Being 2nd in points this decade is great, but it's important to remember he's played 100+ more games than Sid, Malkin and Stamkos, and 40+ more than Kane, Backstrom and Getzlaf.
It also elimintes from the conversation any young guns who entered the league over the past decade.
Giroux is in the mix of second tier star players. He's not a Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin or Kane type player though, as some people try to suggest.
Edit, he's 12th in P/GP this decade.
NHL.com - Stats
He's been better than Kane more seasons than not since cracking the league as a first line player after being buried behind Carter and Richards.
These are just offensive comparisons not taking into consideration Girouxs huge defensive advantage.
2010- Giroux/ 25-51-76 > 27-46-73
2011- Giroux/ 28-65-93 > 23-43-66
2012: Kane/ 23-32-55 > 13-35-48 (lockout)
2013: Giroux/ 28-58-86 > 29-40-69
2014: Giroux/ 25-48-73 > 27-37-64
2015: Kane/ 46-60-106 > 22-45-67
2016: Kane/ 34-55-89 > 14-44-58
2017: Giroux/ 34-68-102 > 27-49-76
2018: undecided, Giroux slightly up.
Overall Giroux has 625 points this decade vs 619 for Kane. Im sure Giroux detractors or Kane supporters would love to talk about PPG and games played as if that hurts G which never made sense to me, you don't discredit the player who plays through injury and is generally durable in order to pump up the player not helping your team in the press box.
Giroux has had better offensive seasons 5 of 8, one of the 3 in favor for Kane was marginal during the lockout season. That coupled with the overall game of Giroux while playing the exclusively C until last year the only argument for saying Kane has been the better player is when you take into consideration cups, which is absurd.