PDA

View Full Version : Dirk vs Kobe, who would you take 1st overall knowing you have 20 years with them?



Jeffy25
03-06-2017, 01:16 AM
Kobe has his antics, but also his competitiveness.

Dirk likes to shoot deeper mid range and create from the pick and roll. But he also helps rim protect and rebound a bit.

Kobe had his good and bad years defensively, creating his own shots better, but also overly shot plenty.



Do you want that stretch 4, or that shot creator 2?

Per game averages
Kobe - 25.0, 5.2, 4.7, 1.4, 0.5, .447/.329/.837
22.9 PER, .550 TS, 172.7 WS, .170 WS/48, 48,637 MIN

Dirk - 21.8, 7.8, 2.5, 0.8, 0.9, .473/.381/.879
22.9 PER, .579 TS%, 200.3 WS, .200 WS/48, 48,169 MIN

Lakers + Giants
03-06-2017, 01:20 AM
Even as a laker fan I acknowledge Kobe is way harder to build around. Dirk is easy to build around, especially in today's NBA.

I do think Kobe is the superior player, but the better player to draft and build around? Dirk.

More-Than-Most
03-06-2017, 01:29 AM
Dirk and its not close... If it was old school NBA maybe kobe because of his drive and smacking ****ers in place... dirk never had a Shaq/Gasol etc etc etc... I think prime kobe is the better defender but Dirk is the better shooter/rebounder etc.

FlashBolt
03-06-2017, 01:54 AM
I gotta go with Dirk here too. Great off-ball player, unselfish, superior playoff performer, can play with everyone, team player. Doesn't mean Dirk is a better player but building around an elite PF is much easier to do than an elite SG.

JordansBulls
03-06-2017, 02:00 AM
For a popular well known franchise probably Kobe. For most franchises Dirk simply because he will be more content than Kobe would be.

YAALREADYKNO
03-06-2017, 12:04 PM
Kobe is the better player but Dirk would be easier to build around. We've seen it in his career he's transitioned from basically 3 different teams and has had them competing in the west as real contenders. Even in his older years with monta and parsons he still had them in the playoffs.

valade16
03-06-2017, 02:36 PM
Give me Kobe.

mightybosstone
03-06-2017, 02:43 PM
I'm shocked how many Dirk votes I'm seeing. Say what you will about Kobe, but I think the dude's resume speaks for itself. I'd probably give Dirk the slightest of edges in terms of peak production. But the strength of Kobe's prime both from a longevity and production standpoint is pretty much unmatched by anybody over the last 20 years.

And I don't buy the "easier to build around" argument. You know who's easier to build around? The more talented and productive player. That guy is Kobe to me, and that's coming from someone who has truly hated him since he was in grade school.

PowerHouse
03-06-2017, 02:57 PM
I'm shocked how many Dirk votes I'm seeing. Say what you will about Kobe, but I think the dude's resume speaks for itself. I'd probably give Dirk the slightest of edges in terms of peak production. But the strength of Kobe's prime both from a longevity and production standpoint is pretty much unmatched by anybody over the last 20 years.

And I don't buy the "easier to build around" argument. You know who's easier to build around? The more talented and productive player. That guy is Kobe to me, and that's coming from someone who has truly hated him since he was in grade school.

+1

And thank you for taking the words out of my mouth about easier to build around which is complete nonsense. Its funny Dirk is getting votes here but those same people put Dirk behind Kobe on their all-time lists.

Heediot
03-06-2017, 03:09 PM
Kobe.

Dirk if I want a regular season with higher wins. Kobe if I want more championships. Say what u want about Kobe but he will manipulate the front office to get him the pieces he needs to win a title lol. He is aslo more cold blooded in the playoffs, although dirk got over the hump when he hit his 30's.

HandsOnTheWheel
03-06-2017, 03:26 PM
I'm shocked how many Dirk votes I'm seeing. Say what you will about Kobe, but I think the dude's resume speaks for itself. I'd probably give Dirk the slightest of edges in terms of peak production. But the strength of Kobe's prime both from a longevity and production standpoint is pretty much unmatched by anybody over the last 20 years.

And I don't buy the "easier to build around" argument. You know who's easier to build around? The more talented and productive player. That guy is Kobe to me, and that's coming from someone who has truly hated him since he was in grade school.
This.

Jamiecballer
03-06-2017, 03:28 PM
Dirk

Hawkeye15
03-06-2017, 03:37 PM
I am a known Kobe hater, I can't stand him at all. But he is the answer here. He was legit a top 5 player for over 15 years, which gives you a longer chance. He could also morph into a defensive role if need be, and was simply the better player. Give me Kobe here

lakerfan85
03-06-2017, 04:08 PM
I'm taking Kobe as well..

LOb0
03-06-2017, 04:11 PM
Kobe. Dirk although I feel he had the most impressive title run to me in modern history, before that there were a lot of soft questions and games I didn't feel he showed up to.

Vee-Rex
03-06-2017, 04:11 PM
I'm a big fan of Dirk but gimme Kobe.

still1ballin
03-06-2017, 04:35 PM
kobe

More-Than-Most
03-06-2017, 05:07 PM
My only thing is... when did Dirk ever have another star in their prime next to him? Gasol/Shaq... I dont mind either answer... I just think people are over looking this plus the fact of how perfect Dirk is mentality wise to build around.

mrblisterdundee
03-06-2017, 05:23 PM
Bryant is the easy choice here. If Harden's doing so well running the Rockets' offense, imagine Bryant being turned loose at point guard. He can do everything as well as Harden on offense, while playing all-NBA-level defense against point guards through small forwards.

valade16
03-06-2017, 05:29 PM
My only thing is... when did Dirk ever have another star in their prime next to him? Gasol/Shaq... I dont mind either answer... I just think people are over looking this plus the fact of how perfect Dirk is mentality wise to build around.

He played next to Steve Nash for 6 years. He also played with Jason Terry for 7 years and Michael Finley for 6.

Dirk was not lacking for supporting talent during his career.

More-Than-Most
03-06-2017, 05:41 PM
He played next to Steve Nash for 6 years. He also played with Jason Terry for 7 years and Michael Finley for 6.

Dirk was not lacking for supporting talent during his career.

i will give you Finley to a point but Terry is an overrated good player but not great... Nash really became Nash when he left but he was also a bad defender... Like I said none of these guys while on dallas was ever as good as Shaq or Gasol and then you can add in their role players as well... Dirk never really had a stacked team.

Rivera
03-06-2017, 06:11 PM
im going Kobe. It was a slightly different NBA when these guys were in their prime, small ball was just starting and Dirks defense left a little more to be desired

I just think, prime for prime, Kobe was better as well

mightybosstone
03-06-2017, 06:22 PM
Bryant is the easy choice here. If Harden's doing so well running the Rockets' offense, imagine Bryant being turned loose at point guard. He can do everything as well as Harden on offense, while playing all-NBA-level defense against point guards through small forwards.

I agree with Kobe as the choice in this poll, but I pretty much disagree with everything you said here about Harden. Harden is a far, far more efficient scorer than prime Kobe and a far better creator for others. He's one of the greatest pick and roll creators in the history of the league.

I'm not saying Harden is the better player, because he's not, but they excel in two very different areas. Kobe was one of the greatest mid-range shooters of all-time. Harden doesn't touch the mid-range shot. Harden is a hyper-efficient scorer. Kobe was more of a volume scorer who never particularly excelled outside the arc. Kobe was a great all around defender. Harden.... not so much.

Heediot
03-06-2017, 06:34 PM
Bryant is the easy choice here. If Harden's doing so well running the Rockets' offense, imagine Bryant being turned loose at point guard. He can do everything as well as Harden on offense, while playing all-NBA-level defense against point guards through small forwards.

I don't think Kobe can play PG as good as Harden just my pinion. Harden is a better passer and play maker in my opinion. Kobe is more of a pure scorer and more of an attack mode kind of player. I think he is one of the best individual players of all time but he isn't the type of player that makes his team mates better. I'll take Kobe over Harden though.

valade16
03-06-2017, 06:35 PM
i will give you Finley to a point but Terry is an overrated good player but not great... Nash really became Nash when he left but he was also a bad defender... Like I said none of these guys while on dallas was ever as good as Shaq or Gasol and then you can add in their role players as well... Dirk never really had a stacked team.

I think a lot of this is hindsight. While Nash became a two time MVP in Phoenix he was an exceptionally good player in Dallas. He didn't magically become a vastly superior PG at the age of 29, he was simply placed in a system that better utilized his talents, but he was always that caliber of player from a skills standpoint and he demonstrated it in Dallas.

I'd also argue Dirk/Nash/Finley was stacked. The reason that Dirk only has 1 title is that his teams lost when they had the opportunity to get more. The Dirk/Nash/Finley teams never won, they blew the first series vs the Heat, and then as the 67 win #1 seed they lost in the 1st Round.

Dirk had ample opportunity to win multiple titles, he didn't get it done.

In Game 4 of the 06 Finals he went 2/14 for 16 pts, and 8/19 (0/4 3pt) for 20 pts in Game 5. He had a - +/- for games 4-6 of that Finals.

In 2007 Dirk scored 19.7 PPG on 38% FG and 21% 3PT (50.9% TS%) vs the Warriors.

Those didn't really have much to do with his teammates, if he plays better they win both of those series.

mrblisterdundee
03-06-2017, 06:37 PM
I agree with Kobe as the choice in this poll, but I pretty much disagree with everything you said here about Harden. Harden is a far, far more efficient scorer than prime Kobe and a far better creator for others. He's one of the greatest pick and roll creators in the history of the league.

I'm not saying Harden is the better player, because he's not, but they excel in two very different areas. Kobe was one of the greatest mid-range shooters of all-time. Harden doesn't touch the mid-range shot. Harden is a hyper-efficient scorer. Kobe was more of a volume scorer who never particularly excelled outside the arc. Kobe was a great all around defender. Harden.... not so much.

He may not be quite as good as Harden from outside, but Bryant wasn't terrible from deep. And while Bryant focused a lot more on the midrange, he could get to the line just as well as Harden.
We never got to see Bryant in Harden's situation, and he was struck in the triangle for much of his career, so it's hard to compare how well they run an offense. Maybe he's more like Westbrook, with his athleticism and insane will to win. But I think Bryant could have done more in a Harden-like situation. That's why I'd value him more than Nowitzki.

Heediot
03-06-2017, 06:45 PM
He may not be quite as good as Harden from outside, but Bryant wasn't terrible from deep. And while Bryant focused a lot more on the midrange, he could get to the line just as well as Harden.
We never got to see Bryant in Harden's situation, and he was struck in the triangle for much of his career, so it's hard to compare how well they run an offense. Maybe he's more like Westbrook, with his athleticism and insane will to win. But I think Bryant could have done more in a Harden-like situation. That's why I'd value him more than Nowitzki.

I think Kobe has some what of a chance, he didn't like Mike D's style. They were lacking in the PG area with a washed up and injury riddled Nash. Mike D's complaint about Kobe is that he as tunnel vision on offense, and when he makes up his mind about something it's hard to change it.

Raps18-19 Champ
03-06-2017, 08:27 PM
Kobe.

Dirk is easier to build around probably but I'll worry about getting the better player first.

Shammyguy3
03-06-2017, 09:03 PM
This is a good debate. I'm not sure how much better Kobe was.

Kobe Bryant age 21-34 55.6ts% 112 ORtg 24.1 PER 32.5usg% 0.190 WS/48 4.7 BPM 68.5 VORP 40,335 minutes 1039 games
Dirk Nowitzki age 22-35 58.5ts% 118 ORtg 24.2 PER 27.6usg% 0.218 WS/48 4.1 BPM 59.9 VORP 38,707 minutes 1,059 games

That's regular season for their primes, each 14 years where they were top-10 players.

Kobe Bryant playoffs age 21-33 54.3ts% 110 ORtg 23.0 PER 31.5usg% 0.166 WS/48 4.8 BPM 13.7 VORP 7,973 minutes 192 games

Dirk Nowitzki playoffs age 22-35 57.9ts% 117 ORtg 24.2 PER 27.3usg% 0.196 WS/48 4.3 BPM 8.8 VORP 5,544 minutes 135 games



Kobe was an average defender throughout his career, same for Dirk. Kobe was a really good facilitator and good rebounder. Dirk was a good facilitator for a big, and an average rebounder.

The major differences honestly to me, is that Kobe was a better facilitator and Dirk was a more efficient player. I'm not sure there is that much of a gap between the two. Dirk's prime was definitely better than Kobe's to me:

Dirk lead the league 3 straight seasons in WS/48. Dirk had 3 seasons with a higher WS/48 than Kobe's best season. Dirk's 4th highest WS/48 exactly ties Kobe's best. Dirk has 11 seasons with a higher ORtg than Kobe's best season.

Per game numbers will favor Kobe. But that's just volume. I take Dirk, even though I rank Kobe higher all-time for a career (because of the rings, who wouldn't).

Kobe had the opportunity to play with a top-5 player ever, and then a top-50 player ever in Pau. Dirk never had those opportunities. He played with Nash, but Nash's career with Dallas he was a 15/7 player (when he left he became a 17/11 player for the following 6 seasons).

GREATNESS ONE
03-06-2017, 09:40 PM
Kobe.

jaydubb
03-06-2017, 10:07 PM
https://youtu.be/LY8rUhlC0xY

^^^^

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

LA_Raiders
03-07-2017, 01:46 AM
Kobe no question. Irk is a hell of an offensive player but he got no D.

Eg714
03-07-2017, 02:56 AM
Kobe no question. Irk is a hell of an offensive player but he got no D.

This is false. Old injured Kobe had no d. Prime Kobe was a solid defender. You should know this.

Eg714
03-07-2017, 02:57 AM
Never mind super high read that wrong.my bad

nastynice
03-07-2017, 07:03 AM
I'm shocked how many Dirk votes I'm seeing. Say what you will about Kobe, but I think the dude's resume speaks for itself. I'd probably give Dirk the slightest of edges in terms of peak production. But the strength of Kobe's prime both from a longevity and production standpoint is pretty much unmatched by anybody over the last 20 years.

And I don't buy the "easier to build around" argument. You know who's easier to build around? The more talented and productive player. That guy is Kobe to me, and that's coming from someone who has truly hated him since he was in grade school.

How the hell did you even hear of him when he was in grade school?? Lebron was like the youngest I remember of anyone getting attention, he was like 15 or 16, I heard of him when he was 17

LA4life24/8
03-08-2017, 01:11 PM
Gotta go with kobe. His drive and mentality, he was the better player idc what your advanced stats say,use your eyes lol. Everyone says look at the crap team Dirk won a chip with, blah blah...

The last tean kobe took to the finals, 2-3 years later only he and pau were still in the frikkin league lol, talk about carrying a crap team lol.

Don't get me wrong i like dirk he's an all time great, humble,cool dude. But gimme kobe, longevity of prime, killer instinct, didnt shy away fron anything.

mrblisterdundee
03-08-2017, 06:14 PM
I think Kobe has some what of a chance, he didn't like Mike D's style. They were lacking in the PG area with a washed up and injury riddled Nash. Mike D's complaint about Kobe is that he as tunnel vision on offense, and when he makes up his mind about something it's hard to change it.

But when he played point guard, he was a nightly triple-double threat. I think it's a role he could grow into. He'd probably trend more toward Westbrook, but Bryant was a better shooter, just as good at getting to the line and a better defender.
In the end, Bryant wanted to win. If you gave him some solid offensive options, he'd move the ball. If you gave him the current Thunder roster or the 2005-06 Lakers, he'd try to do it all by himself, just like Westbrook.

FlashBolt
03-08-2017, 09:22 PM
How many rings does a prime Dirk win with Shaq? C'mon. It's much easier building with Dirk. Literally three rings of Kobe were freebies because of Shaq. Realistically, I think Kobe should have won more considering he came into the league playing with the BEST player and arguably the most dominating ever.

Saddletramp
03-08-2017, 09:50 PM
I really want to say Dirk here because I've always liked him and always hated Kobe but give me Kobe. You start with the better player and go from there.



Screw you op for making me type/think that.

Shammyguy3
03-09-2017, 02:05 AM
I made an argument that Dirk was actually better than Kobe, both at his peak and he had just as long of a career. What makes Kobe definitively better? I know that I have Kobe lower than most people do, even though he was one of my favorite players of the 00s

nastynice
03-09-2017, 02:33 AM
How many rings does a prime Dirk win with Shaq? C'mon. It's much easier building with Dirk. Literally three rings of Kobe were freebies because of Shaq. Realistically, I think Kobe should have won more considering he came into the league playing with the BEST player and arguably the most dominating ever.

Well they won 3, and then he won 2 more after that.

Also keep in mind, replace Kobe with an average player, lakers aren't winning three in a row. Probably not two either.

europagnpilgrim
03-09-2017, 03:36 AM
Well since the nba is all about business and entertainment I would rather be entertained by a copy cat Jordan since we all know Jordan entertained us highly, especially that 'come fly with me version'

for those who say its easier to build a team around Dirk then he should have won more titles because he clearly had the teams to do it for a long stretch of his career, they were legit contenders right there with the Spurs/Lakers and didn't lack talent a bit, too bad Dirk doesn't catch flack for it like the others but then again I really cant blame him since he wasn't as good as those others

I wish some of my fav players had that type of team talent for a decade plus like Dirk did

Chronz
03-09-2017, 10:52 AM
How the hell did you even hear of him when he was in grade school?? Lebron was like the youngest I remember of anyone getting attention, he was like 15 or 16, I heard of him when he was 17

He meant when he was in grade school, not Kobe. Kobe came to my attention when he went out with Brandy tho

FlashBolt
03-09-2017, 11:01 AM
Well they won 3, and then he won 2 more after that.

