PDA

View Full Version : Starting From Scratch: Dirk Nowitzki or Kevin Garnett



Shammyguy3
09-26-2016, 11:53 PM
If you were starting a team from scratch, which player would you favor and why?

Kings Faithful
09-27-2016, 05:09 AM
Dirk. Garnett is the overall better player but Dirks skill set and shooting ability is so unique that I believe that he is easier to compliment and create a winning team with. Similar to how I believe there are a few players who are more skilled than Curry, but his shooting ability makes him more valuable than just about all of them.

PhillyFaninLA
09-27-2016, 05:28 AM
I agree with Kings Faithful....that is what I came into this topic to say.

Dirk is not as good as Garnett but is a highly skilled team oriented guy. Easier to build a team around and find complimenting pieces.

ewing
09-27-2016, 05:52 AM
Dirk. It wasn't that close before Dirk crushed him in longevity but now its a blow out.

Raidaz4Life
09-27-2016, 06:06 AM
I'm surprised Dirk is winning this. This is KG and it isn't even close.

ewing
09-27-2016, 06:59 AM
Dirk. Garnett is the overall better player but Dirks skill set and shooting ability is so unique that I believe that he is easier to compliment and create a winning team with. Similar to how I believe there are a few players who are more skilled than Curry, but his shooting ability makes him more valuable than just about all of them.

that means he is better.

Kyben36
09-27-2016, 08:02 AM
I would take KG Prime any day of the week, guy was a beast on defense, led his team in minisota and boston in terms of that aspect, and thats discluding how good of an offensive player he was.

dont get me wrong i love dirk, but he was a bit of a late bloomer and his defense leaves a ton to be desired.

I will also take KGs Toughness anyday.

ewing
09-27-2016, 08:32 AM
I would take KG Prime any day of the week, guy was a beast on defense, led his team in minisota and boston in terms of that aspect, and thats discluding how good of an offensive player he was.

dont get me wrong i love dirk, but he was a bit of a late bloomer and his defense leaves a ton to be desired.



I will also take KGs Toughness anyday.


He was an all star by his 3rd year

Hawkeye15
09-27-2016, 09:32 AM
KG. You know you have a good/great defense with him.

I would love to have seen KG get the roster support Dirk/Duncan did....

kdspurman
09-27-2016, 10:01 AM
Kg

europagnpilgrim
09-27-2016, 10:13 AM
The Big Ticket

PowerHouse
09-27-2016, 10:49 AM
KG gives you a supreme skill set on both sides of the court, I gotta go with him.

KnicksorBust
09-27-2016, 11:18 AM
Prime Garnett would be an almost superhuman center in today's game of spreading the floor and pick and roll defense. It's interesting to be that he never became more of a 3pt shooter like Chris Bosh did. He's always had the mid-range game in his arsenal.

mngopher35
09-27-2016, 01:10 PM
Kg for me due to his all around game

nycericanguy
09-27-2016, 01:32 PM
damn this made me look up numbers, prime KG averaged 23-24ppg 13-14rpg, 5-6apg, 2bpg & 1.5spg.

with elite D on top of it. No one in todays game can do that. though to be fair, players seem to be limited to 32-34mpg these days. KG used to play close to 40 and still played all 82 games. Man guys are soft these days!

KG was better, but i wonder if Dirk would be more valuable in today's game with his shooting. Unless you think KG could play C full time now. but if not you have to put another C next to him and that isn't ideal in today's game. two bigs that cant shoot.

TrueFan420
09-27-2016, 01:59 PM
Prime Garnett would be an almost superhuman center in today's game of spreading the floor and pick and roll defense. It's interesting to be that he never became more of a 3pt shooter like Chris Bosh did. He's always had the mid-range game in his arsenal.

it wasnt as big of thing when he was playing and towards the end he was just there for defense. If you inserted prime KG to the NBA today im sure hed work on that part of his game.

TrueFan420
09-27-2016, 02:00 PM
KG easily for me. He was elite defensively and was very well rounded offensively.

FlashBolt
09-27-2016, 02:16 PM
The only blemish on KG's career is he didn't translate much of his regular season dominance into the playoffs. But what did you expect? He played with a bunch of nobodies. I mean, it wasn't uncommon for KG to switch off to guards because his respective guard had trouble doing so while at the same time, guarding his own man. It was painful to watch Minny KG and him going to the Celtics was the best decision he made. You saw how great he was in both the 1st/2nd option role and his defense in 07-08 was something he was always capable of but didn't have the capacity/spotlight to showcase it. If you're talking about someone who truly carried his team, you can add KG to that list along with LeBron.

Dirk on the other hand has had a rather stable franchise with multiple great players on/off. His playoff dominance is spectacular but he was a scorer and that was it. Defense was average and especially when you're on the frontcourt, you have to be able to defend. Passing was definitely nowhere near KG's level. Rebounding, KG has the nod. So I'll give Dirk the scoring aspect but just nowhere close in all-around dominance. Even in 2011, I feel Dirk got way too much credit. I thought Terry was a more impactful player and LeBron was probably the biggest reason they won.

YAALREADYKNO
09-27-2016, 03:05 PM
I'll go Dirk. He took Erik Dampier And Desagana Diop to the finals.

Shammyguy3
09-27-2016, 03:27 PM
The only blemish on KG's career is he didn't translate much of his regular season dominance into the playoffs. But what did you expect? He played with a bunch of nobodies. I mean, it wasn't uncommon for KG to switch off to guards because his respective guard had trouble doing so while at the same time, guarding his own man. It was painful to watch Minny KG and him going to the Celtics was the best decision he made. You saw how great he was in both the 1st/2nd option role and his defense in 07-08 was something he was always capable of but didn't have the capacity/spotlight to showcase it. If you're talking about someone who truly carried his team, you can add KG to that list along with LeBron.

Dirk on the other hand has had a rather stable franchise with multiple great players on/off. His playoff dominance is spectacular but he was a scorer and that was it. Defense was average and especially when you're on the frontcourt, you have to be able to defend. Passing was definitely nowhere near KG's level. Rebounding, KG has the nod. So I'll give Dirk the scoring aspect but just nowhere close in all-around dominance. Even in 2011, I feel Dirk got way too much credit. I thought Terry was a more impactful player and LeBron was probably the biggest reason they won.



What great players did Dirk play with exactly?

mngopher35
09-27-2016, 03:58 PM
What great players did Dirk play with exactly?

I think it is a little more about the good coaching and well roundedness of the teams he played on than individual superstars (early nash/finley, late Chandler/Terry/Kidd/Marion title team). His on/off in the playoffs is +2.8 while KG is at +13.2 so KG's teams suffered much more in the post season when he was on the bench it would seem than Dirk's did (although regular season is similar for both). KG also has the advantage, generally speaking, for RAPM up until recently as well which attempts to adjust for teammates.

I mean I guess the guys I mentioned have name value but I will say not as much when you consider their age/ability next to Dirk, it really was more about having a solid roster instead of top level talent around him (while KG had to play de facto pg, guard any position including nash instead of Dirk at times, be the lead defender/scorer/rebounder/playmaker for certain teams etc due to not always having that balance). Either way though it was definitely a better situation than KG's time spent in Minnesota which was most of his prime/peak.

YAALREADYKNO
09-27-2016, 04:27 PM
I think it is a little more about the good coaching and well roundedness of the teams he played on than individual superstars (early nash/finley, late Chandler/Terry/Kidd/Marion title team). His on/off in the playoffs is +2.8 while KG is at +13.2 so KG's teams suffered much more in the post season when he was on the bench it would seem than Dirk's did (although regular season is similar for both). KG also has the advantage, generally speaking, for RAPM up until recently as well which attempts to adjust for teammates.

I mean I guess the guys I mentioned have name value but I will say not as much when you consider their age/ability next to Dirk, it really was more about having a solid roster instead of top level talent around him (while KG had to play de facto pg, guard any position including nash instead of Dirk at times, be the lead defender/scorer/rebounder/playmaker for certain teams etc due to not always having that balance). Either way though it was definitely a better situation than KG's time spent in Minnesota which was most of his prime/peak.

That title team went 2-7 without Dirk

mngopher35
09-27-2016, 04:40 PM
That title team went 2-7 without Dirk

I am not saying Dirk was not the most impactful player in any way or that the team would be the same level without him. Without KG we had like a 10 year stretch where we couldn't recover either because our FO was so bad from KG's tenure until recently. Just to add, they also went 3-5 without Chandler that year, missing any top players can have that affect especially in small samples.

I am pointing out however that statistically speaking over his career Dirk's teams didn't drop off a cliff in the same way that Garnett's have in the playoffs (not even close actually, although to your point I did mention they were similar in RS) and when you look at stats that attempt to adjust for teammates like RAPM KG once again comes out ahead. When Dirk played he had a defined role as the go to scorer because he usually had help in other areas like a smart floor general and defensive center etc. KG had a couple years of that but also spent much of the time covering many holes within our team as the best defender/playmaker/scorer/rebounder and even brought the ball up the court every now and then to get the offense set up when we were in a pickle. He had far more responsibility in an all around aspect because of his teammates that Dirk never had to deal with with his teams.

YAALREADYKNO
09-27-2016, 06:06 PM
I am not saying Dirk was not the most impactful player in any way or that the team would be the same level without him. Without KG we had like a 10 year stretch where we couldn't recover either because our FO was so bad from KG's tenure until recently. Just to add, they also went 3-5 without Chandler that year, missing any top players can have that affect especially in small samples.

I am pointing out however that statistically speaking over his career Dirk's teams didn't drop off a cliff in the same way that Garnett's have in the playoffs (not even close actually, although to your point I did mention they were similar in RS) and when you look at stats that attempt to adjust for teammates like RAPM KG once again comes out ahead. When Dirk played he had a defined role as the go to scorer because he usually had help in other areas like a smart floor general and defensive center etc. KG had a couple years of that but also spent much of the time covering many holes within our team as the best defender/playmaker/scorer/rebounder and even brought the ball up the court every now and then to get the offense set up when we were in a pickle. He had far more responsibility in an all around aspect because of his teammates that Dirk never had to deal with with his teams.

Sure he had more responsibility and why don't you think Dirk's teams fell off? Because Dirk was there. Kg did have it more rough in MN but let's not sit here and act like Dirk was playing with elite level talent Especially when Nash and Finley left the mavs were still always a 50+win team.

mrblisterdundee
09-27-2016, 06:37 PM
Kevin Garnett might not shoot like Dirk Nowitzki, but he still spread the floor quite a bit, and could defend all five positions. Nowitzki's not that great at defending any position.
Garnett had some similar abilities to Draymond Green, minus the outside shooting. But Minnesota sort of hamstrung Garnett for much of his career by not unleashing his full potential as a small-ball, playmaking center who can defend all comers. Nowitzki's legitimately awesome on his own merit, but he also benefitted from better-constructed teams and superior coaching.

mngopher35
09-27-2016, 07:05 PM
Sure he had more responsibility and why don't you think Dirk's teams fell off? Because Dirk was there. Kg did have it more rough in MN but let's not sit here and act like Dirk was playing with elite level talent Especially when Nash and Finley left the mavs were still always a 50+win team.

The comparison here is KG/Dirk so it is worth mentioning and pointing out when comparing. Again I even said in my first reply to shammy "I think it is a little more about the good coaching and well roundedness of the teams he played on than individual superstars". Never do I say he played with elite level talent like some others have or anything like that in fact I said "it really was more about having a solid roster instead of top level talent around him".

Basically just pointing out Dirk has been in a better situation than KG and how the on/off numbers in the playoffs are drastically different as KG's teams fell off much more and when we look at a stat like RAPM which tries to account for teammates KG on the whole comes out better.

YAALREADYKNO
09-27-2016, 07:31 PM
The comparison here is KG/Dirk so it is worth mentioning and pointing out when comparing. Again I even said in my first reply to shammy "I think it is a little more about the good coaching and well roundedness of the teams he played on than individual superstars". Never do I say he played with elite level talent like some others have or anything like that in fact I said "it really was more about having a solid roster instead of top level talent around him".

Basically just pointing out Dirk has been in a better situation than KG and how the on/off numbers in the playoffs are drastically different as KG's teams fell off much more and when we look at a stat like RAPM which tries to account for teammates KG on the whole comes out better.

Kg's situation was tougher but I'm just saying Dirk wasn't playing with the greatest of teams either.

JordansBulls
09-27-2016, 07:51 PM
Dirk Nowitzki for sure. He led a franchise that never won to a title. KG had to join the winniest franchise all time in order to win. Not to mention that KG will hog up your salary cap wanting to be the highest paid in the league.

Shammyguy3
09-27-2016, 08:06 PM
Dirk Nowitzki for sure. He led a franchise that never won to a title. KG had to join the winniest franchise all time in order to win. Not to mention that KG will hog up your salary cap wanting to be the highest paid in the league.



What does that have to do with anything

Chronz
09-27-2016, 09:26 PM
I love going Dirk but one thing that always bugs me is, we saw what KG did with an old Sam Cassell, we've seen what Dirk failed to do with prime Nash. How do you reconcile the 2 facts? Granted it was just 1 year but that was peak KG right there. Maybe it was just external factors at play but it is abit sad in retrospect.

IKnowHoops
09-27-2016, 10:07 PM
I'm surprised Dirk is winning this. This is KG and it isn't even close.

This

In before Flashbolt and Chronz say Dirk > Drob

IKnowHoops
09-27-2016, 10:14 PM
The only blemish on KG's career is he didn't translate much of his regular season dominance into the playoffs. But what did you expect? He played with a bunch of nobodies. I mean, it wasn't uncommon for KG to switch off to guards because his respective guard had trouble doing so while at the same time, guarding his own man. It was painful to watch Minny KG and him going to the Celtics was the best decision he made. You saw how great he was in both the 1st/2nd option role and his defense in 07-08 was something he was always capable of but didn't have the capacity/spotlight to showcase it. If you're talking about someone who truly carried his team, you can add KG to that list along with LeBron.

Dirk on the other hand has had a rather stable franchise with multiple great players on/off. His playoff dominance is spectacular but he was a scorer and that was it. Defense was average and especially when you're on the frontcourt, you have to be able to defend. Passing was definitely nowhere near KG's level. Rebounding, KG has the nod. So I'll give Dirk the scoring aspect but just nowhere close in all-around dominance. Even in 2011, I feel Dirk got way too much credit. I thought Terry was a more impactful player and LeBron was probably the biggest reason they won.

Wow, amazing you can't apply this logic to Drob, especially since his teams were worse.

jason6692
09-27-2016, 11:35 PM
Lol dirk easy if kg dont join a super team he 1st round and out like every year dirk never had a great team and whoever says drob is better than dirk smokes sometthing not named bud

jason6692
09-27-2016, 11:37 PM
Lonjevity check. When last time kg was good
Success with1 team check.
Championship being only all star check.

Same amount of rings and dirk team was much worse that won kg was on the 1st modern big 3 smh

ManningToTyree
09-28-2016, 12:27 AM
Love dirk but it's KG hands down

Stunner
09-28-2016, 08:53 AM
KG and isn't close , he changes the culture of your team with his leadership and defense .

Stunner
09-28-2016, 08:58 AM
KG from the age of 23-30 has better numbers slightly than Tim Duncan and Win Shares and he's the only PF in Duncan era to even come close to be arguably better when in their prime .


KG

22.5 ppg 12.7 RPG 5 apg 1.4 spg 1.6 bpg

Duncan


21.9 ppg 11.9 RPG 3.3 apg .8 spg 2.5 bpg

25.8 PER 111.8 Win Shares KG

25.7 PER 108.7 Win Shares Duncan

FlashBolt
09-28-2016, 10:46 AM
Wow, amazing you can't apply this logic to Drob, especially since his teams were worse.

Yeah, but you're comparing D.Rob to All-Time greats that doesn't even deserve to be compared... Dirk+KG is actually a close debate. D.Rob vs Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt, Kareem.. not even close dude.

Shammyguy3
09-28-2016, 11:53 AM
I think it is a little more about the good coaching and well roundedness of the teams he played on than individual superstars (early nash/finley, late Chandler/Terry/Kidd/Marion title team). His on/off in the playoffs is +2.8 while KG is at +13.2 so KG's teams suffered much more in the post season when he was on the bench it would seem than Dirk's did (although regular season is similar for both). KG also has the advantage, generally speaking, for RAPM up until recently as well which attempts to adjust for teammates.

I mean I guess the guys I mentioned have name value but I will say not as much when you consider their age/ability next to Dirk, it really was more about having a solid roster instead of top level talent around him (while KG had to play de facto pg, guard any position including nash instead of Dirk at times, be the lead defender/scorer/rebounder/playmaker for certain teams etc due to not always having that balance). Either way though it was definitely a better situation than KG's time spent in Minnesota which was most of his prime/peak.

Where did you find that +/-?

Anyway, Dirk's BPM from 01-12 is 4.6 with an 8.8 VORP for the playoffs. Garnett on the other hand from is 5.0 BPM and a 7.9 VORP. Efficiency obviously much favors Dirk, and defense and defensive impact obviously much favors Garnett.

I think this is an interesting discussion because Garnett is definitely the better all-around player. But, Dirk generally lived up to his regular season dominance in the playoffs, and Garnett faltered. Now, if Garnett had a better roster maybe he would not have. I have no idea.

I don't know who I pick in this :laugh2:

valade16
09-28-2016, 12:03 PM
KG and isn't close , he changes the culture of your team with his leadership and defense .

This is complete conjecture. He didn't really change the culture of Minny, whereas Dirk had the Mavericks winning 50 games for over a decade straight with a rotating cast of players and even coaches.

In fact, in Minny people questioned KG's "killer instinct" at the end of games.

JAZZNC
09-28-2016, 12:12 PM
This is complete conjecture. He didn't really change the culture of Minny, whereas Dirk had the Mavericks winning 50 games for over a decade straight with a rotating cast of players and even coaches.

In fact, in Minny people questioned KG's "killer instinct" at the end of games.

I think sometimes people confuse being loud with being a leader. KG didn't change the culture in Minny, he had to go somewhere that already had a winning culture to win. He's just a second fiddle type of player.

Give me the guy who can be the #1 option on a title team and the guy who can be counted on in the clutch. Dirk had 50 win teams for a decade with multiple different casts of players.

mngopher35
09-28-2016, 01:25 PM
Where did you find that +/-?

I dunno why it doesn't just have career option on reference instead of year by year only (am I blind?). I googled it though to get the career #'s:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01/on-off/

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01/on-off/


Anyway, Dirk's BPM from 01-12 is 4.6 with an 8.8 VORP for the playoffs. Garnett on the other hand from is 5.0 BPM and a 7.9 VORP. Efficiency obviously much favors Dirk, and defense and defensive impact obviously much favors Garnett.

Yes but this is where you should consider teammates and role for much of their time in the playoffs imo. Do you think it is easier to be efficient playing off nash or older kidd, not guarding the best player on the other teams, and not being the main playmaker and at times de facto pg? I think this is where the on/off numbers help show that difference while other stats like efficiency just show the production within the roles they had (also if you look RS at the stats you mention for their career KG has a 5.4 BPM and 94.0 Vorp to 3.5 BPM and 65.7 Vorp for Dirk)

When we played Dallas one year in the playoffs Dirk went off in the final game of the series and I have posted the highlights before. Basically none of it was against KG because we had him on Nash or at the point of our zones to stop penetration, Dirk wasn't even the main focus for our defense (granted he did kill it but still shows the type of help he had and how it can make things easier by taking a player like KG off him for most of his opportunities). To me this is an obvious and huge advantage to consider when you mention efficiency etc. and I think the on/off numbers help show which player was clearly carrying the bigger load (by his team drastically falling off without him while the others was just a little bit when he sat).



I think this is an interesting discussion because Garnett is definitely the better all-around player. But, Dirk generally lived up to his regular season dominance in the playoffs, and Garnett faltered. Now, if Garnett had a better roster maybe he would not have. I have no idea.

I don't know who I pick in this :laugh2:

Ya again I think when the defenses tighten in the playoffs that is when it can really help slow down a player without help from a few aspects. In the regular season KG showed a better peak and as you mentioned was clearly better all around. Imagine having him next to Nash to help boost his efficiency offensively etc in a system like the mavs instead of Twolves, I think it is easy to see how we held him back some with the limited help (even 2004 when he finally got "help" cassell injured himself doing the big ball dance and KG had to bring the ball up at times in the WCF against the lakers without our pg available after killing it in game 7 vs. Webber).

I think given that KG so rarely had great talent around him but generally excelled when he did (MVP in 04, DPOY and title in 08 pr-knee injury) it helps negate some of that fall off in numbers you see in the playoffs in short series where he had little help. Imagine if he had help around him for more than just a few years of his prime...

FlashBolt
09-28-2016, 01:27 PM
Where did you find that +/-?

Anyway, Dirk's BPM from 01-12 is 4.6 with an 8.8 VORP for the playoffs. Garnett on the other hand from is 5.0 BPM and a 7.9 VORP. Efficiency obviously much favors Dirk, and defense and defensive impact obviously much favors Garnett.

I think this is an interesting discussion because Garnett is definitely the better all-around player. But, Dirk generally lived up to his regular season dominance in the playoffs, and Garnett faltered. Now, if Garnett had a better roster maybe he would not have. I have no idea.

I don't know who I pick in this :laugh2:

Well you're precisely proving why KG had unrealistic playoff runs. West were heavy in the frontcourt position with guys like Webber, Duncan, Shaq, Gasol, Jermaine, Yao, Dirk, etc.,. Minny had no one else to go to in the playoffs at all. That's not to say Dirk doesn't deserve credit because he's one of those players who stepped up in the playoffs but it's not fair to point fingers at KG for having to do multiple things on the court compared to a guy who's only role is pretty much to score (Dirk). It's why I can't believe why some put Klay over Harden when his only role is to literally score and then defend (which isn't hard to do when you have a team that is capable of just dominating with or without you).

mngopher35
09-28-2016, 01:38 PM
This is complete conjecture. He didn't really change the culture of Minny, whereas Dirk had the Mavericks winning 50 games for over a decade straight with a rotating cast of players and even coaches.

In fact, in Minny people questioned KG's "killer instinct" at the end of games.

While I agree there is no way to prove leadership from either and it really shouldn't be used here I do want to add one thing. While you can say he didn't change the culture here we have been a team for like 28 years now and only made the playoffs 8 times, while KG was here in his prime.

If you need someone to make the last shot of the game I would take Dirk over KG, I will say that.

Hawkeye15
09-28-2016, 02:16 PM
This is complete conjecture. He didn't really change the culture of Minny, whereas Dirk had the Mavericks winning 50 games for over a decade straight with a rotating cast of players and even coaches.

In fact, in Minny people questioned KG's "killer instinct" at the end of games.

