the gist of it.
Enlightening us all
 6 years ago '11        #143
Da Truth23 91 heat pts91
space
avatar space
space
$5,065 | Props total: 2550 2550
Fuk da list it's kinda accurate wondering where they put TMac?


And kobe deserved #1. (Bron fan)
 6 years ago '11        #144
Da Truth23 91 heat pts91
space
avatar space
space
$5,065 | Props total: 2550 2550
Plus if you think Shaq should be over Kobe. Two rings without Shaq, Shaq had only one ring w/o Kobe
 05-27-2012, 07:41 PM         #145
Aquarius 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
Duncan
Shaq
AI


fu*k kobe...aint even top 10 all time...fu*k off his d!ck

most selfish player in nba history....purposely takes ridiculously hard shots thinking he fu*king superman or some sh*t...lame a.ss wanna be jordan punk....
 05-27-2012, 09:23 PM         #146
k3llz 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
if u watching Tim Duncan tonight, u'd disagree
 6 years ago '10        #147
mixtapelive 271 heat pts271
space
space
space
$3,399 | Props total: 2466 2466
 KDE21K said:
I question ANYONE who puts Shaq's career over Duncan's.... and we're giving Kobe the player of the decade when it could be argued he wasn't the best player in any year of the 00's
05-06, 06-07

there's no way you could argue.. even 07-08, you could entertain some arguments but there really wasn't any.
 6 years ago '05        #148
KDE21K 
space
space
space
$567 | Props total: 245 245
 mixtapelive said:
05-06, 06-07

there's no way you could argue.. even 07-08, you could entertain some arguments but there really wasn't any.
I'd take Duncan's 05-06 over Kobe's, especially when you look at the playoff numbers, I see why people regard it highly, as Kobe was an efficient volume shooter....but considering everything Duncan did that year.....I'd still take his year especially considering he didn't touch he ball nearly the amount of times that Kobe did.
 6 years ago '04        #149
chirpflare 173 heat pts173
space
avatar space
space
$4,022 | Props total: 37 37
tmac dont deserve
 6 years ago '04        #150
torious 67 heat pts67
space
avatar space
space
$81,991 | Props total: 11779 11779
 1992 said:
1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe
4. KG
5. AI
 6 years ago '06        #151
PG-13 126 heat pts126
space
avatar space
space
$31,928 | Props total: 7 7
 Aquarius said:
Duncan
Shaq
AI


fu*k kobe...aint even top 10 all time...fu*k off his d!ck

most selfish player in nba history....purposely takes ridiculously hard shots thinking he fu*king superman or some sh*t...lame a.ss wanna be jordan punk....
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 84
BOX Mayweather reveals comeback offer, fighting in ufc; poppin mad sh*t:"th..
22 comments
20 hours ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 76
Image(s) inside P0rnstar Skyy Black IG Pics
59 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 35
Jeezy Sets the Record Straight With Budden and Akademiks | Everyday Struggle
284 comments
23 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 31
NFL The Explicit Details of Accusations Vs NFL Network Employees
119 comments
22 hours ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 28
Article inside 10 Songs That Biggie Recorded But No One Has Found
63 comments
19 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 25
Image(s) inside Rap in the 90's vs rap today
77 comments
21 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 24
Image(s) inside Let’s keep it real: is she a 6 in your area?
51 comments
23 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 23
Image(s) inside 19 yo Becky with a phatty 🍑
88 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy