Did 2k get it right?? How would you change up the eras? CORRECTION: The word I was looking for a "Parity", not "Parody". I could totally go for the "I meant Parody" angle for humor.... but I didn't, I was just dumb and tired while editing. Lol. My bad.
i dont think 2k used only statistics to determine it. the game is catering to the game's demographic hence why they started with the 80s instead of the 50s. Duncan is def up there with Kobe in the 2000s, but you can't argue that Kobe is the more popular player.
It's spelled "parity', not "parody'....although that era is generally considered the weakest era by everyone that isn't a hardcore LeBron fan so I guess "parody" can also work.
I do kinda agree with the LeBron and Steph era don’t get me wrong. But remember Steph didn’t win a single finals mvp in those 3 championships and LeBron was the finas mvp in all 3 of his championships.
Kobe is my favorite player ever...but you're absolutely right. It's a huge shame that the NBA almost wants the fans to forget the incredible impact Duncan had on the Spurs franchise and the culture of winning.
That's why I said marketing has really affected how people remember (or want to remember) basketball history. The NBA primarily markets flashy superstars and the biggest 4-5 markets. Duncan's Spurs should not be forgotten since they went 5/6 from 1999 - 2014 and have the record for most consecutive 50+ wins regular seasons.
I would call the 70s The Lost Era. Since the talent was split between the NBA/ABA we didnt get to see the best compete against each other until more than halfway through the decade.
I would call the 70s the NBA vs ABA Era, it's true that we have lost many interesting series : Knicks vs Pacers 1970 Lakers vs Pacers 1972 Nets vs Celtics 1974 Warriors vs Colonels 1975 to name my favorite teams of that time, but we also had great changes in the game and in the rules thanks to the ABA and the merger with the NBA, changes that probably would have come much later if there hadn't been this rivalry, let's say that I prefer to see the glass half full, and after all, in addition to having seen ABA and NBA teams play against each other during the pre-season in those years, they also organized an All-Star game between the two leagues, even if in reality the NBA was against it ruclips.net/video/zjLb069NzfQ/видео.html Too bad there isn't much footage
@@eobardthawne5653 Duncan is better overall I’ve never heard anyone say Tony Parker is a top 10 player of all time lol. Give me whatever you’re smoking because it sounds good.
So Shaquille Oneal didn't play in the 2000's.... Shaq doesn't have 4 rings in the 2000's. With 5 finals appearances and 7 conference finals ..... 3 finals MVPs.....
What i love about the modern day era is any team can dominate. Right now its the Nuggets but veteran teams like the Warriors and Lakers can pull up as well as the east with Giannis. gonna be amazing to see how this decade will play out
This era is different. There isnt a truly dominant or standout player. There is Jokic, but he isn't going to bring much mainstream/casual viewers due to the "entertainment factor" casuals look for. May as well call the 2020s the Lebron era. Lebron is more relevant than players better than him. Lebron fits the "entertainment" quota enough to name an era after him. Kobe was the previous player to have that
I think these corrections make sense. It feels weird labeling the two recent eras after specific players cuz it feels like we're leaving out a lot of talent, but I guess that's cause they are still pretty recent. As time passes, those decades will increasingly be remembered by 1 or 2 icons, just like the 80s and 90s
No. In sports there is generally 1 or 2 players that surpass the medium at a particular point. Players that even none fans of the sport would know. In the 1990s, that was MJ. Kobe in the 2000s. Lebron in the 2010s... and in the 2020s... Lebron isnt the best yet he is the most relevant player. This is still the Lebron era. Curry is not popular enough to name the era after him. And Jokic is just known by the most hardcore fans
@@sumnahlennon5449 Jokic is not only known by hardcore fans, he just won 2MVPs and a chip bro he's the consensus best player of the 2020s so far, only Giannis is in the conversation with him
@@tallkc2072 doesnt matter. ask the average guy on the street who doesnt watch basketball who jokic is and they probably wont know. they all know who lebron is. this sort of relevance is something different than being the best player in the world. cultural significance contains more than that. jokic will likely never have that mainly he does not care about that at all. he wouldnt even want that to begin with, just like say duncan but maybe even less so. its kind of a silly discussions ince it has nothing to do with basketball rly but well..thats how it is. compare it maybe to actors for example. daniel day lewis is maybe the best male actor of all time but many many people dont know him, especially youger ones. everyone knows the rock. there is no argument on earth where someone would say dwayne is the better actor but his "relevance" in modern culture is still bigger. its not the best example but i just say that to try to give you a feeling of the difference between the 2 things.
I agree with most what you said. However, I would still put Wilt in the 60s era. Just the sheer fact that he broke so many records in that time makes it fine with me to put him together with Bill. Second point, yes the 70s were a mess period for NBA, but when you look what Kareem achieved individually in that time, it can be considered as Kareem Era.
The 70's belonged to DrJ. Despite the fact that his 2 championships were in the ABA, he was the first World wide basketball superstar, NBA teams were lusting after him. In 1975 he was the first player in history to get his own shoe contract.
@@squanchy2925 I mean, Kareem won 5 MVPs in 7 years. He owned the league, even if players and the media didn't like him all that much they had to respect him
Curry never truly beat Lebron on equal playing field. 2015 both Kevin love and Kylie were out for the whole series. 2016, it was equal and bron won. 2017, kd and 2018 kd.
But then we have to put an "*" next to LBJ's MIA teams as they overwhelmingly had a talent advantage over the rest of the EC in that period...BOTH what he did, and KD going to GS were legal.....it's 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.
@@twiliteznnot the same. Warriors had a vast advantage over everyone, not just their conference. Warriors had the second and third best players in the league alongside two other hall of famers all in their prime. Heat had the best player in the league in LeBron. They had a top 7-8 player in Wade. They also had a top 25ish player in bosh. Bosh only ever made all nba once in his career, and it wasn’t with LeBron. Klay made two and an all defense team. Draymond also made two with 8 all defense teams and a DPOY. Warriors were unbeatable when healthy. Again, it’s not the same
I disagree about changing the LeBron era, it's going to be the LeBron era because most of the time, it was about him. Mostly the story was from 'The decision' to 'I'm back in Cleveland', winning that Cleveland a ring.
It feels weird not having a Shaq era. The dude was an absolute monster and dominated the league. 4 rings and 6 finals trips in 11 years is easily equivalent to what other's have done, it's just that his career doesn't nicely fit the decade model that's being used and it overlaps with Jordan, Kobe, and Duncan.
The problem for Shaq is that he is cross eras. He his late 90 and early 2000s on top of sharing most of his rings with Kobe. He definitely has a mini era between Jordan's second retirement and Kobe/Duncan era though
Shaq was the face, and the MIP in the league for the first half of the 2000s, he definitely had his own "era", even if it wasn't across an entire, specific decade
@@Andrew-ms8md Duncan's career is pretty clearly a 2000s career. 1999 was a very solid finals performance but 2003 is a top ten ever. Then he had another okay one in 2005 while having 2 MVPs and numerous other smaller accolades.
The only thing I'd argue about the LeBron era: it was a given that, to win a championship, you'd have to go through LeBron. But I'm not upset Curry shares the spotlight with him.
@@hardywoodaway9912I don’t think u get what he’s saying. You had to get through golden state to get to the finals in the west. You have to go through Lebron to get to the finals in the East.
Maybe they should've called it the Lakers/Spurs era, because unlike Bird vs Magic it wasn't portreited "Duncan vs Kobe". Doing so, you would include: 4 MVPs (2000; 2002; 2003; 2008) 7 Finals MVPS (2000-2003; 2005; 2007; 2009) 9 Western Champions (2000-2005; 2007-2009) 1 6MOY (2008) 1 COY (2003)
I like this because I feel like it finds a way to include Shaq as well as Manu and Parker, which adds like 4 more FMVPs. But people really like to celebrate individuals so I don't see it becoming popular.
I’m liking the “Dynasty Era”, Lakers and Spurs won 7 rings in that span and were so consistent and dominant to be called dynasties. That or the “Western Conference”era cause the west was loaded.
There was never a "Kobe Era." He was never the unquestioned best player in the league for more than 2 or 3 years (maybe). I think Kobe is a great player, but he gets put into conversations like this, and he doesn't belong. When you look at Jordan and LeBron's era, there was ZERO question that they were the best player, by a mile. And they were the face of the NBA during their time. Kobe never had that title and was never the face of an era. The 2000s didn't have a player that could claim it was their "Era".
2010s are definitely the Lebron era 8 straight finals in a decade, also head to head matchups in the playoffs, really? 2 of the top 3 players had to team up to take him down.
And Lebron teamed up with two top 10-15 players to take down the Celtics and get those finals appearances started. Steph didn’t jump ship to make the finals.
@@prlysis which competition, wade was coming off an injury. Chris Bosh was not a top 10 nba player. the best player Lebron ever played with is wade who was a top 10 nba player at best after his injury.
I can't give an entire decade era to someone who wasn't the best player in any of those Finals series. Considering those are the most important and he went to 5 total.
Magic and bird and Timmy and Kobe aren’t at all like Bron and Steph. Bron was clearly better than Steph in every matchup and KD, even according to YOUR finals mvp video, was outplaying Steph when it mattered. It’s the Bron and Warriors era, be fr
I agree. Without context, it does look like Steph was shoulder to shoulder with Lebron. But losing to Bron while up 3-1 at the end of the 73 win season, and then getting KD, who wins 2 Finals MVPs over you should be taken into account imo. Steph is incredible and had a great 2015 - 2019 but Lebron was arguably the best player in the league the ENTIRE decade.
Nobody talks about KD lebron that much as Steph and lebron also everybody starting to take 6 three's a game and shooting from the logo in lebron era when I go everywhere nobody is doing what KD or lebron doing sometimes maybe but everyone is shooting the ball from deep so 🤷🏾♂️
@@IAmNotYourBuddy doesn't matter Matter if he blow 3-0 lead curry still the most talk about dude in this era and people wanna shoot like him so does it really matter.
Love your Vids Jonny but I need to say its still the Bron era. He went to 8 straight finals winning only 3 but in 7 out of the 8 finals he still was the best player on the court while Curry went to 4 winning 3 but with 0 Fmvps and got outplayed by Bron almost every series.
If Curry got outplayed so much, then how did he win a a ring in 2022. Saying Curry got outplayed is a bad take. It's like saying Dwade wasn't even the 10th best player on Heat cuz LeBron carried him. We'll Dwade won a ring before Bron. Curry won a ring before and after KD.
@@anirudhranjan2934just because he won after Kevin Durant doenst mean he didnt get outplayed by him and the win you're talking about happens in the modern era
@@anirudhranjan2934are you ok ? We are talking about the 2010s you casual , aside from those 2 MVPs curry didn’t win any fmvps,bron won 3 and 2 season MVPs also Not to mention 3/8 of those finals Lebron carried injured teams to the finals
Why are finals MVP’s so devalued. Curry was only the best player on his team 1-2 time in 4 rings. Lebron was a clear 4. It’s like calling Kareem the leader of the showtime lakers.
he was the best on all those finals teams. Iggy is among the worst FMVP winners in history, probably the worst. KD was wide open because Steph was being trapped and doubled.
Agreed with most except the 2000s era..personally i think it would made more sense to call it the Shaq and Kobe era as there really was nobody stopping them other then themselves...they are they 3rd team to 3peat after Bills Celtics and Jordans Bulls...even after they split they both still dominated the league with Shaq winning another in Miami and Kobe dropping 60s even 80 point games
@remnant8898 Two things can be true. He was past his prime but was still a problem on the defensive end. Similar to many aging bigs, the last thing to go is usually rim protection. Example: Dwight Howard against Joker in the 2020 WCFs He was past his prime, but he matched up great against Joker at that time.
I don't think only championships define the whole era. I think we should also take into account all the other aspects of the game since there are so many factors that go into a championship that are out of players control such as injuries, superteams, etc. So wilt/Russell should share their era I think
I’m kinda iffy about the 2010s. But I have to give the edge to the LeBron Era. He’s won 4 finals MVP’s in that decade. Also, scoring the most points in that decade and playoff points. Also winning the greatest championship of all time in 2016. I respect Steph, though.
@TyroneNBAFan Bro I don’t delete any comment, but RUclips is suuuuper sensitive about what it sends to my spam or “review” comments. I’ll see if I can find it so I can approve it.
Kobe was a great player but stats have to be put in context and thx to playing w Shaq he faced less double coverage than any other all time scorer. Shaq and big men get underrated over time cuz of the media's love for perimeter players
That double coverage bullshit is dumb. It was actual debunked the video when it was shown what Kobe did without Shaq . He put up the same numbers with or without Shaq and it’s proven
@@beattheodds6219 respectfully Kobe was able to develop into his final form tho while playin with Shaq and a vet squad in his early years. He didn't have to carry the team while developing in his early years. His career w/o shaq the league was starting to change/transition to this era w da inflated offense and less def. Still an all time great tho don't get me wrong but teams def focused more on Shaq
Lmao. More like thanks to Kobe, Shaq didn't have trouble facing the western conference. Which is why the only time their stats is different is on the NBA finals
One glaring fallacy I'd like to point out is that if you're going to count 1999-2000 as part of kobe's era, then you'd have to count the 2019-2020 season as LeBron's era as well. It which puts LeBron at 4 and Steph at 3, and Kobe at 5 and Duncan at 3.
One thing you left out of the LeBron era, is their achievements outside the championships. The Allstars and All-NBA selection has over Curry plays a huge part in that. the period from 2011-2020 Lebron's All-NBA: 1x 3rd All-NBA, 9x 1st All-NBA, 3x All-NBA defensive 1st team, 1x all-nba defensive 2nd team, 10x allstar, Curry's All-NBA: 2x 2nd All-NBA, 1x 3rd All-NBA, 3x 1st All-NBA, 0 defensive team selections, 6x Allstar
I think for the "Kobe era" they called it that because although he and Duncan kinda shared that era, Kobe was the more marketable/face of the NBA player. It was different from Magic and Bird, where they were basically equal in terms of superstardom. Duncan was arguably the most low-key Superstar ever. And on the Bron era... I think they called it that because he started the "player empowerment" movement. Like, joining up and making super teams and not just being moved by the organizations. They pretty much said as much in the description, for this one. That's just my point of view. Love the content and agree with your logic.
Exactly. Duncan was the best player in the 2000s in my books but the most iconic was Kobe. Bron was dominant the entire era and although Steph got his spotlight, it was at the middle and then died in 2019. I guess the better way of naming it is the "western era" in the 2000s and LeBron and the Warriors Dynasty era.
Even if you look at the pictures of the eras, you can see that Curry is missing from the Lebron era, but he is in the modern era, idk about you guys but that Curry picture just doesnt seem right cuz those guys are from the modern era compared to Curry
It's interesting to me that the eras are pretty well split along the decade lines when there's no real reason for that to happen, but I also feel like this decade format hurts players that came in mid-decade and dominated for ten years like Shaq. Are there other players whose ten year peak didn't correlate with a particular decade, and instead spanned two decades?
Mikan Era ✅ the Babe Ruth of basketball Russell Era ❌ I think even Russell would've preferred the Celtics Era I agree about the 70s, except I would call it the The Big Man Era (to acknowledge the depth of talent at center) or The Style Era (to acknowledge the influence of Pistol Pete, Dr. J, Earl Monroe, the Skyhook etc) Bird vs Magic Era ✅ or simply The Rivalry Era, as there were many good ones in the 80s, not just Bird and Magic Jordan Era ✅ for better or worse, Jordan defined the 90s Kobe & Duncan Era ❌ The Wild West Era to acknowledge the western conference dominance. Kobe and Duncan were simply not the era-defining stars Bird, Magic and MJ were, also they're not connected the same way Bird & Magic were Lebron & Steph Era ❌ again, there's not that connection/rivalry that Bird & Magic had, so pairing them together is just odd. call it The Decision Era. Lebron gets his acknowledgement, but it's appropriately backhanded. The Modern Era ❌ call it The Global Era, to acknowledge the influence of foreign players (or the decline of American dominance, whichever way you want to frame it)
The reason that era on the game was label the Magic and Bird era is because either Magic or Bird were representatives in every finals of that decade and the NBA as a company has bonded their names together not just as rivals but also having “saved” the league. The other eras don’t share those qualities.
Eh. I understand the point about how great they were for not only the competition but saving the League fundamentally, but I would say the 2000’s are pretty close to that. 9 Finals appearances split between them, 8 rings, 5 FMVP’s, 3 individual MVP’s between them, 20 All-NBA and 19 All-Defense Selections, along with a host of other great stats and accolades
2010s we had been forced to watch Lebron and/or Steph in most of the Finals. for most of the decade, everyone's eyes were on both athletes. 2000s too had most of the accolades divided between Kobe and Timmy D.
@@ALV5252 Steph was in 5, LeBron was in 9. I’m not sure it’s exactly the same thing, especially because Curry wasn’t really there much in the early 2010’s
While narrating the 90's you mentioned that not only Michael win more championships but he was also the FMVP in all of them. The same applies to LeBron then. Unlike the 60's in which you have a to give it up to Russell because of the 9 to 1 chips despite Wilt's numbers, in the 2010's there's just no argument for Steph being compared to LeBron, you have to be honest. Also your analysis is based on the single premise that an era means strictly a decade, if we just assume that the LeBron era means his entire career, it wouldn't be wrong since NOBODY has done more in basically any statistic or accolades than Lebron since he was drafted.
The modern era should be the international era because the international guys about to run these next 10 years with Jokic Giannis Embiid Luka and even Wemby possibly
The Kobe era argument is full of flaws. Shaq was the MVP of their three peat and Phil Jackson stated that he was hired to build the team around Shaq. Shaq demanded double to triple teams on almost every single play, especially when they played against the Portland Trailblazers in WCF. All the teams' coaches prepared their defense on how to guard Shaq, while he created easy open shots for his teammates. When you made the argument for Lebron vs Steph, you were literally contradicting yourself based on your Kobe arguments. LMFAO!
I wouldn't be mad at the Curry inclusion but I'd still call it the LeBron era because at worst he was top 3-5 in each year of that decade including the playoffs. Also, idk if you take video suggestions from subscribers but I think a "Where Would These Legends Rank Without Their Rings" video would be very interesting.
@@cursin I didn't think I'd have to explain my reason further. LeBron was elite from the start of the decade (much like MJ, yes) but he also won the most MVPs, Finals MVPs and tied for most rings in the 2010s.
@cursin Michael was not even in the league till 84 and almost half the decade was already over nor did he have any real team success. Lebron dominated the 2010's from day one and the argument is he was individually dominant from the start of the 2010's on top of all his team success and curry took some time to get going. Comparing 80's michael to 2010's lebron is terrible.
The two most controversial. Totally agree with the Kobe and Duncan Era narrative. They were both the two best players and while they didn't have the finals matchups like bird and magic, when you consider the spurs vs lakers rivalry, it was THE rivalry of the era, nothing else came close. The only argument I think you can make against Tim Duncan besides the things Jonny brought up was that Duncan's 2014s ring was farther removed than kobes 2010 ring from the 2000s(as well as the fact he took a back seat by then), but even that is very weak argument. With the Curry and Lebron era thing its a mixup because honestly there is a solid argument to counteract steph's argument for the 2010s era and that's KD's arrival in 2017 basically made it impossible for anyone else to realistically compete. This isn't saying curry wasn't the best player, he was in a 1a 1b situation with KD, kinda like Kobe in shaq, but its an argument saying that half of his success that era was contributed by the fact that his team was so stacked they could have won even without them and the fact that in 2015 the cavs had injuries to both love and kyrie(and while I am aware the warriors were injured in 2016, Kyrie and love were completely out of the games, curry was still able to contribute and you can't blame draymond's suspension on anyone but him). I still think that curry should be a part of that era with lebron but it isn't hard to see why people would put lebron above curry in that regard.
I would argue Steph curry wasn’t the main guy when winning most of his championships because he had KD on those teams. It would be different if Steph did all he achieved not on such a stacked team but he didn’t
I feel like part of the reason it was Bird/Magic is because of their legendary rivalry that I don’t think has ever been achieved between two players since. They also were both equally as popular and taking control of the league. In the other eras where you mention Duncan and Steph, while I agree that the stats add up, you gotta ask yourself who in general terms is the “poster child” for each era. Kobe and Lebron’s popularity were at all-time highs during their respective decades, which is why I feel 2k got it pretty spot on
I’d be interested in hearing a case for the 2000s being the “Shaq and Kobe Era” 3 chips together and 1 each on their own in that decade. An MVP each. Kobe and Duncan holds up though. And Jonny’s light years ahead of me on basketball knowledge and history.
@jonnyarnett I’d want to rename the Lebron era the superteam era, as the 2010s were all about building not only the next superteam but preparing for the chance of a superteam.
This doesn’t make sense though. Superteams have existed since previous decades with the 80s Celtics and magic, 2000s lakers, 2000s celtics, 90s bulls and more. Creating a team with at least 2+ stars/superstars has always been the recipe for successful teams, so to label an era dominated by Lebron and having Lebron as the face of the league as the superteam era just doesn’t make sense.
You can't ignore the teams... Lebron's team was not bad, any team that makes it to the finals is good... But cmon.. Steph, Klay, and KD?! You can't tell me that if Bron had KD or even Klay he wouldn't be winning as much as well..
He proclaimed himself the GOAT. With that comes expectation and responsibility. Teamed up with two other all stars at every stop and his finals record is below .500? What other great claiming an era as their own has failures at such a level?
@@andresdelportillo9917 Didn’t watch the vid, huh? GS won it all before they got KD, while they have KD, and even won after KD had left. And even eliminated LeBron 3 times compared to LeBron eliminating them only once. LeBron was so shookt he had to switch teams yet again. But yes, KD going to GS is arguably the weakest move in NBA history. Although the second weakest move is it’s predecessor; that being LeBron starting the whole player-driven superteam and teaming up with Wade and Bosh in Miami. So, in reality, when LeBron and his fans cry about the weak move by KD, they are actually crying and complaining about the consequences of LeBron’s own (and Miami) actions.
@@kookurikapooh golden state beat a short handed cavs team , ever since bron got to LA golden state been losing to them for a while now and they won the same amount of rings post 2018 with Lebron winning in 2020 and curry 2022 , just this year curry got smoked by bron and his play-in team, give bron KD and I bet bron would have almost 7 rings by now
timmy and the spurs never ran an era . they were prominent in most of the modern eras , but they never had a grasp on the eras like Jordan Kobe and Bron.
The reason Bron got his own era, is because he was unquestionably the best player during that decade. We can’t just ignore that staff had KD during two of his wins against Bron
He lost to the same team led by the same player 3 out 4 times that he faced them in the finals. As if he didn’t have Kyrie by his side and other all stars in the process. Bron was never voted unanimous mvp like Curry was (in addition to winning another mvp). He can’t claim an era as solely his own that he didn’t dominate. A finals record of 1-3 versus Curry and his Warriors isn’t anyone’s idea of domination. It is the Bron/Curry era as much as it pains his disciples to accept it.
@@cycleoflife565 that’s is a remarkable revision off history buddy 😂. As if Kevin Durant wasn’t the best player in 2 of those chips. And for 2 of the losses, Bron didn’t have Kyrie dumbass
@@sethrobinson9291 like atp they might aswell call it the Lebron, Curry, and KD era since they all played a very important role in the 2010s. Even tho if u ask me it would make zero sense to call it anyones era other than Lebron, since he was the absolute best player and the most talked about each year
Respectfully, I don’t think you can call the Lakers with Shaq “Kobe’s Lakers”. Kobe was still arguably like the 2nd or 3rd best player in that era, Shaq was clearly the leader and greater player. Also over the entire decade, Duncan was always in the playoffs and winning at least 50 games while Kobe without Shaq did miss the playoffs or got bounced round 1.
I have to 100% agree with you on this one. Leaving off Tim Duncan and Steph Curry is definitely an omission when they included Bird. Even as a Rockets fan, you really cannot justify adding Hakeem to the Jordan era. He was great, but Jordan was on another level. If Hakeem had gotten a third ring, if his late 80s finals run had been in the 90s and had been a victory, Then you would probably have to also have Hakeem.
Popularity and influence of a player should be applied if naming an era over them. 2010s was a dominated by Lebron, or the "Lebron vs Jordan" debate. It makes sense to define that era by Lebron.
@@kdawg6887 Not getting that in '94 or '95 really sucks. That matchup was basically the one missing thing from both of them in the 90s. Amusingly, they both beat Magic's Lakers and lost to Bird's Celtics. 😅
I strongly believe we're currently in a 2nd Parody Era like the 70s... Because there is a lot of talent spread out across the league. It feels like most anything can happen and that mediocre teams can become Championship teams very quickly.
You could have mentioned the possibility about it being Shaq's era. In the 2000s, he ties Kobe's ring count and has more finals MVPs. By the trophy case, it's Shaq's era
Lebron was the best player in the nba from 2010-2018 that's where the conversation ends.I don't want to here about "they both won 3 championships ".Curry did nothing in 2010-2014 and that counts plus he had the best team ever assembled to literally beat lebron😅😅.Either way you look at it its THE LEBRON ERA.Steph was just a close second.
Gonna be honest the 2010s is easily the lebron era. 3 MVPs, 3 FMVPs, 8 damn final appearances and the greatest championship of all time with a top 3 finals performance ever. Curry did very well and as well as you can for someone without a SINGLE FMVP.
Curry was robbed of the 2015 finals mvp. The media, enamored by Bron from the moment he entered the league gave the award to Iggy because they weren’t allowed to give it to their golden boy. Curry was by far more valuable to the Dubs than Iggy.
Wade was the guy on the Heat in the 00s but he became a Pippen once LeBron joined him and yeah Wade stats decline due to injuries but the 2010s decade was also a success for him.
@@cycleoflife565it’s crazy to think of the media gives Steph his 2014/15 and 2017/18 fmvp like he deserved them people would deadass view Steph completely different instead he gets hated to no end
I agree with the changes you made. Because this is a team sport = there are so many variables involved and only selecting one player when there are other great players involved is too short sighted. Thanks for making and sharing this video = keep up the good work!
Sad thing about Lebron to me is that he is not undoubtedly the owner of his era. The era he was given is the Curry-Lebron era. Not simply the Lebron. I understand why Kobe got his own era by himself but I would name it the Kobe-Duncan era
unlike Lebron-Curry, Kobe dominated matchups with The Spurs and Duncan. they don't share the era because Kobe's team was an actual dynasty and Duncan's wasn't.
I think when you choose to use regular season and finals MVPs as a basis for putting one player ahead vs when you don’t shows all the bias. Bird and Magic have the same amount of MVPs, Kobe and Steph have less than Timmy and Lebron. You should have consistent logic throughout all cases so it would be less biased.
outside of 2008 kobe had shaq duncan had a washed up david robinson and zero help for those battles against the lakers in the playoffs and in 04 ginobili and parker were developing if duncan had t mac maybe spurs beat the lakers in 02 and 04 no one was beating them in 01, as for the magic and bird debate make no mistake about it kareem is the reason why magic won 5 rings if bird had kareem he would have won 5 rings too
KD was never seen as the leader on those Warriors teams. KD wasn’t the focus of the opponents’ double teams on a regular basis. We all know who was and has been since the Warriors’ won in 2015. KD deserves his flowers of course but the Warriors have proven twice that they are a championship team with and without Durant. If the Cavs were undoubtedly the better team in 2015 & 2016 as Bron fans like to spin it why were they taken to 7 games by the Warriors and why did their resurrection in 2016 coincide with Green’s suspension and most importantly, Andrew Bogut leaving the series for good due to injury both in game 5? That doesn’t sound like a certainty of superiority to me.
@cycleoflife565 the warriors don't need KD to win but the fact remains they won 2 rings because of KD in that era. Also Kawhi won 2 rings as well so literally everyone was dominating in the LeBron era
They're not saying "the 2010's: LeBron era" they were saying this era is marked by LeBron. They should have either done a LeBron/Curry era or a LeBron and then Curry era.
Just goes to show how much marketing alone affects how some people remember (or want to remember) certain eras, even though facts show Duncan was right there with Kobe and Curry was right there with LeBron in those respective decades. I agree with comments here that 2000s should be called the Spurs/Lakers era, to be more inclusive to Shaq who was a 3x FMVP.
@jonnyarnett - doesn’t Shaq also have a case to share the stage for the 00s era? He had 4 titles. He may have even gotten 2 in Miami if Wade was not hurt in 05 against Detroit up 3-2.
Honestly, I feel that Shaq was slighted here. 3 Finals MVPs and one MVP, 4 rings in total. I think the 2000s should have been the Lakers and Spurs era.
I personally would give the 2000’s to Shaq, he got as many rings as Kobe with one more finals MVP and has arguably the greatest three year finals stretch from anyone not named Jordan.
If your saying "arguably" the greatest 3 year stretch then he is certainly in the conversation with Jordan. Never have I seen someone who looked so completely unfair to play against.
People always bring up Duncan in the 2000s and how underrated he is. It's not like he's forgotten. But 2000s is Kobe's era if you had to choose one. Timmy was in his prime up to around 2005 with Kobe being as good or better and after 05 Kobe was definitely the better player.
I agree kobe made history from 06-09 socring title all star mvp leauge mvp fmvp a ring and don't for get the three peat which Tim never did or win back to back
Using "decade" from "00 to 09" to define an era is so arbitrary. Duncan's championships also came in 1999 and 2014. The total number is the same as Kobe's, but just more spread out. Duncan was always an integral part to each of those wins, never really declined. Why should that be considered less than Kobe's achievement?
I agree with all your eras, but much like you showed Jordan’s personal accomplishments to separate him from Hakeem, I wish you would of compared Duncan v Kobe’s best personal accolades in the 2000s to close the gap: MVPs- Duncan 2 v Kobe 1 *Duncan 2-1 overall Finals MVPs- Duncan 2 v Kobe 1 *Duncan 3-2 overall While not as flashy as the Mamba, the Big Fundamental deserves his flowers 💐
Used to not like this man’s videos but as I started paying more attention to his words and his points/ opinions I’ve come to appreciate this man’s videos
The 2000s should be called “Shaq-Duncan-Kobe” Era. It’s beyond the head-to-head matchups. While it’s true the LAL 2000-2003 dominated, the team imploded and a new powerhouse emerged in 2005-2007 SAS (also the team never went below 3rd seed in the whole decade!) Shaq & Kobe had 4 each and Tim had 3. Also let’s not forget the fact Shaq was a dominant superstar too so regardless if Kobe had the better numbers, the oppossing team’s gameplan was always #1 containing Shaq 1st. Arguments against Tim was he played with 3 HoF but let’s not act like HoF Parker/Manu is on the same level as HoF Shaq. You know who you’ll pick between the three 100% of the time. Also, recall Duncan greatest work were on defense.
Love this list. I agree that no one player defined the 70s but I would honestly call it "the transitional era" because it felt like the bridge between the 60s and the 80s. The 60s I would actually label "The Celtic Dynasty" era or if you must include Russ' name "The Russel Celtics" era. Yes Russel was the face of that team and its best player but that team was stacked with amazing players and it feels wrong to not somehow recognize that.
Russell and Sam Jones were the only Celtics on all of those 60s teams. While Jones was very good (Russell's third best teammate) he was not Russell. He won 4 MVPs during the decade, was a player coach in the finals, and without his offensive contributions the Lakers are the 1962 and 1966 NBA champions. The dynasty lived and died by Russell's career.
@@reillyhopf6508That's how you know you lack knowledge on the matter. Ever heard of John Havlicek? Same guy that also had Jerry West-like highlights and was a main face of the 70s.
@@dusk6159 oh I had no idea Havlicek, who was drafted in 1962, was with Boston during their first 3 titles of the decade. Strange he isn't recorded as having 11 rings though.
I truly believe that the legend of Kobe Bryant started in the many series of Lakers vs Spurs. Simply put, Shaq is a scary dude in LA, he is near unstoppable. However Tim Duncan is one of very few player that in many occasions was able to slow down Shaq, and when Shaq get slowed down by TD, Kobe step up. The stat back it up. Unfortunately for Duncan, the Spurs don't have a player that can matchup with Kobe thus resulting in their loss.
It's kind of fun when someone with a platform echoes the same ideas I've had. I've been calling it the Tim and Kobe era and the Steph and LeBron era for a week now.
The 2010s is LeBron James era 3 Finals MVPS vs 0 2 MVPS each 8 (straight) Finals appearances vs 5 9 playoff appearances vs 7 LeBron had more points, assist rebounds and blocks in regular season and playoffs in the 2010s. Availability is another factor, Curry had more injury issues than LeBron in that era.
As always great Vid from JA, but for this matter here’s my 2 cents; 1. 2000’s should be the Western Dominance era 2. 2010’s should be the L’eastern Conference era.
Glad you pointed out the greatness of Kobe here. Because the disrespect towards Kobe in order to make the other players look better than the mamba is so laughable 😂
NBA 2K series follow whatever mainstream sports media broadcast even if that means trashing or forgetting someone just to prop up someone like Low Budget Jordans anywhere. This is downright funny yet excruciating to see.
@jonnyarnett, totally agree. I did a reel earlier this year and felt the exact same way with little exception. I get Bron fans would argue more finals trips but head to head is the difference. Thanks and continue to share your content!
Did 2k get it right?? How would you change up the eras?
CORRECTION: The word I was looking for a "Parity", not "Parody". I could totally go for the "I meant Parody" angle for humor.... but I didn't, I was just dumb and tired while editing. Lol. My bad.
Wait…
“Parody”?
Not “parity”?
i dont think 2k used only statistics to determine it. the game is catering to the game's demographic hence why they started with the 80s instead of the 50s. Duncan is def up there with Kobe in the 2000s, but you can't argue that Kobe is the more popular player.
It's spelled "parity', not "parody'....although that era is generally considered the weakest era by everyone that isn't a hardcore LeBron fan so I guess "parody" can also work.
I do kinda agree with the LeBron and Steph era don’t get me wrong. But remember Steph didn’t win a single finals mvp in those 3 championships and LeBron was the finas mvp in all 3 of his championships.
Tbh I would’ve made the same mistake on parody instead of parity too 😅
By the time this current era is over it might be called the Euro Era if we see more of them win titles by then
For real, arguably the top 4 players (Jokic Giannis Luka Embiid) are foreigners and if Wemby turns out good he might be in that convo too
Indeed
Isn't Jamal Murray a Canadian too?
@@stanmarsh5030he is. the four players mentioned above are all european
Embiid isn’t European.
Kobe is my favorite player ever...but you're absolutely right. It's a huge shame that the NBA almost wants the fans to forget the incredible impact Duncan had on the Spurs franchise and the culture of winning.
That's why I said marketing has really affected how people remember (or want to remember) basketball history. The NBA primarily markets flashy superstars and the biggest 4-5 markets. Duncan's Spurs should not be forgotten since they went 5/6 from 1999 - 2014 and have the record for most consecutive 50+ wins regular seasons.
Is that all? He didn't mention how Shaq owned that era technically he won more MVPs FMVPs and had the same amount of finals inna era
Dude it’s just 2k lol has nothing to do with the actual NBA
@@JRoyal504lol Shaq wasn’t relevant after 2005-2006 season. That’s why. 2000s era is from 2000-2009
@@eobardthawne5653You need to pass me the number of your drug dealer. He surely makes you go high
I would call the 70s The Lost Era. Since the talent was split between the NBA/ABA we didnt get to see the best compete against each other until more than halfway through the decade.
I would call the 70s the NBA vs ABA Era,
it's true that we have lost many interesting series :
Knicks vs Pacers 1970
Lakers vs Pacers 1972
Nets vs Celtics 1974
Warriors vs Colonels 1975
to name my favorite teams of that time,
but we also had great changes in the game and in the rules
thanks to the ABA and the merger with the NBA,
changes that probably would have come much later if there hadn't been this rivalry, let's say that I prefer to see the glass half full, and after all,
in addition to having seen ABA and NBA teams play against each other
during the pre-season in those years,
they also organized an All-Star game between the two leagues,
even if in reality the NBA was against it
ruclips.net/video/zjLb069NzfQ/видео.html
Too bad there isn't much footage
It should be the Kobe/Duncan/Scalabrine era honestly. 😂
@@eobardthawne5653you just want to be different
@@eobardthawne5653 Parker is not better than Duncan 😂 anyone with a brain knows that. Duncan is top 10 all time Parker ain’t even top 30
@@eobardthawne5653 Duncan is better overall I’ve never heard anyone say Tony Parker is a top 10 player of all time lol. Give me whatever you’re smoking because it sounds good.
I think you meant the parity era not the parody era for the 70s :D Although considering Will Ferrel's Semi-Pro is set in the 70s I guess it also works
Lmao. You saved me with that one 🤣
@@jonnyarnett it’s World Championships right now and you still won’t do a video on DREAM TEAM 2 (94 FIBA TEAM). PLEASE
Cocaine Era
😂😂😂😂😂
WWE video game should do this era andrei the giant era hogan era,Steve Austin era and PG era
So Shaquille Oneal didn't play in the 2000's.... Shaq doesn't have 4 rings in the 2000's. With 5 finals appearances and 7 conference finals ..... 3 finals MVPs.....
What i love about the modern day era is any team can dominate. Right now its the Nuggets but veteran teams like the Warriors and Lakers can pull up as well as the east with Giannis. gonna be amazing to see how this decade will play out
This era is different. There isnt a truly dominant or standout player. There is Jokic, but he isn't going to bring much mainstream/casual viewers due to the "entertainment factor" casuals look for.
May as well call the 2020s the Lebron era. Lebron is more relevant than players better than him. Lebron fits the "entertainment" quota enough to name an era after him. Kobe was the previous player to have that
@@sumnahlennon5449 calling the 2020s the Lebron era is wild
@@sumnahlennon5449Bro you are casual
People over the World are more and more falling in love in Jokic's skills
Jokic era
I think these corrections make sense. It feels weird labeling the two recent eras after specific players cuz it feels like we're leaving out a lot of talent, but I guess that's cause they are still pretty recent. As time passes, those decades will increasingly be remembered by 1 or 2 icons, just like the 80s and 90s
No. In sports there is generally 1 or 2 players that surpass the medium at a particular point. Players that even none fans of the sport would know.