KG changed everything in Minnesota. We were a laughing stock before he came. Been one since he left, until just very recently, and even that is now based of what CAN happen going forward.

KnicksorBust
09-28-2016, 02:25 PM
I'm surprised not a lot of people are taking account the context of which the question is asked. Isn't Garnett the perfect version of a modern C?

FlashBolt
09-28-2016, 02:35 PM
KG changed everything in Minnesota. We were a laughing stock before he came. Been one since he left, until just very recently, and even that is now based of what CAN happen going forward.

Hey, at least you have probably the best future for a rebuilding team. I mean, KAT, Wiggins, Zach, Dunn, Rubio, Thibs.

Hawkeye15
09-28-2016, 03:44 PM
Hey, at least you have probably the best future for a rebuilding team. I mean, KAT, Wiggins, Zach, Dunn, Rubio, Thibs.

right, but it's potential. Until it matures into what is expected, Garnett IS the Wolves.

Stunner
09-28-2016, 04:03 PM
KG got called the Big Ticket for a reason he made minny , was the only reason to go see the team . If minny surrounded him with more talent over his career I think they make the finals once or twice .

Stunner
09-28-2016, 04:04 PM
https://youtu.be/WDyC-OFLyNc

Chronz
09-28-2016, 04:33 PM
I'm surprised not a lot of people are taking account the context of which the question is asked. Isn't Garnett the perfect version of a modern C?

Yeah but will he realize it or will he want to stick with his advantages at the 4? Even as the league got smaller and he got bigger he remained hesitant. The lack of low post players really help him here but his slenderness can be exposed in the paint, I thought he was at his best with Perk/Ervin defensively

Chronz
09-28-2016, 05:02 PM
Heres my pro-Dirk argument

Whats the ideal compliment for each of these players? For Dirk, he can win a title against all odds with Tyson Chandler as his best teammate and JET as the secondary scorer, I understand it was a deep veteran crew but he has proven how little he needs to at least contend in most years. Even in his brittle stages, the guy practically guaranteed a .500 season IMO.

Whereas with KG, we saw him fail to even crack .500 during his apex. When given a star studded cast in Boston with plenty of depth all-around, we saw a tremendous RS but he was taken to the limit by FAR inferior teams in Cleveland/Atlanta, and he wasn't exactly at his best vs LAL as we saw his production wane the furthest (IIRC). I still think he was the FMVP but the fact that he didn't win it should count for something.

Both were removed from their most athletic days upon capturing their first title, relying mostly on guile to get the job done. To me the difference was you could depend more on Dirk in the clutch. They say defense is more consistent than offense and in the RS that happens to be true for the same reason depth matters more in the RS and less in the PS. You're playing a wide range of players in a long grueling season but in the playoffs, you face the same opponent and everyone knows whos running what. Its no coincidence Dirk improved massively as a rebounder/defender come playoffs, he was able to prep and didn't have to rely solely on just his instincts. Good offense will always beat good defense, it just so happens offense is the rarest talent so defense is more important elsewhere. With my #1, I want an elite offensive player and then find him his DPOY caliber guys.

What do you guys think is harder, finding defensive specialist and 6MOY, or Superstars/All-Stars like Pierce/Ray/Rondo?

I do feel bad that KG only got the talent around him to truly show what he was made of those 2 years and then every year after his injury he basically overachieved so who knows what they could've done had he stayed healthy.

Still, injuries are part of the game and Dirk basically only had 2 significant injuries (Vs the Spurs and that one year Cuban basically punted the season he came back on his own time) and they never truly dwindled his game.

Im willing to be swayed either way tho

FlashBolt
09-28-2016, 05:31 PM
Heres my pro-Dirk argument

Whats the ideal compliment for each of these players? For Dirk, he can win a title against all odds with Tyson Chandler as his best teammate and JET as the secondary scorer, I understand it was a deep veteran crew but he has proven how little he needs to at least contend in most years. Even in his brittle stages, the guy practically guaranteed a .500 season IMO.

Whereas with KG, we saw him fail to even crack .500 during his apex. When given a star studded cast in Boston with plenty of depth all-around, we saw a tremendous RS but he was taken to the limit by FAR inferior teams in Cleveland/Atlanta, and he wasn't exactly at his best vs LAL as we saw his production wane the furthest (IIRC). I still think he was the FMVP but the fact that he didn't win it should count for something.

Both were removed from their most athletic days upon capturing their first title, relying mostly on guile to get the job done. To me the difference was you could depend more on Dirk in the clutch. They say defense is more consistent than offense and in the RS that happens to be true for the same reason depth matters more in the RS and less in the PS. You're playing a wide range of players in a long grueling season but in the playoffs, you face the same opponent and everyone knows whos running what. Its no coincidence Dirk improved massively as a rebounder/defender come playoffs, he was able to prep and didn't have to rely solely on just his instincts. Good offense will always beat good defense, it just so happens offense is the rarest talent so defense is more important elsewhere. With my #1, I want an elite offensive player and then find him his DPOY caliber guys.

What do you guys think is harder, finding defensive specialist and 6MOY, or Superstars/All-Stars like Pierce/Ray/Rondo?

I do feel bad that KG only got the talent around him to truly show what he was made of those 2 years and then every year after his injury he basically overachieved so who knows what they could've done had he stayed healthy.

Still, injuries are part of the game and Dirk basically only had 2 significant injuries (Vs the Spurs and that one year Cuban basically punted the season he came back on his own time) and they never truly dwindled his game.

Im willing to be swayed either way tho

Dirk didn't exactly have a great NBA Finals when he won that championship. That had more to do with their zone defense and LeBron just absolutely choking. You just have to fill so many holes with Dirk whereas KG can flow with most players. I like Dirk but if you had to make me choose PF's to start with, it'd go like this:

Timmy
KG
Barkley
Dirk
Malone

valade16
09-28-2016, 05:38 PM
KG changed everything in Minnesota. We were a laughing stock before he came. Been one since he left, until just very recently, and even that is now based of what CAN happen going forward.

The same applies to Dirk. The Mavericks were a laughingstock prior to Dirk. Their playoff drought was over a decade and was actually longer than Minny had been a franchise.

In terms of franchise prestige and trajectory, Dirk had every bit as big an impact on Dallas' fortunes as KG to Minny.

valade16
09-28-2016, 05:43 PM
I'm surprised not a lot of people are taking account the context of which the question is asked. Isn't Garnett the perfect version of a modern C?

Dirk essentially invented the modern shooting big man. Every team has been essentially trying to emulate Dirk for the last decade so I think Dirk would do pretty well in today's NBA.

FlashBolt
09-28-2016, 05:51 PM
Dirk essentially invented the modern shooting big man. Every team has been essentially trying to emulate Dirk for the last decade so I think Dirk would do pretty well in today's NBA.

No way Dirk can play C. Not in any era.

YAALREADYKNO
09-28-2016, 05:59 PM
Heres my pro-Dirk argument

Whats the ideal compliment for each of these players? For Dirk, he can win a title against all odds with Tyson Chandler as his best teammate and JET as the secondary scorer, I understand it was a deep veteran crew but he has proven how little he needs to at least contend in most years. Even in his brittle stages, the guy practically guaranteed a .500 season IMO.

Whereas with KG, we saw him fail to even crack .500 during his apex. When given a star studded cast in Boston with plenty of depth all-around, we saw a tremendous RS but he was taken to the limit by FAR inferior teams in Cleveland/Atlanta, and he wasn't exactly at his best vs LAL as we saw his production wane the furthest (IIRC). I still think he was the FMVP but the fact that he didn't win it should count for something.

Both were removed from their most athletic days upon capturing their first title, relying mostly on guile to get the job done. To me the difference was you could depend more on Dirk in the clutch. They say defense is more consistent than offense and in the RS that happens to be true for the same reason depth matters more in the RS and less in the PS. You're playing a wide range of players in a long grueling season but in the playoffs, you face the same opponent and everyone knows whos running what. Its no coincidence Dirk improved massively as a rebounder/defender come playoffs, he was able to prep and didn't have to rely solely on just his instincts. Good offense will always beat good defense, it just so happens offense is the rarest talent so defense is more important elsewhere. With my #1, I want an elite offensive player and then find him his DPOY caliber guys.

What do you guys think is harder, finding defensive specialist and 6MOY, or Superstars/All-Stars like Pierce/Ray/Rondo?

I do feel bad that KG only got the talent around him to truly show what he was made of those 2 years and then every year after his injury he basically overachieved so who knows what they could've done had he stayed healthy.

Still, injuries are part of the game and Dirk basically only had 2 significant injuries (Vs the Spurs and that one year Cuban basically punted the season he came back on his own time) and they never truly dwindled his game.

Im willing to be swayed either way tho

You go Dirk because he's proven he can win with different players around him. He's gotten to at least the conference finals while going through 3 different changes

Dirk/Nash/Finley-WCF
Dirk/Terry/Howard-NBA Finals
Dirk/Terry/Chandler-NBA Champions
And even when monta Ellis came along they were still a playoff team and he would've gotten OJ Mayo in the playoffs if he didn't miss the first 27 games of the 12-13 season with a knee injury

mngopher35
09-28-2016, 06:05 PM
Heres my pro-Dirk argument

Whats the ideal compliment for each of these players? For Dirk, he can win a title against all odds with Tyson Chandler as his best teammate and JET as the secondary scorer, I understand it was a deep veteran crew but he has proven how little he needs to at least contend in most years. Even in his brittle stages, the guy practically guaranteed a .500 season IMO.

First of all lets look into how that team played around Dirk in 11. 5 teammates over 15 PER and one above 20 and three of his teammates actually had a better BPM than Dirk for the run. I get that the name value isn't necessarily there in terms of stars next to him at the time but I really think people underrate that team around him. DPOY caliber player, Jason Terry with his best post season run ever (was taking Lebron 1v1 in the finals), Jason Kidd to run the team and Marion as a do it all (except hit from the outside) wing. Not to say Dirk wasn't clearly the best but there is a reason he had been more productive in other playoffs yet this was the year they won and it isn't all about him.

As to the question I think an elite defender/anchor and someone to run the offense is what you would want next to Dirk. I also think KG could win with that type of team or a team that added more scoring instead of defense.


Whereas with KG, we saw him fail to even crack .500 during his apex. When given a star studded cast in Boston with plenty of depth all-around, we saw a tremendous RS but he was taken to the limit by FAR inferior teams in Cleveland/Atlanta, and he wasn't exactly at his best vs LAL as we saw his production wane the furthest (IIRC). I still think he was the FMVP but the fact that he didn't win it should count for something.

Again though take a look at the teams we were putting out there. His Boston team was obviously great and guess what, the one year he was there before the knee injury in 09 they won a title. Yup, the one time in his career where he had help that was actually healthy he won, to me that helps negate the questions about carrying a poor team. When actually given help he came away with great success.

While he didn't win the FMVP it looks like you agree he was the best player on that title team which imo is more important than the award. In the one year he had good help here in the regular season before injuries he showed his peak was higher than Dirk and he won the MVP. When he finally had help and everyone stayed healthy in 08 for Boston he won DPOY and a title. Imagine KG on a more stable franchise where he had many years of at least solid help like Dirk had instead of just a couple years throughout his prime, he accomplished similar feats in accolades with less on the whole so if given more who knows. Also if we want to point out KG not making it with some poor casts lets remember Dirk has some playoff failures like 1 seed vs 8 seed along with his success. To me it is more so that Dirk had many opportunities with solid casts and eventually they found the right group to finally win together while having one or two on the poor end as well. KG had basically one year prior to 2010 with a very good cast and won while also advancing far in 2004 until Cassels injury the other year he had talent. He basically maximized his opportunities, he just had far less than most other top level players.


Both were removed from their most athletic days upon capturing their first title, relying mostly on guile to get the job done. To me the difference was you could depend more on Dirk in the clutch. They say defense is more consistent than offense and in the RS that happens to be true for the same reason depth matters more in the RS and less in the PS. You're playing a wide range of players in a long grueling season but in the playoffs, you face the same opponent and everyone knows whos running what. Its no coincidence Dirk improved massively as a rebounder/defender come playoffs, he was able to prep and didn't have to rely solely on just his instincts. Good offense will always beat good defense, it just so happens offense is the rarest talent so defense is more important elsewhere. With my #1, I want an elite offensive player and then find him his DPOY caliber guys.

I agree both were not at their peak athletically, and I think that is more impressive for KG given his skill set. Imagine a peak KG getting the opportunity in his athletic prime when he was at his peak (which was better than Dirk). While I agree offense is more important I also think the gap between them offensively is far smaller than the defensive gap.

I think if you give KG Steve Nash or Jason Kidd to run the offense you can make a contender. It is all hypothetical but basically I think you need a good pg to run the offense and a scorer next to KG capable of the output of say Terry in that 11 run (great efficiency and 3pt shooting, 17.5 ppg). I mean Cassel and Sprewell was enough to get us in the conversation and to the WCF against Shaq/Kobe pre injury.


What do you guys think is harder, finding defensive specialist and 6MOY, or Superstars/All-Stars like Pierce/Ray/Rondo?

What do you think is harder to do, maximize your one good opportunity to win a ring or have many years of good support and a mix of success/failures only to win once your teammates pick up their production not you as an individual?

We both worded it to favor one guy making the answers easy but it ignores so much. Jason Terry had a higher PER, WS/48, BPM while scoring more ppg, more apg on better offensive efficiency and 3 pt shooting in his championship run than Ray Allen in 08. I don't think either guy could only win with the casts they ended up winning with but I do think one of them gets overrated and the other underrated due to name value. Boston was better but again Dallas was very good itself and had a lot of guys stepping up big as both were veteran groups.


I do feel bad that KG only got the talent around him to truly show what he was made of those 2 years and then every year after his injury he basically overachieved so who knows what they could've done had he stayed healthy.

Still, injuries are part of the game and Dirk basically only had 2 significant injuries (Vs the Spurs and that one year Cuban basically punted the season he came back on his own time) and they never truly dwindled his game.

Im willing to be swayed either way tho

To me KG had a better peak, was a far better defender, better rebounder, better playmaker while Dirk was the better scorer who stayed at a high level for a little bit longer. I prefer peak play and defense from big men a lot in my rankings so that could be what sways me towards KG maybe. KG excelled in the few opportunities he had with talent around him while Dirk had a mix with many more seasons of at least good help although never really getting that elite help some have had the luxury of. I don't even mean that as a big negative to Dirk just pointing it out in response to some of what you said about their regular season success, the team around matters in giving opportunities to succeed.

Chronz
09-28-2016, 09:48 PM
First of all lets look into how that team played around Dirk in 11. 5 teammates over 15 PER and one above 20 and three of his teammates actually had a better BPM than Dirk for the run. I get that the name value isn't necessarily there in terms of stars next to him at the time but I really think people underrate that team around him. DPOY caliber player, Jason Terry with his best post season run ever (was taking Lebron 1v1 in the finals), Jason Kidd to run the team and Marion as a do it all (except hit from the outside) wing. Not to say Dirk wasn't clearly the best but there is a reason he had been more productive in other playoffs yet this was the year they won and it isn't all about him
I agree they are underrated but compared to the cast it required KG to squeeze out victories? Not seeing the argument. Marion not hitting 3's for a swing is something you can live with because of Dirk's range. Jason Terry finally having a great post season is only an indictment on his talent level, its not like thats who he was consistently and it was obvious to me that the entire team benefited greatly from Dirk's gravity. And my overall point was thats all it took for him to win/contend.


As to the question I think an elite defender/anchor and someone to run the offense is what you would want next to Dirk. I also think KG could win with that type of team or a team that added more scoring instead of defense.

Thats kind of my point, you would need someone to take the pressure off him in the clutch as opposed to having the guy who had multiple 10pt 4ths and hit numerous clutch shots for the team. All the while opening up the offense for others. And I dont think Dirk really needed someone to run the offense for him, he was an offense onto himself and his presence alone practically guarantees an elite offensive placement, its very hard to find PG's who wouldn't thrive with Dirk's presence.



Again though take a look at the teams we were putting out there. His Boston team was obviously great and guess what, the one year he was there before the knee injury in 09 they won a title. Yup, the one time in his career where he had help that was actually healthy he won, to me that helps negate the questions about carrying a poor team. When actually given help he came away with great success.

Bro, you're asking me to guess something I've already elaborated on. Yes, he barely won many of those series despite having immensely more talented teammates whereas Dirk basically defied all odds and won more impressively. Then their other most successful RS/PS, I see Dirk both grade higher and play harder comp IMO. I mean KG played the quickly imploding Kings that one year and he wasn't exactly an efficient offensive player that run.


While he didn't win the FMVP it looks like you agree he was the best player on that title team which imo is more important than the award.
It is, but there is a difference between being very arguably most important player and its unequivocal FMVP.


In the one year he had good help here in the regular season before injuries he showed his peak was higher than Dirk and he won the MVP. When he finally had help and everyone stayed healthy in 08 for Boston he won DPOY and a title. Imagine KG on a more stable franchise where he had many years of at least solid help like Dirk had instead of just a couple years throughout his prime, he accomplished similar feats in accolades with less on the whole so if given more who knows.
I do imagine, but given that I was less impressed with his title run, less impressed with his best playoff run, less impressed by his longevity, less impressed with what he got out of teammates, Im not seeing much of a reason to give him the benefit of the doubt.

And their peak is pretty close with Dirk being more efficient and KG being more well rounded but come playoffs, gimme the guy who ups his game more. Like Dirk rebounds alot better, win or lose hes put up seemingly better runs at first glance, even in defeat I've come away more impressed with the Diggler.


Also if we want to point out KG not making it with some poor casts lets remember Dirk has some playoff failures like 1 seed vs 8 seed along with his success.
Yeah but I ask myself if its better to be upset and have an MVP season or miss the show entirely and I see it in a better light given the comparison. Also you have to admit the external factors in that series weren't very kind (facing his old coach with his new coach trying too hard to outsmart his rival). But yes, if you're point is that Dirk has had inferior seasons to KG, thats why this is a good debate.


To me it is more so that Dirk had many opportunities with solid casts and eventually they found the right group to finally win together while having one or two on the poor end as well. KG had basically one year prior to 2010 with a very good cast and won while also advancing far in 2004 until Cassels injury the other year he had talent. He basically maximized his opportunities, he just had far less than most other top level players.

I disagree that he maximized his talent to the degree that Dirk did and thats the crux for me.


I think if you give KG Steve Nash or Jason Kidd to run the offense you can make a contender. It is all hypothetical but basically I think you need a good pg to run the offense and a scorer next to KG capable of the output of say Terry in that 11 run (great efficiency and 3pt shooting, 17.5 ppg). I mean Cassel and Sprewell was enough to get us in the conversation and to the WCF against Shaq/Kobe pre injury.

Yeah but I dont see them beating either LA or Detroit but to be fair, I dont see Dirk getting past Detroit or LA either. Thats why its not so much that Dirk won but the fact that he could with such a paltry cast.


What do you think is harder to do, maximize your one good opportunity to win a ring or have many years of good support and a mix of success/failures only to win once your teammates pick up their production not you as an individual?

We both worded it to favor one guy making the answers easy but it ignores so much.
I suppose so, but at just about every instance I found Dirk more impressive, victory or not.


Jason Terry had a higher PER, WS/48, BPM while scoring more ppg, more apg on better offensive efficiency and 3 pt shooting in his championship run than Ray Allen in 08. I don't think either guy could only win with the casts they ended up winning with but I do think one of them gets overrated and the other underrated due to name value. Boston was better but again Dallas was very good itself and had a lot of guys stepping up big as both were veteran groups.
The difference to me is that Jet attained those numbers in some form as a result of Dirk's gravity whereas Ray Allen was the guy who opened up the offense for his teammates moreso than vice versa. Its impossible to quantify but ask yourself this, was Ray Allen capable of more on his own squad, could Jet have been as efficient without Dirk? I suppose its possible that Ray's arrival coincided with his immediate decline tho, he was having some ankle problems or something the year prior. So yeah, Jet could have been both more productive AND more talented at that point but heres the counter. Why were the Celtics so insanely competitive without KG? Sure they didn't repeat but they had a history of winning while he was out in his DPOY season, continued winning with him out of the lineup and they put up a great fight in their eventual loss to the Magic. Whereas I honestly dont even see the Mavs making the playoffs without Dirk.



To me KG had a better peak, was a far better defender, better rebounder, better playmaker while Dirk was the better scorer who stayed at a high level for a little bit longer. I prefer peak play and defense from big men a lot in my rankings so that could be what sways me towards KG maybe. KG excelled in the few opportunities he had with talent around him while Dirk had a mix with many more seasons of at least good help although never really getting that elite help some have had the luxury of. I don't even mean that as a big negative to Dirk just pointing it out in response to some of what you said about their regular season success, the team around matters in giving opportunities to succeed.
Its tough, I personally take the superior offensive player who raises his all-around game in the playoffs vs the guy who sees his offense shrink but what breaks this for me is the context of starting from scratch. I can find defensive bigs more easily than I can find offensive players of his magnitude. KG was on that defensive level that really makes you question it, especially once they allowed zones and Centers went extinct.

Chronz
09-28-2016, 09:57 PM
Jason Terry was on a ridiculous streak that year, it reminds me of the time that Jason Richardson went nova and basically gave the Suns a crucial 3rd All-Star in terms of production despite being FAR removed from his prime. When a player is in such an optimal role, you kind of do have to credit the guys who are making it possible Nash/Amare and I honestly believe those Mavs are rudderless without Dirk to a degree you just dont see in championship teams.

But as you said, give someone enough cracks at it and they should pull through. I remember a study that hinted at the notion that its better to have a consistently great star over a long period of time vs a short peak from a superior player but nothing conclusive.

mngopher35
09-28-2016, 11:19 PM
I agree they are underrated but compared to the cast it required KG to squeeze out victories? Not seeing the argument. Marion not hitting 3's for a swing is something you can live with because of Dirk's range. Jason Terry finally having a great post season is only an indictment on his talent level, its not like thats who he was consistently and it was obvious to me that the entire team benefited greatly from Dirk's gravity. And my overall point was thats all it took for him to win/contend.

But my point is that is still more than what KG had here in Minnesota and his team in Boston wasn't drastically better like many think. I agree that being Terrys best season is not who was consistantly and that is the point. He has played with Dirk before but I have never seen him at that level or take Lebron 1v1 like that and it wasn't just Dirk opening it up. If we want to talk about the two teams in comparison that is worth noting, that Jet outplayed his normal value.

Like I said I think both players can win with different teams than they had, it just happened to be the only time in KG's career he even had a good cast (that was healthy for post season run). He won in that one opportunity while Dirk had many years of solid teams and they finally won with an all time pg to run things, Terry having his most productive post season run, and a DPOY caliber anchor in Chandler. Dirks numbers went down to the level of KG in Minnesota that run actually and part of it is that he took a higher usage and it hurt his efficiency. Even with more talent around him his numbers still dropped and it is something KG dealt with to a far greater extent during his time in the playoffs here.



Thats kind of my point, you would need someone to take the pressure off him in the clutch as opposed to having the guy who had multiple 10pt 4ths and hit numerous clutch shots for the team. All the while opening up the offense for others. And I dont think Dirk really needed someone to run the offense for him, he was an offense onto himself and his presence alone practically guarantees an elite offensive placement, its very hard to find PG's who wouldn't thrive with Dirk's presence.

He might not have needed it but he had it. You have been comparing what each had to win and I think a team playing like that Dallas team would have been enough help for KG in his prime. I don't think KG needed that exact Celtics team to win either but they had the talent to make it work. Just like when he had Cassel/Sprewell they made it work while healthy or as you say about his later team overachieving. When KG had talent he tended to maximize it he just didn't have it as often as most.

I think there are many ways to build around each of them though.






Bro, you're asking me to guess something I've already elaborated on. Yes, he barely won many of those series despite having immensely more talented teammates whereas Dirk basically defied all odds and won more impressively. Then their other most successful RS/PS, I see Dirk both grade higher and play harder comp IMO. I mean KG played the quickly imploding Kings that one year and he wasn't exactly an efficient offensive player that run.

Dirk had his efficiency drop as well when he raised his usage in 2011 while also having more overall talent than KG in 04. It wasn't to the same level but it dropped his stats that year compared to previous and is an example of what happens when you carry a heavier load (which KG did through his tenure in MN). Dirk should actually be much more prepared for that given we all say he is better on the offensive end yet it was KG who had to raise his usage above what it should be more often. Care to touch on why Dirk has such a small difference in comparison for his on/off playoff numbers in comparison to a KG?

That series against the Kings while he was not efficient against Webber he did come through when needed by dominating game 7 including like 13 points in the fourth. Bibby/christie/Peja/Webber/Miller teams may not have been great but we had Hassel, Hoiberg, erving and madsen in our top 7 in post season minutes I believe lol so it isn't like his team had as much talent as Dirks either. Again when he had even solid talent (healthy) his teams seemed to win in his prime (granted I will give you they played to the level of lesser opponents), I just wish it had happened a bit more.


It is, but there is a difference between being very arguably most important player and its unequivocal FMVP.

That's fair enough.



I do imagine, but given that I was less impressed with his title run, less impressed with his best playoff run, less impressed by his longevity, less impressed with what he got out of teammates, Im not seeing much of a reason to give him the benefit of the doubt.

And their peak is pretty close with Dirk being more efficient and KG being more well rounded but come playoffs, gimme the guy who ups his game more. Like Dirk rebounds alot better, win or lose hes put up seemingly better runs at first glance, even in defeat I've come away more impressed with the Diggler.

I mean that is your call but I come away more impressed when watching KG throughout his career and his all around game despite the drop in efficiency due to his circumstances. I dunno I have seen other takes from people on AI etc and I tend to think some people way overrate efficiency without taking into context the roles the individual plays and maybe this is a spot where that makes a difference too.

When Dirk won the ring he was coming off his most efficient 3 year run in the playoffs but that year he upped his usageand it dropped a lot. His PER, WS/48, BPM, ORTG all dropped in some cases a great amount yet it was what his team needed to win. Just like those Twolves teams needed KG to overextend himself on the offensive end because we just didn't have the talent. You can point to his numbers being lower than Dirk but you gotta also acknowledge those on/off numbers and how Dirks numbers fell off too when he extended his role offensively. Again Dirk is supposed to be much more capable on that end as well yet he had that type of fall off in efficiency so I just think people need to consider the context of those numbers a bit more.


Yeah but I ask myself if its better to be upset and have an MVP season or miss the show entirely and I see it in a better light given the comparison. Also you have to admit the external factors in that series weren't very kind (facing his old coach with his new coach trying too hard to outsmart his rival). But yes, if you're point is that Dirk has had inferior seasons to KG, thats why this is a good debate.

My point is just that Dirk had many chances in the playoffs to win, screw up etc so we saw a mix of results (aka more opportunities to impress). This isn't just because he is better but mostly because he was in a good organization for his entire career with a mix of different talents around him to see if it was the right group to win.



I disagree that he maximized his talent to the degree that Dirk did and thats the crux for me.

Can you explain yourself a little here? Outside of 08 and pre-cassell injury in 04 do you think KG was in a position to win pre knee injury? If not it would mean he made it as far as possible every time he had legitimate help around him. I have seen Dirk with highly rated teams lose in the first round unlike KG so not the same case. Again the number of opportunities are different but this is a different way of looking at it than counting times winning (each 1) and focusing on when they in a sense blew it which to me Dirk has done a couple times (does wade go off like that on KG?). I am not even bashing Dirk just trying to show that with those extra opportunities while he was able to have one great situation it took a couple failures to get there too, a luxury KG didn't have with his 1 true shot pre 09.


Yeah but I dont see them beating either LA or Detroit but to be fair, I dont see Dirk getting past Detroit or LA either. Thats why its not so much that Dirk won but the fact that he could with such a paltry cast.

Again though the cast played very well imo and it was after also failing with some solid casts too that maybe shouldn't have. We might not see it happening but the point is KG never got the chance to see if he could step up his game like he just had in game 7 vs. the kings, leaving just 08 as his true chance at having legit help for a ring.


I suppose so, but at just about every instance I found Dirk more impressive, victory or not.

Guess we just disagree here then, I prefer KG's all around game.


The difference to me is that Jet attained those numbers in some form as a result of Dirk's gravity whereas Ray Allen was the guy who opened up the offense for his teammates moreso than vice versa. Its impossible to quantify but ask yourself this, was Ray Allen capable of more on his own squad, could Jet have been as efficient without Dirk? I suppose its possible that Ray's arrival coincided with his immediate decline tho, he was having some ankle problems or something the year prior. So yeah, Jet could have been both more productive AND more talented at that point but heres the counter. Why were the Celtics so insanely competitive without KG? Sure they didn't repeat but they had a history of winning while he was out in his DPOY season, continued winning with him out of the lineup and they put up a great fight in their eventual loss to the Magic. Whereas I honestly dont even see the Mavs making the playoffs without Dirk.

I agree that his team was better prepared to play without him than Dirk's due to them not having enough offense but in the playoffs the on/off numbers in 08 favor KG slightly still compared to Dirk in 11. Again Terry has played many post seasons next to Dirk and I hadn't seen that come out. Watching the games I thought it was clear his own play was just a level higher at times even when he was taking people 1v1. With allen as you mention there was a clear decline but becoming part of a team like that is also going to limit your output compared to before too and something he maybe needed to adjust to (while Terry had continuity with his group to an extent).


Its tough, I personally take the superior offensive player who raises his all-around game in the playoffs vs the guy who sees his offense shrink but what breaks this for me is the context of starting from scratch. I can find defensive bigs more easily than I can find offensive players of his magnitude. KG was on that defensive level that really makes you question it, especially once they allowed zones and Centers went extinct.

To me the defensive gap is so much greater between these two and that is important for big men. I think KG can be built around in a lot of different ways even just starting with Kidd/Terry might be enough for the offense, but with Dirk you need a strong anchor no matter what along with some sort of help offensively still.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 12:31 AM
But my point is that is still more than what KG had here in Minnesota and his team in Boston wasn't drastically better like many think. I agree that being Terrys best season is not who was consistantly and that is the point. He has played with Dirk before but I have never seen him at that level or take Lebron 1v1 like that and it wasn't just Dirk opening it up. If we want to talk about the two teams in comparison that is worth noting, that Jet outplayed his normal value.

Like I said I think both players can win with different teams than they had, it just happened to be the only time in KG's career he even had a good cast (that was healthy for post season run). He won in that one opportunity while Dirk had many years of solid teams and they finally won with an all time pg to run things, Terry having his most productive post season run, and a DPOY caliber anchor in Chandler. Dirks numbers went down to the level of KG in Minnesota that run actually and part of it is that he took a higher usage and it hurt his efficiency. Even with more talent around him his numbers still dropped and it is something KG dealt with to a far greater extent during his time in the playoffs here.




He might not have needed it but he had it. You have been comparing what each had to win and I think a team playing like that Dallas team would have been enough help for KG in his prime. I don't think KG needed that exact Celtics team to win either but they had the talent to make it work. Just like when he had Cassel/Sprewell they made it work while healthy or as you say about his later team overachieving. When KG had talent he tended to maximize it he just didn't have it as often as most.

I think there are many ways to build around each of them though.







Dirk had his efficiency drop as well when he raised his usage in 2011 while also having more overall talent than KG in 04. It wasn't to the same level but it dropped his stats that year compared to previous and is an example of what happens when you carry a heavier load (which KG did through his tenure in MN). Dirk should actually be much more prepared for that given we all say he is better on the offensive end yet it was KG who had to raise his usage above what it should be more often. Care to touch on why Dirk has such a small difference in comparison for his on/off playoff numbers in comparison to a KG?

That series against the Kings while he was not efficient against Webber he did come through when needed by dominating game 7 including like 13 points in the fourth. Bibby/christie/Peja/Webber/Miller teams may not have been great but we had Hassel, Hoiberg, erving and madsen in our top 7 in post season minutes I believe lol so it isn't like his team had as much talent as Dirks either. Again when he had even solid talent (healthy) his teams seemed to win in his prime (granted I will give you they played to the level of lesser opponents), I just wish it had happened a bit more.



That's fair enough.




I mean that is your call but I come away more impressed when watching KG throughout his career and his all around game despite the drop in efficiency due to his circumstances. I dunno I have seen other takes from people on AI etc and I tend to think some people way overrate efficiency without taking into context the roles the individual plays and maybe this is a spot where that makes a difference too.

When Dirk won the ring he was coming off his most efficient 3 year run in the playoffs but that year he upped his usageand it dropped a lot. His PER, WS/48, BPM, ORTG all dropped in some cases a great amount yet it was what his team needed to win. Just like those Twolves teams needed KG to overextend himself on the offensive end because we just didn't have the talent. You can point to his numbers being lower than Dirk but you gotta also acknowledge those on/off numbers and how Dirks numbers fell off too when he extended his role offensively. Again Dirk is supposed to be much more capable on that end as well yet he had that type of fall off in efficiency so I just think people need to consider the context of those numbers a bit more.



My point is just that Dirk had many chances in the playoffs to win, screw up etc so we saw a mix of results (aka more opportunities to impress). This isn't just because he is better but mostly because he was in a good organization for his entire career with a mix of different talents around him to see if it was the right group to win.




Can you explain yourself a little here? Outside of 08 and pre-cassell injury in 04 do you think KG was in a position to win pre knee injury? If not it would mean he made it as far as possible every time he had legitimate help around him. I have seen Dirk with highly rated teams lose in the first round unlike KG so not the same case. Again the number of opportunities are different but this is a different way of looking at it than counting times winning (each 1) and focusing on when they in a sense blew it which to me Dirk has done a couple times (does wade go off like that on KG?). I am not even bashing Dirk just trying to show that with those extra opportunities while he was able to have one great situation it took a couple failures to get there too, a luxury KG didn't have with his 1 true shot pre 09.



Again though the cast played very well imo and it was after also failing with some solid casts too that maybe shouldn't have. We might not see it happening but the point is KG never got the chance to see if he could step up his game like he just had in game 7 vs. the kings, leaving just 08 as his true chance at having legit help for a ring.



Guess we just disagree here then, I prefer KG's all around game.



I agree that his team was better prepared to play without him than Dirk's due to them not having enough offense but in the playoffs the on/off numbers in 08 favor KG slightly still compared to Dirk in 11. Again Terry has played many post seasons next to Dirk and I hadn't seen that come out. Watching the games I thought it was clear his own play was just a level higher at times even when he was taking people 1v1. With allen as you mention there was a clear decline but becoming part of a team like that is also going to limit your output compared to before too and something he maybe needed to adjust to (while Terry had continuity with his group to an extent).



To me the defensive gap is so much greater between these two and that is important for big men. I think KG can be built around in a lot of different ways even just starting with Kidd/Terry might be enough for the offense, but with Dirk you need a strong anchor no matter what along with some sort of help offensively still.


You sure Kidd and Terry are enough on offense for KG?

IKnowHoops
09-29-2016, 12:36 AM
Yeah, but you're comparing D.Rob to All-Time greats that doesn't even deserve to be compared... Dirk+KG is actually a close debate. D.Rob vs Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt, Kareem.. not even close dude.

Hmmm, KG and Duncan are very close. Drob is easily better than KG. Nothing really left to compare him to other than Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt and Kareem. Especially when he has better numbers than all of them. You can't pick and choose what stats you want to ignore. If you look at both regular season and playoffs, he is right there with these guys. If you only look at playoffs he is the least of these guys. If you only look at regular season he is possibly the best of these guys. If you look at both he is right there.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 12:43 AM
You sure Kidd and Terry are enough on offense for KG?

Not positive but given we made the WCF with Cassel/Sprewell I think having those two and more depth than Hassell, Hoiberg, Johnson, Sczerbiak, Olawakandi, Madsen (in order of minutes in playoffs for us) could have been enough if given a couple years together.

None of the hypothetical are sure things but I am just saying I think that is the type of offensive help he needed give or take (assuming the rest of the roster was solid and not just crap). A good pg to run the offense and an efficient 17.5 ppg scorer with range (at least in 2011 playoffs) would be enough imo with good role players/coaching.

FlashBolt
09-29-2016, 12:47 AM
Hmmm, KG and Duncan are very close. Drob is easily better than KG. Nothing really left to compare him to other than Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt and Kareem. Especially when he has better numbers than all of them. You can't pick and choose what stats you want to ignore. If you look at both regular season and playoffs, he is right there with these guys. If you only look at playoffs he is the least of these guys. If you only look at regular season he is possibly the best of these guys. If you look at both he is right there.

KG and Duncan aren't very close... No one has ever said KG is the greatest PF. Duncan is the undisputed greatest PF. If there is a position you want to definitively say who the greatest at that spot was, it's MJ and Duncan at those two spots. The rest can be debated. Maybe Magic as well. Even then, Duncan is still behind Kareem and some have him behind Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, etc., Who's ignoring stats here btw? Who had a better regular season career? D.Rob or Shaq? D.Rob or Hakeem? D.Rob or Kareem? D.Rob or Wilt? You can't judge a player's ranking based on his few years of peak dominance or else it's feasible to say KD is a top ten player. Lmao at "if you only look at the playoffs." If we only LOOKED at the playoffs, he'd be closer to Dwight than Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, or Kareem. And here's the thing: You're still the only guy here defending David Robinson. Can you please realize that? Out of all the users here, not a single person would ever put David Robinson in the discussion of Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, or Wilt. And I'm not a "hater" as you keep proclaiming. David Robinson is irrelevant when it comes to hate. He's just a really good basketball player. But at the end of the day, he's not even close to being at the same level of the other guys.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 12:48 AM
Not positive but given we made the WCF with Cassel/Sprewell I think having those two and more depth than Hassell, Hoiberg, Johnson, Sczerbiak, Olawakandi, Madsen (in order of minutes in playoffs for us) could have been enough if given a couple years together.

None of the hypothetical are sure things but I am just saying I think that is the type of offensive help he needed give or take (assuming the rest of the roster was solid and not just crap). A good pg to run the offense and an efficient 17.5 ppg scorer with range (at least in 2011 playoffs) would be enough imo with good role players/coaching.

But Dirk made the NBA finals with josh Howard and Erick Dampier. So I don't get where this "you need a strong anchor" thing is coming from

valade16
09-29-2016, 12:53 AM
No way Dirk can play C. Not in any era.

Never said he'd play C, just said big man. He is THE gold standard for the modern shooting big man.

The idea that KG should get the edge here because of how much better he'd be in this era when Dirk essentially started "this era" of big men is faulty.

Dirk would dominate this era. Heck, he'd probably take even more 3's than he did before...

FlashBolt
09-29-2016, 12:56 AM
Never said he'd play C, just said big man. He is THE gold standard for the modern shooting big man.

The idea that KG should get the edge here because of how much better he'd be in this era when Dirk essentially started "this era" of big men is faulty.

Dirk would dominate this era. Heck, he'd probably take even more 3's than he did before...

Right.. but the guy you quoted said KG is the modern day C, so I'm not sure what you're disputing in regards to his post.

valade16
09-29-2016, 01:09 AM
Right.. but the guy you quoted said KG is the modern day C, so I'm not sure what you're disputing in regards to his post.

He said he was surprised people were taking Dirk given the context of the question (which was starting from scratch who would you take), then said KG is the modern C as if his abilities being more applicable or valuable in today's era gives him a leg up on Dirk in the context of the question.

But it wouldn't, because Dirk would be dynamite in this era too. It's not like the question was "which player would make a better modern C"

FlashBolt
09-29-2016, 01:26 AM
He said he was surprised people were taking Dirk given the context of the question (which was starting from scratch who would you take), then said KG is the modern C as if his abilities being more applicable or valuable in today's era gives him a leg up on Dirk in the context of the question.

But it wouldn't, because Dirk would be dynamite in this era too. It's not like the question was "which player would make a better modern C"

Exactly. The C position is lacking in skillset. Outside of Towns,Cousins, Gasol, Noah, there isn't much skill involved in the center position outside of lobs, rebounding, and blocking shots. KG would be a nightmare in a way that Duncan was still one even at his old age. Dirk's ability to shoot will translate in any era but I'm not sure you'll see the same effect a prime KG+Duncan would have. I mean, the things AD were doing was what KG+Duncan perfected. Yet, AD was already being brought up as possibly the best player by now according to some from a few polls a year ago. It's actually crazy that KG's shooting from 3-15 ft are nearly identical to that of Dirk's. Dirk can't play C and quite frankly, a skilled C is the most impactful position you can have at this point with the resurgence of the PG position and lack of emphasis on skilled C players. I look at it from this POV:

Dirk was elite offensively but average defensively.
KG was elite defensively and great offensively.

This is a no-brainer. KG's skillset is just impossible to ignore. Dirk's only advantage is FT shooting and his three point shot. They are pretty much even on every other area of the floor offensively. Passing, rebounding, defense. All KG. Tougher to find a C with KG's abilities than a shooter like Dirk.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 01:31 AM
But Dirk made the NBA finals with josh Howard and Erick Dampier. So I don't get where this "you need a strong anchor" thing is coming from

Dampier was a very good defensive center though (his defensive RAPM was close to KG and the Mavs became a top 5 defense when he started on the regular in 07). Also given that the biggest issue that team had was penetration from Wade in the finals I think it points to a weakness even with a good not elite defensive center like Dampier next to him.

It was a good overall postseason for Dirk/Dallas no doubt though so I don't wanna just write this off. It is hard to use these hypothetical perfectly but I do think Dampier was a good defensive center with a solid frontcourt defender in Howard too I think (although definitely agree not DPOY type). I think both of these guys can be built around in multiple ways but I think one thing that Dirk needs is a defensive presence next to him in the paint.

Just to be clear I don't think there is a big gap despite the back and forth. While I say I think people overrate his title run I actually think it lead to Dirk being rated more appropriately overall as a player all time etc in the Barkley/KG/Malone range. I personally prefer Garnett because I think his situation/context held him back to a greater extent and his team won when he finally got real chances (RAPM and on/off numbers support this to an extent imo). To me he was elite defensively which none of the other three were while still being capable of 23/5 on offense with great rebounding on top. Yes his efficiency suffered because he had to play out of his role moreso than the others but again I think the context and numbers mentioned help alleviate that concern to an extent (he wouldn't be as efficient as Dirk but the gap offensively to me is much smaller than the defensive one).

basketfan4life
09-29-2016, 02:57 AM
Dirk, no question for me. The year he won the MVP and the year before that, he was the supreme basketball player. I have never seen any big man making teammates better, better than Dirk those 2 years, man i don't even know how many guards i've seen better than Dirk about that aspect of the game. If you just look at assist numbers and say otherwise, we just have to agree to disagree. And he was a deadly scorer from about anywhere on the court. He won a ring with no other true star in the team roster.

These things don't happen for no reason.

Stunner
09-29-2016, 08:40 AM
KG is the only PF to come close to fighting Duncan for best PF in their peak years . I already posted the statistics of both from the age of 23-30 , the only reason Duncan gets the edge is because unlike KG Duncan has had a stable environment from the day he was drafted where KG had to go thru the worst to get to a very good team for like what a season of two in minny and then traded to Boston .


Duncan had a HOF coach , HOF center his rookie year and one of the best supporting cast his entire career and then gets a stud like Leonard .


Duncan ill say at the end is better by a little bit but the gap is not SUPER huge the rings only make it so and that's because of circumstances of teams . But I won't knock anyone who says they would take peak kg over Duncan at all .


Answer this if KG had what Duncan had his entire career do you think KG would have a few rings ?

kdspurman
09-29-2016, 08:59 AM
KG is the only PF to come close to fighting Duncan for best PF in their peak years . I already posted the statistics of both from the age of 23-30 , the only reason Duncan gets the edge is because unlike KG Duncan has had a stable environment from the day he was drafted where KG had to go thru the worst to get to a very good team for like what a season of two in minny and then traded to Boston .


Duncan had a HOF coach , HOF center his rookie year and one of the best supporting cast ever his entire career.

Duncan ill say at the end is better by a little bit but the gap is not SUPER huge the rings only make it so and that's because of circumstances of teams . But I won't knock anyone who says they would take peak kg over Duncan at all .


Answer this if KG had what Duncan had his entire career do you think KG would have a few rings ?

Playoff performances matter too. TD did his share of carrying weaker teams too early on. You think KG does what he did in 03' with that roster?

kdspurman
09-29-2016, 09:16 AM
Exactly. The C position is lacking in skillset. Outside of Towns,Cousins, Gasol, Noah, there isn't much skill involved in the center position outside of lobs, rebounding, and blocking shots. KG would be a nightmare in a way that Duncan was still one even at his old age. Dirk's ability to shoot will translate in any era but I'm not sure you'll see the same effect a prime KG+Duncan would have. I mean, the things AD were doing was what KG+Duncan perfected. Yet, AD was already being brought up as possibly the best player by now according to some from a few polls a year ago. It's actually crazy that KG's shooting from 3-15 ft are nearly identical to that of Dirk's. Dirk can't play C and quite frankly, a skilled C is the most impactful position you can have at this point with the resurgence of the PG position and lack of emphasis on skilled C players. I look at it from this POV:

Dirk was elite offensively but average defensively.
KG was elite defensively and great offensively.

This is a no-brainer. KG's skillset is just impossible to ignore. Dirk's only advantage is FT shooting and his three point shot. They are pretty much even on every other area of the floor offensively. Passing, rebounding, defense. All KG. Tougher to find a C with KG's abilities than a shooter like Dirk.

That's kinda how I feel. KG's defense and overall skillset give him the edge for me. A big who defends like that and the other intangibles is a tougher find

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 09:20 AM
Dampier was a very good defensive center though (his defensive RAPM was close to KG and the Mavs became a top 5 defense when he started on the regular in 07). Also given that the biggest issue that team had was penetration from Wade in the finals I think it points to a weakness even with a good not elite defensive center like Dampier next to him.

It was a good overall postseason for Dirk/Dallas no doubt though so I don't wanna just write this off. It is hard to use these hypothetical perfectly but I do think Dampier was a good defensive center with a solid frontcourt defender in Howard too I think (although definitely agree not DPOY type). I think both of these guys can be built around in multiple ways but I think one thing that Dirk needs is a defensive presence next to him in the paint.

Just to be clear I don't think there is a big gap despite the back and forth. While I say I think people overrate his title run I actually think it lead to Dirk being rated more appropriately overall as a player all time etc in the Barkley/KG/Malone range. I personally prefer Garnett because I think his situation/context held him back to a greater extent and his team won when he finally got real chances (RAPM and on/off numbers support this to an extent imo). To me he was elite defensively which none of the other three were while still being capable of 23/5 on offense with great rebounding on top. Yes his efficiency suffered because he had to play out of his role moreso than the others but again I think the context and numbers mentioned help alleviate that concern to an extent (he wouldn't be as efficient as Dirk but the gap offensively to me is much smaller than the defensive one).

Dampier was better defensively than he was offensively yes but he was no game changer what's so ever. The mavs had solid defenders but no elite defenders that year.
The myth with kg is that he just needs guys who can score and take pressure off of him has been debunked when Billups and Sczerbiak both averaged 22 & 20 in the 02 playoffs. Yes Garnett is a great defensive anchor but he still needs a little bit of help defensively as well while still needing that go to guy late in crunch time. With Dirk he's proven he can win with a multitude of players around him. Even in his later years he's still getting the mavs into the playoffs. That says a lot about Dirk and the way he can effect teams.

Stunner
09-29-2016, 09:44 AM
Playoff performances matter too. TD did his share of carrying weaker teams too early on. You think KG does what he did in 03' with that roster?

That team won 60 games nevertheless lol he prob doesn't but I wouldn't act like kg won't come to play at all . No team wins a ship alone even tho Duncan was the best guy on the floor .

KG in the playoffs this three year stretch tho the first two posted seasons is a small sample size


01-02

24 ppg

18.7 RPG

5 apg

1.7 spg

1.7 bpg



02-03


27 ppg
15.7 RPG
5.2 apg

1.7 spg

1.7 bpg


03-04

24.3 ppg

14.7 RPG

5.1 apg

1.3 spg

2.3 bpg

03-04 season is over 18 games





Duncan 03 playoffs

24.7 ppg

15.4 RPG

5.3 apg

3.3 bpg

Chronz
09-29-2016, 10:55 AM
Dirk didn't exactly have a great NBA Finals when he won that championship. That had more to do with their zone defense and LeBron just absolutely choking. You just have to fill so many holes with Dirk whereas KG can flow with most players. I like Dirk but if you had to make me choose PF's to start with, it'd go like this:

Timmy
KG
Barkley
Dirk
Malone

He was more impressive than KG with less talent whilst facing superior comp all playoffs. Thats all I care about and I disagree overall, it had everything to do with Dirk. He was far and away the most important piece, without him the entire thing crumbles. Quite possibly the most clutch playoff run in history, the only thing keeping him out of having an elite run are his own pedestrian numbers for the full game(past his prime) but he still controlled the game in ways no one else could. In a comparison vs KG who was both less impressive individually and on a less impressive collective unit.


You go Dirk because he's proven he can win with different players around him. He's gotten to at least the conference finals while going through 3 different changes

Dirk/Nash/Finley-WCF
Dirk/Terry/Howard-NBA Finals
Dirk/Terry/Chandler-NBA Champions
And even when monta Ellis came along they were still a playoff team and he would've gotten OJ Mayo in the playoffs if he didn't miss the first 27 games of the 12-13 season with a knee injury
I hated the 03 playoffs, I honestly felt the Spurs were like the 4th best team in the Conference at full health but it was a really close call for me either way, it just sucks that everyone but the Spurs were hurting, even the Nets weren't at full capacity IIRC.

ewing
09-29-2016, 11:21 AM
i think Marbury is the best PG in the league. Him and Francis will be like the new Walt and Earl

FlashBolt
09-29-2016, 11:46 AM
KG is the only PF to come close to fighting Duncan for best PF in their peak years . I already posted the statistics of both from the age of 23-30 , the only reason Duncan gets the edge is because unlike KG Duncan has had a stable environment from the day he was drafted where KG had to go thru the worst to get to a very good team for like what a season of two in minny and then traded to Boston .


Duncan had a HOF coach , HOF center his rookie year and one of the best supporting cast his entire career and then gets a stud like Leonard .


Duncan ill say at the end is better by a little bit but the gap is not SUPER huge the rings only make it so and that's because of circumstances of teams . But I won't knock anyone who says they would take peak kg over Duncan at all .


Answer this if KG had what Duncan had his entire career do you think KG would have a few rings ?

It would be accurate to say KG would have more rings and Duncan would have less had they switched teams. But Duncan was the better player 100%.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 11:54 AM
Dampier was better defensively than he was offensively yes but he was no game changer what's so ever. The mavs had solid defenders but no elite defenders that year.

They were not elite but they were very good defenders next to him while also having scorers like Terry/Howard/Stackhouse on top. That is a well balanced team with defense and scoring next to Dirk where he doesn't need to do much but focus on what he is good at in scoring.



The myth with kg is that he just needs guys who can score and take pressure off of him has been debunked when Billups and Sczerbiak both averaged 22 & 20 in the 02 playoffs. Yes Garnett is a great defensive anchor but he still needs a little bit of help defensively as well while still needing that go to guy late in crunch time. With Dirk he's proven he can win with a multitude of players around him. Even in his later years he's still getting the mavs into the playoffs. That says a lot about Dirk and the way he can effect teams.

If you look I say a lot of times he needs someone to help him run the offense too and that is probably the most important piece whether it is playmaking/scoring someone to create (cassel was best he got in MN for that). While I agree those two had good runs scoring I believe that was the dallas series no? We were going up against a better duo next to Dirk in Nash/Finley and in fact KG had to switch onto Nash for much of the series because Billups couldn't contain him (young still, Terrell Brandon actually was our pg that year early on but unfortunately couldn't finish). That is the thing KG didn't have solid support next to him on defense even to the extent of howard/Dampier to go with a couple scorers, he had Rasho.

I think if you give him a Kidd to run the offense, Terry to help with scoring and add in some decent depth instead of what we usually had it is enough to compete eventually (like I said before). Maybe not every year and they come against some better teams but with Dirk we are talking years and years of solid casts to come away with one title too. With a Kidd or nash type of pg KG could have played a role much more suited to his abilities spending as much time finishing plays instead of creating then just balance the team from there.

I think Dirk ended up playing below his ability in that 06 final (while Wade dominated by attacking the paint which he needs someone to cover for him but Dampier had Shaq) and then they choked in 07 though so while he had both defensive (Dampier/Howard) and offensive help (Terry/Stackhouse/Howard) his teams also still floundered with the success mixed in to even get there in 06 (why I keep mentioning when you have talent for so long you have the advantage of just needing it to really click once for a title). You can call it a myth if you want for KG needing scorers but I think it depends on just getting the right type of offensive help with the offensive playmaking and rounding out the team with better depth than the wolves ever had (yes even a Dampier would be an upgrade). If you wanna call that a myth then we can talk about how the 06 finals and 07 playoffs went when Dirk had some talent but not an anchor at the level of Chandler, a hof pg, or a scoring guard exceeding his normal play. That is what it actually took for those Dallas teams to get over the hump as well...

This is why hypothetical are always tough though and like I said we can't be sure either way. I think Nash/Finley would have been the best duo KG ever played with here in MN yet Dirk saw less success with them compared to a team with Dampier/Howard/Terry went further. Sometimes it is about building the right group more than just throwing down names/points scored when talking about a team. So yes KG with Billups/Wally did not win but given the depth on that team and fact they were going against a better Dallas group where Nash actually could take a defender like KG off of Dirk (KG never had the luxury of a player who could take that type of attention away from him) I wouldn't say it is a myth he just needed some better offensive help. Just because someone like Dirk had the luxury of a more gifted duo/overall support than his own when they matched up doesn't change that. Dirk spent much of his career with better cast around him than Wally/young Billups and little else support around him so I don't think it is a negative KG couldn't win with that specific duo, unless we are saying it is a huge huge blunder that Nash/Finley wasn't enough for Dirk.

kdspurman
09-29-2016, 11:56 AM
That team won 60 games nevertheless lol he prob doesn't but I wouldn't act like kg won't come to play at all . No team wins a ship alone even tho Duncan was the best guy on the floor .

KG in the playoffs this three year stretch tho the first two posted seasons is a small sample size


01-02

24 ppg

18.7 RPG

5 apg

1.7 spg

1.7 bpg



02-03


27 ppg
15.7 RPG
5.2 apg

1.7 spg

1.7 bpg


03-04

24.3 ppg

14.7 RPG

5.1 apg

1.3 spg

2.3 bpg

03-04 season is over 18 games




Duncan 03 playoffs

24.7 ppg

15.4 RPG

5.3 apg

3.3 bpg


Similar numbers, but TD has just shown to have the type of game and personality/leadership skills (those matter sometimes) to get his team further into the playoffs.

Like during that time just being able to post and draw double teams meant a lot. Shaq was obviously the same way. KG played a different style than Duncan did. Not to mention Duncan's ability to guard 4's & 5's. As much as their numbers may be similar, their styles were very different.

It's why I'm not so sure switching KG on to those Spurs teams automatically equals him having more rings. Would he be the type of leader that Duncan was that helped create that culture? Would he have been OK with how hard Pop coached him? Would he have commanded double teams that got guys like Bowen/Stephen Jackson/Kerr etc... those open looks?

valade16
09-29-2016, 12:05 PM
Exactly. The C position is lacking in skillset. Outside of Towns,Cousins, Gasol, Noah, there isn't much skill involved in the center position outside of lobs, rebounding, and blocking shots. KG would be a nightmare in a way that Duncan was still one even at his old age. Dirk's ability to shoot will translate in any era but I'm not sure you'll see the same effect a prime KG+Duncan would have. I mean, the things AD were doing was what KG+Duncan perfected. Yet, AD was already being brought up as possibly the best player by now according to some from a few polls a year ago. It's actually crazy that KG's shooting from 3-15 ft are nearly identical to that of Dirk's. Dirk can't play C and quite frankly, a skilled C is the most impactful position you can have at this point with the resurgence of the PG position and lack of emphasis on skilled C players. I look at it from this POV:

Dirk was elite offensively but average defensively.
KG was elite defensively and great offensively.

This is a no-brainer. KG's skillset is just impossible to ignore. Dirk's only advantage is FT shooting and his three point shot. They are pretty much even on every other area of the floor offensively. Passing, rebounding, defense. All KG. Tougher to find a C with KG's abilities than a shooter like Dirk.

I think you are assuming Dirk's shooting would have the same effect now as it did during his peak.

Dirk's peak he was taking 6 or so 3pt shots per 100 possessions. Last season he took 7.4, his highest ever. In today's NBA, at his peak, Dirk would be taking more 3pt shots and his efficiency would actually increase.

Dirk was a more efficient scorer and that would only increase in disparity in today's NBA. Especially considering KG's main offensive weapon, his midrange, would be highly discouraged in most offense's.

I look at it like this: what skill would the other need to compensate for with the rest of the team. Dirk would need a rim protecting center. KG would need an offensive player capable of being the main offensive weapon at the end of games who isn't afraid to take those shots.

It seems way easier to me to find a rim protecting center in today's NBA than an efficient offensive weapon who is consistently good at the end of games.

How many non-superstars would you trust to be the main offensive weapon at the end of games?

valade16
09-29-2016, 12:10 PM
KG was very much like Rasheed at their peaks in that, being the team's best player, at the end of games when you really needed them to step up their game offensively or really needed a bucket, they seemed very hesitant to take charge and score.

KG was great, but you definitely need another strong offensive weapon for him to be successful.

Hawkeye15
09-29-2016, 12:23 PM
KG was very much like Rasheed at their peaks in that, being the team's best player, at the end of games when you really needed them to step up their game offensively or really needed a bucket, they seemed very hesitant to take charge and score.

KG was great, but you definitely need another strong offensive weapon for him to be successful.


part of KG's problem was he was too unselfish. He continually made the right basketball play late in games, which pissed Wolves fans off. I am sorry, but I would rather KG take a contested fade away 19 footer, than Trenton Hassell a wide open 15 footer with the clock winding down.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 12:40 PM
KG was very much like Rasheed at their peaks in that, being the team's best player, at the end of games when you really needed them to step up their game offensively or really needed a bucket, they seemed very hesitant to take charge and score.

KG was great, but you definitely need another strong offensive weapon for him to be successful.

I think you are too focused on this late game stuff when a well built team would be more important than late game hero imo. When KG had a solid unit in 04 and a guy like Cassel next to him it was still him who took over game 7 4th quarter against Webber so it wasn't like he was incapable.

It was only when Dirk had a strong offensive weapon (terry stepping up), a defensive anchor at top level in chandler, and a pg to run the offense like old Kidd that he finally made it over the hump (well rounded team with an anchor). I don't think you would need much different for KG, that team just becomes more defensive oriented with that kind of length/defensive talent throughout.

Chronz
09-29-2016, 01:12 PM
But my point is that is still more than what KG had here in Minnesota and his team in Boston wasn't drastically better like many think. I agree that being Terrys best season is not who was consistantly and that is the point. He has played with Dirk before but I have never seen him at that level or take Lebron 1v1 like that and it wasn't just Dirk opening it up. If we want to talk about the two teams in comparison that is worth noting, that Jet outplayed his normal value.
Not really interested in debating the finer points because I disagree with you entirely, to me it was significantly better than Dirks in terms of talent but so long as you agree that it was in fact more talented and capable of more without its best player, thats all I care about because it shows us that despite more talent and favorable competition, he still doesn't outperform Dirk on either a team or individual level. Dirk wasn't responsible for all his points, obviously, but he influenced his efficiency more than anyone at the time did for any other teammate IMO. Like he was making bums like Barea appear magical and unstoppable simply because you couldn't leave Dirk open.


Like I said I think both players can win with different teams than they had, it just happened to be the only time in KG's career he even had a good cast (that was healthy for post season run). He won in that one opportunity while Dirk had many years of solid teams and they finally won with an all time pg to run things, Terry having his most productive post season run, and a DPOY caliber anchor in Chandler. Dirks numbers went down to the level of KG in Minnesota that run actually and part of it is that he took a higher usage and it hurt his efficiency. Even with more talent around him his numbers still dropped and it is something KG dealt with to a far greater extent during his time in the playoffs here.

Yup and in just about every situation you can conjure up, overall, I came away more impressed with what Dirk got out of his teams than what KG did. You look at KG's best individual playoff run and his offensive efficiency was subpar despite facing easier comp whereas Dirk tore up teams even when he didn't have the talent. Personally, I think Dirk had more chances in part because hes easier to build with. I wont disagree that his teams carried him in ways that KG's couldn't, a great example is his series vs the Rockets where his team won in spite of him in some ways, so there are are examples I dont value higher than even most of KG's early first round exits, just not all. Overall, Im not seeing a reason to give the benefit of the doubt to KG here.




He might not have needed it but he had it. You have been comparing what each had to win and I think a team playing like that Dallas team would have been enough help for KG in his prime. I don't think KG needed that exact Celtics team to win either but they had the talent to make it work. Just like when he had Cassel/Sprewell they made it work while healthy or as you say about his later team overachieving. When KG had talent he tended to maximize it he just didn't have it as often as most.

Yeah but we're talking about an old *** J-Kidd,




I think there are many ways to build around each of them though.

Yup and to me its easier to find defenders than offensive guys.



Dirk had his efficiency drop as well when he raised his usage in 2011 while also having more overall talent than KG in 04.
I dont know about that, show me a playoff run in Dirk's history where his offensive efficiency fell off a cliff the way KG did in his most impressive run with Minny. You're talking about a player at his absolute apex seeing both his scoring rate AND his efficiency drop to levels well below league average and well beneath stars who have overachieved with their casts. Whereas Dirk was past his prime, actually raising his scoring average and only suffering a modest decline in offensive efficiency and a tremendous increase in his all-around game (again he upped his effort defensively come playoffs). This without even mentioning the soft teams KG got to play against, KG thoroughly let me down those playoffs. The closest we have for Dirk is that loss vs the Dubs when his coach drastically altered their style of play at the last minute, he was swarmed by midgets but even then he gobbled up the offensive boards to compensate. Its clear he was at fault despite his numbers but I wont say the efficiency drop is equally understandable.


It wasn't to the same level but it dropped his stats that year compared to previous and is an example of what happens when you carry a heavier load (which KG did through his tenure in MN). Dirk should actually be much more prepared for that given we all say he is better on the offensive end yet it was KG who had to raise his usage above what it should be more often. Care to touch on why Dirk has such a small difference in comparison for his on/off playoff numbers in comparison to a KG?

It wasn't even close to the same level tho and that matters alot. In fact, you could argue that there was zero drop off and only an increase in overall effectiveness. Like show me a single usage-efficiency skill curve method (Stay out of this Indy) that exonerates the disparity in their RS:PS efficiency, you cant.

Dirk did carry a heavy load and he was more prepared for it, which is why we dont see him drop off ala KG. Like the year you're talking about, 04 vs 11:

Per100P
KG RS: 33.2PTS/6.8AST (112 O-RTG/29.6 Usage) PER:29.4
KG PS: 29.9PTS/6.3AST (100 O-RTG/30.3 Usage) PER: 25.0

Dirk RS: 35.3PTS/4.0AST (118 O-RTG/28.2 Usage) PER:23.4
Dirk PS: 39.1PTS/3.6AST (115 O-RTG/32.0 Usage) PER:25.2

I would mention the WS difference but I didn't want to take the time to separate the O/D components. To me, its pretty sad when a players usage goes up and their PER goes down as the 2 are highly connected from what I understand. Usually just taking/making more shots at even a low rate of efficiency is enough to boost ones PER. So just at first glance you can see that Dirk elevated his game and the gap between the 2 only grows when you consider their comp (KG was inefficient vs the Kings/Nuggets so it wasn't just a facing LA thing).


To answer your question, because +/- thrives on sample size and the playoffs can leave you with all sorts of cooky results from what little I see of it. Like I havent ever taken the time to review playoff trends outside my favorite players and its almost impossible to google search for playoff only +/- analysis, as most (team+analysts alike) use the RS data to influence their odds/gameplan. Put it this way, you know how easily you dismissed the Mavs going 1-7 or whatever it was when Dirk sat due to small sample sizes, now imagine you hyping up microscopically smaller sample set. Not very telling is it? I'll look into the 2 eventually in terms of +/- analysis if I can find anyone who has done the work on it. I can undestand most numbers but definitely not equipped to answer that Q, tho there may be great meaning in there somewhere.



That series against the Kings while he was not efficient against Webber he did come through when needed by dominating game 7 including like 13 points in the fourth. Bibby/christie/Peja/Webber/Miller teams may not have been great but we had Hassel, Hoiberg, erving and madsen in our top 7 in post season minutes I believe lol so it isn't like his team had as much talent as Dirks either. Again when he had even solid talent (healthy) his teams seemed to win in his prime (granted I will give you they played to the level of lesser opponents), I just wish it had happened a bit more.

True but given the lack of help, I just wish he was more impressive in defeat. Like I never expected Tmac's teams to get out of R.1 but I was WAY more impressed with the way he raised his 2-way ability, and this with him dealing with injuries on occasion. Tmac pushed Dirk to 7 games despite have FAR less talent, missing his 2 primary PF's and defending Dirk for large chunks. Like if I had seen that kind of valiant effort in defeat, I wouldn't be so down on KG in a comp vs Dirk.

Still, that series is a reminder of how much of a team game this is. Its also a reminder of +/- analysis being noteworthy in short samples if you know what you're looking at, as this was the series where Dan Rosenbaum made his name. Not that it was all him but it helped the decision making process when his +/- numbers suggested it was best to attack Yao with small ball. IIRC, its why if you look at that series you will see Yao posting HUGE individual numbers but the team struggling while he was out there, its because the Rockets feared putting him on Dirk and risked him on Josh Howard, who just had his way with him. Deke was often a better alternative because the Mavs couldn't exploit him defensively.




I mean that is your call but I come away more impressed when watching KG throughout his career and his all around game despite the drop in efficiency due to his circumstances.
I dunno I have seen other takes from people on AI etc and I tend to think some people way overrate efficiency without taking into context the roles the individual plays and maybe this is a spot where that makes a difference too.

The contextual argument works both ways, as his circumstances dont exonerate such a glaring drop IMO, to me that unfortunate circumstance was being his teams primary option, where Dirk would raise his game KG would shrivel. KG was at his best as the best outlet option in the league more than being the fulcrum of an offense. Purely statistically, that title run was his best playoff run ever (scored more and on higher efficiency than his MVP year) and even in those friendliest of circumstances he doesn't hold a candle to Dirk.


When Dirk won the ring he was coming off his most efficient 3 year run in the playoffs but that year he upped his usageand it dropped a lot. His PER, WS/48, BPM, ORTG all dropped in some cases a great amount yet it was what his team needed to win. Just like those Twolves teams needed KG to overextend himself on the offensive end because we just didn't have the talent. You can point to his numbers being lower than Dirk but you gotta also acknowledge those on/off numbers and how Dirks numbers fell off too when he extended his role offensively. Again Dirk is supposed to be much more capable on that end as well yet he had that type of fall off in efficiency so I just think people need to consider the context of those numbers a bit more.

I dont know what numbers you're looking at, nor how you're accounting for any sort of disparity. I didn't agree with your claim that his efficiency dropped his title year when the usage-efficiency tradeoff was well in line with what we would expect from a player in the RS, that this happened in the playoffs only makes it more impressive. You keep bringing up talent but I've seen Dirk without the requisite talent to win, he didn't fall off a cliff ala KG(relatively speaking of course).


My point is just that Dirk had many chances in the playoffs to win, screw up etc so we saw a mix of results (aka more opportunities to impress). This isn't just because he is better but mostly because he was in a good organization for his entire career with a mix of different talents around him to see if it was the right group to win.