Also keep in mind, replace Kobe with an average player, lakers aren't winning three in a row. Probably not two either.

Keep in mind that Kobe had the luxury of playing with the best players for the majority of his career. Realistically, there was only a 2-3 year stint in which Kobe had terrible teammates in his prime. I look at it from the POV that Shaq fell into Kobe's lap because the player who gave you the best chance of winning was Shaq and if you just give him another All-Star type player, you would have won. Imagine if we flipped the roles and gave Dirk Shaq. Or how about Dirk at PF, Pau Gasol at C, Bynum at backup C, and Lamar Odom? It's impossible to judge Dirk vs Kobe and who to build around with when Kobe just had a better team when it mattered. The way I see it, Dirk doesn't need the ball to dominate so he'd be comfortable just getting to his spots. Kobe needs the ball to dominate and then we gotta take into consideration that Dirk was more efficient WITH/WITHOUT the ball.

nastynice
03-09-2017, 02:06 PM
Keep in mind that Kobe had the luxury of playing with the best players for the majority of his career. Realistically, there was only a 2-3 year stint in which Kobe had terrible teammates in his prime. I look at it from the POV that Shaq fell into Kobe's lap because the player who gave you the best chance of winning was Shaq and if you just give him another All-Star type player, you would have won. Imagine if we flipped the roles and gave Dirk Shaq. Or how about Dirk at PF, Pau Gasol at C, Bynum at backup C, and Lamar Odom? It's impossible to judge Dirk vs Kobe and who to build around with when Kobe just had a better team when it mattered. The way I see it, Dirk doesn't need the ball to dominate so he'd be comfortable just getting to his spots. Kobe needs the ball to dominate and then we gotta take into consideration that Dirk was more efficient WITH/WITHOUT the ball.

I get that he was with shaq, but he was still a huge reason why they won. You made it sound like Kobe could have just played average and they woulda still won that much.

Also, Dirk has had some VERY good teams. Dallas did him right, you can never fault them for what they put around Dirk

Redrum187
03-09-2017, 02:17 PM
Kobe has the better career, but give me Dirk. With the way the game is played now, Dirk would be even better and moving forward 20 years from now. Usually good shooting big men don't play D, and I can see many people are still drinking the kool-aid and think Dirk was terrible on defense because he's a White dude (yes, race card applies here when you actually look at Dirk's defensive body of work).

Can't go wrong with either though.

FlashBolt
03-09-2017, 09:07 PM
I get that he was with shaq, but he was still a huge reason why they won. You made it sound like Kobe could have just played average and they woulda still won that much.

Also, Dirk has had some VERY good teams. Dallas did him right, you can never fault them for what they put around Dirk

Kobe did his part but let's be honest here.. Shaq was the guy who you had to stop no matter what. Does Dirk win more than five with Shaq? Yeah. And his personality would have allowed Shaq to be the 1st option still.

valade16
03-09-2017, 10:09 PM
I made an argument that Dirk was actually better than Kobe, both at his peak and he had just as long of a career. What makes Kobe definitively better? I know that I have Kobe lower than most people do, even though he was one of my favorite players of the 00s

The peak numbers are very similar:

PER:
Dirk 28.1
Kobe 28.0

BPM:
Dirk 6.7
Kobe 6.4

VORP:
7.1 Kobe
6.2 Dirk

The only glaring discrepancy is WS/48 in Dirk's favor. So if Dirk was better at his peak it was not by much. Although they have the same # of years, Kobe was a more productive player longer:

# years with 4.0+ BPM:
Kobe: 11
Dirk: 7

# years with 4.0+ VORP:
Kobe: 13
Dirk: 8

Not to mention as overrated as Kobe's D was and as underrated as Dirk's D was, Kobe was still the better defender.

I'd take 4-5 years of greater productivity over 1-2 yeas of slightly higher peak.

ciaban
03-09-2017, 10:44 PM
Dirk and its not close... If it was old school NBA maybe kobe because of his drive and smacking ****ers in place... dirk never had a Shaq/Gasol etc etc etc... I think prime kobe is the better defender but Dirk is the better shooter/rebounder etc.

Well considering one is a power forward and the others a shooting gaurd, he should be the better rebounder.

ciaban
03-09-2017, 10:46 PM
Dirk and its not close... If it was old school NBA maybe kobe because of his drive and smacking ****ers in place... dirk never had a Shaq/Gasol etc etc etc... I think prime kobe is the better defender but Dirk is the better shooter/rebounder etc.

No, but he had Steve Nash for 6 years

Shammyguy3
03-09-2017, 10:52 PM
The peak numbers are very similar:

PER:
Dirk 28.1
Kobe 28.0

BPM:
Dirk 6.7
Kobe 6.4

VORP:
7.1 Kobe
6.2 Dirk

The only glaring discrepancy is WS/48 in Dirk's favor. So if Dirk was better at his peak it was not by much. Although they have the same # of years, Kobe was a more productive player longer:

# years with 4.0+ BPM:
Kobe: 11
Dirk: 7

# years with 4.0+ VORP:
Kobe: 13
Dirk: 8

Not to mention as overrated as Kobe's D was and as underrated as Dirk's D was, Kobe was still the better defender.

I'd take 4-5 years of greater productivity over 1-2 yeas of slightly higher peak.

But it's not like Dirk's productivity that year was far behind Kobe.

3.7 3.5 3.5 were Dirk's 3 next best seasons of VORP, which is not far off of a 4.0 (Kobe's next best ones were 2.4 and 2.1 which is a significant drop)
3.8 3.4 3.3 were Dirk's 3 next best seasons for VORP, which again isn't far from 4.0 (Kobe had a 3.8 and 3.6).


Just going off of those two, maybe Kobe had 2ish omre seasons of "greater" productivity, but Dirk's peak is not just 1-2 years better nor is it slightly higher.

Kobe's career high is a 0.224 WS/48. That's it. Over an 8 year period (2001-2008) Dirk had a 0.239 WS/48:
0.224
0.222
0.249
0.190
0.248
0.275
0.278
0.223

Bolded lead the league. Over that same time frame he had a 25.2 PER 58.7ts% 43.2 VORP 5.2 BPM and 119 ORtg. Kobe's 8 year period (2002-2009) puts him at a 25.0 PER 56.1ts% 44.0 VORP 5.2 BPM but only a 0.201 WS/48 and 113 ORtg


During that time frame, Dirk had only one negative DWS season (-0.1). Over Kobe's time frame, he had four negative DWS seasons (-0.2 -1.0 -1.4 -1.5).


They are really neck and neck, except Dirk is vastly more efficient offensively and wasn't the liability defensively that Kobe was. Honeslty - Kobe was not a good defender, he had one really good year early on in LA with Shaq but fell off tremendously after that. Dirk was never that detrimental as a defender, which is even more important as a big.


Really it's a toss-up. A great debate. But if someone flips the coin, i'm hoping I get the side with Dirk's head on it

Shammyguy3
03-09-2017, 11:01 PM
No, but he had Steve Nash for 6 years

But Nash was a 14/7 type player, not the 17/11 he became in Phoenix. He was a later bloomer. Kobe had far and away more help than Dirk ever did

KingPosey
03-09-2017, 11:35 PM
i will give you Finley to a point but Terry is an overrated good player but not great... Nash really became Nash when he left but he was also a bad defender... Like I said none of these guys while on dallas was ever as good as Shaq or Gasol and then you can add in their role players as well... Dirk never really had a stacked team.

Well it's not really comparing Finley or Nash to Shaq or Pau individually because dirk really had them both for a several year stretch. Nash's D sucked but I think as the game evolves we are seeing for the most part point guards don't play great defense, and Pau really went through some stretches of not being a great defender anyways

Shlumpledink
03-10-2017, 01:21 AM
They are really neck and neck, except Dirk is vastly more efficient offensively and wasn't the liability defensively that Kobe was. Honeslty - Kobe was not a good defender, he had one really good year early on in LA with Shaq but fell off tremendously after that. Dirk was never that detrimental as a defender, which is even more important as a big.


Come on now. We are underrating Kobe to make a point about a player.

Kobe at his best was a lockdown defender. His ball denial defense was especially good. Dirk at his best was an average defender.

I remember playoff series where Kobe had to take over and guard the best player several times. I remember one game where the Lakers were 2-2 with the Thunder, and Kobe guarded Westbrook all game. Held Westbrook to 4-13 and 8 turnovers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiyODnD0V5k

Look at his full court defense on Wade. Don't tell me he is a liability out there. He was a liability later in his career, for sure. I think after they beat Boston in the finals Kobe started playing too many people like how he played Rondo. Before that though, he was top 10 in defense at the wing.

This idea of Kobe being mediocre at defense is hyperbole at best.

nastynice
03-10-2017, 01:59 AM
Kobe did his part but let's be honest here.. Shaq was the guy who you had to stop no matter what. Does Dirk win more than five with Shaq? Yeah. And his personality would have allowed Shaq to be the 1st option still.

I certainly don't disagree about shaq being better than kobe. Don't think I'm on board with the five rings tho, I honestly don't know if they would even win three. Three peating is an insanely tough thing to do. The Popovich spurs haven't done it, the lebron heat super team didn't, the boston big 3 didn't. It took BOTH shaq and kobe to do it

europagnpilgrim
03-10-2017, 04:03 AM
Kobe has the better career, but give me Dirk. With the way the game is played now, Dirk would be even better and moving forward 20 years from now. Usually good shooting big men don't play D, and I can see many people are still drinking the kool-aid and think Dirk was terrible on defense because he's a White dude (yes, race card applies here when you actually look at Dirk's defensive body of work).

Can't go wrong with either though.

race card doesn't apply to who plays or don't play D, if its a vast majority of white players who don't play top notch d then that's what it is but you did have scrappy guys like Cowens/Sloan and a few others who did play d to best of its ability, its usually just majority of white/euro players who can shoot as its main strength

Dirk didn't play lockdown d but I guess he was out there on the floor and did the best he could do

if Dirk was a respectable defender he would be mentioned for that, especially in my book but he was a 7footer who could shoot pretty much lights out and was mentally and physically tough and didn't back down

it helped him he was a white German if you really think about it because he would basically be just another player similar to what Rodman said about Bird in his bad boy days

Bird and Dirk are basically what Em is to the hip hop game, so I guess the race card applies to make them more also on the flip side of it

with the spacing and 3pt shooting and tick tack fouls called today going forward a lot of players from the past would be even better going forward

europagnpilgrim
03-10-2017, 04:09 AM
Well it's not really comparing Finley or Nash to Shaq or Pau individually because dirk really had them both for a several year stretch. Nash's D sucked but I think as the game evolves we are seeing for the most part point guards don't play great defense, and Pau really went through some stretches of not being a great defender anyways

as you pick up your knowledge of the game you will start to realize only a handful played consistently tough defense 1 on 1 while not being a top notch scorer and it always came down to the scheme of the team defense being able to do what they do as a whole

the game is about scoring/getting buckets and being entertained

its a reason why Chamberlain sold the tickets back in those days, it wasn't because the Celtics were winning titles but because of a individual who could score 70-100pts/dunk anytime he stepped foot on the court, and its still the same in the present, we love the dunks and park ball moves, the oohs and aahs of the game never change it just evolves to the next era and amped up by that era that is a witness to it

europagnpilgrim
03-10-2017, 04:16 AM
But it's not like Dirk's productivity that year was far behind Kobe.

3.7 3.5 3.5 were Dirk's 3 next best seasons of VORP, which is not far off of a 4.0 (Kobe's next best ones were 2.4 and 2.1 which is a significant drop)
3.8 3.4 3.3 were Dirk's 3 next best seasons for VORP, which again isn't far from 4.0 (Kobe had a 3.8 and 3.6).


Just going off of those two, maybe Kobe had 2ish omre seasons of "greater" productivity, but Dirk's peak is not just 1-2 years better nor is it slightly higher.

Kobe's career high is a 0.224 WS/48. That's it. Over an 8 year period (2001-2008) Dirk had a 0.239 WS/48:
0.224
0.222
0.249
0.190
0.248
0.275
0.278
0.223

Bolded lead the league. Over that same time frame he had a 25.2 PER 58.7ts% 43.2 VORP 5.2 BPM and 119 ORtg. Kobe's 8 year period (2002-2009) puts him at a 25.0 PER 56.1ts% 44.0 VORP 5.2 BPM but only a 0.201 WS/48 and 113 ORtg


During that time frame, Dirk had only one negative DWS season (-0.1). Over Kobe's time frame, he had four negative DWS seasons (-0.2 -1.0 -1.4 -1.5).


They are really neck and neck, except Dirk is vastly more efficient offensively and wasn't the liability defensively that Kobe was. Honeslty - Kobe was not a good defender, he had one really good year early on in LA with Shaq but fell off tremendously after that. Dirk was never that detrimental as a defender, which is even more important as a big.


Really it's a toss-up. A great debate. But if someone flips the coin, i'm hoping I get the side with Dirk's head on it

all the VORP and other non sense aside Dirk did have the actual talent to make more than 2 finals trips in his career(especially early on and thru his ''prime''), Kobe went to 7(3 without Shaq), if Dirk was really that good he would have doubled up and went to at least 4, they were capable of winning 60-65 games for a stretch and Cuban kept enough talent around him, it wasn't like he was Westbrook as of now or like Iverson was in his philly days, Cuban kept him properly laced with players to make a title run

ewing
03-10-2017, 08:36 AM
Kobe did his part but let's be honest here.. Shaq was the guy who you had to stop no matter what. Does Dirk win more than five with Shaq? Yeah. And his personality would have allowed Shaq to be the 1st option still.

Dirk and Shaq would have been totally unstoppable. What is your other big going to do, leave Dirk to help on help on Shaq. The best interior big and the best prerimiter big on the court together are unstoppable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

More-Than-Most
03-10-2017, 09:24 AM
Dirk and Shaq would have been totally unstoppable. What is your other big going to do, leave Dirk to help on help on Shaq. The best interior big and the best prerimiter big on the court together are unstoppable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

this is why i am at a loss how people are voting for kobe... dirk and shaq are legit unstoppable and with the dirk mentality they fit perfect while dirk is a sick shooter. its a nice matchup.... but people love kobe and hero ball... i love kobe work ethic and have him ahead of dirk all time but in this situation its like people are refusing to look at the big picture... kobe is a top 8-12 player ever... dirk is a top 15-20 player ever..... kobe is the better player but fit Dirk blows kobe out of the water with his skill set and mentality... yet people go with kobe. Its shocking.. stupid but shocking.

Heediot
03-10-2017, 11:06 AM
this is why i am at a loss how people are voting for kobe... dirk and shaq are legit unstoppable and with the dirk mentality they fit perfect while dirk is a sick shooter. its a nice matchup.... but people love kobe and hero ball... i love kobe work ethic and have him ahead of dirk all time but in this situation its like people are refusing to look at the big picture... kobe is a top 8-12 player ever... dirk is a top 15-20 player ever..... kobe is the better player but fit Dirk blows kobe out of the water with his skill set and mentality... yet people go with kobe. Its shocking.. stupid but shocking.

Killer instinct is under-rated in sports. Some guys have it naturally (MJ, Kobe, Brady) others gain it through pain and loss (Lebron, Dirk, Peyton is an example of a guy who doesn't handle big moments as well as his skills show). That's why I would take Kobe and his hero ball in the playoffs and Dirk in the regular season. If Dirk was as ruthless as he was on his championship run throughout his career, I would take Dirk overall. Just like I would take a guy like Kyle Lowry and Harden in the regular season but give me Kyrie Irving in the playoffs.

Shammyguy3
03-10-2017, 02:54 PM
Dirk's run in 2011 was amazing no doubt. However, it wasn't really that far off of his career playoff averages. His 2006 run was actually better. He was more efficient in 2006

2006 versus 2011 playoffs
124 ORtg versus 115 ORtg
0.263 WS/48 versus 0.210 WS/48
2.4 VORP versus 1.2 VORP
7.9 BPM versus 3.8 BPM
26.8 PER versus 25.2 PER
59.6ts% versus 60.9ts%
26.9usg% versus 32.0usg%

2006 versus 2011 playoffs per36 minutes
22.7ppg versus 25.4ppg
9.8rpg versus 7.5ppg
2.5apg versus 2.3apg (just barely)
1.8tov versus 2.8tov

2006 versus 2011 Leading up to the Finals per game
28.4ppg versus 28.4ppg
11.9rpg versus 7.5ppg
3.1apg versus 2.7apg
2.1tov versus 3.2tov
42.4mpg versus 38.9mpg
61.8ts% versus 64.0ts%
27.7usg% versus 31.9usg%
129 ORtg versus 119 ORtg

2006 Finals versus 2011 Finals
22.8ppg versus 26.0ppg
10.8rpg versus 9.7ppg
2.5apg versus 2.0apg
2.2tov versus 2.8tov
43.7mpg versus 40.4mpg
53.0% versus 53.7ts% (just barely)
25.4% versus 31.9usg%
109 ORtg versus 105 ORtg

Again very similar. The 2011 Mavs relied on Dirk more offensively, which is likely the cause for a slight drop in efficiency. Ultimately, people like the 2011 run more because the Mavs won a ring and were underdogs each round. That to me though is more of "Give me the 2011 Mavs run over the 2006 Mavs run" instead of "Dirk's 2011 run > Dirk's 2006 run"

valade16
03-10-2017, 03:14 PM
I simply disagree with the premise that Dirk was a better defender than Kobe. Dirk was a league average defender (meaning he wasn't so bad he wrecked your D) in a scheme and system designed to completely hide him as a defender. Is it no surprise that the Mav's D was not good unless they had an All-NBA caliber defensive C next to Dirk?

Kobe may have been overrated in terms of his defense, but that was because he stopped playing it consistently in favor of a heavier load on offense. 3-peat Kobe was a very good defender and after that he was still capable of locking an opposing player up for stretches through his second title runs.

Shammyguy3
03-10-2017, 06:02 PM
I simply disagree with the premise that Dirk was a better defender than Kobe. Dirk was a league average defender (meaning he wasn't so bad he wrecked your D) in a scheme and system designed to completely hide him as a defender. Is it no surprise that the Mav's D was not good unless they had an All-NBA caliber defensive C next to Dirk?

Kobe may have been overrated in terms of his defense, but that was because he stopped playing it consistently in favor of a heavier load on offense. 3-peat Kobe was a very good defender and after that he was still capable of locking an opposing player up for stretches through his second title runs.

The value that he brings there doesn't outweigh the efficiency of Dirk's offense to me. I understand the Kobe argument, but I'm making a Dirk one to the best of my ability.

The argument that the Mavs defense was only good with an all-nba caliber defensive center is a fair point. However - the Mavs offense was phenomenal year in and year out regardless of the little help Dirk had. The Lakers' offense was much more talented minus Kobe than the Mavs minus Dirk

Maverick's team offensive rating NBA rank by year
2000 - 7th
2001 - 4th
2002 - 1st
2003 - 1st
2004 - 1st
2005 - 4th
2006 - 1st
2007 - 2nd
2008 - 8th
2009 - 5th
2010 - 10th
2011 - 8th
2012 - 22nd
2013 - 14th (missed 29 games)
2014 - 3rd
2015 - 5th
2016 - 11th

That is amazing. Bolded is the years after Nash left that the offense was still elite, and at worst really good. Kobe Bryant had much more help offensively than Dirk ever did, and the Mavs' offenses rank right up there with the Lakers'

Lakers' team offensive rating NBA rank by year (Blue with ShaqRed with Pau
1997 - 9th
1998 - 2nd
1999 - 2nd
2000 - 5th
2001 - 2nd
2002 - 2nd
2003 - 4th
2004 - 6th
2005 - 7th
2006 - 8th
2007 - 7th
2008 - 3rd
2009 - 3rd
2010 - 11th
2011 - 6th
2012 - 10th
2013 - 9th


For comps sake

BKLYNpigeon
03-10-2017, 07:15 PM
Kobe.

More marketable and You will make way more Money.

Shammyguy3
03-10-2017, 07:49 PM
Kobe.

More marketable and You will make way more Money.

if Dirk was in New York don't you think he would have been more marketable? Maybe just as marketable as Kobe? Maybe not. But i think that's a stupid reason to pick a player

lol, please
03-10-2017, 10:39 PM
Like others have said, I consider Kobe the better player, but to build around, Dirk, and if I am just adding a great player to a semi-complete squad, Kobe.

europagnpilgrim
03-10-2017, 11:08 PM
Killer instinct is under-rated in sports. Some guys have it naturally (MJ, Kobe, Brady) others gain it through pain and loss (Lebron, Dirk, Peyton is an example of a guy who doesn't handle big moments as well as his skills show). That's why I would take Kobe and his hero ball in the playoffs and Dirk in the regular season. If Dirk was as ruthless as he was on his championship run throughout his career, I would take Dirk overall. Just like I would take a guy like Kyle Lowry and Harden in the regular season but give me Kyrie Irving in the playoffs.

Killer instinct is something you have naturally and it doesn't waver or progress through a regular season or postseason or from losing

Jordan was a killer when he first entered the league, and when he got swept out by the Celtics early and by the bad boys in the middle and when he finally broke through, same with Kobe even when he shot those air balls early in Utah and then during 3peat and after with another 3 in a row finals trip

Brady was the same during regular season and postseason, you don't win 12-14 games each year basically without and a little help from a cheating coach

Lebron had to have killer instinct in order to score like 30 straight points in the ECF against Detroit

give me Irving over Lowry all day but Harden would be a coin toss though I prefer Harden since he has proven he can carry a lesser team to at least the playoffs, give Harden a Lebron and he goes to Finals after Finals, similar to how that OKC tenure was about to get when they made 1 Finals before breaking that trio up

most players with killer instinct have to go through the rough patches of a career to reach the ultimate pinnacle, nature of the business but doesn't mean they lack it because they lost as I pointed out earlier with those same players you mentioned

JordansBulls
03-11-2017, 12:42 AM
Dirk is more likely to stick with your franchise no matter what.

mightybosstone
03-11-2017, 01:03 AM
This is a good debate. I'm not sure how much better Kobe was.

Kobe Bryant age 21-34 55.6ts% 112 ORtg 24.1 PER 32.5usg% 0.190 WS/48 4.7 BPM 68.5 VORP 40,335 minutes 1039 games
Dirk Nowitzki age 22-35 58.5ts% 118 ORtg 24.2 PER 27.6usg% 0.218 WS/48 4.1 BPM 59.9 VORP 38,707 minutes 1,059 games

That's regular season for their primes, each 14 years where they were top-10 players.

Kobe Bryant playoffs age 21-33 54.3ts% 110 ORtg 23.0 PER 31.5usg% 0.166 WS/48 4.8 BPM 13.7 VORP 7,973 minutes 192 games

Dirk Nowitzki playoffs age 22-35 57.9ts% 117 ORtg 24.2 PER 27.3usg% 0.196 WS/48 4.3 BPM 8.8 VORP 5,544 minutes 135 games



Kobe was an average defender throughout his career, same for Dirk. Kobe was a really good facilitator and good rebounder. Dirk was a good facilitator for a big, and an average rebounder.

The major differences honestly to me, is that Kobe was a better facilitator and Dirk was a more efficient player. I'm not sure there is that much of a gap between the two. Dirk's prime was definitely better than Kobe's to me:

Dirk lead the league 3 straight seasons in WS/48. Dirk had 3 seasons with a higher WS/48 than Kobe's best season. Dirk's 4th highest WS/48 exactly ties Kobe's best. Dirk has 11 seasons with a higher ORtg than Kobe's best season.

Per game numbers will favor Kobe. But that's just volume. I take Dirk, even though I rank Kobe higher all-time for a career (because of the rings, who wouldn't).

Kobe had the opportunity to play with a top-5 player ever, and then a top-50 player ever in Pau. Dirk never had those opportunities. He played with Nash, but Nash's career with Dallas he was a 15/7 player (when he left he became a 17/11 player for the following 6 seasons).

I don't think it's fair to rank them on the same level defensively, man. Kobe was an excellent perimeter defender at his peak. Dirk was average at best at that end of the floor.

Heediot
03-11-2017, 06:41 AM
Killer instinct is something you have naturally and it doesn't waver or progress through a regular season or postseason or from losing

Jordan was a killer when he first entered the league, and when he got swept out by the Celtics early and by the bad boys in the middle and when he finally broke through, same with Kobe even when he shot those air balls early in Utah and then during 3peat and after with another 3 in a row finals trip

Brady was the same during regular season and postseason, you don't win 12-14 games each year basically without and a little help from a cheating coach

Lebron had to have killer instinct in order to score like 30 straight points in the ECF against Detroit

give me Irving over Lowry all day but Harden would be a coin toss though I prefer Harden since he has proven he can carry a lesser team to at least the playoffs, give Harden a Lebron and he goes to Finals after Finals, similar to how that OKC tenure was about to get when they made 1 Finals before breaking that trio up

most players with killer instinct have to go through the rough patches of a career to reach the ultimate pinnacle, nature of the business but doesn't mean they lack it because they lost as I pointed out earlier with those same players you mentioned

Personally I believe there are guys who know how to block out the noise and embrace the big moments/games/shots. I think LeBron was a guy who let the outside noise and his personal expectations overwhelm him earlier in his career. The difference between pressure/performing in a conference championship vs. a grand final is significant.

Now a guy like Kobe has his faults too, he may go to extremes in embracing the hero/clutch status and his ego. He will force low percentage double and even tripled team shots and not see an open player, and more then most he may miss that shot. People, especially his fan boys only remember the shots that he does make. A guy like Jordan was a willing passer, because he knew what the right play was and he'll find a Paxon or a Kerr for the better look.

That's just my view some guys know how to block out noise/expectations and embrace the moment more organically then others. Is it inside all of us to be clutch, but it also comes easily and more naturally to some vs. others (who have to develop and hone the mindset).

YAALREADYKNO
03-11-2017, 08:46 AM
I simply disagree with the premise that Dirk was a better defender than Kobe. Dirk was a league average defender (meaning he wasn't so bad he wrecked your D) in a scheme and system designed to completely hide him as a defender. Is it no surprise that the Mav's D was not good unless they had an All-NBA caliber defensive C next to Dirk?

Kobe may have been overrated in terms of his defense, but that was because he stopped playing it consistently in favor of a heavier load on offense. 3-peat Kobe was a very good defender and after that he was still capable of locking an opposing player up for stretches through his second title runs.

So you consider Diop and Dampier to be all NBA defensive Centers?

ManningToTyree
03-11-2017, 09:06 AM
Kobe

JasonJohnHorn
03-11-2017, 10:08 AM
If I'm picking a player and I get them both for 20 years, it's Kobe.

NBA is a business, and Kobe is not only going to give you a chance to win, he's going to sell tickets and merchandise.

Dirk might help you win, but as we saw, in twenty years he was only in a strong position to win 3 times, and only pulled it off once, with one of those three chances seeing him knocked out in the first round.


Dirk's lack of D makes him a little harder to build around than people think, and he's a mid-range shooter at heart, even though he's a great 3pt shooter as well. Plus he's a post player.... as good as he is at 3's, he never hit them at the volume the current league demands.


Kobe has his own set of problems, but a shrewd GM will build around him and he's selling jerseys, even when they are losing, so at the end of the day, Kobe sells tickets and helps you win. Dirk just helps you win.


That said, as a teammate, and as a coach, and as a fan, I'd rather have Dirk. But if you are making me an owner, and I have to think about $$$$$ and winning, Kobe is the only legit option here.

Shammyguy3
03-11-2017, 01:05 PM
I don't think it's fair to rank them on the same level defensively, man. Kobe was an excellent perimeter defender at his peak. Dirk was average at best at that end of the floor.

excellent? Not sure about that. And how long was that for anyway? One season? Two?

Shammyguy3
03-11-2017, 01:07 PM
If I'm picking a player and I get them both for 20 years, it's Kobe.

NBA is a business, and Kobe is not only going to give you a chance to win, he's going to sell tickets and merchandise.

Dirk might help you win, but as we saw, in twenty years he was only in a strong position to win 3 times, and only pulled it off once, with one of those three chances seeing him knocked out in the first round.


Dirk's lack of D makes him a little harder to build around than people think, and he's a mid-range shooter at heart, even though he's a great 3pt shooter as well. Plus he's a post player.... as good as he is at 3's, he never hit them at the volume the current league demands.


Kobe has his own set of problems, but a shrewd GM will build around him and he's selling jerseys, even when they are losing, so at the end of the day, Kobe sells tickets and helps you win. Dirk just helps you win.


That said, as a teammate, and as a coach, and as a fan, I'd rather have Dirk. But if you are making me an owner, and I have to think about $$$$$ and winning, Kobe is the only legit option here.

that's the team thing. Remember that guy Shaq Kobe got to play with? Remove those years and Kobe's teams weren't contenders for more years than Dirk's Mavs.

Redrum187
03-11-2017, 07:44 PM
If I'm picking a player and I get them both for 20 years, it's Kobe.

NBA is a business, and Kobe is not only going to give you a chance to win, he's going to sell tickets and merchandise.

Dirk might help you win, but as we saw, in twenty years he was only in a strong position to win 3 times, and only pulled it off once, with one of those three chances seeing him knocked out in the first round.


Dirk's lack of D makes him a little harder to build around than people think, and he's a mid-range shooter at heart, even though he's a great 3pt shooter as well. Plus he's a post player.... as good as he is at 3's, he never hit them at the volume the current league demands.


Kobe has his own set of problems, but a shrewd GM will build around him and he's selling jerseys, even when they are losing, so at the end of the day, Kobe sells tickets and helps you win. Dirk just helps you win.


That said, as a teammate, and as a coach, and as a fan, I'd rather have Dirk. But if you are making me an owner, and I have to think about $$$$$ and winning, Kobe is the only legit option here.

Do you even know who Dirk's teammates were? The fact Dirk got the Mavericks the best record in the NBA with Josh Howard as his best teammate should speak more than how far Kobe got with Shaq/Pau. I don't think it should be held against Dirk that he and the Mavericks OVERACHIEVED in the regular season and lost to Don Nelson's Warriors. Kobe didn't do jack when he didn't have Shaq or Pau... Dirk still made the Mavericks relevant with Josh Howard and Erick Dampier... Erick ... Dampier...

Vinylman
03-12-2017, 09:57 AM
that's the team thing. Remember that guy Shaq Kobe got to play with? Remove those years and Kobe's teams weren't contenders for more years than Dirk's Mavs.

Lmfao

The lakers went to 3 straight finals between 2008-10 and won 2

That alone is better than dirks entire career

Your hate is blinding

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2017, 11:16 AM
that's the team thing. Remember that guy Shaq Kobe got to play with? Remove those years and Kobe's teams weren't contenders for more years than Dirk's Mavs.

Yeah... but Shaq-less Kobe still has more rings than Dirk, and one can't assume that he wouldn't have had any other complementary pieces for the first 10 seasons of his career.


Don't get me wrong... I agree 100%. Ring count is (despite what many say) LARGELY about luck. Magic was in the finals as a rookie: Bird followed shortly there after. Kobe was brought in as a rookie to a team with Shaq. Duncan got drafted by a team with one of the top-5 centers all time. These guys are lucky. LBJ and Jordan had to wait 6 or 7 seasons for the teams that drafted them to put together a real contender.

My view, and my apologies if I didn't make it clear, is that both guys are about as easy to build around as the other. Dirk had good ownership that was willing to spend. They did twice make bad calls to cut salary (Nast and Finley), but both were so that they could spend money elsewhere. This team was trying to put a winner around Dirk, and three times gave him the tools to do so (had they kept Chandler they might have been able to give him a 4th shot), and of those times, Dirk really dropped the ball once, losing in the first round, got screwed over by officials once (the first title against Miami) and really legitimized his franchise-player/HOF status in 2011. In my mind, officials calling all things equal, Dirk would have 2 titles. Kobe's got help from officials a lot....but at the end of the day... I don't think it would be any easier to build around one than the other. It's not like the Spurs and Duncan where it's easy to build a contender around him. I think Nash and Finley are easily better than Parker and Manu, but Dirk never took them there the way Duncan took Parker and Manu there.

I'm rambling now... sorry...

I like Dirk more than Kobe, but if I'm an owner, I take Kobe for 20 years because he's no less easy to build around, and he sells more merchandise. It's really just about profits, not rings.

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2017, 11:21 AM
Do you even know who Dirk's teammates were? The fact Dirk got the Mavericks the best record in the NBA with Josh Howard as his best teammate should speak more than how far Kobe got with Shaq/Pau. I don't think it should be held against Dirk that he and the Mavericks OVERACHIEVED in the regular season and lost to Don Nelson's Warriors. Kobe didn't do jack when he didn't have Shaq or Pau... Dirk still made the Mavericks relevant with Josh Howard and Erick Dampier... Erick ... Dampier...

Yeah... that was impressive....


People say this, but then these same people never say: "Hey... he had Nash (an MVP) and Finley (of the best all-around guard in the league) and never really made any noise with them."

As mentioned in my other post, Duncan did far more with Parker and Manu than Dirk did with Nash and Finley. Dirk is great, and he's pulled off impressive stuff... but that regular season record meant nothing when they got beat out in the first round. The team was relatively healthy. Well coached. Over performed, in large part thanks to a herculine and HOF performance from Dirk, yes, but Dirk is no easier to build around than Kobe. That's all I'm saying. He's a better teammate. A better shooter. A better post player. A better rebounder. And he's not so inferior on defense to Kobe (who was grossly overrated in that respect) that it negates everything else he did.

As a teammate, coach, or GM, I'd take Dirk over Kobe.

As an owner, I take the bank.

Redrum187
03-12-2017, 01:53 PM
Yeah... that was impressive....


People say this, but then these same people never say: "Hey... he had Nash (an MVP) and Finley (of the best all-around guard in the league) and never really made any noise with them."

As mentioned in my other post, Duncan did far more with Parker and Manu than Dirk did with Nash and Finley. Dirk is great, and he's pulled off impressive stuff... but that regular season record meant nothing when they got beat out in the first round. The team was relatively healthy. Well coached. Over performed, in large part thanks to a herculine and HOF performance from Dirk, yes, but Dirk is no easier to build around than Kobe. That's all I'm saying. He's a better teammate. A better shooter. A better post player. A better rebounder. And he's not so inferior on defense to Kobe (who was grossly overrated in that respect) that it negates everything else he did.

As a teammate, coach, or GM, I'd take Dirk over Kobe.

As an owner, I take the bank.

Dirk never had MVP Nash... Nash was not close to the impact player he became in Phoenix. That's like saying "LeBron played with Shaq and still lost, Kobe is better!" Well... Shaq was not prime/MVP Shaq when he played with LeBron... it's not the same thing.

As for Michael Finley... the hell? What is a pre-primed Dirk and Finley going to do? The fact his name is brought up actually makes me laugh out loud literally.

I was mostly commenting because you said Dirk had 3 chances to win the title... You then brought up the Mavs/GSW series where Josh Howard was Dirk's best teammate as if it somehow equates to Kobe's chances when he had Pau/Shaq. If Kobe managed to get the Lakers the best overall record and/or go to the Finals with a Josh Howard-like player, then I will concede. Truth is, Kobe didn't do anything noteworthy when he had Dirk-like help.

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2017, 07:13 PM
Dirk never had MVP Nash... Nash was not close to the impact player he became in Phoenix. That's like saying "LeBron played with Shaq and still lost, Kobe is better!" Well... Shaq was not prime/MVP Shaq when he played with LeBron... it's not the same thing.


Saying Dirk has Nash the year before he won MVP is NOT the same as saying LBJ had Shaq TEN YEARS AFTER he won MVP.

Shaq, as MVP, averaged nearly 30 points a game and nearly 14 rebounds. As a member of the Cavs a DECADE later, he posted like 12 and 6. If you think comparing Shaq at age 37 and age 27 is the same as comparing Nash at age 29 and age 30, when there wasn't even a full point differential in is PPG and his assists-to-turnover ratio was essentially the same, and the only difference in APG is the fact that 'Antoni ran a faster offense and let Nash run the ball more than he was allowed to in Dallas where plays were often run through Dirk, then you are being wilfully blind or are completely delusional.

Dirk played with ALL-STAR Steve Nash: LBJ had a Shaq they picked up at play-it-again-sports. Dirk has Nash for 4 or 5 great season between 25-29: LBJ had a 37-year-old Shaq for one year (versus Koen who had prime Shaq and dropped the ball with him in several seasons).


Dirk has ALL-STAR Michael Finely. For Finley's best year. That guy was a killer on D, was a strong rebounder for his position, and playmaker, and could shoot the 3-ball.

AND Dirk picked up Antoine Walker off an All-Star season.


AND they had Jamison the year before he made the All-Star team and the year after a 22-ppg season.


He had Nash, Finley, Jamison and Walker ALL at the same time. All All-Star calibre players, one the year before his back-to-back MVP season, one coming off an All-Star season, one about to enter and All-Star season, and one playing as well as he did as an All-Star a couple of seasons before. THAT WAS A SUPER TEAM.

If any other player were given that many All-Stars and only pulled out 52 wins with them, they'd be a laughing stock. If LBJ or Kobe did something like that, people would tear them apart.


Let's not pretend like the Mavs didn't put pieces around Dirk.

And comparing Dirk and Nash to LBJ and Shaq is just intentionally misleading. Come on man.

You take and franchise player and give him FOUR All-Stars and he only gets 52 wins and lose in the first round to the Kings, and he'll get criticised far more than Dirk did.

And out of fairness, I'm not even mentioning Josh Howard being on that team, though he was a couple years away from being an All-Star but was still a rookie.







As for Michael Finley... the hell? What is a pre-primed Dirk and Finley going to do? The fact his name is brought up actually makes me laugh out loud literally.

Well... laugh at Finley if you want: he was a great player, and an All-Star, and it wasn't 'just Dirk and Finley', it was Dirk Nash and Finley for like five years and Jamison and Walker thrown on to boot.

I was mostly commenting because you said Dirk had 3 chances to win the title... You then brought up the

Truth is, Kobe didn't do anything noteworthy when he had Dirk-like help.


You compare what Dirk had in 04 to what Kobe had when he won with Gasol, and you'll see Dirk was likely better equipped. As for when he had little help... I know a lot of people who were impressed with 35 points a game in 06 was pretty impressive. I'd say that season was actually 'noteworthy' to a lot of people, and given that they got knocked out in the same round that Dirk and that 67 win team got knocked out, I'd say the both accomplished about as much in those respective seasons.


Please don't make me defend Kobe any more. I can't stand him.

europagnpilgrim
03-12-2017, 08:11 PM
Personally I believe there are guys who know how to block out the noise and embrace the big moments/games/shots. I think LeBron was a guy who let the outside noise and his personal expectations overwhelm him earlier in his career. The difference between pressure/performing in a conference championship vs. a grand final is significant.

Now a guy like Kobe has his faults too, he may go to extremes in embracing the hero/clutch status and his ego. He will force low percentage double and even tripled team shots and not see an open player, and more then most he may miss that shot. People, especially his fan boys only remember the shots that he does make. A guy like Jordan was a willing passer, because he knew what the right play was and he'll find a Paxon or a Kerr for the better look.

That's just my view some guys know how to block out noise/expectations and embrace the moment more organically then others. Is it inside all of us to be clutch, but it also comes easily and more naturally to some vs. others (who have to develop and hone the mindset).

being clutch and having a killer instinct is really the same but with a slight twist

Lebron didn't let the outside noise over whelm him at all, he destroyed Orlando when they lost as he did the Celtics with Cavs and then with the Heat, only diff. is that he won with the Heat but he went mini Wilt Chamberlain in both jerseys

he laid a egg against Mavs in 11' but it was clearly a rigged series if you go back and look at the previous series against the Bulls where he looked like the best ever or top 3 at worst against a Thibs laced top flight defense

all the top notch players know how to block out noise since most have been in big moments leading up prior to joining the nba, and most are fearless off top and naturally gifted so that helps as well

and no the difference in pressure is really not that significant because its only a round later from the Conf finals to the NBA finals, only difference is that someone will be holding the trophy as opposed to going home a round earlier but in the end the losing team is still going home without the trophy in both series

pressure is media/hype made, the best players go out and perform best to its ability and doing something they have been doing for years and years, that is no pressure to doing something you love to do and are passionate about, not at all

I respect your viewpoint though, to each its own

Shammyguy3
03-12-2017, 09:34 PM
Lmfao

The lakers went to 3 straight finals between 2008-10 and won 2

That alone is better than dirks entire career

Your hate is blinding

Yeah, the Lakers were contenders for 3 years without Shaq. The Mavs were title contenders for 3 years:

2003 lost in WCF to the Spurs (ended up beating the NJ Nets - the Mavs were easily the second best team in the league that year and lost 4-2 to the champions)
2006 lost in Finals to Heat (after beating the Spurs and Suns)
2011 won the NBA finals

It's not hate - it's acknowledging how much help Kobe Bryant had to win his rings. Dirk never had a Pau Gasol. Dirk's best teammates were Nash before he blew up, Josh Howard, Jason Terry, and Tyson Chandler. Jason Terry is on the level of LaMar Odom.

These are damn near identical players in terms of production. Their teams were contenders for the same amount of years, even though Kobe's team had more help.



Yeah... but Shaq-less Kobe still has more rings than Dirk, and one can't assume that he wouldn't have had any other complementary pieces for the first 10 seasons of his career.

Do you think Kobe Bryant would have won a ring with his second best player being at the production level of pre-MVP Nash, Josh Howard, Jason Terry, Tyson Chandler? I don't. Give me Pau/Odom.



Don't get me wrong... I agree 100%. Ring count is (despite what many say) LARGELY about luck. Magic was in the finals as a rookie: Bird followed shortly there after. Kobe was brought in as a rookie to a team with Shaq. Duncan got drafted by a team with one of the top-5 centers all time. These guys are lucky. LBJ and Jordan had to wait 6 or 7 seasons for the teams that drafted them to put together a real contender.

Agreed here which is why I don't like the "rings" argument even when you remove the Pau Gasol years. Charles Barkley is better than Scottie Pippen right? I think most people would say so, but Chuck has zero rings and Pippen has 6.


My view, and my apologies if I didn't make it clear, is that both guys are about as easy to build around as the other. Dirk had good ownership that was willing to spend. They did twice make bad calls to cut salary (Nast and Finley), but both were so that they could spend money elsewhere. This team was trying to put a winner around Dirk, and three times gave him the tools to do so (had they kept Chandler they might have been able to give him a 4th shot), and of those times, Dirk really dropped the ball once, losing in the first round, got screwed over by officials once (the first title against Miami) and really legitimized his franchise-player/HOF status in 2011. In my mind, officials calling all things equal, Dirk would have 2 titles. Kobe's got help from officials a lot....but at the end of the day... I don't think it would be any easier to build around one than the other. It's not like the Spurs and Duncan where it's easy to build a contender around him. I think Nash and Finley are easily better than Parker and Manu, but Dirk never took them there the way Duncan took Parker and Manu there.

I'm rambling now... sorry...

I like Dirk more than Kobe, but if I'm an owner, I take Kobe for 20 years because he's no less easy to build around, and he sells more merchandise. It's really just about profits, not rings.

All good - it's a debate. I lean towards Dirk. I totally get the arguments for Kobe, especially if you're looking at merchandise.

flea
03-12-2017, 10:00 PM
I'd probably take Dirk because he's a great teammate but it's close. For non-impact defenders I'd usually take the guy that's a guard over a forward or big but Dirk's scoring is special enough to give him the edge. He has a way bigger impact (as do all great scoring bigs) on his team's offense than his assist totals indicate.

Shammyguy3
03-12-2017, 10:14 PM
being clutch and having a killer instinct is really the same but with a slight twist

Lebron didn't let the outside noise over whelm him at all, he destroyed Orlando when they lost as he did the Celtics with Cavs and then with the Heat, only diff. is that he won with the Heat but he went mini Wilt Chamberlain in both jerseys

he laid a egg against Mavs in 11' but it was clearly a rigged series if you go back and look at the previous series against the Bulls where he looked like the best ever or top 3 at worst against a Thibs laced top flight defense

all the top notch players know how to block out noise since most have been in big moments leading up prior to joining the nba, and most are fearless off top and naturally gifted so that helps as well

and no the difference in pressure is really not that significant because its only a round later from the Conf finals to the NBA finals, only difference is that someone will be holding the trophy as opposed to going home a round earlier but in the end the losing team is still going home without the trophy in both series

pressure is media/hype made, the best players go out and perform best to its ability and doing something they have been doing for years and years, that is no pressure to doing something you love to do and are passionate about, not at all

I respect your viewpoint though, to each its own

Yeah, totally a rigged series. It's not like great players can play poorly at times in their career. I'm sure Lebron was 100% okay with that series being rigged and decided to play worse.

Shammyguy3
03-12-2017, 10:15 PM
I'd probably take Dirk because he's a great teammate but it's close. For non-impact defenders I'd usually take the guy that's a guard over a forward or big but Dirk's scoring is special enough to give him the edge. He has a way bigger impact (as do all great scoring bigs) on his team's offense than his assist totals indicate.

My line of thinking too. It's similar to Dwight's assists in Orlando, where the Magic would swing the ball once or twice on the perimeter after Dwight got doubled and passed it back to the perimeter. Those hockey-like assists right?

europagnpilgrim
03-12-2017, 10:21 PM
Yeah, totally a rigged series. It's not like great players can play poorly at times in their career. I'm sure Lebron was 100% okay with that series being rigged and decided to play worse.

No doubt any player from the best to the 12th man can have a bad game or two in a 7 game series but I was trying to show you how in the world can a superstar dismantle a way better team defense in Chicago only to play like he didn't know how to play ball the very next round against a lesser team defense

the nba and sports in general are rigged or do you think that rogue ref was just blowing smoke out his ***? Lebron froze himself out by either just forgetting how to play the damn game or that rogue ref is on to something

not only did Lebron play worse against the Mavs after torching the first 3 rounds like a mini Wilt Chamberlain but he played like he never had stepped foot on the court until that series started, especially after seeing him from 2010 and earlier in his career

Shammyguy3
03-12-2017, 10:42 PM
No doubt any player from the best to the 12th man can have a bad game or two in a 7 game series but I was trying to show you how in the world can a superstar dismantle a way better team defense in Chicago only to play like he didn't know how to play ball the very next round against a lesser team defense

the nba and sports in general are rigged or do you think that rogue ref was just blowing smoke out his ***? Lebron froze himself out by either just forgetting how to play the damn game or that rogue ref is on to something

not only did Lebron play worse against the Mavs after torching the first 3 rounds like a mini Wilt Chamberlain but he played like he never had stepped foot on the court until that series started, especially after seeing him from 2010 and earlier in his career

Lebron averaged 18/7/7 in the finals on average efficiency. I don't think that's him playing like he never stepped on the court. That's him playing below his normal level.

And if sports in general are rigged, why discuss anything? There is no point to.

JasonJohnHorn
03-13-2017, 12:06 AM
Do you think Kobe Bryant would have won a ring with his second best player being at the production level of pre-MVP Nash, Josh Howard, Jason Terry, Tyson Chandler? I don't. Give me Pau/Odom.

Two logical phallacies at once: Moving the goal post and strawman. Your comparison was LBJ/Shaq, now it's Kobe and Nash? Moving the goal post.

Strawman? Dirk didn't have 'just Nash'. He has Nash and Finley playing at an All-Star level for several years, and had Nash, Finley, Jamison and Walker, all guys who were all-stars in their prime, and all guys who were in their prime years. It's not like every MVP needs MVP on their team to win. But the comparison is unfair because Dirk and Kobe play different positions. It's faired to compare Dirk to Duncan, because they are both forwards, and both forwards with All-Star guards (Nash/Finley; Parker/Manu). Look what Duncan did in his first few seasons with those two compared to what Dirk pulled off.

If you want to compare situations, you have to make them fair. You are setting them up for failure.





Agreed here which is why I don't like the "rings" argument even when you remove the Pau Gasol years. Charles Barkley is better than Scottie Pippen right? I think most people would say so, but Chuck has zero rings and Pippen has 6.

Right. What does that have to do with anything. Barkley never played with Jordan or anybody at Jordan's level until he got to Houston and by that time Hakeem was already past his prime years and Barkley was struggling with injury.




All good - it's a debate. I lean towards Dirk. I totally get the arguments for Kobe, especially if you're looking at merchandise.

I'm not a fan of Kobe. The hero-ball thing. I like team guys, like CP3, Duncan, Garnett, Hill. As I said, Dirk is a better teammate. He's a better shooter, and obviously a better rebounder (though it is unfair to compare the two in that regard because of the positional difference).

Shammyguy3
03-13-2017, 02:14 AM
Two logical phallacies at once: Moving the goal post and strawman. Your comparison was LBJ/Shaq, now it's Kobe and Nash? Moving the goal post.

My comparison was never LBJ/Shaq. Don't confuse me with other posters.



Strawman? Dirk didn't have 'just Nash'. He has Nash and Finley playing at an All-Star level for several years, and had Nash, Finley, Jamison and Walker, all guys who were all-stars in their prime, and all guys who were in their prime years. It's not like every MVP needs MVP on their team to win. But the comparison is unfair because Dirk and Kobe play different positions. It's faired to compare Dirk to Duncan, because they are both forwards, and both forwards with All-Star guards (Nash/Finley; Parker/Manu). Look what Duncan did in his first few seasons with those two compared to what Dirk pulled off.

Michael Finley was not that good. C'mon. He was consistently average his entire career.
Antawn Jamison? You mean the 1 season he played in Dallas? He was a career 52.3ts% 0.112 WS/48 109 ORtg player. Meh right? With Dallas that one year, he became a 58.1ts% 0.183 WS/48 122 ORtg player. Holy batman - I am crediting Dirk tremendously with that because he never got close to that production again in his career, either before or after his 80 game stint in Dallas.

Antoine Walker? You mean his 1 season he also played in Dallas? Where he put up a 101 ORtg, 47.5ts%, .066 WS/48? Walker was garbage.

And you're the one moving the goal post now, as the comparison was supposed to be Dirk and Kobe. Now you say you can't compare them because they're at different positions. So let's compare Dirk versus Duncan? What?



If you want to compare situations, you have to make them fair. You are setting them up for failure.

No i'm not






Right. What does that have to do with anything. Barkley never played with Jordan or anybody at Jordan's level until he got to Houston and by that time Hakeem was already past his prime years and Barkley was struggling with injury.

It's an analogy of Pippen playing with a generational talent in Jordan, like how Kobe played with a generational talent in Shaq. Barkley had good teammates, like Dirk did, but never had the chance to play with a generation talent in his prime with Philly/Phoenix (like you admitted). You actually made my point. Dirk was never in the situation Kobe was. When you remove that generational talent, Dirk did just as much with his team as Kobe did with his team (and Kobe's teammates were better).


I'm not a fan of Kobe. The hero-ball thing. I like team guys, like CP3, Duncan, Garnett, Hill. As I said, Dirk is a better teammate. He's a better shooter, and obviously a better rebounder (though it is unfair to compare the two in that regard because of the positional difference).

I am a fan of Kobe. But I can have this debate and set that aside.

europagnpilgrim
03-13-2017, 02:54 AM
Lebron averaged 18/7/7 in the finals on average efficiency. I don't think that's him playing like he never stepped on the court. That's him playing below his normal level.

And if sports in general are rigged, why discuss anything? There is no point to.

Lebron put up like 38ppg against the Magic one series and him and Pierce use to battle it out with 40pt games before he went to Heat then when he went to Heat and they were down 3-2 he went mini Wilt Chamberlain so what he put up on the Mavs series was basically playing like he just stepped on the court and got 18ppg off of sheer athletic ability/natural talent

of course he played below his normal level, like he froze himself out because for sure Terry/Marion/Stephenson didn't do it though they got the boatload credit of getting into his head, go look at his stats the first 3 rounds that year in playoffs and see the significant drop off also

because we live in a society that turns a blind eye to what goes on because we have heavily invested in such entertainment, the grammys and Oscars and so forth are rigged/private selected, its not just sports

its not as scripted as say WWE but its pretty damn close because the refs control the game, how come you think they are never fined by the nba for blowing calls and as soon as someone calls them out they are fined heavily?



if you cant see that then I guess you are in a whole different dimension of brainwashed

go back and watch that 02' Lakers/Kings series and tell me if that wasn't fixed to a certain degree, I mean it smacks you right in the face and that's 15yrs ago

why would that ref that served prison time for leaking out the rigged info go to prison if what he saying was not true?

why did Canseco call out Arod when the first set of names leaked out about the steroid use in baseball and everybody though he was crazy? and he was actually on point accurate

cheating=fixed=rigged, its just different names they like to call it, all links in the same damn chain

mightybosstone
03-13-2017, 11:34 AM
excellent? Not sure about that. And how long was that for anyway? One season? Two?

Huh? Dude, he was a 12-time All-Defensive team winner. Now, I'll admit that he was just getting the award based on his prior work those last few seasons, but he was an elite perimeter defender for the better part of a decade. If I had to list the 10 best perimeter defenders of the last 20 years at their peaks, I don't know how I could leave him off that conversation.

Dirk was never remotely deserving of that kind of defensive recognition.

Forever35
03-13-2017, 12:38 PM
Eeeeneeee... Meeeneeee... Miiineee...

For me it would have to be Kobe... Come on, he has his own shoe...

Kobe was great... I think he gets forgotten a little after the achilles... Usually you don't see one of the greats go down to a career ending injury... I won't be going out on a limb by saying if that injury never happened Kobe is most definitely ending his career with 15 straight 25ppg seasons...

Shammyguy3
03-13-2017, 01:53 PM
Huh? Dude, he was a 12-time All-Defensive team winner. Now, I'll admit that he was just getting the award based on his prior work those last few seasons, but he was an elite perimeter defender for the better part of a decade. If I had to list the 10 best perimeter defenders of the last 20 years at their peaks, I don't know how I could leave him off that conversation.

Dirk was never remotely deserving of that kind of defensive recognition.

I view Kobe's defensive teams like I do Jeter's gold gloves.

10 best perimeter defenders the last 20 years
Tony Allen
Kawhi Leonard
Ron Artest
Avery Bradley
Chris Paul
Andre Iguodala
Gerald Wallace
Bruce Bowen
Raja Bell
Andrei Kirilenko

Kobe's not better than those guys defensively. And I'm missing other guys that never received the recognition they deserved (Luol Deng, Ricky Rubio, Jimmy Butler, Shane Battier, Chauncey Billups, Tayshaun Prince, and I'm sure i'm missing a few others)

Blitzbolt
03-15-2017, 10:25 PM
I got Dirk....I think Shaq and pau help Kobe with the rings while Dirk didn't had elite help like he did.

mightybosstone
03-15-2017, 10:34 PM
I view Kobe's defensive teams like I do Jeter's gold gloves.

10 best perimeter defenders the last 20 years
Tony Allen
Kawhi Leonard
Ron Artest
Avery Bradley
Chris Paul
Andre Iguodala
Gerald Wallace
Bruce Bowen
Raja Bell
Andrei Kirilenko

Kobe's not better than those guys defensively. And I'm missing other guys that never received the recognition they deserved (Luol Deng, Ricky Rubio, Jimmy Butler, Shane Battier, Chauncey Billups, Tayshaun Prince, and I'm sure i'm missing a few others)
Some of those guys should absolutely be ahead of Kobe, but my point is that the list is debatable in the first place. Regardless of whether you think Kobe belongs in the top 10 or the top 20 or wherever you'd put him, the bottom line is that he at least belongs in that conversation at all. How many big men would we have to go through before we'd get to Dirk in terms of best interior defenders of the last 20 years? Easily hundreds, right?

Forprimarily this reason, I think Kobe makes up some of Dirk's advantage in terms of their peak stats and Dirk's efficiency. Combine that with Kobe's superior playmaking ability, and I'd give him the slight edge over Dirk.

Shammyguy3
03-15-2017, 11:04 PM
Some of those guys should absolutely be ahead of Kobe, but my point is that the list is debatable in the first place. Regardless of whether you think Kobe belongs in the top 10 or the top 20 or wherever you'd put him, the bottom line is that he at least belongs in that conversation at all. How many big men would we have to go through before we'd get to Dirk in terms of best interior defenders of the last 20 years? Easily hundreds, right?

Forprimarily this reason, I think Kobe makes up some of Dirk's advantage in terms of their peak stats and Dirk's efficiency. Combine that with Kobe's superior playmaking ability, and I'd give him the slight edge over Dirk.

Good point but I combat that with the fact that just because Kobe may be in the top X players for perimeter defenders the last decade, and Dirk is in the top Y (where Y is greater than X), doesn't mean Kobe has this huge edge.

Hakeem is arguably the 5th best center ever right? Does that mean Oscar Robertson is better just because he is the 2nd best PG ever? Or that Jerry West being the 2nd or 3rd best SG ever is more impressive than Hakeem?

And I could name plenty more defenders that are better than Kobe - guys that were primarily used as defensive specialists that may have not received a ton of playing time. Players like Ronnie Brewer.

The argument that Dirk's defense being average affects his teams' overall defensive scheme more than Kobe's defense being average is an argument I can listen to for sure. But Dirk's impact offensively definitely outweighs Kobe's, and that gap is large enough to compensate for me to take Dirk

valade16
03-16-2017, 03:02 PM
I just simply disagree with the premise that Kobe was average on defense. He was definitely a good defender early in his career and with Shaq. He didn't start being an average defender until after when he took on a heavier load offensively, and even then, similar to T-Mac, he was capable of being a good defender when he could spare the energy.

I also don't think Dirk's offense is much better than Kobe's. We are only talking about efficiency, but volume must also play a role here. Kobe scored 10 more PPG in his best season, and he didn't score it inefficiently.

As Shammy you pointed out, when Shaq left the Lakers, here was the rank of their Ortg when Kobe was essentially by himself:

8th
7th
3rd (2/3 of the year without Pau)

To be able to lead those teams to top 10 offensive efficiency those seasons is pretty remarkable to me. Kobe has had more help in his career than Dirk, but for those seasons I don't think Dirk ever had less help than Kobe did and yet Kobe still had them among the top 10 best offenses in those seasons.

We are massively overthinking this, Kobe is the better player and he should be the pick.

Shammyguy3
03-16-2017, 03:39 PM
We are massively overthinking this, Kobe is the better player and he should be the pick.

This i totally disagree with :laugh2: If Kobe is better, it's marginal. He's higher in my all-time rank, but that takes into account his career rings. I can't put someone with 1 ring above someone who is similar prime-wise and career length-wise over someone with 5 rings, regardless of the help. However, If there is a separation between these two it is marginal because Dirk is a better offensive player than Kobe, and that offsets it for me.

valade16
03-16-2017, 03:50 PM
This i totally disagree with :laugh2: If Kobe is better, it's marginal. He's higher in my all-time rank, but that takes into account his career rings. I can't put someone with 1 ring above someone who is similar prime-wise and career length-wise over someone with 5 rings, regardless of the help. However, If there is a separation between these two it is marginal because Dirk is a better offensive player than Kobe, and that offsets it for me.

He's the more efficient offensive player, I don't know if he's actually better. Kobe has a way higher volume (on good efficiency) and is a way better facilitator.

In fact Kobe has 3 seasons of OBPM higher than Dirk's highest.

FOXHOUND
03-16-2017, 05:03 PM
I think there is some serious revisionist history in this thread to try and discredit Kobe and to prop up Dirk. I think some people are viewing Dirk later in his career and blanketing that over his full career. I think some people are trying really hard to discredit Steve Nash in Dallas, as if he wasn't an All-NBA 3rd Team player in back to back seasons for them.

Dirk's defense got way better throughout his career. Early on, he was pretty bad on that end despite his strong rebounding and the ability to get some steals and blocks. His offense also progressively improved, mainly by moving more inward after Nash left and eventually developing that unstoppable post shot we now all know and love. Dirk didn't have that shot earlier in his career and relied far more on 3 point shots. In analytic theory, this was a bad decision on his part but we all know that's not the truth, right?

Let's look at the 2002-03 season. Dallas finished 60-22 that year, tied for best in the NBA with San Antonio who beat them on a tiebreaker. The Lakers finished 50-32 that season, good for the 5th seed in the west and tied with Detroit and Portland for 5th best in the league.

What happened? That was when Shaq started becoming fat and lazy, but more so this was the season after the infamous "toe" injury and following surgery. While Shaq was still dominant, he wasn't 3peat Shaq ever again. Kobe played 41.5 MPG and averaged 30 PPG, 6 APG, 7 RPG, 2.2 STL, 0.8 BLK while shooting .451/.383/.843 with 4.0 3PTA and 8.7 FTA a game. Tim Duncan won MVP that year. Kobe finished 3rd, two places ahead of Shaq and four places ahead of Dirk. Kobe also finished 8th in DPOY voting that season.

Why did Dirk finish so low in MVP voting with Dallas tying for the best record in the NBA? It's probably because that Dallas team was pretty damn good. Steve Nash, as mentioned, was not only an All-Star but finished on the 3rd Team in All-NBA. Michael Finley brought 19.3 PPG and Nick Van Exel, while his numbers may look pedestrian by todays standards, brought 12.5 PPG and 4.3 APG off the bench while finishing 4th in 6th Man of the Year voting. It's also worth nothing that Dirk was 2nd Team All-NBA that season, and didn't make a 1st team until Nash left Dallas which allowed his role to grow combined with other bigs in the NBA aging and falling.

The Lakers had Shaq and Kobe, everyone remembers that. People remember the names of the others, especially guys like Derek Fisher and Rick Fox. But how productive were these guys, especially after a 3peat that leaves guys worn out?

Fisher put up 10.5 PPG on 9.5 FGA and 1.5 FTA with 3.6 APG that season in 34.5 MPG and for the first time was a full time starter.

Fox averaged 9 PPG on 8.2 FGA and 0.9 FTA.

Starting at PF was a mix of Samaki Walker for 39 games (6.3 PPG in 24.5 MPG as a starter), Horry for 26 games (8.2 PPG shooting .371/.254/.794 with 3.1 APG in 34.5 MPG as a starter). The remaining 17 starts there were split by Slava Medvedenko and Mark Madsen.

Quite simply, beyond the powers of Kobe and Shaq, that team was absolute dog **** lmao. That was enough for them during the 3peat, but at this stage with the infamous toe and Shaq no longer being dominant enough it was clearly not.

Basically, what I'm saying so far is that it shouldn't be downplayed just how much better Kobe was than Dirk earlier in their careers. Kobe was already one of the best 5 players in the NBA along with Shaq, Duncan, KG and TMac, and at worst 3rd best. Dirk was a soft top 10, as he dropped to All-NBA 3rd Team in the 03-04 season.

Let's jump into the playoffs, the WCF. San Antonio vs Dallas. Dirk got hurt and only played in 3 of the 6 games. Some people might remember that. Do they remember game 5 of that series?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200305270SAS.html

Dallas won 103-91 in game 5 of the WCF without Dirk. If that isn't a simple example of how good that team was, I don't know what is.

The other thing is - when was Dirk ever better than Kobe? When Nash left, Dirk ascended and became a 1st Team All-NBA player for 5 of the next 6 seasons. How can we forget that Kobe outscored Dirk and his entire Mavs team by himself for three quarters surrounded by Odom and garbage?

This post is way too long to say something obvious, but judging by the thread it isn't as obvious as it should be. For a 20-year career, I'll take the 11-time 1st Team All-NBA and 9-time 1st Team All-Defense player over the 5-time 1st Team All-NBA player. For anyone who doubts Kobe's defense or the validity of a coach voted award, go rewatch the 2009 WCF when he would switch onto and lock down Melo or Billups whenever either one got too hot.

Supreme LA
03-16-2017, 08:09 PM
I can't really see how this is even a debate. I guess the real question should be, who would you rather build around to WIN championships? Not who's easier to build around.

It's obviously Kobe.

Supreme LA
03-16-2017, 08:16 PM
I view Kobe's defensive teams like I do Jeter's gold gloves.

10 best perimeter defenders the last 20 years
Tony Allen
Kawhi Leonard
Ron Artest
Avery Bradley
Chris Paul
Andre Iguodala
Gerald Wallace
Bruce Bowen
Raja Bell
Andrei Kirilenko

Kobe's not better than those guys defensively. And I'm missing other guys that never received the recognition they deserved (Luol Deng, Ricky Rubio, Jimmy Butler, Shane Battier, Chauncey Billups, Tayshaun Prince, and I'm sure i'm missing a few others)

You do realize that the majority of your list outside of Kawaii & CP3 consists of players who's only role was to defend? None of which had to carry the burden of running an offense and scoring. I would put more value into your list if some of those players were actual 2-way players on a consistent basis and had to carry an offensive load that Kobe had to.

I think many people try to diminish the fact that Kobe was and could be a great defender when needed. His defense was always superb in the postseason when it mattered. If you're looking at it objectively, Kobe on any single possession in a game that actually mattered is better and more capable of stopping an opposing player than a majority of defenders you have on that list.

Kobe's defensive ability was simply greater than you actually give him credit for is all I'm saying. If you're ranking him in terms of his effort during the regular season after Shaq left than you have a point. Still, that doesn't equate to a majority of those players having a greater ability to defend than Kobe.

Seriously, could you really imagine what Kobe could have done defensively if he put forth all of his energy and that side of the ball? Like if he literally had no offensive role aside from spotting up and shooting open jumpers. He would easily have been a better defender than 95% of your list.

It's just common sense. Anybody who's played basketball competitively understands the amount of energy exerted to carry a team on both ends, I give Kobe tons of credit for his playoff defense considering how much energy he exerted to carry the offensive load of his team during those runs.

FlashBolt
03-17-2017, 02:03 PM
You guys are overrating Kobe's defense. He hasn't been an elite defensive player for over a decade. His best defensive seasons were during the 2001-2003 years. I'm still shocked some of you keep bringing up the defensive teams he's been on when it's evident he didn't deserve at least five of those.

And this question says "who would you start a team with."

Do any of you truly think it's easier to build around Kobe than Dirk?

valade16
03-17-2017, 03:55 PM
You guys are overrating Kobe's defense. He hasn't been an elite defensive player for over a decade. His best defensive seasons were during the 2001-2003 years. I'm still shocked some of you keep bringing up the defensive teams he's been on when it's evident he didn't deserve at least five of those.

And this question says "who would you start a team with."

Do any of you truly think it's easier to build around Kobe than Dirk?

Minus every single All-Defensive team you feel Kobe shouldn't have been on and he still has more than Dirk. I'd also point out Kobe being good on defense "a decade ago" still encompasses nearly half his career.

FlashBolt
03-17-2017, 04:51 PM
Minus every single All-Defensive team you feel Kobe shouldn't have been on and he still has more than Dirk. I'd also point out Kobe being good on defense "a decade ago" still encompasses nearly half his career.

Kobe's personality is what loses this for me. I just pointed out his overrated defensive accomplishments. You have to build him with specific players. Dirk is a different case and would work with anyone. I'd take that guy. And yes, Dirk would have more rings if he played with Shaq as well.

valade16
03-17-2017, 05:20 PM
Kobe's personality is what loses this for me. I just pointed out his overrated defensive accomplishments. You have to build him with specific players. Dirk is a different case and would work with anyone. I'd take that guy. And yes, Dirk would have more rings if he played with Shaq as well.

I get the personality argument. I think we're giving Dirk too much credit, he needs a very specific team/player to win too. If you don't have an elite rim-protecting C who can guard PFs and recover and help on Dirk's man you won't win with Dirk.

And if you take out all of Shaq's rings, Kobe still has more rings than Dirk.

FlashBolt
03-17-2017, 08:32 PM
I get the personality argument. I think we're giving Dirk too much credit, he needs a very specific team/player to win too. If you don't have an elite rim-protecting C who can guard PFs and recover and help on Dirk's man you won't win with Dirk.

And if you take out all of Shaq's rings, Kobe still has more rings than Dirk.

Kobe has had more help, though. Dirk has never played with a player of Pau's caliber. Seriously; even in 2011, I wouldn't say it was the Mavs that were just "too good" but LeBron just choking away what should have been his first ring.

I'm not sure we're giving Dirk enough credit for staying with the Mavs through it all and I've never heard one bad thing about him. Personally, I just find it easier to get others to play with Dirk. He's not going to dominate the ball and he's an absolute savage when it matters (one of the few players who actually improves in the playoffs). I just think about it from the perspective if Dirk had Shaq early on in his career. Shaq probably wouldn't have left and they would have continued winning for a longer duration.