In the 1990s, that was MJ. Kobe in the 2000s. Lebron in the 2010s... and in the 2020s... Lebron isnt the best yet he is the most relevant player. This is still the Lebron era. Curry is not popular enough to name the era after him. And Jokic is just known by the most hardcore fans
2010s should’ve been called Lebron vs Curry just like magic vs bird
@@sumnahlennon5449 Jokic is not only known by hardcore fans, he just won 2MVPs and a chip bro he's the consensus best player of the 2020s so far, only Giannis is in the conversation with him
@@tallkc2072 doesnt matter. ask the average guy on the street who doesnt watch basketball who jokic is and they probably wont know. they all know who lebron is. this sort of relevance is something different than being the best player in the world. cultural significance contains more than that. jokic will likely never have that mainly he does not care about that at all. he wouldnt even want that to begin with, just like say duncan but maybe even less so. its kind of a silly discussions ince it has nothing to do with basketball rly but well..thats how it is.
compare it maybe to actors for example. daniel day lewis is maybe the best male actor of all time but many many people dont know him, especially youger ones. everyone knows the rock. there is no argument on earth where someone would say dwayne is the better actor but his "relevance" in modern culture is still bigger. its not the best example but i just say that to try to give you a feeling of the difference between the 2 things.
@@peterpan3022 that's fair enough, I never really tried to look at it from an outsider's perspective.
I agree with most what you said. However, I would still put Wilt in the 60s era. Just the sheer fact that he broke so many records in that time makes it fine with me to put him together with Bill. Second point, yes the 70s were a mess period for NBA, but when you look what Kareem achieved individually in that time, it can be considered as Kareem Era.
Also because Wilt is the only 1960s player most people know of. So that is the Wilt era
@@sumnahlennon5449people know Bill Russell and Jerry West
@@sumnahlennon5449then wilt didn’t do so good in “his era” because they seems to be talking about , winning
Got more rings in the 80s for the Lakers but Kareem past his prime by then, that was Magic Johnson era Lakers.
Wilt has one ring in the 60s. That ain´t enough and would totally disrespect Russel. I could settle for Russel AND Wilt era.
The 70's belonged to DrJ. Despite the fact that his 2 championships were in the ABA, he was the first World wide basketball superstar, NBA teams were lusting after him. In 1975 he was the first player in history to get his own shoe contract.
If you HAD to name the era after someone, it would be Dr. J or Kareem. But neither did enough to put their name on it.
There were signature shoes out before 1975, and one of them was by Kareem.
@@squanchy2925 I mean, Kareem won 5 MVPs in 7 years. He owned the league, even if players and the media didn't like him all that much they had to respect him
Curry never truly beat Lebron on equal playing field. 2015 both Kevin love and Kylie were out for the whole series. 2016, it was equal and bron won. 2017, kd and 2018 kd.
But then we have to put an "*" next to LBJ's MIA teams as they overwhelmingly had a talent advantage over the rest of the EC in that period...BOTH what he did, and KD going to GS were legal.....it's 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.
@@twiliteznnot the same. Warriors had a vast advantage over everyone, not just their conference. Warriors had the second and third best players in the league alongside two other hall of famers all in their prime. Heat had the best player in the league in LeBron. They had a top 7-8 player in Wade. They also had a top 25ish player in bosh. Bosh only ever made all nba once in his career, and it wasn’t with LeBron. Klay made two and an all defense team. Draymond also made two with 8 all defense teams and a DPOY. Warriors were unbeatable when healthy. Again, it’s not the same
If the answer isn’t Ben Simmons I’m unsubscribing
Welp, see ya later 😂
@@jonnyarnett it’s World Championships right now and you still won’t do a video on DREAM TEAM 2 (94 FIBA TEAM). PLEASE
I disagree about changing the LeBron era, it's going to be the LeBron era because most of the time, it was about him. Mostly the story was from 'The decision' to 'I'm back in Cleveland', winning that Cleveland a ring.
No.
LeBron owns Steph, and QUADRUPLES HIM in fmvps, undeniable fact @@LexGuevarra
But Curry has influenced the game way more than Lebron ever did.
@@facelessandnameless doesn't matter ledaddy clears
and he was upset by the Dallas mavericks swept by the warriors and raped by spurs yea its Lebrons era lol
It feels weird not having a Shaq era. The dude was an absolute monster and dominated the league. 4 rings and 6 finals trips in 11 years is easily equivalent to what other's have done, it's just that his career doesn't nicely fit the decade model that's being used and it overlaps with Jordan, Kobe, and Duncan.
The problem for Shaq is that he is cross eras. He his late 90 and early 2000s on top of sharing most of his rings with Kobe. He definitely has a mini era between Jordan's second retirement and Kobe/Duncan era though
Duncan's career doesn't really fit nicely into a decade either with a championship in the 90's, 3 in the 00's, and 1 in the 10's
Shaq was the face, and the MIP in the league for the first half of the 2000s, he definitely had his own "era", even if it wasn't across an entire, specific decade
@@Andrew-ms8md Duncan's career is pretty clearly a 2000s career. 1999 was a very solid finals performance but 2003 is a top ten ever. Then he had another okay one in 2005 while having 2 MVPs and numerous other smaller accolades.
@@wizard1687shaqs era is the Shaq and Kobe era.
The only thing I'd argue about the LeBron era: it was a given that, to win a championship, you'd have to go through LeBron. But I'm not upset Curry shares the spotlight with him.
so did curry 😂
Lebron is one of the biggest losers, he was dominated by Curry, its not his Era
@@hardywoodaway9912I don’t think u get what he’s saying. You had to get through golden state to get to the finals in the west. You have to go through Lebron to get to the finals in the East.
@@ducatarinagetting beat ≠ getting dominated. LeBron was always the better player in those finals series. It always came down to the team overall.
@@Ryangoslingaltaccount Lebron is one of the biggest losers.
Maybe they should've called it the Lakers/Spurs era, because unlike Bird vs Magic it wasn't portreited "Duncan vs Kobe".
Doing so, you would include:
4 MVPs (2000; 2002; 2003; 2008)
7 Finals MVPS (2000-2003; 2005; 2007; 2009)
9 Western Champions (2000-2005; 2007-2009)
1 6MOY (2008)
1 COY (2003)
I like this because I feel like it finds a way to include Shaq as well as Manu and Parker, which adds like 4 more FMVPs. But people really like to celebrate individuals so I don't see it becoming popular.
what is a 6moy and a coy, DumFuk?? 😹😹
also, "potreited" WTF is this???
😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹
A;so.
I’m liking the “Dynasty Era”, Lakers and Spurs won 7 rings in that span and were so consistent and dominant to be called dynasties.
That or the “Western Conference”era cause the west was loaded.
@@Dr._is_sleepy yall bring up solid points. i'm loving this comments section. esp this thread
@@eobardthawne5653💩💩💩
2000s was the Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan Era. Can't omit Diesel.
Big facts
Yeah Shaq won an equal amount of rings as Kobe during that era and has a mvp in that era too.
I just found this channel last week and DANG does Jonny consistently come with heat 🔥
Glad to have you on board! Means a lot :)
He’s the best NBA RUclipsr in my opinion. No slight to the other ones cause they are great also but to me this guy is the MJ of NBA RUclips 😂💯
@@mtdubdachamp6917 Jimmy highroller probably has a stat that disagrees with that
@@jonnyarnettyou should have more attention lol
There was never a "Kobe Era."
He was never the unquestioned best player in the league for more than 2 or 3 years (maybe).
I think Kobe is a great player, but he gets put into conversations like this, and he doesn't belong.
When you look at Jordan and LeBron's era, there was ZERO question that they were the best player, by a mile. And they were the face of the NBA during their time.
Kobe never had that title and was never the face of an era. The 2000s didn't have a player that could claim it was their "Era".
2010s are definitely the Lebron era 8 straight finals in a decade, also head to head matchups in the playoffs, really? 2 of the top 3 players had to team up to take him down.
And Lebron teamed up with two top 10-15 players to take down the Celtics and get those finals appearances started. Steph didn’t jump ship to make the finals.
@@justamessenger4577you don’t have to jump ship when you have a great organization
LeBron is notorious for teaming up with his competition to compete for titles.
@@prlysis which competition, wade was coming off an injury. Chris Bosh was not a top 10 nba player. the best player Lebron ever played with is wade who was a top 10 nba player at best after his injury.
@@catvapecult5876Nah facts. Bron was stuck with one of the worst front offices in the league I woulda left too
Cant name an era solely after a guy(Lebron) who lost to another guy(Steph) head to head 3 times in da finals
Steph wasn't even the best player on 2 of those teams
Can't get an era when u weren't even the best on ur team 😂😂 u steph fans are funny
bro wasn’t even the best player on his team
Just gonna leave out how lebrons best teammates in 2 of those series were Tristan Thompson and Kevin love while curry had klay, draymond and kd?
When he wasn’t the best on his team might as well call it the klay Thompson era as both were not the best on they team
Shaq still had 4 championships in the 00s and was the MVP in 3. It's just wrong leaving him out of it.
Agree. The same number of MVPs that Kobe had, same number of rings, but 3 times the number of Finals MVPs. The Lakers and Spurs era would be better.
@@guilhermegraca8211 I like that Era title. Nice choice
He had 3 the first ring in the 3 peat was 1999
Facts Early 2000’s is SHAQ Era 1 MVP season 4 finals 3 peat FMVP
@@ghettocaillou1398 99 was the spurs, I'm pretty sure. Lakers were 2000, 2001,2002. Please point me to the correct info if I'm wrong
If anything it should be the "Lebron and the Warriors" era, even though Steph is the heart of it, but it's hard to ignore two titles with KD as FMVP
True and Lebron's 3FMVP during that decade vs Curry's 0 exemplifies that
Bingo ❤❤
I can't give an entire decade era to someone who wasn't the best player in any of those Finals series. Considering those are the most important and he went to 5 total.
Bro at the end of the day LeBron couldn't stop Curry from getting his rings.
It's LeBron and Curry era , stop it
Kind of like Wade and Bosh and LeBron teaming up 🤣🤣🤣 stop it, bro.
Magic and bird and Timmy and Kobe aren’t at all like Bron and Steph. Bron was clearly better than Steph in every matchup and KD, even according to YOUR finals mvp video, was outplaying Steph when it mattered. It’s the Bron and Warriors era, be fr
I agree. Without context, it does look like Steph was shoulder to shoulder with Lebron. But losing to Bron while up 3-1 at the end of the 73 win season, and then getting KD, who wins 2 Finals MVPs over you should be taken into account imo. Steph is incredible and had a great 2015 - 2019 but Lebron was arguably the best player in the league the ENTIRE decade.