Thats true but it can also work against him, when you're consistently that good, you're bound to have a misfire eventually. Like KAJ lost in R1 while getting his *** locked down by an inferior team, he made up for that in other years. Same applies for Dirk IMO, he won more impressively, had a more impressive runs in defeat. Not gonna give the guy whos missing the playoffs extra credit when quite frankly, he wasn't that impressive in defeat anyways.

I also think he had more opportunities in part because he was easier to build with and the kind of player who raised his game come playoffs far more than someone like KG ever could. He was better at making players better. But yes, he had moments where his team carried him that KG was never afforded, which is why I downplay those seasons, maybe even below years where KG missed the playoffs. We should do a run down of their best seasons and rank them in order.


Can you explain yourself a little here? Outside of 08 and pre-cassell injury in 04 do you think KG was in a position to win pre knee injury? If not it would mean he made it as far as possible every time he had legitimate help around him. I have seen Dirk with highly rated teams lose in the first round unlike KG so not the same case.
Yeah, I feel Dirk is such a threat without the ball that he maximizes the touches everyone else gets, that a wider range of players see their efficiency improve next to him than they would with KG. Without knowing what you meant I dont know how to elaborate, other than to simply say I feel Dirk accomplished more with less, he won his title more impressively, had more impressive playoff runs. Its easy for fans to say KG never underachieved when hes missing the playoffs entirely or getting ousted in R.1 but thats not to say another player couldn't have accomplished more.

To answer you, they're definitely not winning outside those years but that doesn't exonerate his performances entirely, and yeah Dirk had that 1 year where his coach failed him and it was a giant black spot in his career but he more than made up for that in his title run and again, in a comparison vs KG, its not that grievous an error when the guy is missing the playoffs entirely. Its hard to say KG had a better year for example just because Dirk was upset but its a definite argument.
Maybe KG wins that series because when the team goes small, hes a better C. I personally think the Mavs win that series if they just continue playing their game instead of altering their gameplan for a far inferior team. AJ had the single biggest coaching blunder of his era when he wanted to slow down the attack whilst playing small, its like why the **** are you trying to match up with them? And if you go small why not run, GS had a good defensive unit in the half court, where they sucked ALL year was in transition and IIRC on the boards. You took away 2 of your strengths and neglected to expose their weaknesses all because you wanted to outsmart your rival. He gave the Dubs extra motivation when he tanked a late season game vs them and played his starters vs the Clips (their closest rival with Minny not too far behind IIRC). I blame Dirk because thats what you have to do when such an upset happens and your star isnt exactly shining bright, but that was easily the most damage I've ever seen a coach do and I'd be surprised if he ever landed such a great gig ever again.



Again the number of opportunities are different but this is a different way of looking at it than counting times winning (each 1) and focusing on when they in a sense blew it which to me Dirk has done a couple times (does wade go off like that on KG?). I am not even bashing Dirk just trying to show that with those extra opportunities while he was able to have one great situation it took a couple failures to get there too, a luxury KG didn't have with his 1 true shot pre 09.

I personally think KG fails to make it beyond the Spurs that year much less push the champs to 6. I've never seen KG obliterate such a powerhouse the way Dirk abused those Spurs. If not for Dirk, Duncan prolly has a 3-peat in there. And Wade went off in large part because the gameplan was to stop Shaq by any means necessary and to me, he didn't blow it that year, if anything he overachieved. I look at his cast and I dont see how that team was that good, Wade had more playoff talent alongside him IMO. Josh Howard was good but he was basically the West version of Mo Williams in that even playing on the team with the best record didn't get him an All-Star nomination, it took an injury for him to make the cut. I've always felt the least talented 60+ win teams were Brons early Cavs teams and Dirks peak Mavs teams.


Again though the cast played very well imo and it was after also failing with some solid casts too that maybe shouldn't have. We might not see it happening but the point is KG never got the chance to see if he could step up his game like he just had in game 7 vs. the kings, leaving just 08 as his true chance at having legit help for a ring.

That he even went to a game 7 vs an imploding Kings team whilst struggling to the tune of 22.5 PPG on a woefully inept sub 100 O-RTG (97) isn't something to be boastful about. Its like you damn well better finally show up big.


Guess we just disagree here then, I prefer KG's all around game.

Its what makes me question it for sure, I just see no evidence that an all-around game is more conducive to winning over a dominant offensive player who happens to shrink the defensive gap come playoffs while simultaneously seeing an increase in the offensive gap. Like can you think of a friendlier circumstance than his first year in Boston because to me, very few had such a cushion for winning than he did in Boston and he still almost blew it.


I agree that his team was better prepared to play without him than Dirk's due to them not having enough offense but in the playoffs the on/off numbers in 08 favor KG slightly still compared to Dirk in 11. Again Terry has played many post seasons next to Dirk and I hadn't seen that come out. Watching the games I thought it was clear his own play was just a level higher at times even when he was taking people 1v1. With allen as you mention there was a clear decline but becoming part of a team like that is also going to limit your output compared to before too and something he maybe needed to adjust to (while Terry had continuity with his group to an extent).

Already addressed the +/- quip, such small samples require more than just raw output, otherwise you shouldn't ignore the far greater sample of the Mavs falling apart when Dirk missed games his title year whereas the Cetlics had proven capable of withstanding the loss of KG and the departure of key reserves (Like James Posey for example) to a much higher degree the following year. Like I dont care what minuscule numbers you point to, those Mavs without Dirk aren't coming close to matching the success of the Celtics without KG. Those Celtics were soo stacked that many suggested KG lost his MVP chances when they saw the team do just fine without him and nobody was surprised to see them continue winning games/playoff series once he was gone. The room for error was much smaller for Dirk to win his title and he stepped up in kind, whereas KG was carried abit more IMO. Like I highly doubt Jet does what he did without Dirk around, you can point to 1v1 stuff but that ignores whatever effect the gravity Dirk provides for his teammates to go 1v1. Its an intangibles argument I know, but Ill see what the +/- analysis digs up throughout their tenure together.

Let me just put it this way, would you really want Jet over Ray Allen? Who do you think commands more attention and would Jet have the ability to defend the best players the way Ray did? I think if Ray were in his spot, hes even more productive than Jason Terry and the Celtics get worse, tasking KG/Pierce with even more responsibilities, the kind of responsibilities that KG shut down when he refused to sign off on a trade to Boston. It was only until they landed Ray that he was OK with it.



To me the defensive gap is so much greater between these two and that is important for big men. I think KG can be built around in a lot of different ways even just starting with Kidd/Terry might be enough for the offense, but with Dirk you need a strong anchor no matter what along with some sort of help offensively still.
Enough offense? Well put it this way, either Kidd cuts down on some of KG's touches (Assists go down for sure) or KG takes the ball away from Kidd while providing less spacing/room to work with, essentially diminishing what Kidd brings to the table. Keep in mind this was an old Kidd whom at his peak was never a great offensive player to begin with.

Jet is interesting because he was a combo guard who could play multiple roles. With KG capable of handling the playmaking, Jason could conceivably thrive more but again, you made a big deal about his 1v1 capabilities and that gets cut into by the inferior shooter and more ball dominant big. Its hard to imagine anyone getting more out of Jason Terry than Dirk did, the guy shot up to 120 ORTG simply by joining Dirk's team and his assists increased as well. That his efficiency dwindled as he saw more bench time and less time alongside Dirk was no coincidence, I only have the numbers from as early as 2008 which just so happened to coincide with a season when the Mavs began experimenting with him as a 6th man and the splits dont show anything outside the team being better as a result of it, which was why they started it in the first place. He himself was basically the same, increase usage and correlating efficiency loss but much of that was due to still playing heavy minutes alongside Dirk. If we look at his numbers without Dirk, his TS% reverts right back to where it was in Atlanta. I'll look into their entire tenure together but it was neat to see his TS% at 53.8 without Dirk that one year I looked into and then see that his final 4 years in Atlanta spat out 53.7, final 3 years were at 53.9, final 2 at 53.4 with his final year being at 51.9.

Also, the defensive gap shrinks in the playoffs and offensive gap increases.

IKnowHoops
09-29-2016, 01:15 PM
KG and Duncan aren't very close... No one has ever said KG is the greatest PF. Duncan is the undisputed greatest PF. If there is a position you want to definitively say who the greatest at that spot was, it's MJ and Duncan at those two spots. The rest can be debated. Maybe Magic as well. Even then, Duncan is still behind Kareem and some have him behind Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, etc., Who's ignoring stats here btw? Who had a better regular season career? D.Rob or Shaq? D.Rob or Hakeem? D.Rob or Kareem? D.Rob or Wilt? You can't judge a player's ranking based on his few years of peak dominance or else it's feasible to say KD is a top ten player. Lmao at "if you only look at the playoffs." If we only LOOKED at the playoffs, he'd be closer to Dwight than Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, or Kareem. And here's the thing: You're still the only guy here defending David Robinson. Can you please realize that? Out of all the users here, not a single person would ever put David Robinson in the discussion of Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, or Wilt. And I'm not a "hater" as you keep proclaiming. David Robinson is irrelevant when it comes to hate. He's just a really good basketball player. But at the end of the day, he's not even close to being at the same level of the other guys.

Few years? Drob has 10 PER years better than Hakeems best year. He has six WS48 better than Hakeems best year. Drob kills Hakeem in the regular season bruh. And his Peak is higher PER than everyone accept
Wilt, and based on the fact Wilt played against a lot of 6'5 non athletes, I think its safe to say Drob would of been better in that era than Wilt was seeing as how close there Peaks are anyway. Defensively he is also better than all of these guys and equal to Hakeem so...again, he is right there with them. And he had the least amount of talent around him so "what do you expect come playoff time"

Chronz
09-29-2016, 01:17 PM
But Dirk made the NBA finals with josh Howard and Erick Dampier. So I don't get where this "you need a strong anchor" thing is coming from

What a waste of money that was, especially when they signed Diop for the vet min who eventually proved to be a better option for much of their stay together. IIRC, Diop actually won the starting spot because he didn't require touches and could cover for Dirk defensively, all for peanuts. Imagine if he had just retained Nash.....


Never said he'd play C, just said big man. He is THE gold standard for the modern shooting big man.

The idea that KG should get the edge here because of how much better he'd be in this era when Dirk essentially started "this era" of big men is faulty.

Dirk would dominate this era. Heck, he'd probably take even more 3's than he did before...

I wish I were an NBA insider, I've seen people mention the stretch 4 era is pretty much over and that we're now in the small ball 4 era. Where simply having spacing from the position isn't enough, you want to find the guy who can stretch and put it on the floor. Luckily Dirk was that guy too, he was really fast back in his hey.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 01:28 PM
I will respond later this afternoon chronz, on my way out right now

Chronz
09-29-2016, 01:33 PM
Similar numbers,
They aren't that similar, KG was well below league average in per possession efficiency, to get Duncan to play well beneath his established norms for an entire playoff series, you required the Wallace Bro+McDyess in an NBA Finals type of setting. KG struggled vs the likes of the broken down Webber led Kings and wasn't exactly torching the lowly Nuggets. Duncan eviscerates the likes of them with ease.


but TD has just shown to have the type of game and personality/leadership skills (those matter sometimes) to get his team further into the playoffs.

Like during that time just being able to post and draw double teams meant a lot. Shaq was obviously the same way. KG played a different style than Duncan did. Not to mention Duncan's ability to guard 4's & 5's. As much as their numbers may be similar, their styles were very different.

It's why I'm not so sure switching KG on to those Spurs teams automatically equals him having more rings. Would he be the type of leader that Duncan was that helped create that culture? Would he have been OK with how hard Pop coached him? Would he have commanded double teams that got guys like Bowen/Stephen Jackson/Kerr etc... those open looks?

All true. KG does win a ring with you guys but I dont think he wins in 99, definitely doesn't win in 03 (where does Duncan go?) and the rest are debatable. All esle being equal, a low post presence that sucks in defenses and capable/willing to play Center was far more valuable than KG.

Its not like he was anchoring defenses the way Duncan was, it took the rule changes allowing zones for his box-1 abilities to truly showcase his talent and then the greatest defensive innovator for a coach to play him on the strongside for him to reach his peak defensively. Which may not be a relevant complaint considering thats what did happen but I think its easier to build a dominant defense with Duncan than with KG. Yes defense is more important for bigmen, but what does that say when the bigman in question is able to play the bigger positions? For that reason I found KG's defense to be slightly overrated, Duncan was without a doubt better on that end and he has zero DPOY's to KG's 1.

Chronz
09-29-2016, 01:42 PM
I think you are too focused on this late game stuff when a well built team would be more important than late game hero imo. When KG had a solid unit in 04 and a guy like Cassel next to him it was still him who took over game 7 4th quarter against Webber so it wasn't like he was incapable.

It was only when Dirk had a strong offensive weapon (terry stepping up), a defensive anchor at top level in chandler, and a pg to run the offense like old Kidd that he finally made it over the hump (well rounded team with an anchor). I don't think you would need much different for KG, that team just becomes more defensive oriented with that kind of length/defensive talent throughout.

But you're comparing a WCF loss, all while facing inferior teams on route, to a Finals victory for Dirk. In essence you're comparing what it took for a player to have a relatively uninspired playoff run vs what it took for a championship. When what you should be comparing is what it took for both of them to make their furthest without a chip.

An adequate frontcourt compliment for Dirk was Desagnia Diop ffs, he took that guy to the Finals and upset the Spurs in the process, Dirk was HUGE that series. Its a shame Cassell got hurt because he was the perfect compliment for KG.

In many ways, what he did for KG is similar to what he did for Elton Brand in his career year here in LA. He got him the easiest shots and took over when needed. Just when exactly did Sam get hurt?

valade16
09-29-2016, 01:43 PM
part of KG's problem was he was too unselfish. He continually made the right basketball play late in games, which pissed Wolves fans off. I am sorry, but I would rather KG take a contested fade away 19 footer, than Trenton Hassell a wide open 15 footer with the clock winding down.

Growing up the only 2 non Blazer jerseys I had were a Knicks Sprewell jersey and a Minny KG jersey. I loved KG and Sprewell and was rooting for them when they went to the WCF. I even loved Wally Szczerbiak.

And I agree wholeheartedly. It was painful watching both Rasheed and KG defer to teammates who missed shots when all I really wanted them to do was take the shot.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 02:04 PM
I think you are too focused on this late game stuff when a well built team would be more important than late game hero imo. When KG had a solid unit in 04 and a guy like Cassel next to him it was still him who took over game 7 4th quarter against Webber so it wasn't like he was incapable.

It was only when Dirk had a strong offensive weapon (terry stepping up), a defensive anchor at top level in chandler, and a pg to run the offense like old Kidd that he finally made it over the hump (well rounded team with an anchor). I don't think you would need much different for KG, that team just becomes more defensive oriented with that kind of length/defensive talent throughout.

But you're comparing a WCF loss, all while facing inferior teams on route, to a Finals victory for Dirk. In essence you're comparing what it took for a player to have a relatively uninspired playoff run vs what it took for a championship. When what you should be comparing is what it took for both of them to make their furthest without a chip.

An adequate frontcourt compliment for Dirk was Desagnia Diop ffs, he took that guy to the Finals and upset the Spurs in the process, Dirk was HUGE that series. Its a shame Cassell got hurt because he was the perfect compliment for KG.

In many ways, what he did for KG is similar to what he did for Elton Brand in his career year here in LA. He got him the easiest shots and took over when needed. Just when exactly did Sam get hurt?

I am showing what happened the one time kg had even somewhat legit help with us. To use us losing after cassel went down doesn't do much to sway me considering the victory for dirk included far superior help, it was even much better than when cassel was in.

I will get more in depth when I respond to the longer post but I think the theme you will see is putting context behind what is being said like here. On my phone now but the points will be similar, take the context of situation, help around them, role they had to play (including guarding top players on other teams). It is no surprise to me that the guy we both agree was inferior offensively struggled to carry a bigger load, do more all around, with less help.

Chronz
09-29-2016, 02:05 PM
I will respond later this afternoon chronz, on my way out right now

I know, it kinda goes without saying when it comes to you Minny fans.

Chronz
09-29-2016, 02:15 PM
I am showing what happened the one time kg had even somewhat legit help with us. To use us losing after cassel went down doesn't do much to sway me considering the victory for dirk included far superior help, it was even much better than when cassel was in.

I will get more in depth when I respond to the longer post but I think the theme you will see is putting context behind what is being said like here. On my phone now but the points will be similar, take the context of situation, help around them, role they had to play (including guarding top players on other teams). It is no surprise to me that the guy we both agree was inferior offensively struggled to carry a bigger load, do more all around, with less help.
No you're doing much more than mentioning KG, you're directly comparing the casts they led with entirely different results. Like with Dirk you applied the whole "over the hump" thing but showing us the time that KG didn't get over the hump. Wouldn't it be more apples to apples to show us what they did when both got over the hump and when both came closest to getting over the hump but couldn't quite make it.

KG didn't win with that cast, Dirk did.

Before I ask you something, do you consider that 11 team to be the best overall collection of talent Dirk ever had (outside 03 of course, when he himself got injured) relative to his league?

Do you feel Dirk had more talent alongside him in 06 than even KG in his best Minny team?

ewing
09-29-2016, 02:16 PM
Never said he'd play C, just said big man. He is THE gold standard for the modern shooting big man.

The idea that KG should get the edge here because of how much better he'd be in this era when Dirk essentially started "this era" of big men is faulty.

Dirk would dominate this era. Heck, he'd probably take even more 3's than he did before...


Its OK to say center. He isn't a center but he did and would get mins at the spot.

Hawkeye15
09-29-2016, 02:18 PM
I know, it kinda goes without saying when it comes to you Minny fans.

put yourself in our shoes. How many all timers have we had?

The answer is 1. Took me years to let my barrier down and admit KG's weaknesses and flaws. But he was a top 25 player ever.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 02:42 PM
They were not elite but they were very good defenders next to him while also having scorers like Terry/Howard/Stackhouse on top. That is a well balanced team with defense and scoring next to Dirk where he doesn't need to do much but focus on what he is good at in scoring.




If you look I say a lot of times he needs someone to help him run the offense too and that is probably the most important piece whether it is playmaking/scoring someone to create (cassel was best he got in MN for that). While I agree those two had good runs scoring I believe that was the dallas series no? We were going up against a better duo next to Dirk in Nash/Finley and in fact KG had to switch onto Nash for much of the series because Billups couldn't contain him (young still, Terrell Brandon actually was our pg that year early on but unfortunately couldn't finish). That is the thing KG didn't have solid support next to him on defense even to the extent of howard/Dampier to go with a couple scorers, he had Rasho.

I think if you give him a Kidd to run the offense, Terry to help with scoring and add in some decent depth instead of what we usually had it is enough to compete eventually (like I said before). Maybe not every year and they come against some better teams but with Dirk we are talking years and years of solid casts to come away with one title too. With a Kidd or nash type of pg KG could have played a role much more suited to his abilities spending as much time finishing plays instead of creating then just balance the team from there.

I think Dirk ended up playing below his ability in that 06 final (while Wade dominated by attacking the paint which he needs someone to cover for him but Dampier had Shaq) and then they choked in 07 though so while he had both defensive (Dampier/Howard) and offensive help (Terry/Stackhouse/Howard) his teams also still floundered with the success mixed in to even get there in 06 (why I keep mentioning when you have talent for so long you have the advantage of just needing it to really click once for a title). You can call it a myth if you want for KG needing scorers but I think it depends on just getting the right type of offensive help with the offensive playmaking and rounding out the team with better depth than the wolves ever had (yes even a Dampier would be an upgrade). If you wanna call that a myth then we can talk about how the 06 finals and 07 playoffs went when Dirk had some talent but not an anchor at the level of Chandler, a hof pg, or a scoring guard exceeding his normal play. That is what it actually took for those Dallas teams to get over the hump as well...

This is why hypothetical are always tough though and like I said we can't be sure either way. I think Nash/Finley would have been the best duo KG ever played with here in MN yet Dirk saw less success with them compared to a team with Dampier/Howard/Terry went further. Sometimes it is about building the right group more than just throwing down names/points scored when talking about a team. So yes KG with Billups/Wally did not win but given the depth on that team and fact they were going against a better Dallas group where Nash actually could take a defender like KG off of Dirk (KG never had the luxury of a player who could take that type of attention away from him) I wouldn't say it is a myth he just needed some better offensive help. Just because someone like Dirk had the luxury of a more gifted duo/overall support than his own when they matched up doesn't change that. Dirk spent much of his career with better cast around him than Wally/young Billups and little else support around him so I don't think it is a negative KG couldn't win with that specific duo, unless we are saying it is a huge huge blunder that Nash/Finley wasn't enough for Dirk.

The reason why I bring up Billups and Sczerbiak is because people make it seem like all kg needed was people to help him score and then kg's all around game would take care of every other flaw the team had. They make it seem like it's as simple as that. With kg you needed guys who could score and more importantly a guy you can count on to close the game. Sure Dirk had Nash and Finley during those days but it doesn't take away from the fact that kg had two guys go off for 20+. It came down to superstar vs superstar and Dirk elevated his game where as kg put up great numbers but in the closing moments would usually disappear and was even called out by his coach.

Dirk had a well balanced team but take Dirk off that team and what are they? A first round exit if they even make the playoffs? Dirk's on court presence helped that group a bunch by spacing the floor, clearing the lanes, and giving them more one on one opportunities because the defense was so keen in on trying to stop Dirk. Chandler was an after thought until he came to Dallas and cp3 and melo had him as well and still couldn't get to at least a conf finals.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 02:48 PM
What a waste of money that was, especially when they signed Diop for the vet min who eventually proved to be a better option for much of their stay together. IIRC, Diop actually won the starting spot because he didn't require touches and could cover for Dirk defensively, all for peanuts. Imagine if he had just retained Nash.....



I wish I were an NBA insider, I've seen people mention the stretch 4 era is pretty much over and that we're now in the small ball 4 era. Where simply having spacing from the position isn't enough, you want to find the guy who can stretch and put it on the floor. Luckily Dirk was that guy too, he was really fast back in his hey.

Lol right but then again nobody saw Nash doing what he did in Phoenix but still. Why waste that money on Dampier smh. Oh what could've been

Oefarmy2005
09-29-2016, 04:37 PM
The voting at the top of the page is pretty clear - no? I have always maintained the fact that absolute prime KG > Duncan, so he is for sure better than Dirk. Dirk is pretty good though.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 05:23 PM
Not really interested in debating the finer points because I disagree with you entirely, to me it was significantly better than Dirks in terms of talent but so long as you agree that it was in fact more talented and capable of more without its best player, thats all I care about because it shows us that despite more talent and favorable competition, he still doesn't outperform Dirk on either a team or individual level. Dirk wasn't responsible for all his points, obviously, but he influenced his efficiency more than anyone at the time did for any other teammate IMO. Like he was making bums like Barea appear magical and unstoppable simply because you couldn't leave Dirk open.