Supreme LA
03-17-2017, 10:14 PM
You guys are overrating Kobe's defense. He hasn't been an elite defensive player for over a decade. His best defensive seasons were during the 2001-2003 years. I'm still shocked some of you keep bringing up the defensive teams he's been on when it's evident he didn't deserve at least five of those.

And this question says "who would you start a team with."

Do any of you truly think it's easier to build around Kobe than Dirk?

If by "easier" you mean just to plug random players into a lineup than you have a point. But is the goal to simply put a decent team out on the floor OR is it to win and compete for titles? If it's the latter then there's better choice than Kobe.

Yes i get that Kobe's alpha personality and ball dominance requires a specific mix of players but it's not like you couldn't. Kobe's had two lasting title runs with 2 totally different lineups throughout his career.

I really don't understand the premise of your argument.

FlashBolt
03-17-2017, 11:13 PM
If by "easier" you mean just to plug random players into a lineup than you have a point. But is the goal to simply put a decent team out on the floor OR is it to win and compete for titles? If it's the latter then there's better choice than Kobe.

Yes i get that Kobe's alpha personality and ball dominance requires a specific mix of players but it's not like you couldn't. Kobe's had two lasting title runs with 2 totally different lineups throughout his career.

I really don't understand the premise of your argument.

By easier, I mean there wouldn't be any drama involved and since he's not a ball dominator, you wouldn't have to worry about alpha personality.

And you keep forgetting he played with Shaq and his second stint was still a very solid team. Pau Gasol was an absolute animal. Who did Dirk play with?

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 03:23 AM
Well they won 3, and then he won 2 more after that.

Also keep in mind, replace Kobe with an average player, lakers aren't winning three in a row. Probably not two either.

How are they not winning three in a row from 00-02?

Shaq
00 Playoffs - 30.7/15.4/3.1/2.4/0.6 - .566 TS%, 31.4 Usage, 25.0 Game Score, 115 ORtg
01 Playoffs - 30.4/15.4/3.2/2.4/0.4 - .564 TS%, 32.1 Usage, 24.1 Game Score, 113 ORtg
02 Playoffs - 28.5/12.6/2.8/2.5/0.5 - .569 TS%, 31.5 Usage, 22.0 Game Score, 112 ORtg

Kobe
00 Playoffs - 21.1/4.5/4.4/1.5/1.5 - .517 TS%, 26.7 Usage, 14.5 Game Score, 107 ORtg (missed a game in the Finals that they won)
01 Playoffs - 29.4/7.3/6.1/0.8/1.6 - .555 TS%, 30.4 Usage, 22.0 Game Score, 116 ORtg
02 Playoffs - 26.6/5.8/4.6/0.9/1.4 - .511 TS%, 30.1 Usage, 17.3 Game Score, 107 ORtg


He had little to do with 2000. Not nearly as productive as Shaq in 02 but shot more than he should have. You could possibly argue 01 he nearly equally as important through that run. But Shaq didn't need Kobe. But Kobe needed Shaq.

YAALREADYKNO
03-18-2017, 07:51 AM
By easier, I mean there wouldn't be any drama involved and since he's not a ball dominator, you wouldn't have to worry about alpha personality.

And you keep forgetting he played with Shaq and his second stint was still a very solid team. Pau Gasol was an absolute animal. Who did Dirk play with?

The great Jason Terry that "STACKED" 2011 mavs team who went 2-7 without Dirk that same season 😂😂😂

valade16
03-18-2017, 09:26 AM
Kobe has had more help, though. Dirk has never played with a player of Pau's caliber. Seriously; even in 2011, I wouldn't say it was the Mavs that were just "too good" but LeBron just choking away what should have been his first ring.

I'm not sure we're giving Dirk enough credit for staying with the Mavs through it all and I've never heard one bad thing about him. Personally, I just find it easier to get others to play with Dirk. He's not going to dominate the ball and he's an absolute savage when it matters (one of the few players who actually improves in the playoffs). I just think about it from the perspective if Dirk had Shaq early on in his career. Shaq probably wouldn't have left and they would have continued winning for a longer duration.

Can people stop disrespecting Steve Nash? Only when it comes to Dirk could people look at a 2-time MVP and say "Dirk played with nobody". I get it, he wasn't "Steve Nash"... except that argument is kind of hollow. Nash was 29 when he went to Phoenix, he didn't suddenly get better he was simply in a better scheme for his talents. He was still an All-NBA caliber player next to Dirk.

I get the Dirk loyalty argument and maybe Shaq wouldn't have left, but whose to say they win more than 3 titles with Shaq getting lazy and fat? Heck, when Shaq/Kobe were winning their first ring Dirk was averaging 17.5/6.5 in his second season. The Lakers likely lose that WCF to the Blazers.

Heediot
03-18-2017, 09:55 AM
It's possible Shaq may reduced Dirk's effectiveness and reduce him to just a shooter. Part of Dirk's game is his ability to take you inside and outside. He uses either or to set you up. With shaq I'm not saying he still can't do that, but the spacing would be more clogged for him to maximize that strategy. But him and Shaq in the triangle would be filthy as both have good feel as passers, so you never know how Phil would utilize them. The possibilities are intriguing.

Shammyguy3
03-18-2017, 12:08 PM
Can people stop disrespecting Steve Nash? Only when it comes to Dirk could people look at a 2-time MVP and say "Dirk played with nobody". I get it, he wasn't "Steve Nash"... except that argument is kind of hollow. Nash was 29 when he went to Phoenix, he didn't suddenly get better he was simply in a better scheme for his talents. He was still an All-NBA caliber player next to Dirk.

I get the Dirk loyalty argument and maybe Shaq wouldn't have left, but whose to say they win more than 3 titles with Shaq getting lazy and fat? Heck, when Shaq/Kobe were winning their first ring Dirk was averaging 17.5/6.5 in his second season. The Lakers likely lose that WCF to the Blazers.

My point being - was Steve Nash in Dallas a more productive player than Pau Gasol was in Los Angeles? I say no. So even the best teammate Dirk had wasn't as good as Kobe's 2nd best teammate he's ever had when they were all on their respective teams

Chronz
03-18-2017, 01:36 PM
Can people stop disrespecting Steve Nash? Only when it comes to Dirk could people look at a 2-time MVP and say "Dirk played with nobody". I get it, he wasn't "Steve Nash"... except that argument is kind of hollow. Nash was 29 when he went to Phoenix, he didn't suddenly get better he was simply in a better scheme for his talents. He was still an All-NBA caliber player next to Dirk.

I get the Dirk loyalty argument and maybe Shaq wouldn't have left, but whose to say they win more than 3 titles with Shaq getting lazy and fat? Heck, when Shaq/Kobe were winning their first ring Dirk was averaging 17.5/6.5 in his second season. The Lakers likely lose that WCF to the Blazers.

Some metrics grade one of Nash seasons with Dallas higher than even his first mvp season.

FlashBolt
03-18-2017, 01:37 PM
Can people stop disrespecting Steve Nash? Only when it comes to Dirk could people look at a 2-time MVP and say "Dirk played with nobody". I get it, he wasn't "Steve Nash"... except that argument is kind of hollow. Nash was 29 when he went to Phoenix, he didn't suddenly get better he was simply in a better scheme for his talents. He was still an All-NBA caliber player next to Dirk.

I get the Dirk loyalty argument and maybe Shaq wouldn't have left, but whose to say they win more than 3 titles with Shaq getting lazy and fat? Heck, when Shaq/Kobe were winning their first ring Dirk was averaging 17.5/6.5 in his second season. The Lakers likely lose that WCF to the Blazers.

I don't know where to even begin.

1) That wasn't the same Steve Nash. Stop. There was a clear difference in Nash's development and he far from the MVP-caliber player we saw in Phoenix with such a stacked offensive squad. Dallas never had that at the time so it's not even fair to equate Nash in his Dallas days to Phoenix. By your logic, did Isaiah Thomas just get better or was he always this good? He's fairly old for someone who just became an elite player but he has improved significantly and there is no debate regarding that.

2) Fat Shaq was still a beast in 2004 to 2006 and Dirk was playing at such a high level then. Remember, they made the NBA Finals and if not for Wade going historically GOAT levels at the NBA Finals, Dirk would have essentially carried a team like Hakeem did with Houston.

3) Dirk averaging 17.5/6.5 was nothing to scoff at. Kobe got easier touches with Shaq being there so that definitely plays a role. Shaq allowed Kobe to develop at his own pace whereas other players such as LeBron had to be the go-to guy right out of the league. Not to mention that Dirk would have fit exceptionally well with Shaq because he would draw frontcourt defenders away and no one doubles Shaq with Dirk in the perimeter.

4) Even though Nash was a very good player, please don't act like Pau Gasol wouldn't be the best player Dirk would have played with. The simple fact is Kobe has had more help by virtue of the Lakers organization. It would really be difficult to build around Kobe when he trashtalks half the players he has played with. Hell, even the CURRENT team, they hated Kobe. When they said Kobe will "mentor" them, I already knew it was a bad move. Kobe is not a mentor because he'll project his level of play with an average player. D'Angelo said there was more freedom with Kobe gone.. Who the hell says those things? Answer: Someone who doesn't have respect for another.

Mr.B
03-18-2017, 01:38 PM
But Nash was a 14/7 type player, not the 17/11 he became in Phoenix. He was a later bloomer. Kobe had far and away more help than Dirk ever did

At the time Dirk and Nash played together they also had a coach that would bench you for playing defense.

FlashBolt
03-18-2017, 01:41 PM
I'm still amazed how much you guys forget Shaq dominated. Literally, you stuff Shaq with another All-Star quality player and you were favorites to win a ring. I can't imagine a scenario in which Allen Iverson, Dirk Nowitzki, and KG don't win three rings without prime Shaq. That's absurd. Prime LeBron and prime Shaq would probably be tormenting the league like no one would imagine.

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 03:35 PM
Can people stop disrespecting Steve Nash? Only when it comes to Dirk could people look at a 2-time MVP and say "Dirk played with nobody". I get it, he wasn't "Steve Nash"... except that argument is kind of hollow. Nash was 29 when he went to Phoenix, he didn't suddenly get better he was simply in a better scheme for his talents. He was still an All-NBA caliber player next to Dirk.

I get the Dirk loyalty argument and maybe Shaq wouldn't have left, but whose to say they win more than 3 titles with Shaq getting lazy and fat? Heck, when Shaq/Kobe were winning their first ring Dirk was averaging 17.5/6.5 in his second season. The Lakers likely lose that WCF to the Blazers.

That first ring that Kobe didn't even play a game in the Finals in and wasn't a starter all season for?

Kobe shot 43% in that Portland series and was pretty weak until games 6 (loss) and 7 for the Lakers.

Dirk and Kobe were pretty equal in values in the 00 season.

Shaq wins 00-02 with Dirk like he would with Kobe, wouldn't be an issue for the Lakers.

Maybe they even win against the Spurs in 03 (Kobe was pretty bad in that series in the 3 loses that weren't Game 5).


But that Lakers team is very different with Dirk instead of Kobe. Dirk would play off of Shaq and away from the rim and would have less points and boards playing next to him. Making him look more like a roll/starting player instead of an all-star. I'd say 19/7 per game by 01-04 range instead of 25/10. The Lakers are just a different team with Dirk instead of Kobe.

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 03:37 PM
It's possible Shaq may reduced Dirk's effectiveness and reduce him to just a shooter. Part of Dirk's game is his ability to take you inside and outside. He uses either or to set you up. With shaq I'm not saying he still can't do that, but the spacing would be more clogged for him to maximize that strategy. But him and Shaq in the triangle would be filthy as both have good feel as passers, so you never know how Phil would utilize them. The possibilities are intriguing.

Well Dirk could certainly play the 10 minutes per game that Shaq sat during this time to do that then. But I agree, he'd be more of a shooter and passer and long rebounder rather than another post player.

I think Dirk would actually do pretty well with that set up though.

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 03:44 PM
Some metrics grade one of Nash seasons with Dallas higher than even his first mvp season.

He was certainly a much better playoff performer in Phoenix than in Dallas

valade16
03-18-2017, 04:51 PM
That first ring that Kobe didn't even play a game in the Finals in and wasn't a starter all season for?

Kobe shot 43% in that Portland series and was pretty weak until games 6 (loss) and 7 for the Lakers.

Dirk and Kobe were pretty equal in values in the 00 season.

Shaq wins 00-02 with Dirk like he would with Kobe, wouldn't be an issue for the Lakers.

Maybe they even win against the Spurs in 03 (Kobe was pretty bad in that series in the 3 loses that weren't Game 5).

But that Lakers team is very different with Dirk instead of Kobe. Dirk would play off of Shaq and away from the rim and would have less points and boards playing next to him. Making him look more like a roll/starting player instead of an all-star. I'd say 19/7 per game by 01-04 range instead of 25/10. The Lakers are just a different team with Dirk instead of Kobe.

The first Lakers title Kobe started 62 of 66 games he played and averaged 38 MPG and played 5/6 games in the Finals. I think you're mistaken.

Also, Kobe's FG% is a poor measurement of his offensive efficiency. First he shot 52% from 3 that series and his TS% was .552 (Shaq's was .550 for reference).

I don't think Young Dirk with Shaq beats those Blazers in 00.

Kobe's BPM that year was 5.3 and his VORP was 4.7. Dirk's were 1.7 and 2.7. Not to mention Kobe was an All-NBA 1st defender (one he actually deserved) and it's clear: Kobe was just flat out better that season.

valade16
03-18-2017, 04:53 PM
Some metrics grade one of Nash seasons with Dallas higher than even his first mvp season.

People can keep trying to sell this "Nash wasn't that good before Phoenix" drivel, I'm not buying it.

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 05:26 PM
People can keep trying to sell this "Nash wasn't that good before Phoenix" drivel, I'm not buying it.

Nash became better because he had more than just Dirk to pass to.

Johnson, Marion, and Stoudemire along with Q. Richardson/Raja Bell/Boris Diaw were better guys for him to feed than Antoine Walker, Michael Finley and Josh Howard.

His Assist % went from mid 30's to upper 40's/50's because he had more than just Dirk he could pass to.


Look at the starters field goal percentages that he had in his last year in Dallas to his first year in Phoenix

Dallas 03-04
Finley - .443
Nowitzki - .462
Walker - .428
Howard - .430 (a rookie, but that's a big there)

Phoenix 04-05
Johnson - .461
Marion - .476
Stoudemire - .559
Richardson - .389


This is a huge upgrade for Nash to run in and is why he exploded with them.

mngopher35
03-18-2017, 05:53 PM
^ Isn't that kind of Valades point here? Nash was an elite talent/player on both teams it's just that the talent/fit of the Suns got him more recognition and better assists numbers.

Therefore we shouldn't just be writing Nash off here when talking about his help, he was clearly an elite player just not in the perfect situation yet to get recognition.

DanG
03-18-2017, 07:02 PM
The answer is Kobe. Dirk is all finesse, not a great rebounder, not a rim protector, not a great passer. Kobe will do anything for your team to win because he almost has no weaknesses.

Give me the better player.

europagnpilgrim
03-18-2017, 08:13 PM
This really comes down to do you want a poor mans Jordan or a taller version of Bird minus the passing ability and super trash talk

and for those saying Nash wasn't the same in Dallas vs Phoenix need to really re evaluate how they look at basketball, it was the Suns who ran a higher pace 7 seconds or less vs. a high pace with more half court sets over in Dallas, Nash was the same player just like Harden was the same player before the offense style changed when Mike D got to Houston

its a reason why most felt like Shaq and then Lebron/Kobe or whoever else should have won those mvp's because it was clear that Nash was the same player the day he came out of SantaClara or whatever college he went to but he just got handed the house keys in Phoenix

Nash could shoot the same and create the same with the Mavs and he didn't magically morph into this super ball player just months later(especially 10yrs into his career already), whoever thinks that needs to take up on another sport or just quit watching sports in general

Quinnsanity
03-18-2017, 09:38 PM
As much as I tend to dislike Kobe, I'd probably take him over Dirk. It's just so hard to get anywhere with a big man who can't play defense. Modern teams would just force Dirk into pick-and-rolls all day (as they do now, though that's obviously unfair as a comparison since Dirk is so old now, he would've been better at his peak). When they won the title they needed basically a DPOY caliber center to do it (Chandler's defense in that series was just ****ing nuts).

With Kobe, you're getting a really good defensive player at his peak, but you're also getting someone who a really efficient NBA offense could be built around even with the isolation. Their offenses were 3rd, 3rd and 11th in the three post-Shaq Finals years, and was 8th the year Kobe averaged 35 with no one else on his team. It's obviously harder to build an offense around an isolation star, but Kobe was so good that it was viable, and the advantage of his defense against Dirk's pushes it over the top to me.