Nobody talks about KD lebron that much as Steph and lebron also everybody starting to take 6 three's a game and shooting from the logo in lebron era when I go everywhere nobody is doing what KD or lebron doing sometimes maybe but everyone is shooting the ball from deep so 🤷🏾♂️
@@IAmNotYourBuddy doesn't matter Matter if he blow 3-0 lead curry still the most talk about dude in this era and people wanna shoot like him so does it really matter.
So for the Lebron era, he’s just gonna ignore MVPS, finals mvps, stats, all nba teams, all defense teams, and all star teams?
😂, hes an old head what do u expect
Fac
Love your Vids Jonny but I need to say its still the Bron era. He went to 8 straight finals winning only 3 but in 7 out of the 8 finals he still was the best player on the court while Curry went to 4 winning 3 but with 0 Fmvps and got outplayed by Bron almost every series.
Curry also got outplayed by his own batman kd n outplayed by kyrie n lebron..real talk here.
If Curry got outplayed so much, then how did he win a a ring in 2022. Saying Curry got outplayed is a bad take. It's like saying Dwade wasn't even the 10th best player on Heat cuz LeBron carried him. We'll Dwade won a ring before Bron. Curry won a ring before and after KD.
@@anirudhranjan2934just because he won after Kevin Durant doenst mean he didnt get outplayed by him and the win you're talking about happens in the modern era
@@anirudhranjan2934are you ok ?
We are talking about the 2010s you casual , aside from those 2 MVPs curry didn’t win any fmvps,bron won 3 and 2 season MVPs also
Not to mention 3/8 of those finals Lebron carried injured teams to the finals
bron is better but only reason kd outplayed curry is cause defence focused on steph. every other series steph outplayed kd. almost every
@@retr0428
Why are finals MVP’s so devalued. Curry was only the best player on his team 1-2 time in 4 rings. Lebron was a clear 4. It’s like calling Kareem the leader of the showtime lakers.
he was the best on all those finals teams. Iggy is among the worst FMVP winners in history, probably the worst. KD was wide open because Steph was being trapped and doubled.
@@_M....steph?
Agreed with most except the 2000s era..personally i think it would made more sense to call it the Shaq and Kobe era as there really was nobody stopping them other then themselves...they are they 3rd team to 3peat after Bills Celtics and Jordans Bulls...even after they split they both still dominated the league with Shaq winning another in Miami and Kobe dropping 60s even 80 point games
But they only did it for 2 years of that era and then split even before half of the decade was over.
After 2002, Kobe took over and won more and was better than Shaq so the for the entirety of the 2000s it's Kobe
50s Lakers 3 peated too
@@ArmandoKozomarafacts
Facts And they both got 4 rings in that decade
The ironic thing is, Kobe only had better stats than Shaq vs the spurs, was thanks to Duncans defense on Shaq.
then who did lol@@eobardthawne5653
Shaq had to deal with David Robinson and Tim Duncan in those head to head series along with the mind of Pop.
robinson was way past his prime in the 2000s.
@remnant8898 Two things can be true. He was past his prime but was still a problem on the defensive end. Similar to many aging bigs, the last thing to go is usually rim protection. Example: Dwight Howard against Joker in the 2020 WCFs He was past his prime, but he matched up great against Joker at that time.
I don't think only championships define the whole era. I think we should also take into account all the other aspects of the game since there are so many factors that go into a championship that are out of players control such as injuries, superteams, etc. So wilt/Russell should share their era I think
I’m kinda iffy about the 2010s. But I have to give the edge to the LeBron Era. He’s won 4 finals MVP’s in that decade. Also, scoring the most points in that decade and playoff points. Also winning the greatest championship of all time in 2016. I respect Steph, though.
Greatest championship of all time. 🤣🤣 what a joke
@@Jaymack12what championships do you believe are greater?
@@kingrakim7016 bulls 1993 , Dirk 2011, Spurs 2014, etc etc just off the top of my head
@@Jaymack12You meant Dallas not Dirk. Dirk did not guard LBJ and make him have an abysmal player.
@@pumelelabanca1442 you’re right. Thanks for the correction
Parody or Parity? 😂
It was a Parody of Parity. lol
@@TyroneNBAFanwhat did you comment?
@TyroneNBAFan Bro I don’t delete any comment, but RUclips is suuuuper sensitive about what it sends to my spam or “review” comments. I’ll see if I can find it so I can approve it.
@@TyroneNBAFanwhat did u comment
@@legendaryshots4047suggon deez
Kobe was a great player but stats have to be put in context and thx to playing w Shaq he faced less double coverage than any other all time scorer. Shaq and big men get underrated over time cuz of the media's love for perimeter players
That double coverage bullshit is dumb. It was actual debunked the video when it was shown what Kobe did without Shaq . He put up the same numbers with or without Shaq and it’s proven
@@beattheodds6219 respectfully Kobe was able to develop into his final form tho while playin with Shaq and a vet squad in his early years. He didn't have to carry the team while developing in his early years. His career w/o shaq the league was starting to change/transition to this era w da inflated offense and less def. Still an all time great tho don't get me wrong but teams def focused more on Shaq
@@beattheodds6219 I def rate Kobe over Bron and pretty much all the modern stars of this era but I would give Duncan a slight edge
Lmao. More like thanks to Kobe, Shaq didn't have trouble facing the western conference. Which is why the only time their stats is different is on the NBA finals
One glaring fallacy I'd like to point out is that if you're going to count 1999-2000 as part of kobe's era, then you'd have to count the 2019-2020 season as LeBron's era as well. It which puts LeBron at 4 and Steph at 3, and Kobe at 5 and Duncan at 3.
One thing you left out of the LeBron era, is their achievements outside the championships.
The Allstars and All-NBA selection has over Curry plays a huge part in that.
the period from 2011-2020
Lebron's All-NBA: 1x 3rd All-NBA, 9x 1st All-NBA, 3x All-NBA defensive 1st team, 1x all-nba defensive 2nd team, 10x allstar,
Curry's All-NBA: 2x 2nd All-NBA, 1x 3rd All-NBA, 3x 1st All-NBA, 0 defensive team selections, 6x Allstar
I think for the "Kobe era" they called it that because although he and Duncan kinda shared that era, Kobe was the more marketable/face of the NBA player. It was different from Magic and Bird, where they were basically equal in terms of superstardom. Duncan was arguably the most low-key Superstar ever.
And on the Bron era... I think they called it that because he started the "player empowerment" movement. Like, joining up and making super teams and not just being moved by the organizations. They pretty much said as much in the description, for this one.
That's just my point of view. Love the content and agree with your logic.
Exactly. Duncan was the best player in the 2000s in my books but the most iconic was Kobe. Bron was dominant the entire era and although Steph got his spotlight, it was at the middle and then died in 2019. I guess the better way of naming it is the "western era" in the 2000s and LeBron and the Warriors Dynasty era.
Bro the 2007-08 Celtics started the super teams
Shaq also won four rings in the 2000s.
Ok but from 05-2010 Shaq wasn't even a top 10 player in league.. That's literally HALF the decade so that's kinda irrelevant lol
Even if you look at the pictures of the eras, you can see that Curry is missing from the Lebron era, but he is in the modern era, idk about you guys but that Curry picture just doesnt seem right cuz those guys are from the modern era compared to Curry
It's interesting to me that the eras are pretty well split along the decade lines when there's no real reason for that to happen, but I also feel like this decade format hurts players that came in mid-decade and dominated for ten years like Shaq. Are there other players whose ten year peak didn't correlate with a particular decade, and instead spanned two decades?
Literally Curry actually, only really kicked off in 2015 and still great till now. In the decade format I think LeBron takes it easily though.
Mikan Era ✅ the Babe Ruth of basketball
Russell Era ❌ I think even Russell would've preferred the Celtics Era
I agree about the 70s, except I would call it the The Big Man Era (to acknowledge the depth of talent at center) or The Style Era (to acknowledge the influence of Pistol Pete, Dr. J, Earl Monroe, the Skyhook etc)
Bird vs Magic Era ✅ or simply The Rivalry Era, as there were many good ones in the 80s, not just Bird and Magic
Jordan Era ✅ for better or worse, Jordan defined the 90s
Kobe & Duncan Era ❌ The Wild West Era to acknowledge the western conference dominance. Kobe and Duncan were simply not the era-defining stars Bird, Magic and MJ were, also they're not connected the same way Bird & Magic were
Lebron & Steph Era ❌ again, there's not that connection/rivalry that Bird & Magic had, so pairing them together is just odd. call it The Decision Era. Lebron gets his acknowledgement, but it's appropriately backhanded.
The Modern Era ❌ call it The Global Era, to acknowledge the influence of foreign players (or the decline of American dominance, whichever way you want to frame it)
I think everyone can agree that this is the best list we have until further notice
I think because Tim Duncan is quiet, and wasn’t a flashy player, 2K would rather Kobe represent the era
The reason that era on the game was label the Magic and Bird era is because either Magic or Bird were representatives in every finals of that decade and the NBA as a company has bonded their names together not just as rivals but also having “saved” the league. The other eras don’t share those qualities.
Nobody is as intrinsecal to each other as Magic and Bird indeed. Although the Lakers vs Spurs Era, or just Kobe vs Duncan too is fine anyway.
Eh.
I understand the point about how great they were for not only the competition but saving the League fundamentally, but I would say the 2000’s are pretty close to that. 9 Finals appearances split between them, 8 rings, 5 FMVP’s, 3 individual MVP’s between them, 20 All-NBA and 19 All-Defense Selections, along with a host of other great stats and accolades
2010s we had been forced to watch Lebron and/or Steph in most of the Finals. for most of the decade, everyone's eyes were on both athletes.