Yup and in just about every situation you can conjure up, overall, I came away more impressed with what Dirk got out of his teams than what KG did. You look at KG's best individual playoff run and his offensive efficiency was subpar despite facing easier comp whereas Dirk tore up teams even when he didn't have the talent. Personally, I think Dirk had more chances in part because hes easier to build with. I wont disagree that his teams carried him in ways that KG's couldn't, a great example is his series vs the Rockets where his team won in spite of him in some ways, so there are are examples I dont value higher than even most of KG's early first round exits, just not all. Overall, Im not seeing a reason to give the benefit of the doubt to KG here.

Ya we just see that team totally different it appears. I tend to give credit to the players next to Dirk stepping up their game as much if not more as I give just him the credit. Many of them had played together before so this wasn't some new twist where Dirk just magically changed things for them imo, they clearly stepped up individually which can happen in small samples. We just don't see eye to eye here and it is probably something that has to do with what we saw more than the numbers themselves so hard to sway.

Also just because a team is capable of more if their roles were to change doesn't negate their actual output within said roles and adjusting to different situations. When the Heat came together that first year they suffered as well to put it together, Boston luckily had a little more depth though but still the stars had an adjustment coming together which can affect them statistically (not only KG, see Ray allen/Pierce statistically or Bosh/LBJ) . I have a feeling we just disagree about a lot of the context behind these situations).

I think the reason Dirk had more opportunities is because he had more talent around him and it really wasn't that close. I get that he also excelled individually sometimes statistically but he also didn't try to take on the load KG did despite everyone knowing/thinking he was the better offensive force. From 99-04 in KG's prime in MN his playoff usage was 28.6% on average with a mix of responsibilities and that is on top of being the best/most important defender as well. There were 2 times in his playoff career where Dirk reached higher usage than that, his title year and the year after. In those years he had PER 24.8, .199 WS/48, 3.2 BPM, 115 ortg and it included what everyone calls his elite playoff run where he had far more help than KG did over that span. So his numbers went from the best 3 year stretch of his career from an efficiency standpoint down when doing a bit more offensively (again with more help like Jkidd/Terry so it wasn't necessarily taking on more roles and also not as the main defender either yet still a drop off). He was getting older but this is the only time we can look at where he even tried to take on a bigger usage like KG had to his entire career here and includes what many call his best run. If his best run can have a slight drop off in efficiency with Kidd and that much help why wouldn't we expect the same from someone taking on different responsibilities like de facto pg or best defender with less talent to help him and take attention away?




Yeah but we're talking about an old *** J-Kidd,

Yup and to me its easier to find defenders than offensive guys.

True so they would need solid depth too for sure. The thing is I think you need both offense/defense around Dirk to an extent anyways. Probably do with both of them in fact. I really don't think either is much more difficult to build around honestly. KG with more defense like Chandler they could become an elite defensive unit with a couple more pieces who can help offensively they can rely on that defense more for example. Both players are flexible but it seems KG needs some kind of offensive help (either running team/scoring) while Dirk needs defensive help like a good anchor. I think in todays nba there is plenty of each to build around effectively.


I dont know about that, show me a playoff run in Dirk's history where his offensive efficiency fell off a cliff the way KG did in his most impressive run with Minny. You're talking about a player at his absolute apex seeing both his scoring rate AND his efficiency drop to levels well below league average and well beneath stars who have overachieved with their casts. Whereas Dirk was past his prime, actually raising his scoring average and only suffering a modest decline in offensive efficiency and a tremendous increase in his all-around game (again he upped his effort defensively come playoffs). This without even mentioning the soft teams KG got to play against, KG thoroughly let me down those playoffs. The closest we have for Dirk is that loss vs the Dubs when his coach drastically altered their style of play at the last minute, he was swarmed by midgets but even then he gobbled up the offensive boards to compensate. Its clear he was at fault despite his numbers but I wont say the efficiency drop is equally understandable.

In his most impressive run with us he had 7 games against Webber and 6 more without Cassel healthy out of an 18 games sample size so no Dirk never had to deal with that you are correct. Dirk in the 06 finals on top of lacking the defense to help stop Wade posted 23 ppg, 2.5 apg and his ortg was 109 which all in all is a huge drop off from his averages on the biggest stage (again this is without having that same level defense which his team really could have used). Following year as a one seed look at his numbers in that series as well like you mention. In fact the year before either in 05 his playoff stats were poor as well. Dirk may not have had as many drop offs in efficiency but again he pretty much had more talent around him his entire tenure with Dallas and when circumstances affect the individual for whatever reason (like you mention for Dirk but fail to see with KG it seems) they fall off a bit. Even without being asked to do the same things as KG like be the best defender and generally having more help he still had some series where his play dropped off a ton compared to normal and his team lost (notice how it happened the years without Kidd/Nash too, I think this is an important note). Again I think the context behind the stats is the most important and if you look into how teams played KG at times forcing it to others you can understand why a lesser offensive player trying to do much more than he should might drop in efficiency.


It wasn't even close to the same level tho and that matters alot. In fact, you could argue that there was zero drop off and only an increase in overall effectiveness. Like show me a single usage-efficiency skill curve method (Stay out of this Indy) that exonerates the disparity in their RS:PS efficiency, you cant.

Dirk did carry a heavy load and he was more prepared for it, which is why we dont see him drop off ala KG. Like the year you're talking about, 04 vs 11:

Per100P
KG RS: 33.2PTS/6.8AST (112 O-RTG/29.6 Usage) PER:29.4
KG PS: 29.9PTS/6.3AST (100 O-RTG/30.3 Usage) PER: 25.0

Dirk RS: 35.3PTS/4.0AST (118 O-RTG/28.2 Usage) PER:23.4
Dirk PS: 39.1PTS/3.6AST (115 O-RTG/32.0 Usage) PER:25.2

I would mention the WS difference but I didn't want to take the time to separate the O/D components. To me, its pretty sad when a players usage goes up and their PER goes down as the 2 are highly connected from what I understand. Usually just taking/making more shots at even a low rate of efficiency is enough to boost ones PER. So just at first glance you can see that Dirk elevated his game and the gap between the 2 only grows when you consider their comp (KG was inefficient vs the Kings/Nuggets so it wasn't just a facing LA thing).

The numbers used for the post season include 13/18 games against Webber or without a pg, you can understand how that might influence things right? If you are going to rely on the stats lets take a 10 year breakdown of their prime playoffs:

KG 99-08:23.9 PER, .172 ws/48, 6.4 BPM Per 100 possessions: 29.5 pts, 5.9 assists, 16.8 rebounds 106 ortg
Dirk 02-11: 25 PER, .207 ws/48, 4.8 BPM Per 100 possessions: 33.4 pts, 3.5 assists, 13.5 rebounds 119 ortg

Despite not being the same level offensive player or having talent around him to help his efficiency like Dirk and lastly the extra responsibilities he had defensively his usage was just above Dirk over that span. Given what we have seen in Dirk's numbers when he was missing a pg like Nash/Kidd or tried to take higher usage to me that difference in ORTG is pretty easily explained. KG did more than he should be doing offensively given his talents and defensive responsibility and in turn his efficiency dropped off. To me that is an obvious outcome given his situation and it just seems like something you are trying to side step while making excuses for Dirk when it happened to him (as if KG didn't have random crap happening or major attention on him with his usual casts here).



To answer your question, because +/- thrives on sample size and the playoffs can leave you with all sorts of cooky results from what little I see of it. Like I havent ever taken the time to review playoff trends outside my favorite players and its almost impossible to google search for playoff only +/- analysis, as most (team+analysts alike) use the RS data to influence their odds/gameplan. Put it this way, you know how easily you dismissed the Mavs going 1-7 or whatever it was when Dirk sat due to small sample sizes, now imagine you hyping up microscopically smaller sample set. Not very telling is it? I'll look into the 2 eventually in terms of +/- analysis if I can find anyone who has done the work on it. I can undestand most numbers but definitely not equipped to answer that Q, tho there may be great meaning in there somewhere.

What? I am talking about their entire playoff careers so over 5000 minutes of data for each. I think your example is the microscopic one in comparison (in the RS no less). KG at +13 and Dirk at +4 is a huge huge gap over their careers and while it still isn't an extremely large sample it is more than pretty much everything else we have talked about in individual years or series etc.

To me it points against what you keep saying about Dirk being this huge influence while Kg is not as much since only one of them actually had their teams falling of bad when they weren't on the court in the playoffs. Would love to see what you find if anything useful on the subject.




True but given the lack of help, I just wish he was more impressive in defeat. Like I never expected Tmac's teams to get out of R.1 but I was WAY more impressed with the way he raised his 2-way ability, and this with him dealing with injuries on occasion. Tmac pushed Dirk to 7 games despite have FAR less talent, missing his 2 primary PF's and defending Dirk for large chunks. Like if I had seen that kind of valiant effort in defeat, I wouldn't be so down on KG in a comp vs Dirk.

Still, that series is a reminder of how much of a team game this is. Its also a reminder of +/- analysis being noteworthy in short samples if you know what you're looking at, as this was the series where Dan Rosenbaum made his name. Not that it was all him but it helped the decision making process when his +/- numbers suggested it was best to attack Yao with small ball. IIRC, its why if you look at that series you will see Yao posting HUGE individual numbers but the team struggling while he was out there, its because the Rockets feared putting him on Dirk and risked him on Josh Howard, who just had his way with him. Deke was often a better alternative because the Mavs couldn't exploit him defensively.

I do get what you are saying here but to me given how his teams won when he did have talent I think it helps negate some of the concern when his much lesser ones lost. KG has to be one of the most difficult to rank given how few opportunities he really had but imo he made the most of them in 04/08 from a team perspective, only losing once injuries took away a player. Given that I think KG was great but not elite as an offensive player it just seems easier for me to understand why such a high volume of responsibility would hurt his efficiency. He wasn't as efficient as Dirk in the first place but even with far less help around him and the extra responsibility those 10 year playoff numbers aren't much worse in the end (main difference being that efficiency).




The contextual argument works both ways, as his circumstances dont exonerate such a glaring drop IMO, to me that unfortunate circumstance was being his teams primary option, where Dirk would raise his game KG would shrivel. KG was at his best as the best outlet option in the league more than being the fulcrum of an offense. Purely statistically, that title run was his best playoff run ever (scored more and on higher efficiency than his MVP year) and even in those friendliest of circumstances he doesn't hold a candle to Dirk.

His first year on a newly built team with other volume players, that context matters as we have seen it affect others statistically as well. If you can see that his stats jumped up even despite that factor just because he actually had talent you have to understand how much poor teams in Minny likely held him down at his peak right? We totally agree he wasn't supposed to be the type to be the primary option carrying scrubs, yet that is what he had to do too often. Of course that will have a negative affect on his stats/efficiency both due to role he has to play and lack of attention needing to go elsewhere. Despite all of this those playoff numbers weren't drastically different so if they switched spot I can only imagine what KG could put up in offenses like Dallas has had over the years with some talent and pg's.



I dont know what numbers you're looking at, nor how you're accounting for any sort of disparity. I didn't agree with your claim that his efficiency dropped his title year when the usage-efficiency tradeoff was well in line with what we would expect from a player in the RS, that this happened in the playoffs only makes it more impressive. You keep bringing up talent but I've seen Dirk without the requisite talent to win, he didn't fall off a cliff ala KG(relatively speaking of course).

Well that's kinda my point, his usage raised and his efficiency dropped as should be expected. Despite still having great talent, a pg and not being the defensive anchor when Dirk did a little more offensively we saw a bit of a fall.

Include those other factors for a lesser offensive player and it seems obvious his would be hampered even more so. I am bringing up talent because 2/3 years without Kidd/Nash Dirk had an ortg of 111/109, a PER below 21, ws/48 below .13, BPM below 2.2 and pts per 100 possessions below 30 (aka KG level in Minny or worse in terms of production). This is smaller sample sizes but these are years with Terry/Howard/Stackhouse still yet in 2/3 years without those guys his numbers actually did drop off pretty big. He did mix in one great run where he eventually fell off in the finals but it isn't like the Wolves didn't have 04 mixed in with the poor years either.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 05:24 PM
Made it that far Chronz but not sure when I can get to the rest, wanted to at least put it out there since it's done though. I do plan on finishing my response to the rest but it might not come till tomorrow, will see how today ends up going...

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 05:27 PM
I know, it kinda goes without saying when it comes to you Minny fans.

Lol you mess with KG, Shaq, Lebron and you will hear from me most likely. Also like Stockton and Westbrook a little more than others too probably. Can't wait until Towns starts making some noise so I can talk him up too haha.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 07:23 PM
Thats true but it can also work against him, when you're consistently that good, you're bound to have a misfire eventually. Like KAJ lost in R1 while getting his *** locked down by an inferior team, he made up for that in other years. Same applies for Dirk IMO, he won more impressively, had a more impressive runs in defeat. Not gonna give the guy whos missing the playoffs extra credit when quite frankly, he wasn't that impressive in defeat anyways.

I also think he had more opportunities in part because he was easier to build with and the kind of player who raised his game come playoffs far more than someone like KG ever could. He was better at making players better. But yes, he had moments where his team carried him that KG was never afforded, which is why I downplay those seasons, maybe even below years where KG missed the playoffs. We should do a run down of their best seasons and rank them in order.

I don't only judge by playoffs either though and given what I saw from Dirk 2/3 years without a pg (yet still imo more talent than most Minny teams) I just feel that when you look at the situations it is clear why his numbers might be propped up in comparison and how he had many more opportunities to shine like you mention due to that. Dirk has had multiple RS worse than 06 KG from a statistical standpoint but never missed the playoffs so I don't think that should necessarily be an extra credit thing just realizing how poor his casts actually were. His teams didn't fall off very much when he was off the court in the playoffs over his career. I dunno we are probably at the point of circles here where we just see things differently.


To me KG was a better individual player due to his all around game and imo the regular season numbers back that up. When we look at the context behind the playoffs and knowing how defenses clamp down especially when you are forced to do more/play out of your role etc it just makes sense to me that his numbers would fall off a bit in comparison with no one to take that attention away or run the team in the same way as nash/Kidd with surrounding talent too (again they are still solid numbers just Dirk moves from a bit behind to ahead from RS to post season in those prime years I mentioned).


Yeah, I feel Dirk is such a threat without the ball that he maximizes the touches everyone else gets, that a wider range of players see their efficiency improve next to him than they would with KG. Without knowing what you meant I dont know how to elaborate, other than to simply say I feel Dirk accomplished more with less, he won his title more impressively, had more impressive playoff runs. Its easy for fans to say KG never underachieved when hes missing the playoffs entirely or getting ousted in R.1 but thats not to say another player couldn't have accomplished more.

I know what you mean about Dirk but I also think KG was a better handler/passer to also get others involved outside of just spacing (he could still take players out some just obviously not like Dirk).

Once you delve into how Dirk played without Nash/Kidd and consider how overextending a lesser offensive player hurts efficiency and how much more KG was already doing on defense etc I just feel like you can easily see how KG was at such a disadvantage in comparison to Dirk to be efficient.


To answer you, they're definitely not winning outside those years but that doesn't exonerate his performances entirely, and yeah Dirk had that 1 year where his coach failed him and it was a giant black spot in his career but he more than made up for that in his title run and again, in a comparison vs KG, its not that grievous an error when the guy is missing the playoffs entirely. Its hard to say KG had a better year for example just because Dirk was upset but its a definite argument.
Maybe KG wins that series because when the team goes small, hes a better C. I personally think the Mavs win that series if they just continue playing their game instead of altering their gameplan for a far inferior team. AJ had the single biggest coaching blunder of his era when he wanted to slow down the attack whilst playing small, its like why the **** are you trying to match up with them? And if you go small why not run, GS had a good defensive unit in the half court, where they sucked ALL year was in transition and IIRC on the boards. You took away 2 of your strengths and neglected to expose their weaknesses all because you wanted to outsmart your rival. He gave the Dubs extra motivation when he tanked a late season game vs them and played his starters vs the Clips (their closest rival with Minny not too far behind IIRC). I blame Dirk because thats what you have to do when such an upset happens and your star isnt exactly shining bright, but that was easily the most damage I've ever seen a coach do and I'd be surprised if he ever landed such a great gig ever again.

To me this is what happens when you have less talent, injuries, poor coaching, tough situations etc. and it is something KG dealt with nearly every year here in MN. For Dirk he still had talent on that team imo yet his failure isn't only due to him there were other reasons and his numbers fell off.

I totally agree with you that there are multiple factors outside of Dirk for why that upset happened, just like there are multiple reasons KG suffered during his time here with lesser talent. The thing is Dirk also had many years where these things or lack of talent weren't happening and KG basically had 1. I won't fault KG alone for that just like I don't with Dirk but you gotta acknowledge it for both players imo.




I personally think KG fails to make it beyond the Spurs that year much less push the champs to 6. I've never seen KG obliterate such a powerhouse the way Dirk abused those Spurs. If not for Dirk, Duncan prolly has a 3-peat in there. And Wade went off in large part because the gameplan was to stop Shaq by any means necessary and to me, he didn't blow it that year, if anything he overachieved. I look at his cast and I dont see how that team was that good, Wade had more playoff talent alongside him IMO. Josh Howard was good but he was basically the West version of Mo Williams in that even playing on the team with the best record didn't get him an All-Star nomination, it took an injury for him to make the cut. I've always felt the least talented 60+ win teams were Brons early Cavs teams and Dirks peak Mavs teams.

It is hypothetical but I will say in like 01 I think it was KG put up 21/4 with 120 ortg (while not letting Duncan go off like he did against Dallas) so he has gone off to an extent vs. the spurs and Duncan before. I would agree that Wade had a bit more on his team but still that unit was better than most teams we had here in Minny and that is the key in this comparison.

I am not sure blowing it is the right term at all for Dirk's year since he was great until the finals but he definitely dropped off there. Shaq kept the defensive center I think Dampier/Diop from helping at all and it left Wade wide open lanes, I truly think KG would have been a factor moreso than Dirk that series but again hypothetical.



That he even went to a game 7 vs an imploding Kings team whilst struggling to the tune of 22.5 PPG on a woefully inept sub 100 O-RTG (97) isn't something to be boastful about. Its like you damn well better finally show up big.

I agree he hadn't played his best up to that point but he did come through when needed late in game 7 which goes against the narrative. He stepped up when it mattered most despite it being an overall down series.


Its what makes me question it for sure, I just see no evidence that an all-around game is more conducive to winning over a dominant offensive player who happens to shrink the defensive gap come playoffs while simultaneously seeing an increase in the offensive gap. Like can you think of a friendlier circumstance than his first year in Boston because to me, very few had such a cushion for winning than he did in Boston and he still almost blew it.

I think an all around player who is far better defensively while somewhat close offensively can be better especially when talking big men. I think KG had major impact on both ends while Dirk had it on one and while there was a gap offensively it was mostly due to efficiency which we saw him struggle with at times without Nash/Kidd or with higher usage like KG had to deal with every single year (I mean still would be better than KG but it extends the gap you see in playoff numbers for their prime).

Miami in 2011 had a major cushion according to everyone right? Same idea of 3 stars coming together and it failing yet the 2008 Celtics with KG as the best player still won. I think people overrate the idea of individual players and underrate the concept of a good team.



Already addressed the +/- quip, such small samples require more than just raw output, otherwise you shouldn't ignore the far greater sample of the Mavs falling apart when Dirk missed games his title year whereas the Cetlics had proven capable of withstanding the loss of KG and the departure of key reserves (Like James Posey for example) to a much higher degree the following year. Like I dont care what minuscule numbers you point to, those Mavs without Dirk aren't coming close to matching the success of the Celtics without KG. Those Celtics were soo stacked that many suggested KG lost his MVP chances when they saw the team do just fine without him and nobody was surprised to see them continue winning games/playoff series once he was gone. The room for error was much smaller for Dirk to win his title and he stepped up in kind, whereas KG was carried abit more IMO. Like I highly doubt Jet does what he did without Dirk around, you can point to 1v1 stuff but that ignores whatever effect the gravity Dirk provides for his teammates to go 1v1. Its an intangibles argument I know, but Ill see what the +/- analysis digs up throughout their tenure together.

In this case it fits since it is one run, but I will point out they also fell of when Chandler was injured. Again though we are talking one post season run which is a small sample as you pointed out. Players can play above their level in small samples and imo that happened with Terry/Dallas. I get that Boston had the talent but Dallas had continuity/vets who hadn't won yet as well so it isn't drastically different imo. If we use the stats to show how each players individual support actually played in that run like you have for KG vs. Dirk Dallas looks just fine via comparison like I pointed out with Terry/Allen. I agree there are other factors at play though (just like I feel the same way with KG and his situations), I just disagree it was all to do with Dirk.


Let me just put it this way, would you really want Jet over Ray Allen? Who do you think commands more attention and would Jet have the ability to defend the best players the way Ray did? I think if Ray were in his spot, hes even more productive than Jason Terry and the Celtics get worse, tasking KG/Pierce with even more responsibilities, the kind of responsibilities that KG shut down when he refused to sign off on a trade to Boston. It was only until they landed Ray that he was OK with it.

I would take Ray Allen overall but I think Kidd/Terry/Marion/Chandler/Barea stepped up their game along with Dirk leading to the title, it wasn't just his gravity all of a sudden making them click out of no where. In the finals for example it was the defense and Terry stepping up more than Dirk stepping up imo for why they won.

[QUOTE=Chronz;31202190]Enough offense? Well put it this way, either Kidd cuts down on some of KG's touches (Assists go down for sure) or KG takes the ball away from Kidd while providing less spacing/room to work with, essentially diminishing what Kidd brings to the table. Keep in mind this was an old Kidd whom at his peak was never a great offensive player to begin with.

Jet is interesting because he was a combo guard who could play multiple roles. With KG capable of handling the playmaking, Jason could conceivably thrive more but again, you made a big deal about his 1v1 capabilities and that gets cut into by the inferior shooter and more ball dominant big. Its hard to imagine anyone getting more out of Jason Terry than Dirk did, the guy shot up to 120 ORTG simply by joining Dirk's team and his assists increased as well. That his efficiency dwindled as he saw more bench time and less time alongside Dirk was no coincidence, I only have the numbers from as early as 2008 which just so happened to coincide with a season when the Mavs began experimenting with him as a 6th man and the splits dont show anything outside the team being better as a result of it, which was why they started it in the first place. He himself was basically the same, increase usage and correlating efficiency loss but much of that was due to still playing heavy minutes alongside Dirk. If we look at his numbers without Dirk, his TS% reverts right back to where it was in Atlanta. I'll look into their entire tenure together but it was neat to see his TS% at 53.8 without Dirk that one year I looked into and then see that his final 4 years in Atlanta spat out 53.7, final 3 years were at 53.9, final 2 at 53.4 with his final year being at 51.9.