The one real issue I'd have with building a team around Kobe would be the worry that he'd want out if things weren't going well. But if you promised me I was getting 20 years with him and I could build patiently? Suddenly that's not a problem. Obviously you always want another star with anyone you're building a team around, but the sort of archetypes that make sense with Kobe make sense tend to be pretty readily available on the FA market. Like if you want a shooting point guard and a passing big man, you could've signed Eric Gordon and Pau Gasol last summer for what amounts to less than 30% of the cap. A year ago you could get Beverley and Greg Monroe for virtually that same price. But the kind of center you need with Dirk is just a really rare commodity, one teams don't usually let get away. The great irony here is that Dallas did just that by letting Tyson Chandler go, and they tried and failed to correct that mistake with DeAndre Jordan. But look at the best rim protectors in the league today. Rudy Gobert isn't going anywhere. DeAndre probably isn't going anywhere. Whiteside probably isn't going anywhere. Marc Gasol probably isn't going anywhere. If you don't have a guy like that, it's just really hard to build a functioning defense with Dirk. Even with Chandler they were only 8th in defense. They made the top 10 a few other times but were generally a mediocre or worse defense with Dirk, and that was before teams really knew how to take advantage of him. So I'd rather take the guy I feel comfortable having on both ends of the floor.

Quinnsanity
03-18-2017, 10:12 PM
A couple of Nash notes. I'm not sure where I stand on it, but I think it's important to properly contextualize his leap.

- 2004-05 was the start of the major rule changes that led to less hand checking and more calling of defensive three-seconds (from the official NBA rules history page (http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html)). That was also Nash's first year in Phoenix. That obviously made a big difference.

- Nash had a lot more decision making power in Phoenix. Remember, Michael Finley had the ball in his hands a lot in Dallas, and so did Dirk. Finley's usage rate of 24.2 in his six full seasons with Nash in Dallas was higher than the usage rate of any wing Nash played with during his Phoenix peak (Marion was 20.5 with Nash, Joe Johnson and QRich were both 19% in their one season with him). Combine that with the difference between Dirk, who created most of his shots for himself, and Amar'e, who was so dependent on Nash in the pick-and-roll game, and what you generally have is a situation where Nash just has the ball in his hands a lot more in Phoenix.

- The types of shots Nash took in Phoenix were very different from what he took in Dallas. Only 18.3% of the shots he took with the Suns were within three feet of the basket, compared to 24.6% in Dallas. Essentially, that's the difference between 2015-16 Klay Thompson (18.2%) and 2015-16 James Harden (24.6%). That's ****ing nuts. Those are two completely different players. Now, I'll grant that the drop was most precipitous in his last few Phoenix years, but it existed all the same before that. He happened to be an excellent jump shooter, so taking more jump shots probably did serve to open up the floor a bit for him as a passer.

- Despite taking more jump shots, Nash was far more efficient in Phoenix than he was in Dallas. His lowest field goal percentage during his second Suns stint was higher than his highest in any year in Dallas, and that's with him taking fewer shots close to the rim. The difference isn't quite as extreme in three-point percentage, but it's notable (41.6% in Dallas, 43.7% in Phoenix). What I would suggest would be that Nash didn't inherently become a better shooter, but rather got smarter about the shots that he did take.

So overall, I guess I'd say that Nash probably didn't find some holy grail that made him more talented. Instead, he found himself on the perfect team for his specific skill set, was lucky enough to have rule changes that were suited perfectly to his style, and probably grew more intelligent as a player with more decision making power on offense. Does that make him better? That's a pretty subjective question. He certainly played better, but that's true of a lot of stars who switch teams in their primes and find better teammates. Overall what I'd say is that in general, players don't see huge improvements in talent in their eighth or ninth season, but can play better basketball if the circumstances allow it.

FlashBolt
03-20-2017, 02:08 PM
"Dirk isn't a great rebounder."

Yes, because Dirk spreads the floor better than any other PF we've seen.. Is this a serious question? You get LESS rebounding opportunities if you're farther from the basket. It's why PG's average the LEAST rebounds.

FlashBolt
03-20-2017, 02:17 PM
This really comes down to do you want a poor mans Jordan or a taller version of Bird minus the passing ability and super trash talk

and for those saying Nash wasn't the same in Dallas vs Phoenix need to really re evaluate how they look at basketball, it was the Suns who ran a higher pace 7 seconds or less vs. a high pace with more half court sets over in Dallas, Nash was the same player just like Harden was the same player before the offense style changed when Mike D got to Houston

its a reason why most felt like Shaq and then Lebron/Kobe or whoever else should have won those mvp's because it was clear that Nash was the same player the day he came out of SantaClara or whatever college he went to but he just got handed the house keys in Phoenix

Nash could shoot the same and create the same with the Mavs and he didn't magically morph into this super ball player just months later(especially 10yrs into his career already), whoever thinks that needs to take up on another sport or just quit watching sports in general

Just because they had a similar style of play doesn't mean he didn't improve. Isaiah Thomas is an example. He's improved a bunch with how he's been able to score and get to the line. His USG% is higher but it's much more productive than his other high USG% seasons as well. It's like LeBron as well. 2007-2009 LeBron was an absolute beast physically but there's just an unexplained reason in his game that has taken off because of mental improvements he has made. I feel Nash under the Phoenix system improved in his approach of the game. Dallas never had that opportunity for him to take that game to the next level and that isn't Dirk's responsibility.

And I'm not sure how Kobe deserved more MVP's than he has. He's never been the best player distinctively and the best year he had (2005-2006), we didn't see a Kobe that led his team to enough wins. Realistically, LeBron could have won MVP the entire past decade because he's been the best player for just about that long and it's not even close.

The case for Dirk over Kobe isn't that he's a better individual player but someone who would be a better main piece or even complementary player than Kobe. Kobe's personality is a huge turn-off. If you are hiring a worker and they had Kobe's mentality, it would be incredibly painful to make it work. Phil hated him, Shaq hated him, and he has had more than plenty former teammates ridicule him. And people really need to observe Dirk's performance come playoff time. He's literally one of handful who takes their game to another level.

Shammyguy3
03-20-2017, 02:21 PM
"Dirk isn't a great rebounder."

Yes, because Dirk spreads the floor better than any other PF we've seen.. Is this a serious question? You get LESS rebounding opportunities if you're farther from the basket. It's why PG's average the LEAST rebounds.

Dirk: Career 21.8 defensive rebound percentage. Career 3.4 offensive rebound percentage.
Pau: Career 21.7 defensive rebound percentage. Career 8.6 offensive rebound percentage.


That offensive rebounding rate makes a big difference, and Dirk stretching the floor is why his isn't at Pau's level because Pau was on the block a lot more.

Dirk career rebounding percentage: 12.7%
Pau career rebounding percentage: 15.3%

europagnpilgrim
03-20-2017, 02:32 PM
Just because they had a similar style of play doesn't mean he didn't improve. Isaiah Thomas is an example. He's improved a bunch with how he's been able to score and get to the line. His USG% is higher but it's much more productive than his other high USG% seasons as well. It's like LeBron as well. 2007-2009 LeBron was an absolute beast physically but there's just an unexplained reason in his game that has taken off because of mental improvements he has made. I feel Nash under the Phoenix system improved in his approach of the game. Dallas never had that opportunity for him to take that game to the next level and that isn't Dirk's responsibility.

And I'm not sure how Kobe deserved more MVP's than he has. He's never been the best player distinctively and the best year he had (2005-2006), we didn't see a Kobe that led his team to enough wins. Realistically, LeBron could have won MVP the entire past decade because he's been the best player for just about that long and it's not even close.

The case for Dirk over Kobe isn't that he's a better individual player but someone who would be a better main piece or even complementary player than Kobe. Kobe's personality is a huge turn-off. If you are hiring a worker and they had Kobe's mentality, it would be incredibly painful to make it work. Phil hated him, Shaq hated him, and he has had more than plenty former teammates ridicule him. And people really need to observe Dirk's performance come playoff time. He's literally one of handful who takes their game to another level.

See how you figure this out by just typing what you did? of course Isaiah is doing more with higher usage and getting more recognition because his team is winning and are like 2nd or 3rd out East which while on Sacramento they were garbage so his stats were meaningless even though he was capable of doing what he is doing now, same with Nash in Phoenix since the ball was in his hands like all the time, Thomas was the same player with Kings/Suns but they weren't fighting for the 2nd or 3rd seed out West, more like the 8-10th seed or a lottery pick

I said how everybody else was screaming that Kobe/Shaq/Lebron/Dirk should have won those mvps from 05-06' but Nash won them and he didn't do anything special, 18ppg and 11apg is nothing special but is damn good stats from the PG position, he didn't go Tiny Archibald and drop 30/10 and that's what was needed from him to come out the West but he wasn't built like that

but we are starting from scratch when you talk about what player would you take and you always and I mean always take the better/best player, not what is a complimentary until you have the best perimeter and then inside presence, then you build the complimentary players

I would probably take the poor man version of Jordan if push came to shove over the lesser version of Bird

but if you take Dirk its not like you cant build around him as Cuban proved for like 15 yrs

FlashBolt
03-20-2017, 02:48 PM
See how you figure this out by just typing what you did? of course Isaiah is doing more with higher usage and getting more recognition because his team is winning and are like 2nd or 3rd out East which while on Sacramento they were garbage so his stats were meaningless even though he was capable of doing what he is doing now, same with Nash in Phoenix since the ball was in his hands like all the time, Thomas was the same player with Kings/Suns but they weren't fighting for the 2nd or 3rd seed out West, more like the 8-10th seed or a lottery pick

I said how everybody else was screaming that Kobe/Shaq/Lebron/Dirk should have won those mvps from 05-06' but Nash won them and he didn't do anything special, 18ppg and 11apg is nothing special but is damn good stats from the PG position, he didn't go Tiny Archibald and drop 30/10 and that's what was needed from him to come out the West but he wasn't built like that

but we are starting from scratch when you talk about what player would you take and you always and I mean always take the better/best player, not what is a complimentary until you have the best perimeter and then inside presence, then you build the complimentary players

I would probably take the poor man version of Jordan if push came to shove over the lesser version of Bird

but if you take Dirk its not like you cant build around him as Cuban proved for like 15 yrs

1) He's a totally different player. I can't understand where we draw the line in improvement. Being on a better team with a stellar coach has made him better. It's hand-in-hand. Otherwise you're just saying "they've always been the same player. no improvement whatsoever." I can literally say that about any player. I guess Jimmy Butler hasn't improved at all.

2) I probably disagree with his MVP selection as I thought Dirk deserved it but I completely understand that it was also warranted. At that time, D'Antoni's system was rather revolutionary. They led the league in scoring and I think they had the best or one of the best records in the league. Nash was hitting 50/40/90 -- when it wasn't a common thing to do. It still isn't today. I mean, the Lakers probably weren't getting any votes because of the Shaq+Kobe drama anyways. Cavs were on an average record or just not amusing enough and it wasn't like LeBron was doing what Westbrook is by getting triple doubles 40+ times in one season.
Archibald drop 30/10 in what was more possessions in a game. Per 100 possessions, there is no question that Nash would have better numbers. Not to mention Archibald was leading his team to a terrible record. Not sure how many have been MVP with a dismal record teamwise.

3) The better player isn't always the best fit. Kobe's just had incredible help from teammates and that's why it wasn't a much bigger issue than it could have been. Playing for the Lakers and under Phil Jackson definitely helped mitigate those problems.

Jeffy25
03-20-2017, 06:03 PM
Dirk: Career 21.8 defensive rebound percentage. Career 3.4 offensive rebound percentage.
Pau: Career 21.7 defensive rebound percentage. Career 8.6 offensive rebound percentage.


That offensive rebounding rate makes a big difference, and Dirk stretching the floor is why his isn't at Pau's level because Pau was on the block a lot more.

Dirk career rebounding percentage: 12.7%
Pau career rebounding percentage: 15.3%

Here, let me pick up that mic you just dropped

valade16
03-20-2017, 07:02 PM
1) He's a totally different player. I can't understand where we draw the line in improvement. Being on a better team with a stellar coach has made him better. It's hand-in-hand. Otherwise you're just saying "they've always been the same player. no improvement whatsoever." I can literally say that about any player. I guess Jimmy Butler hasn't improved at all.

2) I probably disagree with his MVP selection as I thought Dirk deserved it but I completely understand that it was also warranted. At that time, D'Antoni's system was rather revolutionary. They led the league in scoring and I think they had the best or one of the best records in the league. Nash was hitting 50/40/90 -- when it wasn't a common thing to do. It still isn't today. I mean, the Lakers probably weren't getting any votes because of the Shaq+Kobe drama anyways. Cavs were on an average record or just not amusing enough and it wasn't like LeBron was doing what Westbrook is by getting triple doubles 40+ times in one season.
Archibald drop 30/10 in what was more possessions in a game. Per 100 possessions, there is no question that Nash would have better numbers. Not to mention Archibald was leading his team to a terrible record. Not sure how many have been MVP with a dismal record teamwise.

3) The better player isn't always the best fit. Kobe's just had incredible help from teammates and that's why it wasn't a much bigger issue than it could have been. Playing for the Lakers and under Phil Jackson definitely helped mitigate those problems.

I get what you're saying, but it isn't a huge deal in this scenario because it's literally grab one guy for your team. You get to design the rest of the team around the player you select. You can grab whoever you need to fit around the player you select.

If it were put Kobe or Dirk on X team it may be a different story.

europagnpilgrim
03-20-2017, 10:02 PM
1) He's a totally different player. I can't understand where we draw the line in improvement. Being on a better team with a stellar coach has made him better. It's hand-in-hand. Otherwise you're just saying "they've always been the same player. no improvement whatsoever." I can literally say that about any player. I guess Jimmy Butler hasn't improved at all.

2) I probably disagree with his MVP selection as I thought Dirk deserved it but I completely understand that it was also warranted. At that time, D'Antoni's system was rather revolutionary. They led the league in scoring and I think they had the best or one of the best records in the league. Nash was hitting 50/40/90 -- when it wasn't a common thing to do. It still isn't today. I mean, the Lakers probably weren't getting any votes because of the Shaq+Kobe drama anyways. Cavs were on an average record or just not amusing enough and it wasn't like LeBron was doing what Westbrook is by getting triple doubles 40+ times in one season.
Archibald drop 30/10 in what was more possessions in a game. Per 100 possessions, there is no question that Nash would have better numbers. Not to mention Archibald was leading his team to a terrible record. Not sure how many have been MVP with a dismal record teamwise.

3) The better player isn't always the best fit. Kobe's just had incredible help from teammates and that's why it wasn't a much bigger issue than it could have been. Playing for the Lakers and under Phil Jackson definitely helped mitigate those problems.

I know what I am talking about, Nash was always a good to really good FT shooter and 3pt/perimeter shooter coming out of college, he didn't get better because he had a 50-40-90 but if that make you feel better than think that, I think the more fast pace wide open offense helped him get more better looks but he only probably shot 12 times per game so that 50pct from the field is not that spectacular if you really think about it

Nash was not in a revolutionary offense because everybody screams about the high pace in the old days and sware that's how Wilt/Oscar and others had inflated stats and Nash was not capable of getting 30ppg to go along with his assists because he wasn't built like that no matter the number of possessions and they played the fastest and had highest scoring avg per game as a team so it was plenty of possessions to go around, if Nash would or was capable of dropping 30ppg they would have easily beat the Spurs and whoever because they needed that from the perimeter because Amare was unstoppable with that pick and roll/dunks, he killed Duncan

plus the old school Nuggets scored big and at fast pace and that RUM TMC of old warriors and anywhere pretty much Nelson coached was small ball fast hectic pace, so to me it was a breath of fresh fast pace air but nothing that was revolutionary more like a rehash

the better player is always drafted first if you are starting from scratch and I would think if you say who would you pick player a or player b we are talking about from scratch, but if you say Shaq or Wilt(young versions) are there then I would take the dominant backcourt player, similar to how Orlando could have had Webber to pair with Shaq but they went with the perimeter player(and fit) in Penny

If you had a Nash/Stockton/Iverson/Zeke/Magic/Oscar in the fold then I would roll with Dirk


Butler got handed the keys and signed a max contract extension so his PPG went up with him being more of the focal point, they got rid of Rose and his PPG went up but he was always the tough nose defender with a mid range game, who can knock down an occasion 3pt shot here and there, and he was always clutch or not scared of the moment to take the big shot, good for Butler

of course his PPG improved because his shots per game went up and ft attempts as well but to me he is the same player, style wise and what he brings to the table every game

FlashBolt
03-20-2017, 10:54 PM
I know what I am talking about, Nash was always a good to really good FT shooter and 3pt/perimeter shooter coming out of college, he didn't get better because he had a 50-40-90 but if that make you feel better than think that, I think the more fast pace wide open offense helped him get more better looks but he only probably shot 12 times per game so that 50pct from the field is not that spectacular if you really think about it

Nash was not in a revolutionary offense because everybody screams about the high pace in the old days and sware that's how Wilt/Oscar and others had inflated stats and Nash was not capable of getting 30ppg to go along with his assists because he wasn't built like that no matter the number of possessions and they played the fastest and had highest scoring avg per game as a team so it was plenty of possessions to go around, if Nash would or was capable of dropping 30ppg they would have easily beat the Spurs and whoever because they needed that from the perimeter because Amare was unstoppable with that pick and roll/dunks, he killed Duncan

plus the old school Nuggets scored big and at fast pace and that RUM TMC of old warriors and anywhere pretty much Nelson coached was small ball fast hectic pace, so to me it was a breath of fresh fast pace air but nothing that was revolutionary more like a rehash

the better player is always drafted first if you are starting from scratch and I would think if you say who would you pick player a or player b we are talking about from scratch, but if you say Shaq or Wilt(young versions) are there then I would take the dominant backcourt player, similar to how Orlando could have had Webber to pair with Shaq but they went with the perimeter player(and fit) in Penny

If you had a Nash/Stockton/Iverson/Zeke/Magic/Oscar in the fold then I would roll with Dirk


Butler got handed the keys and signed a max contract extension so his PPG went up with him being more of the focal point, they got rid of Rose and his PPG went up but he was always the tough nose defender with a mid range game, who can knock down an occasion 3pt shot here and there, and he was always clutch or not scared of the moment to take the big shot, good for Butler

of course his PPG improved because his shots per game went up and ft attempts as well but to me he is the same player, style wise and what he brings to the table every game

Reassuring to yourself that you know what you're talking about is a sign of inferiority complex. I never said 50-40-90 was what did it for me but I can see why those who voted him as MVP would be interested in such an arbitrary stat. A tad-bit like how voters are probably going to vote Russell Westbrook in because of his triple doubles.