2000s too had most of the accolades divided between Kobe and Timmy D.
@@ALV5252
Steph was in 5, LeBron was in 9. I’m not sure it’s exactly the same thing, especially because Curry wasn’t really there much in the early 2010’s
All I see is bullshit when we all know for majority of the 2010's, we were expecting Warriors and Cavs in the finals
Another Jonny video, Another Jonny W
One could argue the 2000s was Shaq’s era too. 4 rings 3 FMVP
While narrating the 90's you mentioned that not only Michael win more championships but he was also the FMVP in all of them. The same applies to LeBron then. Unlike the 60's in which you have a to give it up to Russell because of the 9 to 1 chips despite Wilt's numbers, in the 2010's there's just no argument for Steph being compared to LeBron, you have to be honest. Also your analysis is based on the single premise that an era means strictly a decade, if we just assume that the LeBron era means his entire career, it wouldn't be wrong since NOBODY has done more in basically any statistic or accolades than Lebron since he was drafted.
The modern era should be the international era because the international guys about to run these next 10 years with Jokic Giannis Embiid Luka and even Wemby possibly
Man Very true, the Euro era.
The Kobe era argument is full of flaws. Shaq was the MVP of their three peat and Phil Jackson stated that he was hired to build the team around Shaq. Shaq demanded double to triple teams on almost every single play, especially when they played against the Portland Trailblazers in WCF. All the teams' coaches prepared their defense on how to guard Shaq, while he created easy open shots for his teammates. When you made the argument for Lebron vs Steph, you were literally contradicting yourself based on your Kobe arguments. LMFAO!
I wouldn't be mad at the Curry inclusion but I'd still call it the LeBron era because at worst he was top 3-5 in each year of that decade including the playoffs. Also, idk if you take video suggestions from subscribers but I think a "Where Would These Legends Rank Without Their Rings" video would be very interesting.
In that case 80s era should be jordans then
@@cursin I didn't think I'd have to explain my reason further. LeBron was elite from the start of the decade (much like MJ, yes) but he also won the most MVPs, Finals MVPs and tied for most rings in the 2010s.
@@cursin Lebron won in the 2010s, Jordan didn't win in the 80s.
Lebron is one of the biggest losers, he was dominated by Curry, its not his Era
@cursin Michael was not even in the league till 84 and almost half the decade was already over nor did he have any real team success. Lebron dominated the 2010's from day one and the argument is he was individually dominant from the start of the 2010's on top of all his team success and curry took some time to get going. Comparing 80's michael to 2010's lebron is terrible.
The two most controversial.
Totally agree with the Kobe and Duncan Era narrative. They were both the two best players and while they didn't have the finals matchups like bird and magic, when you consider the spurs vs lakers rivalry, it was THE rivalry of the era, nothing else came close. The only argument I think you can make against Tim Duncan besides the things Jonny brought up was that Duncan's 2014s ring was farther removed than kobes 2010 ring from the 2000s(as well as the fact he took a back seat by then), but even that is very weak argument.
With the Curry and Lebron era thing its a mixup because honestly there is a solid argument to counteract steph's argument for the 2010s era and that's KD's arrival in 2017 basically made it impossible for anyone else to realistically compete. This isn't saying curry wasn't the best player, he was in a 1a 1b situation with KD, kinda like Kobe in shaq, but its an argument saying that half of his success that era was contributed by the fact that his team was so stacked they could have won even without them and the fact that in 2015 the cavs had injuries to both love and kyrie(and while I am aware the warriors were injured in 2016, Kyrie and love were completely out of the games, curry was still able to contribute and you can't blame draymond's suspension on anyone but him). I still think that curry should be a part of that era with lebron but it isn't hard to see why people would put lebron above curry in that regard.
I would argue Steph curry wasn’t the main guy when winning most of his championships because he had KD on those teams. It would be different if Steph did all he achieved not on such a stacked team but he didn’t
I feel like part of the reason it was Bird/Magic is because of their legendary rivalry that I don’t think has ever been achieved between two players since. They also were both equally as popular and taking control of the league. In the other eras where you mention Duncan and Steph, while I agree that the stats add up, you gotta ask yourself who in general terms is the “poster child” for each era. Kobe and Lebron’s popularity were at all-time highs during their respective decades, which is why I feel 2k got it pretty spot on
I think Shaq has a argument for being one of the players for the 2000s era
I’d be interested in hearing a case for the 2000s being the “Shaq and Kobe Era” 3 chips together and 1 each on their own in that decade. An MVP each. Kobe and Duncan holds up though. And Jonny’s light years ahead of me on basketball knowledge and history.
@jonnyarnett
I’d want to rename the Lebron era the superteam era, as the 2010s were all about building not only the next superteam but preparing for the chance of a superteam.
This doesn’t make sense though. Superteams have existed since previous decades with the 80s Celtics and magic, 2000s lakers, 2000s celtics, 90s bulls and more. Creating a team with at least 2+ stars/superstars has always been the recipe for successful teams, so to label an era dominated by Lebron and having Lebron as the face of the league as the superteam era just doesn’t make sense.
You can't ignore the teams... Lebron's team was not bad, any team that makes it to the finals is good... But cmon.. Steph, Klay, and KD?! You can't tell me that if Bron had KD or even Klay he wouldn't be winning as much as well..
He proclaimed himself the GOAT. With that comes expectation and responsibility. Teamed up with two other all stars at every stop and his finals record is below .500? What other great claiming an era as their own has failures at such a level?
Timmy and the Spurs, as well as the GS should be up for consideration.
Nah warriors were so shook of bron they had to run and get KD
@@andresdelportillo9917
Didn’t watch the vid, huh?
GS won it all before they got KD, while they have KD, and even won after KD had left. And even eliminated LeBron 3 times compared to LeBron eliminating them only once.
LeBron was so shookt he had to switch teams yet again.
But yes, KD going to GS is arguably the weakest move in NBA history.
Although the second weakest move is it’s predecessor; that being LeBron starting the whole player-driven superteam and teaming up with Wade and Bosh in Miami.
So, in reality, when LeBron and his fans cry about the weak move by KD, they are actually crying and complaining about the consequences of LeBron’s own (and Miami) actions.
@@kookurikapooh golden state beat a short handed cavs team , ever since bron got to LA golden state been losing to them for a while now and they won the same amount of rings post 2018 with Lebron winning in 2020 and curry 2022 , just this year curry got smoked by bron and his play-in team, give bron KD and I bet bron would have almost 7 rings by now
timmy and the spurs never ran an era . they were prominent in most of the modern eras , but they never had a grasp on the eras like Jordan Kobe and Bron.
@@dafloat
True. Timmy and the Spurs wasn’t as dominant.
But there is a good explanation provided in the vid.
The reason Bron got his own era, is because he was unquestionably the best player during that decade. We can’t just ignore that staff had KD during two of his wins against Bron
He clearly ignored tf out of it😂
@@arnellsmith which is insane to me
He lost to the same team led by the same player 3 out 4 times that he faced them in the finals. As if he didn’t have Kyrie by his side and other all stars in the process. Bron was never voted unanimous mvp like Curry was (in addition to winning another mvp). He can’t claim an era as solely his own that he didn’t dominate. A finals record of 1-3 versus Curry and his Warriors isn’t anyone’s idea of domination. It is the Bron/Curry era as much as it pains his disciples to accept it.
@@cycleoflife565 that’s is a remarkable revision off history buddy 😂. As if Kevin Durant wasn’t the best player in 2 of those chips. And for 2 of the losses, Bron didn’t have Kyrie dumbass
@@sethrobinson9291 like atp they might aswell call it the Lebron, Curry, and KD era since they all played a very important role in the 2010s. Even tho if u ask me it would make zero sense to call it anyones era other than Lebron, since he was the absolute best player and the most talked about each year
Respectfully, I don’t think you can call the Lakers with Shaq “Kobe’s Lakers”. Kobe was still arguably like the 2nd or 3rd best player in that era, Shaq was clearly the leader and greater player. Also over the entire decade, Duncan was always in the playoffs and winning at least 50 games while Kobe without Shaq did miss the playoffs or got bounced round 1.
I have to 100% agree with you on this one. Leaving off Tim Duncan and Steph Curry is definitely an omission when they included Bird.
Even as a Rockets fan, you really cannot justify adding Hakeem to the Jordan era. He was great, but Jordan was on another level. If Hakeem had gotten a third ring, if his late 80s finals run had been in the 90s and had been a victory, Then you would probably have to also have Hakeem.
Popularity and influence of a player should be applied if naming an era over them. 2010s was a dominated by Lebron, or the "Lebron vs Jordan" debate. It makes sense to define that era by Lebron.
True that but a Bulls vs Rockets finals would've been an amazing match up to watch in the 90s
@@kdawg6887 Not getting that in '94 or '95 really sucks. That matchup was basically the one missing thing from both of them in the 90s.
Amusingly, they both beat Magic's Lakers and lost to Bird's Celtics. 😅
I agree with Tim but not curry.. Curry was not the best player on 2 of those championship
@@vernonherbThen Kobe shouldn't be mentioned in the 2000s because he wasn't the best player on 3 of his championship teams in the 2000s.
I strongly believe we're currently in a 2nd Parody Era like the 70s... Because there is a lot of talent spread out across the league. It feels like most anything can happen and that mediocre teams can become Championship teams very quickly.
You could have mentioned the possibility about it being Shaq's era. In the 2000s, he ties Kobe's ring count and has more finals MVPs. By the trophy case, it's Shaq's era
From 2003 and on Kobe was easily the best player in the 2000s so Kobe was better for longer than Shaq in that era
heavy disagree. kobe was only best in 2006 2007 and 2008 that's it and even that's debatable@@ArmandoKozomara
Lebron was the best player in the nba from 2010-2018 that's where the conversation ends.I don't want to here about "they both won 3 championships ".Curry did nothing in 2010-2014 and that counts plus he had the best team ever assembled to literally beat lebron😅😅.Either way you look at it its THE LEBRON ERA.Steph was just a close second.