Also, the defensive gap shrinks in the playoffs and offensive gap increases.

For Terry didn't he drop his usage some and was coming into his prime/peak early for Dallas? That could play a part in it as well. Just looked it up and he was 18/6 average in ATL after rookie year and that first year in dallas 12/5 in 8 less minutes. To me maturing as a player and having your usage cut down and responsibility lessened could also result in that upgrade in efficiency yet lower volume (I feel like I have been trying to point that out throughout lol).

Not that I don't think Dirk wouldn't help players but it is worth pointing out there were also obvious reasons for a bump in efficiency there but I agree Dirk also plays a part. Like Cassel at 34 had his highest ws/48, BPM (as well as just ws/vorp) along with his 2nd highest PER for his career next to KG. I get that star players can help others just also think there are other reasons for the boost with Terry too.

I dunno with the hypotheticals though they are so tough. I mostly just think KG needs someone to help with the offensive pressure next to him even if it is just in the sense of setting the plays up and getting it to others in the right spot. Sure his assist numbers might go down but he in turn should have some easier baskets and more energy to exert with less responsibility as well.

kdspurman
09-29-2016, 07:48 PM
They aren't that similar, KG was well below league average in per possession efficiency, to get Duncan to play well beneath his established norms for an entire playoff series, you required the Wallace Bro+McDyess in an NBA Finals type of setting. KG struggled vs the likes of the broken down Webber led Kings and wasn't exactly torching the lowly Nuggets. Duncan eviscerates the likes of them with ease.

Yea that was the toughest comp I've ever seen against TD defensively. TD said Sheed was the toughest guy to go up against iirc in an interview years ago.



All true. KG does win a ring with you guys but I dont think he wins in 99, definitely doesn't win in 03 (where does Duncan go?) and the rest are debatable. All esle being equal, a low post presence that sucks in defenses and capable/willing to play Center was far more valuable than KG.

Its not like he was anchoring defenses the way Duncan was, it took the rule changes allowing zones for his box-1 abilities to truly showcase his talent and then the greatest defensive innovator for a coach to play him on the strongside for him to reach his peak defensively. Which may not be a relevant complaint considering thats what did happen but I think its easier to build a dominant defense with Duncan than with KG. Yes defense is more important for bigmen, but what does that say when the bigman in question is able to play the bigger positions? For that reason I found KG's defense to be slightly overrated, Duncan was without a doubt better on that end and he has zero DPOY's to KG's 1.


I'd also argue he definitely doesn't in 05/14 either. I just don't think he would've had the right personality fit needed to fit in that 14 team that fit like a glove. Also, rim protection was essential. And in 05, I just don't think his game would've translated as well against that front line. As you said, a low post presence/willingness to play the 5 was valuable, and TD did both in that series.

I agree w/you regarding their defense too. As much as people like to compare the 2, they really played quite differently on both ends. TD early on could take you off the dribble and drive by you, square you up with the bank shot all similar things KG did sans the bank shot. But TD had the ability to take you in the post and punish you, had the mini hook, great footwork, etc... He commanded double teams

Loved this quote from Nazr Mohammed


When I was with the Spurs, the big men had this drill we would do after practice called “Follow the Leader.” How it worked was basically one guy would be the leader and perform a post-move on the block, and then the rest of the guys would try to do the same move — same number of dribbles, same footwork, same everything. Tim usually led the drill, and watching him perform it showed you why he was such a special player. We’d do this drill for 15 or 20 minutes, and Tim would never do the same move twice.

When you were guarding him, he had a move, and a counter, and another counter, and then about 50 other counters just in case the first three moves didn’t work out. And you could always tell that he had scouted you because he’d devise a unique way to attack you based on what you did to slow him down the last time you played. Tim is the perfect example of what happens when you combine skill, talent and work ethic.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 08:19 PM
The reason why I bring up Billups and Sczerbiak is because people make it seem like all kg needed was people to help him score and then kg's all around game would take care of every other flaw the team had. They make it seem like it's as simple as that. With kg you needed guys who could score and more importantly a guy you can count on to close the game. Sure Dirk had Nash and Finley during those days but it doesn't take away from the fact that kg had two guys go off for 20+. It came down to superstar vs superstar and Dirk elevated his game where as kg put up great numbers but in the closing moments would usually disappear and was even called out by his coach.

Our superstar was guarding the pg because of his penetration and that context is huge. When you are taking the biggest defensive attention (like KG and Nash were for much of that series) it makes it easier on others. Dirk had his huge game when KG was almost never on him because Flip was trying different ways to stop the penetration from the guards. The stuff you mention doesn't really matter if the games aren't close in the first place because one clearly has more talent around him, people make too much of late shots imo. A good team is what can help set up efficient looks better than just relying on 1v1 anyways.

KG needed help in any way he could get it on those minnesota teams and a couple of guys scoring in volume while getting killed on the other end (to the point of KG taking over their responsibilities) isn't that drastic imo. I get what you mean in that if you just add one scorer or something that isn't enough but that is true of every star basically. I think both of these two pf's can be built around in multiple ways in the end but you likely start with helping ease the offensive load for KG and get an anchor for Dirk.




Dirk had a well balanced team but take Dirk off that team and what are they? A first round exit if they even make the playoffs? Dirk's on court presence helped that group a bunch by spacing the floor, clearing the lanes, and giving them more one on one opportunities because the defense was so keen in on trying to stop Dirk. Chandler was an after thought until he came to Dallas and cp3 and melo had him as well and still couldn't get to at least a conf finals.

Being a first round exit without your superstar is actually a pretty good cast imo especially in this case when it is a veteran unit built for that guy (as opposed to star power carrying the team which is better for missing a top guy imo). I agree Dirk was the key and biggest factor no doubt. However Kidd/Terry/Marion/Chandler/Barea all together playing at high levels is also what helped push them over the edge and you are just naming names with no context for the rest. What Dirk did individually and that unit did as a whole was definitely impressive but just throwing one piece like Chandler onto a lesser team and saying look they didn't go anywhere doesn't mean much imo (in the knicks case wasn't Chandler part of what got them into the 2nd round and the CP3 teams miss the playoffs without him?).

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 08:42 PM
Our superstar was guarding the pg because of his penetration and that context is huge. When you are taking the biggest defensive attention (like KG and Nash were for much of that series) it makes it easier on others. Dirk had his huge game when KG was almost never on him because Flip was trying different ways to stop the penetration from the guards. The stuff you mention doesn't really matter if the games aren't close in the first place because one clearly has more talent around him, people make too much of late shots imo. A good team is what can help set up efficient looks better than just relying on 1v1 anyways.

KG needed help in any way he could get it on those minnesota teams and a couple of guys scoring in volume while getting killed on the other end (to the point of KG taking over their responsibilities) isn't that drastic imo. I get what you mean in that if you just add one scorer or something that isn't enough but that is true of every star basically. I think both of these two pf's can be built around in multiple ways in the end but you likely start with helping ease the offensive load for KG and get an anchor for Dirk.




Being a first round exit without your superstar is actually a pretty good cast imo especially in this case when it is a veteran unit built for that guy (as opposed to star power carrying the team which is better for missing a top guy imo). I agree Dirk was the key and biggest factor no doubt. However Kidd/Terry/Marion/Chandler/Barea all together playing at high levels is also what helped push them over the edge and you are just naming names with no context for the rest. What Dirk did individually and that unit did as a whole was definitely impressive but just throwing one piece like Chandler onto a lesser team and saying look they didn't go anywhere doesn't mean much imo (in the knicks case wasn't Chandler part of what got them into the 2nd round and the CP3 teams miss the playoffs without him?).

So what does that tell you about kg then? He needs more than just scorers to help take him to the next level. He needs help defensively as well. The point about chandler is that yes he played a big part but he was on other teams with superstars as well and they didn't have as much success why? Because at the end of the day it was Dirk. I remember in the 11 playoffs OKC badly out rebounded the mavs and it was Dirk who brought them back to force OT and ultimately Kidd hit a 3 to seal to deal. How is Garnett not taking over not drastic? In game 1 Billups chipped in 25 & 9 and the wolves lost 101-94 while kg was awful that game. You can blame Garnett's supporting cast to a certain degree but it wasn't always the cast playing poor. The wolves had there chances and there superstar KG just didn't close the game for them.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 08:52 PM
So what does that tell you about kg then? He needs more than just scorers to help take him to the next level. He needs help defensively as well. The point about chandler is that yes he played a big part but he was on other teams with superstars as well and they didn't have as much success why? Because at the end of the day it was Dirk. I remember in the 11 playoffs OKC badly out rebounded the mavs and it was Dirk who brought them back to force OT and ultimately Kidd hit a 3 to seal to deal. How is Garnett not taking over not drastic? In game 1 Billups chipped in 25 & 9 and the wolves lost 101-94 while kg was awful that game by his standards. You can blame Garnett's supporting cast to a certain degree but it wasn't always the cast playing poor. The wolves had there chances and there superstar KG just didn't close the game for them.

At the end of the day it was Dirk/Terry/Kidd/Chandler/Barea/Carlisle etc. Again taking one piece and putting him on lesser units then saying look he didn't win means nothing. In fact since those teams made it furthest with him it actually helps show his impact to an extent imo if anything.

That happens to all superstars in their careers though and choosing one game when his team is clearly outmatched talent wise is not going to sway either way (at least Billups was playing off the attention given to KG). I agree KG had games where he didn't step up but it is far easier to excel when your PG is taking the defensive attention and you get to work on mismatches without worrying about creating/defense. context matters. I can point to an entire series in 07 for Dirk playing down below normal level. We can go back and forth on that all day but point being using a game here and there is useless in the scheme of an entire career.

Chronz
09-29-2016, 08:53 PM
Can I just say that I appreciate the actual debate here. I just got done with a youtube debate and while the populace is large in numbers its short on intellectualism, Ill take the minor few here over the insane numbers on lesser forums. Then again, I miss the kobephiles among others. Can we bring them back?

Chronz
09-29-2016, 08:58 PM
Yea that was the toughest comp I've ever seen against TD defensively. TD said Sheed was the toughest guy to go up against iirc in an interview years ago.


Yeah, one of my older buddies recognized that back in the day and I didn't believe him. Sheed was the best on Dwight too from what I remember. Whats cool is how the Pistons were prepped for ANY kind of big man star. Ben/Elden were better vs Shaq than Sheed was but the story changed vs Duncan. If anything, Ben was like the 3rd most effective defender vs Duncan that series. McDyess did a better job IMO but part of that had to do with Ben's help defense being more relevant vs Duncan.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 09:43 PM
At the end of the day it was Dirk/Terry/Kidd/Chandler/Barea/Carlisle etc. Again taking one piece and putting him on lesser units then saying look he didn't win means nothing. In fact since those teams made it furthest with him it actually helps show his impact to an extent imo if anything.

That happens to all superstars in their careers though and choosing one game when his team is clearly outmatched talent wise is not going to sway either way (at least Billups was playing off the attention given to KG). I agree KG had games where he didn't step up but it is far easier to excel when your PG is taking the defensive attention and you get to work on mismatches without worrying about creating/defense. context matters. I can point to an entire series in 07 for Dirk playing down below normal level. We can go back and forth on that all day but point being using a game here and there is useless in the scheme of an entire career.

Yes chandler made an impact but people act like chandler was the Main reason the mavs won. He played his role great. I mean Dirk did take Erick Dampier and desagana Diop to the finals.
And it Further proving my point that to build around Garnett you need more than just a couple of guys who can score. Kg's also had an entire series where he's struggled as well and Dirks had more bright spots in the clutch more so than KG. Just look at there elimination game numbers.
Garnett-18.5ppg 46.2%fg 12.5rpg 4.2apg 1.3spg 1.2bpg
Nowitzki-28.4ppg 48.4%fg 10.9rpg 2.8apg 1.0spg 1.2bpg
Even a few years ago Against the rockets in the playoffs Dirk still averaged 21 & 10 being 35-36.

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 09:52 PM
At the end of the day it was Dirk/Terry/Kidd/Chandler/Barea/Carlisle etc. Again taking one piece and putting him on lesser units then saying look he didn't win means nothing. In fact since those teams made it furthest with him it actually helps show his impact to an extent imo if anything.

That happens to all superstars in their careers though and choosing one game when his team is clearly outmatched talent wise is not going to sway either way (at least Billups was playing off the attention given to KG). I agree KG had games where he didn't step up but it is far easier to excel when your PG is taking the defensive attention and you get to work on mismatches without worrying about creating/defense. context matters. I can point to an entire series in 07 for Dirk playing down below normal level. We can go back and forth on that all day but point being using a game here and there is useless in the scheme of an entire career.

Yes chandler made an impact but people act like chandler was the Main reason the mavs won. He played his role great. I mean Dirk did take Erick Dampier and desagana Diop to the finals.
And it Further proving my point that to build around Garnett you need more than just a couple of guys who can score. Kg's also had an entire series where he's struggled as well and Dirks had more bright spots in the clutch more so than KG. Just look at there elimination game numbers.
Garnett-18.5ppg 46.2%fg 12.5rpg 4.2apg 1.3spg 1.2bpg
Nowitzki-28.4ppg 48.4%fg 10.9rpg 2.8apg 1.0spg 1.2bpg
Even a few years ago Against the rockets in the playoffs Dirk still averaged 21 & 10 being 35-36.
What is this about chandler? I have literally never heard that.

That team also had Howard, terry, stack house right? You just keep picking and choosing small pieces that seem irrelevant to an actual discussion between the two. You can't just ignore the rest of the team or single out a game as if those are going to make an actual point in the context of an entire career.

The elimination game thing holds some weight though, I hadn't seen those numbers but I wouldn't question that. I would point out though that it's possible some elimination games for kg might have been more of a lost cause (like that series vs mavs when flip started playing around with many looks to try anything that might work) while when he had a team capable like 04 he stepped up big in that one. Still though those numbers are really impressive for dirk.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 10:11 PM
What is this about chandler? I have literally never heard that.

That team also had Howard, terry, stack house right? You just keep picking and choosing small pieces that seem irrelevant to an actual discussion between the two. You can't just ignore the rest of the team or single out a game as if those are going to make an actual point in the context of an entire career.

The elimination game thing holds some weight though, I hadn't seen those numbers but I wouldn't question that. I would point out though that it's possible some elimination games for kg might have been more of a lost cause (like that series vs mavs when flip started playing around with many looks to try anything that might work) while when he had a team capable like 04 he stepped up big in that one. Still though those numbers are really impressive for dirk.

I'm not ignoring What any of those other players brought to the team but again none of them were stars like how many people think of Dirks cast when they're talked about. Yes Dirk's had more help than Kg when he was in minny but it wasn't a huge gap by any means especially once Nash and Finley left and Dirk officially became the franchise player so you can't always use the supporting cast as an excuse for kg

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 10:19 PM
What is this about chandler? I have literally never heard that.

That team also had Howard, terry, stack house right? You just keep picking and choosing small pieces that seem irrelevant to an actual discussion between the two. You can't just ignore the rest of the team or single out a game as if those are going to make an actual point in the context of an entire career.

The elimination game thing holds some weight though, I hadn't seen those numbers but I wouldn't question that. I would point out though that it's possible some elimination games for kg might have been more of a lost cause (like that series vs mavs when flip started playing around with many looks to try anything that might work) while when he had a team capable like 04 he stepped up big in that one. Still though those numbers are really impressive for dirk.

I'm not ignoring What any of those other players brought to the team but again none of them were stars like how many people think of Dirks cast when they're talked about. Yes Dirk's had more help than Kg when he was in minny but it wasn't a huge gap by any means especially once Nash and Finley left and Dirk officially became the franchise player so you can't always use the supporting cast as an excuse for kg

I don't think people assume those teams are star studded but look at 05 and 07 without Nash/Kidd. The way his numbers fell off is what I am pointin out with kg. dirk had two very poor years below most of kgs and one better one in that finals run (despite having a poor finals). The way his production fell off even with just a little more help than kg in those other two years is all I am really saying about the talent difference. Lacking it can certainly hurt a players individual efficiency

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 10:32 PM
I don't think people assume those teams are star studded but look at 05 and 07 without Nash/Kidd. The way his numbers fell off is what I am pointin out with kg. dirk had two very poor years below most of kgs and one better one in that finals run (despite having a poor finals). The way his production fell off even with just a little more help than kg in those other two years is all I am really saying about the talent difference. Lacking it can certainly hurt a players individual efficiency

Are you talking about the same 05 in which he averaged 26.1ppg in the regular season?

mngopher35
09-29-2016, 10:46 PM
I don't think people assume those teams are star studded but look at 05 and 07 without Nash/Kidd. The way his numbers fell off is what I am pointin out with kg. dirk had two very poor years below most of kgs and one better one in that finals run (despite having a poor finals). The way his production fell off even with just a little more help than kg in those other two years is all I am really saying about the talent difference. Lacking it can certainly hurt a players individual efficiency

Are you talking about the same 05 in which he averaged 26.1ppg in the regular season?

I dunno probably, we are talking playoff production though.

YAALREADYKNO
09-29-2016, 11:10 PM
I dunno probably, we are talking playoff production though.

His playoff production was still at over 23ppg lol

ewing
09-29-2016, 11:12 PM
this thread is silly

flea
09-29-2016, 11:19 PM
This is a good thread.

Chronz
09-30-2016, 01:03 PM
this thread is silly
It's like debating DRob vs Chuck to me.

KnicksorBust
09-30-2016, 02:31 PM
He said he was surprised people were taking Dirk given the context of the question (which was starting from scratch who would you take), then said KG is the modern C as if his abilities being more applicable or valuable in today's era gives him a leg up on Dirk in the context of the question.

But it wouldn't, because Dirk would be dynamite in this era too. It's not like the question was "which player would make a better modern C"

But the point is that the game is changing and peak KG playing C is superman. He's the absolute perfect C to stretch the floor and defend pick and rolls. He allows you to play your fastest most athletic lineups and have 5 shooters on the floor at all times.

With these all these modern superstar SFs like LeBron, Durant, Kawhi, Paul George, etc. logging minutes at the PF position, KG gives you the versatility to have the Warriors "death lineup" with him at Center. With Dirk you still need a traditional Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bogut big man to protect the rim. With KG not only do you get rim protection but you get a center that can handle switching to a guard on a pick and roll (!) and a center that can shoot so offensively your completely spaced out at all times for slashers and attacking the rim. No doubt Dirk is still valuable in any era and I saw your post claiming he would shoot more 3's. I'm not going to argue that. But it's KG's versatility at his peak that would make him the perfect center for the modern game.


I wish I were an NBA insider, I've seen people mention the stretch 4 era is pretty much over and that we're now in the small ball 4 era. Where simply having spacing from the position isn't enough, you want to find the guy who can stretch and put it on the floor. Luckily Dirk was that guy too, he was really fast back in his hey.

All of the best SFs play spend at least some minutes at the PF position and these lineups are not going away. I'd be curious to compare Dirk's production against traditional power forwards vs. small ball PFs and see which he has had more success against (normalizing for talent level).

Hawkeye15
09-30-2016, 02:36 PM
But the point is that the game is changing and peak KG playing C is superman. He's the absolute perfect C to stretch the floor and defend pick and rolls. He allows you to play your fastest most athletic lineups and have 5 shooters on the floor at all times.

With these all these modern superstar SFs like LeBron, Durant, Kawhi, Paul George, etc. logging minutes at the PF position, KG gives you the versatility to have the Warriors "death lineup" with him at Center. With Dirk you still need a traditional Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bogut big man to protect the rim. With KG not only do you get rim protection but you get a center that can handle switching to a guard on a pick and roll (!) and a center that can shoot so offensively your completely spaced out at all times for slashers and attacking the rim. No doubt Dirk is still valuable in any era and I saw your post claiming he would shoot more 3's. I'm not going to argue that. But it's KG's versatility at his peak that would make him the perfect center for the modern game.



I think Towns fits your description. Or will anyways. He can step out on guards, and get back to protect. Shoot with range, and put the ball on the floor.

KnicksorBust
09-30-2016, 02:39 PM
I think Towns fits your description. Or will anyways. He can step out on guards, and get back to protect. Shoot with range, and put the ball on the floor.

I agree. I think he is going to be the best center in the NBA this season. It's a shame Ricky Rubio is holding him back... ;)

Shammyguy3
09-30-2016, 03:18 PM
It's like debating DRob vs Chuck to me.

I was considering that as my next poll :laugh2: funny that you brought it up

valade16
09-30-2016, 03:54 PM
But the point is that the game is changing and peak KG playing C is superman. He's the absolute perfect C to stretch the floor and defend pick and rolls. He allows you to play your fastest most athletic lineups and have 5 shooters on the floor at all times.

With these all these modern superstar SFs like LeBron, Durant, Kawhi, Paul George, etc. logging minutes at the PF position, KG gives you the versatility to have the Warriors "death lineup" with him at Center. With Dirk you still need a traditional Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bogut big man to protect the rim. With KG not only do you get rim protection but you get a center that can handle switching to a guard on a pick and roll (!) and a center that can shoot so offensively your completely spaced out at all times for slashers and attacking the rim. No doubt Dirk is still valuable in any era and I saw your post claiming he would shoot more 3's. I'm not going to argue that. But it's KG's versatility at his peak that would make him the perfect center for the modern game.

All of the best SFs play spend at least some minutes at the PF position and these lineups are not going away. I'd be curious to compare Dirk's production against traditional power forwards vs. small ball PFs and see which he has had more success against (normalizing for talent level).

Was KG that great as a rim protector? I don't recall him ever being a dominant rim protector in the early 00's, he was very skinny.

Maybe he was, but I don't recall that at all.

Miltstar
09-30-2016, 04:11 PM
KG for sure, Dirk was a bit better offensively but defensively it's KG by a landslide

kdspurman
09-30-2016, 05:35 PM
Was KG that great as a rim protector? I don't recall him ever being a dominant rim protector in the early 00's, he was very skinny.

Maybe he was, but I don't recall that at all.

I had the same thought as you. Always a guy who could come out and guard you on the perimeter, and communicated like hell with teammates, but never really a rim protector imo.

Chronz
09-30-2016, 08:30 PM
Was KG that great as a rim protector? I don't recall him ever being a dominant rim protector in the early 00's, he was very skinny.

Maybe he was, but I don't recall that at all.
Not in the traditional sense but he prevented you from getting to your spots in the paint. If you had him beat you could cram it on him more than most rim protectors but good luck with that.

Still I'd rather have each at pf because it's their best position for the most part and it's not like the argument changes that much, Dirk spaces you out more and has a greater quickness advantage vs opposing centers. KG wasn't the best post defender, i recall games where posey would D up Bosh in his place and found it odd. Not bad just odd

Chronz
09-30-2016, 08:34 PM
KG for sure, Dirk was a bit better offensively but defensively it's KG by a landslide
Except in the playoffs where KGs offense shrank and Dirks defense elevated

Redrum187
09-30-2016, 10:40 PM
For the regular season, probably KG, but for the postseason, give me Mr. 25/10... I trust Dirk way more in the postseason than I do KG.

Chronz
10-01-2016, 12:02 AM
I was considering that as my next poll :laugh2: funny that you brought it up
That happens alot to me here. Its why i keep coming back.

Jeffy25
10-01-2016, 02:56 AM
I'm picking Garnett, but I am a big Dirk fan, and I think this is closer than a lot of posters feel.

ewing
10-01-2016, 07:51 AM
Was KG that great as a rim protector? I don't recall him ever being a dominant rim protector in the early 00's, he was very skinny.

Maybe he was, but I don't recall that at all.


No. He was a very good defender but a Bill Russell narrative has evolved around him b/c he was long and could step out on D. Valuable yes, but he wasn't Pat Ewing or Dennis Rodman, hell he wasn't as valuable a defender as Bowen or prime Artest.

YAALREADYKNO
10-01-2016, 10:13 AM
No. He was a very good defender but a Bill Russell narrative has evolved around him b/c he was long and could step out on D. Valuable yes, but he wasn't Pat Ewing or Dennis Rodman, hell he wasn't as valuable a defender as Bowen or prime Artest.

So what you're trying to say is his defense is overrated?

ewing
10-01-2016, 11:31 AM
So what you're trying to say is his defense is overrated?

On this forum it seems to be. He was an all d guy but not a all time defender



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Raps18-19 Champ
10-01-2016, 06:53 PM
Dirk. It wasn't that close before Dirk crushed him in longevity but now its a blow out.

Crushed in longevity how exactly?

KG played 18 years of productive basketball. Dirk has played 18 years in the NBA.

hugepatsfan
10-01-2016, 07:50 PM
Crushed in longevity how exactly?

KG played 18 years of productive basketball. Dirk has played 18 years in the NBA.

Garnett's "prime" I wouldn't say started until probably the 1999-2000 season. He had awesome years before that but I would say that's when he started playing at an all-time level. That ended when he hurt his knee his second year in Boston. He was productive after that but never the same. So really only half his career was
prime" years.

Dirk's all-time years were probably from like 2000-01 until 2013-14. So you're looking at I'd say an extra 5 or so years of all time play. Almost 150%. Dirk clearly has KG beat in longevity. I don't think there's really any good argument to made for him being better for those prime years. Not that it's a huge gap but it isn't even debatable that there is one really. But with that gap being as small as I think it is, a good argument to be made that Dirk's longevity is better to start a franchise from scratch with IMO.

ewing
10-01-2016, 09:44 PM
Crushed in longevity how exactly?

KG played 18 years of productive basketball. Dirk has played 18 years in the NBA.


Dirl was clearly better for longer. he guys is still putting up 18 a night and main cog on a playoff team.

IKnowHoops
10-04-2016, 01:56 AM
No. He was a very good defender but a Bill Russell narrative has evolved around him b/c he was long and could step out on D. Valuable yes, but he wasn't Pat Ewing or Dennis Rodman, hell he wasn't as valuable a defender as Bowen or prime Artest.

Artest and Bowen were good against 2nd and 3rd tier players but they still got lit up against the very best. KG has absolutely shut down a Prime Tmac, and I'm talking to the toon of like 5 points. "Ive never been guarded like that before" -Tmac after KG shut him down. Bowen and Artest are not on KG's defensively. They both have great energy and drive, but they didn't posses the physical tools to dominate like KG defensively.

ewing
10-04-2016, 02:43 AM
Artest and Bowen were good against 2nd and 3rd tier players but they still got lit up against the very best. KG has absolutely shut down a Prime Tmac, and I'm talking to the toon of like 5 points. "Ive never been guarded like that before" -Tmac after KG shut him down. Bowen and Artest are not on KG's defensively. They both have great energy and drive, but they didn't posses the physical tools to dominate like KG defensively.

you don't disappoint

kaufen
10-04-2016, 05:38 AM
I’d say Dirk since he consistently lead the Mavs further in the playoffs before finally winning a title. One reason why the Timberwolves had trouble was those monster contracts KG had. The Wolves couldn’t afford another big time player. Garnett definitely played at a level justifying a max deal but there comes a point when you have to choose between a title or money.

FlashBolt
10-04-2016, 05:44 PM
I’d say Dirk since he consistently lead the Mavs further in the playoffs before finally winning a title. One reason why the Timberwolves had trouble was those monster contracts KG had. The Wolves couldn’t afford another big time player. Garnett definitely played at a level justifying a max deal but there comes a point when you have to choose between a title or money.

I agree with this but that has nothing to do with who the better player was. Contracts aside (because Dirk did make a massive amount of money as well), I'd take KG. He just played basketball overall much better.

valade16
10-04-2016, 05:57 PM
Does KG's defense elevate a team to elite status? Because one could argue that Dirk by himself propelled a team to elite status offensively. No matter the supporting cast or the coach, Dirk's teams were elite offensively:

2000: 106.6 Ortg (7th)
2001: 107.1 Ortg (4th)
2002: 112.2 Ortg (1st)
2003: 110.7 Ortg (1st)
2004: 112.1 Ortg (1st)
2005: 110.3 Ortg (4th)
2006: 111.8 Ortg (1st)
2007: 111.3 Ortg (2nd)
2008: 111.1 Ortg (8th)
2009: 110.5 Ortg (5th)
2010: 109.2 Ortg (10th)
2011: 109.7 Ortg (8th)
2012: 103.3 Ortg (22nd)
2013: 105.9 Ortg (14th)
2014: 111.2 Ortg (3rd)
2015: 109.5 Ortg (5th)
2016: 106.7 Ortg (11th)

So the Mavericks since Nowitzki became a starter have finished Top 10 in Ortg every season except 3: 2012, 2013 and last season.

2012 and 2013 coincidentally happen to be the only seasons in which Dirk Nowitzki played less than 73 games. He played 62 in 2012 and 53 in 2013. The only other time was as a 37 year old.

That seems like a pretty strong indication that Dirk by himself is tremendously impactful on the offensive end, essentially capable of taking any roster so long as it's not filled with absolute trash offensively, and making it top 10 if not elite.

Does KG have that kind of impact on either side of the ball or does KG impact the game by making both sides good if not elite?

ewing
10-04-2016, 07:52 PM
Does KG's defense elevate a team to elite status? Because one could argue that Dirk by himself propelled a team to elite status offensively. No matter the supporting cast or the coach, Dirk's teams were elite offensively:

2000: 106.6 Ortg (7th)
2001: 107.1 Ortg (4th)
2002: 112.2 Ortg (1st)
2003: 110.7 Ortg (1st)
2004: 112.1 Ortg (1st)
2005: 110.3 Ortg (4th)
2006: 111.8 Ortg (1st)
2007: 111.3 Ortg (2nd)
2008: 111.1 Ortg (8th)
2009: 110.5 Ortg (5th)
2010: 109.2 Ortg (10th)
2011: 109.7 Ortg (8th)
2012: 103.3 Ortg (22nd)
2013: 105.9 Ortg (14th)
2014: 111.2 Ortg (3rd)
2015: 109.5 Ortg (5th)
2016: 106.7 Ortg (11th)

So the Mavericks since Nowitzki became a starter have finished Top 10 in Ortg every season except 3: 2012, 2013 and last season.

2012 and 2013 coincidentally happen to be the only seasons in which Dirk Nowitzki played less than 73 games. He played 62 in 2012 and 53 in 2013. The only other time was as a 37 year old.

That seems like a pretty strong indication that Dirk by himself is tremendously impactful on the offensive end, essentially capable of taking any roster so long as it's not filled with absolute trash offensively, and making it top 10 if not elite.

Does KG have that kind of impact on either side of the ball or does KG impact the game by making both sides good if not elite?


quality post Vlade.

Shammyguy3
10-04-2016, 08:00 PM
Does KG's defense elevate a team to elite status? Because one could argue that Dirk by himself propelled a team to elite status offensively. No matter the supporting cast or the coach, Dirk's teams were elite offensively:

2000: 106.6 Ortg (7th)
2001: 107.1 Ortg (4th)
2002: 112.2 Ortg (1st)
2003: 110.7 Ortg (1st)
2004: 112.1 Ortg (1st)
2005: 110.3 Ortg (4th)
2006: 111.8 Ortg (1st)
2007: 111.3 Ortg (2nd)
2008: 111.1 Ortg (8th)
2009: 110.5 Ortg (5th)
2010: 109.2 Ortg (10th)
2011: 109.7 Ortg (8th)
2012: 103.3 Ortg (22nd)
2013: 105.9 Ortg (14th)
2014: 111.2 Ortg (3rd)
2015: 109.5 Ortg (5th)
2016: 106.7 Ortg (11th)

So the Mavericks since Nowitzki became a starter have finished Top 10 in Ortg every season except 3: 2012, 2013 and last season.

2012 and 2013 coincidentally happen to be the only seasons in which Dirk Nowitzki played less than 73 games. He played 62 in 2012 and 53 in 2013. The only other time was as a 37 year old.

That seems like a pretty strong indication that Dirk by himself is tremendously impactful on the offensive end, essentially capable of taking any roster so long as it's not filled with absolute trash offensively, and making it top 10 if not elite.

Does KG have that kind of impact on either side of the ball or does KG impact the game by making both sides good if not elite?



Very good point. I'll have to look at that if somebody else doesn't post it before me

hugepatsfan
10-05-2016, 11:38 AM
Does KG's defense elevate a team to elite status? Because one could argue that Dirk by himself propelled a team to elite status offensively. No matter the supporting cast or the coach, Dirk's teams were elite offensively:

2000: 106.6 Ortg (7th)
2001: 107.1 Ortg (4th)
2002: 112.2 Ortg (1st)
2003: 110.7 Ortg (1st)
2004: 112.1 Ortg (1st)
2005: 110.3 Ortg (4th)
2006: 111.8 Ortg (1st)
2007: 111.3 Ortg (2nd)
2008: 111.1 Ortg (8th)
2009: 110.5 Ortg (5th)
2010: 109.2 Ortg (10th)
2011: 109.7 Ortg (8th)
2012: 103.3 Ortg (22nd)
2013: 105.9 Ortg (14th)
2014: 111.2 Ortg (3rd)
2015: 109.5 Ortg (5th)
2016: 106.7 Ortg (11th)

So the Mavericks since Nowitzki became a starter have finished Top 10 in Ortg every season except 3: 2012, 2013 and last season.

2012 and 2013 coincidentally happen to be the only seasons in which Dirk Nowitzki played less than 73 games. He played 62 in 2012 and 53 in 2013. The only other time was as a 37 year old.

That seems like a pretty strong indication that Dirk by himself is tremendously impactful on the offensive end, essentially capable of taking any roster so long as it's not filled with absolute trash offensively, and making it top 10 if not elite.

Does KG have that kind of impact on either side of the ball or does KG impact the game by making both sides good if not elite?

I think this is pretty seriously underrating the players Dirk played with offensively. The only years where I'd say he had anything approaching poor offensive support were those 2 years they ranked outside of the top 10 (poor players due to FA miscues). For many of those years he played with a combination of prime Steve Nash, Michael Finley, tail end of his prime J-Kidd, prime Jason Terry, Josh Howard pre injury troubles, Juwan Howard, etc. He's had a tremendous amount of offensive support throughout his whole career. And then for a good portion of those later years he's been with probably the 2nd best coach in the game who has a great system.

He's an incredible offensive player that makes a tremendous impact. Anyone can see that. I don't think your list is particularly useful in illustrating that though because you simply can't ignore the tremendous offensive support he's had his whole career. You can't say "see it doesn't matter who he plays with" when the worse years they had you just write off as outliers despite those seasons being the ones that are the best opportunity to make your case using this method. And not to mention that those seasons are probably unfair to Dirk that they came later - in his youth I bet he carries those teams much higher.

valade16
10-05-2016, 11:54 AM
I think this is pretty seriously underrating the players Dirk played with offensively. The only years where I'd say he had anything approaching poor offensive support were those 2 years they ranked outside of the top 10 (poor players due to FA miscues). For many of those years he played with a combination of prime Steve Nash, Michael Finley, tail end of his prime J-Kidd, prime Jason Terry, Josh Howard pre injury troubles, Juwan Howard, etc. He's had a tremendous amount of offensive support throughout his whole career. And then for a good portion of those later years he's been with probably the 2nd best coach in the game who has a great system.

He's an incredible offensive player that makes a tremendous impact. Anyone can see that. I don't think your list is particularly useful in illustrating that though because you simply can't ignore the tremendous offensive support he's had his whole career. You can't say "see it doesn't matter who he plays with" when the worse years they had you just write off as outliers despite those seasons being the ones that are the best opportunity to make your case using this method. And not to mention that those seasons are probably unfair to Dirk that they came later - in his youth I bet he carries those teams much higher.

I find it a bigger coincidence that Dirk played with elite offensive talent his entire career thus explaining the Mav's great Ortg's than I do that the 2 years Dirk missed significant time the Mav's Ortg's plummeted accordingly.

I also think we're overvaluing some of his offensive talent due to nostalgia or prestige or whatever. Josh Howard, Caron Butler and Jason Terry were good offensive support, but they were by no means great. Also, The Mav's Ortg actually went down when Jason Kidd joined them.

It's impossible to look at 3 different coaches, at least 4 distinct eras of player support and conclude that Dirk wasn't heavily responsible for their offensive efficiency.

hugepatsfan
10-05-2016, 01:46 PM
I find it a bigger coincidence that Dirk played with elite offensive talent his entire career thus explaining the Mav's great Ortg's than I do that the 2 years Dirk missed significant time the Mav's Ortg's plummeted accordingly.

I also think we're overvaluing some of his offensive talent due to nostalgia or prestige or whatever. Josh Howard, Caron Butler and Jason Terry were good offensive support, but they were by no means great. Also, The Mav's Ortg actually went down when Jason Kidd joined them.

It's impossible to look at 3 different coaches, at least 4 distinct eras of player support and conclude that Dirk wasn't heavily responsible for their offensive efficiency.

It's impossible for any sane person to not conclude that Dirk was heavily responsible for their offensive efficiency. He's a top 30 player all time (IDK exact spot but that seems like something I think most/all can agree on, right?). That's not what I'm arguing. I'm just sayin that he's had consistently great offensive help throughout his career (team-wide issue was always a lack of defense for most of his career w/ DAL). It seems your approach was well look how even when pieces change offense is still great and he's the constant. I just don't think that type of offensive analysis holds much weight when even as the pieces changed he still had high quality. It does show that his game is easy to adapt to but that seems like common knowledge. I just don't think the circumstances of Dirk's supporting casts really lend itself to that type of list telling us anything really.

YAALREADYKNO
10-05-2016, 02:54 PM
It's impossible for any sane person to not conclude that Dirk was heavily responsible for their offensive efficiency. He's a top 30 player all time (IDK exact spot but that seems like something I think most/all can agree on, right?). That's not what I'm arguing. I'm just sayin that he's had consistently great offensive help throughout his career (team-wide issue was always a lack of defense for most of his career w/ DAL). It seems your approach was well look how even when pieces change offense is still great and he's the constant. I just don't think that type of offensive analysis holds much weight when even as the pieces changed he still had high quality. It does show that his game is easy to adapt to but that seems like common knowledge. I just don't think the circumstances of Dirk's supporting casts really lend itself to that type of list telling us anything really.

He had great help offensively early in his career but once Finley and Nash left he had above average offensive help. They were always one of the worst teams assists wise and would iso a lot until Kidd got there. Dirk had a lot to do with guys like josh Howard and Jason Terry having the success they had. He gave them more one on one opportunities and opened up the lane for everybody on the team. To say he's always had great help throughout his career even after Nash and Finley left is a bit of a stretch. Great help is Duncan with Ginobili and Parker and even Kobe with Pau Bynum Odom

valade16
10-05-2016, 03:09 PM
What is the great offensive help he had after Nash/Finley?

Would anyone call Josh Howard or Jason Terry "great" offensive help? Doubtful.

hugepatsfan
10-05-2016, 04:01 PM
What is the great offensive help he had after Nash/Finley?

Would anyone call Josh Howard or Jason Terry "great" offensive help? Doubtful.

He got a couple of back-end prime years out of Jason Kidd.

I'm not saying the guy had all NBA players but he had an overall good offensive supporting cast. He's always been their alpha but he's never really been on a team where you say wow he doesn't have enough support offensively. He pretty much always had that. We can argue semantics of what "great" exactly means. I didn't mean great as him having help on par with Ginobli/Parker like another poster mentioned. But he's consistently been surrounded with good offensive offensive support. He hasn't been hurting. Not Duncan level help but nothing to complain about either.

To go back to your post, you said their year by year rankings prove as long as he doesn't have trash around him offensively he'll be top 10. All I'm saying is that he's never had anything even close enough to trash where we can really cite those numbers as giving any insight to that claim. I would agree with those statements but the stats you actually cited to back it up to me aren't really relevant because the circumstances don't even come close enough to applying.

nycericanguy
10-05-2016, 04:15 PM
Why choose?

Take KP =D

KG's length and defense, with Dirk's shooting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBaeRAI5DPs

valade16
10-05-2016, 04:19 PM
He got a couple of back-end prime years out of Jason Kidd.

I'm not saying the guy had all NBA players but he had an overall good offensive supporting cast. He's always been their alpha but he's never really been on a team where you say wow he doesn't have enough support offensively. He pretty much always had that. We can argue semantics of what "great" exactly means. I didn't mean great as him having help on par with Ginobli/Parker like another poster mentioned. But he's consistently been surrounded with good offensive offensive support. He hasn't been hurting. Not Duncan level help but nothing to complain about either.

To go back to your post, you said their year by year rankings prove as long as he doesn't have trash around him offensively he'll be top 10. All I'm saying is that he's never had anything even close enough to trash where we can really cite those numbers as giving any insight to that claim. I would agree with those statements but the stats you actually cited to back it up to me aren't really relevant because the circumstances don't even come close enough to applying.

I get what you're saying I just disagree. Again, it's not just that his teams were good offensively, they were elite.

Terry and Howard are not nothing in terms of offensive help, but in 2006 for example those were his main offensive support and the Mavs had the best Ortg in the league at 111.8. The Champion Warriors were 111.6. I don't think many people expect Terry and Howard to be the compliments to an offense comparable to Curry/Klay/Dray Dubs, yet they were.

And again in 2014 his offensive help was Monta Ellis and 35/37 year old Vince and Marion. They were 3rd on Ortg at 111.2. I don't think anybody would expect a team whose offensive support was Ellis and old man Vince/Marion to have an offense as efficient as the Champion Dubs.

I can re-phrase and say he takes good offensive teams and makes them elite, but even then I don't think I'd call his 2006 or 2014 offenses good without him there; and that's the point.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-05-2016, 09:17 PM
Garnett's "prime" I wouldn't say started until probably the 1999-2000 season. He had awesome years before that but I would say that's when he started playing at an all-time level. That ended when he hurt his knee his second year in Boston. He was productive after that but never the same. So really only half his career was
prime" years.

Dirk's all-time years were probably from like 2000-01 until 2013-14. So you're looking at I'd say an extra 5 or so years of all time play. Almost 150%. Dirk clearly has KG beat in longevity. I don't think there's really any good argument to made for him being better for those prime years. Not that it's a huge gap but it isn't even debatable that there is one really. But with that gap being as small as I think it is, a good argument to be made that Dirk's longevity is better to start a franchise from scratch with IMO.

I wouldn't limits someone's longevity on their "prime/elite" years. Not like KG, whether it was a questionable selection or not, wasn't an all star before 2000 or an all star/all NBA defensive player after his 2nd year in Boston either.

Their overall production in an 18 year span is almost identical. That doesn't happen if someone has you beat by "almost 150%".

Raps18-19 Champ
10-05-2016, 09:20 PM
Dirl was clearly better for longer. he guys is still putting up 18 a night and main cog on a playoff team.

I mean if we're counting by who can score more, sure.

ewing
10-05-2016, 09:22 PM
I mean if we're counting by who can score more, sure.


he was better for longer.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-05-2016, 09:50 PM
he was better for longer.

Well 1-2 years is definitely longer so you're right there. We just seem to have different definitions of "crushed".

hugepatsfan
10-06-2016, 02:55 PM
I wouldn't limits someone's longevity on their "prime/elite" years. Not like KG, whether it was a questionable selection or not, wasn't an all star before 2000 or an all star/all NBA defensive player after his 2nd year in Boston either.

Their overall production in an 18 year span is almost identical. That doesn't happen if someone has you beat by "almost 150%".

That's fair. For me personally, when I'm ranking how great someone is years where they were a contributor but not elite don't hold much weight. I care about longevity to an extent but more so prime years (provided there are enough of them of course).

Chronz
10-06-2016, 03:43 PM
You can't say "see it doesn't matter who he plays with" when the worse years they had you just write off as outliers despite those seasons being the ones that are the best opportunity to make your case using this method.

Are you talking about 2012 and 2013? Wasn't Dirk hurt those years and/or exiting his prime days? I know he played pretty much every game in 2012 but he was slipping and the motivation wasn't the same given the way Cuban punted the championship defense.

Like I know 2012 was a HUGE drop to 22nd but its pretty interesting to note the offense gained basically the same amount of pts with his presence on the court vs off from the year prior. Like in 2011 when he led the 8th ranked offense, they fell off by 10PTS. In 2012, the 22nd ranked offense dropped 9.1PTS without him.

Just raw +/- numbers but I think the argument that Dirk makes good into elite and garbage into good is still held up by those poor seasons. I will say Cuban has a done a good job of ensuring at least adequate offensive support but those guys become far more efficient with Dirk than I can recall anyone getting such a boost from KG.

Jason Terry without Dirk might just continue being an inefficient scorer his whole career and nobody talks about him as a great offensive piece. Cubes has also forced Dirk into playing with Antoine Walker, a man who couldn't be efficient in any role to save his life. Monta Ellis, remember how people were hyping up what a transformed player he became, does that hold true without Dirk?

As for Kidd, even at his apex I would hesitate calling him a great offensive player but thats just me, hes definitely a good offensive player but by the time he got to Dallas he wasn't anything to rave about.