Gonna be honest the 2010s is easily the lebron era. 3 MVPs, 3 FMVPs, 8 damn final appearances and the greatest championship of all time with a top 3 finals performance ever. Curry did very well and as well as you can for someone without a SINGLE FMVP.
Curry was robbed of the 2015 finals mvp. The media, enamored by Bron from the moment he entered the league gave the award to Iggy because they weren’t allowed to give it to their golden boy. Curry was by far more valuable to the Dubs than Iggy.
Wade was the guy on the Heat in the 00s but he became a Pippen once LeBron joined him and yeah Wade stats decline due to injuries but the 2010s decade was also a success for him.
@@russenterprise6502wade was the best player when lebron joined that first year. After that yeah lebron was the main guy with wade being a number 2
@@cycleoflife565it’s crazy to think of the media gives Steph his 2014/15 and 2017/18 fmvp like he deserved them people would deadass view Steph completely different instead he gets hated to no end
@@cycleoflife565 bron was better than both of them
Man 2k knew that steph shit was fluky for real!! And love the the channel brody been listening for years keep it up!!
I agree with the changes you made. Because this is a team sport = there are so many variables involved and only selecting one player when there are other great players involved is too short sighted. Thanks for making and sharing this video = keep up the good work!
Sad thing about Lebron to me is that he is not undoubtedly the owner of his era. The era he was given is the Curry-Lebron era. Not simply the Lebron.
I understand why Kobe got his own era by himself but I would name it the Kobe-Duncan era
unlike Lebron-Curry, Kobe dominated matchups with The Spurs and Duncan. they don't share the era because Kobe's team was an actual dynasty and Duncan's wasn't.
I think when you choose to use regular season and finals MVPs as a basis for putting one player ahead vs when you don’t shows all the bias. Bird and Magic have the same amount of MVPs, Kobe and Steph have less than Timmy and Lebron. You should have consistent logic throughout all cases so it would be less biased.
hes an mj stan so obviously hes biased
outside of 2008 kobe had shaq duncan had a washed up david robinson and zero help for those battles against the lakers in the playoffs and in 04 ginobili and parker were developing if duncan had t mac maybe spurs beat the lakers in 02 and 04 no one was beating them in 01, as for the magic and bird debate make no mistake about it kareem is the reason why magic won 5 rings if bird had kareem he would have won 5 rings too
I think the reason they didnt make it LBJ vs Steph era because you also have to include KD as well.
KD was never seen as the leader on those Warriors teams.
KD wasn’t the focus of the opponents’ double teams on a regular basis. We all know who was and has been since the Warriors’ won in 2015.
KD deserves his flowers of course but the Warriors have proven twice that they are a championship team with and without Durant.
If the Cavs were undoubtedly the better team in 2015 & 2016 as Bron fans like to spin it why were they taken to 7 games by the Warriors and why did their resurrection in 2016 coincide with Green’s suspension and most importantly, Andrew Bogut leaving the series for good due to injury both in game 5?
That doesn’t sound like a certainty of superiority to me.
@@cycleoflife565he was the best and won those fmvps
@cycleoflife565 the warriors don't need KD to win but the fact remains they won 2 rings because of KD in that era. Also Kawhi won 2 rings as well so literally everyone was dominating in the LeBron era
They're not saying "the 2010's: LeBron era" they were saying this era is marked by LeBron. They should have either done a LeBron/Curry era or a LeBron and then Curry era.
Just goes to show how much marketing alone affects how some people remember (or want to remember) certain eras, even though facts show Duncan was right there with Kobe and Curry was right there with LeBron in those respective decades.
I agree with comments here that 2000s should be called the Spurs/Lakers era, to be more inclusive to Shaq who was a 3x FMVP.
@jonnyarnett - doesn’t Shaq also have a case to share the stage for the 00s era? He had 4 titles. He may have even gotten 2 in Miami if Wade was not hurt in 05 against Detroit up 3-2.
Honestly, I feel that Shaq was slighted here. 3 Finals MVPs and one MVP, 4 rings in total. I think the 2000s should have been the Lakers and Spurs era.
I personally would give the 2000’s to Shaq, he got as many rings as Kobe with one more finals MVP and has arguably the greatest three year finals stretch from anyone not named Jordan.
If your saying "arguably" the greatest 3 year stretch then he is certainly in the conversation with Jordan. Never have I seen someone who looked so completely unfair to play against.
People always bring up Duncan in the 2000s and how underrated he is. It's not like he's forgotten. But 2000s is Kobe's era if you had to choose one. Timmy was in his prime up to around 2005 with Kobe being as good or better and after 05 Kobe was definitely the better player.
I agree kobe made history from 06-09 socring title all star mvp leauge mvp fmvp a ring and don't for get the three peat which Tim never did or win back to back
Using "decade" from "00 to 09" to define an era is so arbitrary. Duncan's championships also came in 1999 and 2014. The total number is the same as Kobe's, but just more spread out. Duncan was always an integral part to each of those wins, never really declined. Why should that be considered less than Kobe's achievement?
I agree with all your eras, but much like you showed Jordan’s personal accomplishments to separate him from Hakeem, I wish you would of compared Duncan v Kobe’s best personal accolades in the 2000s to close the gap:
MVPs- Duncan 2 v Kobe 1
*Duncan 2-1 overall
Finals MVPs- Duncan 2 v Kobe 1
*Duncan 3-2 overall
While not as flashy as the Mamba, the Big Fundamental deserves his flowers 💐
Used to not like this man’s videos but as I started paying more attention to his words and his points/ opinions I’ve come to appreciate this man’s videos
The 2000s should be called “Shaq-Duncan-Kobe” Era.
It’s beyond the head-to-head matchups. While it’s true the LAL 2000-2003 dominated, the team imploded and a new powerhouse emerged in 2005-2007 SAS (also the team never went below 3rd seed in the whole decade!)
Shaq & Kobe had 4 each and Tim had 3. Also let’s not forget the fact Shaq was a dominant superstar too so regardless if Kobe had the better numbers, the oppossing team’s gameplan was always #1 containing Shaq 1st. Arguments against Tim was he played with 3 HoF but let’s not act like HoF Parker/Manu is on the same level as HoF Shaq. You know who you’ll pick between the three 100% of the time. Also, recall Duncan greatest work were on defense.
Awesome video, you are spot on. Well done sir.
Love this list. I agree that no one player defined the 70s but I would honestly call it "the transitional era" because it felt like the bridge between the 60s and the 80s. The 60s I would actually label "The Celtic Dynasty" era or if you must include Russ' name "The Russel Celtics" era. Yes Russel was the face of that team and its best player but that team was stacked with amazing players and it feels wrong to not somehow recognize that.
Russell and Sam Jones were the only Celtics on all of those 60s teams. While Jones was very good (Russell's third best teammate) he was not Russell. He won 4 MVPs during the decade, was a player coach in the finals, and without his offensive contributions the Lakers are the 1962 and 1966 NBA champions.
The dynasty lived and died by Russell's career.
@@reillyhopf6508That's how you know you lack knowledge on the matter.
Ever heard of John Havlicek?
Same guy that also had Jerry West-like highlights and was a main face of the 70s.
@@dusk6159 oh I had no idea Havlicek, who was drafted in 1962, was with Boston during their first 3 titles of the decade. Strange he isn't recorded as having 11 rings though.
I truly believe that the legend of Kobe Bryant started in the many series of Lakers vs Spurs. Simply put, Shaq is a scary dude in LA, he is near unstoppable. However Tim Duncan is one of very few player that in many occasions was able to slow down Shaq, and when Shaq get slowed down by TD, Kobe step up. The stat back it up. Unfortunately for Duncan, the Spurs don't have a player that can matchup with Kobe thus resulting in their loss.
Duncan and Curry definitely got disrespected.
Curry doesn't have a FMVP in that decade... I think LeBron earned that decade imho
It's kind of fun when someone with a platform echoes the same ideas I've had. I've been calling it the Tim and Kobe era and the Steph and LeBron era for a week now.
How can it be your era with no finals MVPs in that Era?
@@arnellsmithwho
@@beattheodds6219 I’m referring to how people wanna add Curry into it💀 like did we all suddenly forget he wasn’t even the 2nd best player that decade?
Then you should’ve made a video about it then lol
LeBron was the face of the league for the 2010s while Steph was not a super star until 2015.
Shaq definitely makes an argument for the 2000s
You heard it, milion Magic and Bird era first time hearing Kobe and Duncan era
The 2010s is LeBron James era
3 Finals MVPS vs 0
2 MVPS each
8 (straight) Finals appearances vs 5
9 playoff appearances vs 7
LeBron had more points, assist rebounds and blocks in regular season and playoffs in the 2010s.
Availability is another factor, Curry had more injury issues than LeBron in that era.
Finally a video I can agree with you on💯😂although the 70s I would call the Kareem era just because there was parity and he was by far the best player
Just wanna help the video 🎉🎉🎉
As always great Vid from JA, but for this matter here’s my 2 cents;
1. 2000’s should be the Western Dominance era
2. 2010’s should be the L’eastern Conference era.
For 2000s,
SPURS owns the era
but individually, it's most likely Kobe
Shaq should've been included because he has 4 titles as well in that 2000s era.
Glad you pointed out the greatness of Kobe here. Because the disrespect towards Kobe in order to make the other players look better than the mamba is so laughable 😂
NBA 2K series follow whatever mainstream sports media broadcast even if that means trashing or forgetting someone just to prop up someone like Low Budget Jordans anywhere.
This is downright funny yet excruciating to see.
@jonnyarnett, totally agree. I did a reel earlier this year and felt the exact same way with little exception. I get Bron fans would argue more finals trips but head to head is the difference. Thanks and continue to share your content!
Thank you Jonny!