And it was revolutionary. D'Antoni's style is used in many teams today. Considering how teams began transitioning to it more than ever since his stint with Phoenix, it's fair to say Nash had a large part in the heavy use of pick-and-roll/fast pace. Yes, they played with a higher pace decades ago but they stopped and D'Antoni brought it back with his own style with the heavy use of three point shooting. And if you need more evidence, check the Suns record before Nash got there. Check their three point shooting attempts(which was at 14) compared to the year after with Nash (24). They won 33 more games by basically replacing Marbury with Nash. So you can't possibly tell me D'Antoni didn't revolutionize the way the game is now played when the league average for three point attempts was at 15 and they were jacking up 24 and had the best record/scored the most points. Hell, the Rockets today are jacking up 40 three point shots compared to the league average of 27.

Lastly, I refuse to believe Butler has "always" been the same player. I'm questioning whether there is a meaning of improvement in your dictionary or not. How do you evaluate whether a player improves?

europagnpilgrim
03-20-2017, 11:48 PM
Reassuring to yourself that you know what you're talking about is a sign of inferiority complex. I never said 50-40-90 was what did it for me but I can see why those who voted him as MVP would be interested in such an arbitrary stat. A tad-bit like how voters are probably going to vote Russell Westbrook in because of his triple doubles.

And it was revolutionary. D'Antoni's style is used in many teams today. Considering how teams began transitioning to it more than ever since his stint with Phoenix, it's fair to say Nash had a large part in the heavy use of pick-and-roll/fast pace. Yes, they played with a higher pace decades ago but they stopped and D'Antoni brought it back with his own style with the heavy use of three point shooting. And if you need more evidence, check the Suns record before Nash got there. Check their three point shooting attempts(which was at 14) compared to the year after with Nash (24). They won 33 more games by basically replacing Marbury with Nash. So you can't possibly tell me D'Antoni didn't revolutionize the way the game is now played when the league average for three point attempts was at 15 and they were jacking up 24 and had the best record/scored the most points. Hell, the Rockets today are jacking up 40 three point shots compared to the league average of 27.

Lastly, I refuse to believe Butler has "always" been the same player. I'm questioning whether there is a meaning of improvement in your dictionary or not. How do you evaluate whether a player improves?

child please, inferior because I know what I am talking about? I say it speaks of my confidence of watching the games and following how players do what they do for years, pre nba and when they reach the league

Big O didn't even win the nba mvp award when he avg a triple double so I wouldn't be shocked at all if Westbrook didn't win the award also, and Big O basically avg. a triple double for 6 or 7 straight years if you round off his totals to whole number, Wilt didn't win the nba mvp when he avg 50ppg so like I said you either know or you don't know, just like Wilt didn't improve because he avg 50ppg and didn't fall off the next yr when he put up like 45ppg, he was just that damn dominant/good out of Kansas, when you are a real good player all it takes is maintaining confidence and adapting to the grueling 82 game schedule

Like I said it was Mike D just rehashing so it wasn't revolutionary but more like a breath of fresh air especially if you like scoring like I do, I never liked those 90's games of 88pts scored, though I respect the defense I prefer offense in high volume/bulk

Mike D didn't revolutionize it because I mentioned those who ran the fast pace/small ball prior to him in the old days to the golden age/90's, D Nelson was the kingpin of that and that Moe coach for the Nuggets, even Karl did it in his Nuggets tenure, or tried hard to, reason why nba teams weren't doing it more was because it wasn't ship proven until the Warriors broke through as a primary jump shooting team but even they run a mix of Spurs/Bulls/Suns offense of years past

Mike D offense is a 3pt heavy style with pick and roll/points in the paint combo so those 3pt attempts are really not that amazing and it goes the same for the Rockets this year as he has said he wants them to shoot 50 attempts per game, you are who you are as a coach/owner/player until proven otherwise, the reason why the Rockets are shooting that many more 3's is because they have a collection of better/more capable snipers around Harden than what they had in Phoenix, that's basic common bball sense 101

if that's the case then Curry should get more credit for it since M Jackson and others say he is ruining the game by influencing all these guys to shoot nothing but 3's while they should be learning the basic fundamentals instead of learning how to shoot from 30ft when its clear its not many that can do that from junior high to the nba

I look at how the player is from college to first few years in the league, the best players just do what they do

like for instance J Kidd was a triple double threat at California and he carried it over to the nba, Chris Jackson/Abdul Rauf was a lights out shooter/scorer/playmaker at LSU and it carried over to the nba, its others I can name also but you get where I am coming from, Kidd wasn't a better player because he could hit a 3pt set shot as he aged because by the time he was doing that he had lost all the other stuff that made him a special triple double PG threat

it seems like you take improvement as someone shooting 65pct free throw to 68pct and jump up and down like they really did something, is Deandre Jordan such a improved player because he shoots free throws better this year? I think he is the same player as he was 3-5yrs ago, playing to his capability/potential of what he was already blessed with to do naturally, just because Deandre can hit a turn around hook every now and then doesn't make him warrant touches like Shaq/Dream, it just means he can hit one every now and then and it doesn't improve him as a player since he should be able to do that anyway being a Footer and playing 2ft from the basket 99pct of the time when he is not setting a screen for CP3

we just have diff. levels of what we feel improving is, if Butler shot 30pct from 3 last year and is now around 34pct do you think he is really that much better of a 3pt shooter? I don't think so but oh well its just my 2 cents on the matter

Wilt didn't improve as a player because he shot 70pct fg with the Lakers because by that time he was old and had knee surgery on both legs and he wasn't taking high volume of shots like his previous younger years, so he should have shot that high with the talent around him and the small amount of shots per game but he still was a rebounding and shot blocking force, like he always been and especially for his age at that time

FlashBolt
03-21-2017, 12:49 AM
child please, inferior because I know what I am talking about? I say it speaks of my confidence of watching the games and following how players do what they do for years, pre nba and when they reach the league

Big O didn't even win the nba mvp award when he avg a triple double so I wouldn't be shocked at all if Westbrook didn't win the award also, and Big O basically avg. a triple double for 6 or 7 straight years if you round off his totals to whole number, Wilt didn't win the nba mvp when he avg 50ppg so like I said you either know or you don't know, just like Wilt didn't improve because he avg 50ppg and didn't fall off the next yr when he put up like 45ppg, he was just that damn dominant/good out of Kansas, when you are a real good player all it takes is maintaining confidence and adapting to the grueling 82 game schedule

Like I said it was Mike D just rehashing so it wasn't revolutionary but more like a breath of fresh air especially if you like scoring like I do, I never liked those 90's games of 88pts scored, though I respect the defense I prefer offense in high volume/bulk

Mike D didn't revolutionize it because I mentioned those who ran the fast pace/small ball prior to him in the old days to the golden age/90's, D Nelson was the kingpin of that and that Moe coach for the Nuggets, even Karl did it in his Nuggets tenure, or tried hard to, reason why nba teams weren't doing it more was because it wasn't ship proven until the Warriors broke through as a primary jump shooting team but even they run a mix of Spurs/Bulls/Suns offense of years past

Mike D offense is a 3pt heavy style with pick and roll/points in the paint combo so those 3pt attempts are really not that amazing and it goes the same for the Rockets this year as he has said he wants them to shoot 50 attempts per game, you are who you are as a coach/owner/player until proven otherwise, the reason why the Rockets are shooting that many more 3's is because they have a collection of better/more capable snipers around Harden than what they had in Phoenix, that's basic common bball sense 101

if that's the case then Curry should get more credit for it since M Jackson and others say he is ruining the game by influencing all these guys to shoot nothing but 3's while they should be learning the basic fundamentals instead of learning how to shoot from 30ft when its clear its not many that can do that from junior high to the nba

I look at how the player is from college to first few years in the league, the best players just do what they do

like for instance J Kidd was a triple double threat at California and he carried it over to the nba, Chris Jackson/Abdul Rauf was a lights out shooter/scorer/playmaker at LSU and it carried over to the nba, its others I can name also but you get where I am coming from, Kidd wasn't a better player because he could hit a 3pt set shot as he aged because by the time he was doing that he had lost all the other stuff that made him a special triple double PG threat

it seems like you take improvement as someone shooting 65pct free throw to 68pct and jump up and down like they really did something, is Deandre Jordan such a improved player because he shoots free throws better this year? I think he is the same player as he was 3-5yrs ago, playing to his capability/potential of what he was already blessed with to do naturally, just because Deandre can hit a turn around hook every now and then doesn't make him warrant touches like Shaq/Dream, it just means he can hit one every now and then and it doesn't improve him as a player since he should be able to do that anyway being a Footer and playing 2ft from the basket 99pct of the time when he is not setting a screen for CP3

we just have diff. levels of what we feel improving is, if Butler shot 30pct from 3 last year and is now around 34pct do you think he is really that much better of a 3pt shooter? I don't think so but oh well its just my 2 cents on the matter

Wilt didn't improve as a player because he shot 70pct fg with the Lakers because by that time he was old and had knee surgery on both legs and he wasn't taking high volume of shots like his previous younger years, so he should have shot that high with the talent around him and the small amount of shots per game but he still was a rebounding and shot blocking force, like he always been and especially for his age at that time

My God, you are void of context aren't ya? I'm not even going to read all this nonsense you type up.

1) Nash won MVP because the previous year, Suns were doodoo and they had practically the same roster along with Marburry at the PG. They had the same coach, too. Turns out Nash was their missing piece and he generated 33 extra wins.

2) Yes.. Oscar Robertson didn't win because back then, players were the ones doing the voting and they never kept track of stats the way it is done now. Not to mention Wilt averaged 50/25 and didn't win either.. there were too many players putting up unbelievable stats in that year so it made Oscar's triple double seem pedestrian. And you keep bringing up the stats when there were so few teams and black players were significantly underrepresnted compared to now. The league was not as competitive, pal. Russell would average 45/15/15 if we base it off per 100 possessions. Statistically measured, Bryant/Jordan blow away Wilt's points per possession. It'll be .46 vs .38 (.08 more points per possession.) Iverson has a higher points per possession than Wilt too. Tired of reading about these old players in which what? Ten teams? Give me a break.

3) How many times do I have to tell you that Mike D'Antoni was the first to implement that pace along with three point shooting and constant usage of the pick-and-roll? Have you taken a look at how many three point shots the Rockets have taken since D'Antoni took charge? About ten more per game.

4) Players improve all the time. Just because they "always" had it in them doesn't mean certain factors don't cause them to become better. A fat guy has it in him to be more lean and muscular.. but he has to work for it.

Child please? Grandpa, PUHLEASE.

europagnpilgrim
03-21-2017, 03:11 PM
My God, you are void of context aren't ya? I'm not even going to read all this nonsense you type up.

1) Nash won MVP because the previous year, Suns were doodoo and they had practically the same roster along with Marburry at the PG. They had the same coach, too. Turns out Nash was their missing piece and he generated 33 extra wins.

2) Yes.. Oscar Robertson didn't win because back then, players were the ones doing the voting and they never kept track of stats the way it is done now. Not to mention Wilt averaged 50/25 and didn't win either.. there were too many players putting up unbelievable stats in that year so it made Oscar's triple double seem pedestrian. And you keep bringing up the stats when there were so few teams and black players were significantly underrepresnted compared to now. The league was not as competitive, pal. Russell would average 45/15/15 if we base it off per 100 possessions. Statistically measured, Bryant/Jordan blow away Wilt's points per possession. It'll be .46 vs .38 (.08 more points per possession.) Iverson has a higher points per possession than Wilt too. Tired of reading about these old players in which what? Ten teams? Give me a break.

3) How many times do I have to tell you that Mike D'Antoni was the first to implement that pace along with three point shooting and constant usage of the pick-and-roll? Have you taken a look at how many three point shots the Rockets have taken since D'Antoni took charge? About ten more per game.

4) Players improve all the time. Just because they "always" had it in them doesn't mean certain factors don't cause them to become better. A fat guy has it in him to be more lean and muscular.. but he has to work for it.

Child please? Grandpa, PUHLEASE.

You have to be a child because outside of the 33 wins that Phoenix got more when Nash got there you basically typed out everything that I mentioned in my post

next time you should read what you reply to so you wont repeat what someone says to you, but that is what a child does

respect your elders

Wilt didn't shoot 3's like a guard so they should have more points per possession and he was a shaky ft shooter but neither of those players you mentioned were as solo dominant as he was especially when you figured in he could block 20shots per game in his heyday to go along with the PPG/RPG and he was a damn good passer

the league is filled with a whole bunch of European(white) players today so does that make it weaker since all they do is really just shoot from 3pt line and play finesse? the few blacks dominated back then like it is today with just more in abundance. and why did the league with lesser athletes play at a faster/higher pace than supreme faster stronger athletes of today? that pace **** is for excuse makers to devalue what Wilt/Oscar/Baylor etc did, and you cant compare athletes of today to the past because they would haven't the advantage of today and would have to play by the old rules and the infancy of back then

That fat guy could get lean and muscular, only to regress back to his natural(or new) self of being fat months later, I see it happen all time with athletes and others, see Derrick Coleman as he was once lean and just got fat and never recovered, it even happened to Shaq during his Lakers tenure and he never recovered no matter how much shape he got in at first with that Heat trade

Z Randolph is not a better player just because he can hit a 3pt shot now in his career, if a guy improves at something it means very little like how maybe T Allen and Rondo can shoot a 3pt shot, regardless of the outcome they have more confidence in taking the shot, even though they are pretty much going to brick it though on occasion they knock the shot down

players do what they do because they are capable of doing that and getting confidence to do it more and more, Lebron confidence has been shaky from the FT line his entire career and pre nba, Lebron lost his 3pt shot and now has the re newed confidence back in it this year, he didn't improve at 3pt shooting because he was always capable of hitting the shot, its all about confidence and doing what you do

when you talking about players improving I think of the 12th man finally getting a few minutes on the court, the good to very good players are who they are

hope that makes you feel better since you are over ranking players improving, impressive is more like it to me

Quinnsanity
03-21-2017, 09:27 PM
Dirk: Career 21.8 defensive rebound percentage. Career 3.4 offensive rebound percentage.
Pau: Career 21.7 defensive rebound percentage. Career 8.6 offensive rebound percentage.


That offensive rebounding rate makes a big difference, and Dirk stretching the floor is why his isn't at Pau's level because Pau was on the block a lot more.

Dirk career rebounding percentage: 12.7%
Pau career rebounding percentage: 15.3%

To pick up on this, it's actually kind of remarkable that Dirk rebounded as much as he did considering where he took his shots. Here's how his shot distribution breaks down:

14.5% within 0-3 feet of the basket/8.5% 3-10 feet/25.1% 10-16 feet/31.7% 16+ feet 2-pointers/20.3% three's.

His offensive rebound rate was 3.4%.

LeBron's offensive rebound rate is 3.7%, but he hasn't had the late career fall off Dirk's had. If you count only Dirk's first 14 years, he has the exact same offensive rebound rate (3.7%) as LeBron, but LeBron's shot distribution is:

35.2% within 0-3 feet of the basket/12.1% 3-10 feet/10.2% 10-16 feet/21.9% 16+ feet 2-pointers/20.6% three's.

LeBron tends to be much closer to the basket than Dirk... but Dirk was offensive rebounding just as much. I know LeBron usually had more rebounding teammates on the floor than Dirk, but nobody has ever questioned his rebounding. Dirk was a much better offensive rebounder than he had any right to be.

FlashBolt
03-22-2017, 12:52 AM
You have to be a child because outside of the 33 wins that Phoenix got more when Nash got there you basically typed out everything that I mentioned in my post

next time you should read what you reply to so you wont repeat what someone says to you, but that is what a child does

respect your elders

Wilt didn't shoot 3's like a guard so they should have more points per possession and he was a shaky ft shooter but neither of those players you mentioned were as solo dominant as he was especially when you figured in he could block 20shots per game in his heyday to go along with the PPG/RPG and he was a damn good passer

the league is filled with a whole bunch of European(white) players today so does that make it weaker since all they do is really just shoot from 3pt line and play finesse? the few blacks dominated back then like it is today with just more in abundance. and why did the league with lesser athletes play at a faster/higher pace than supreme faster stronger athletes of today? that pace **** is for excuse makers to devalue what Wilt/Oscar/Baylor etc did, and you cant compare athletes of today to the past because they would haven't the advantage of today and would have to play by the old rules and the infancy of back then

That fat guy could get lean and muscular, only to regress back to his natural(or new) self of being fat months later, I see it happen all time with athletes and others, see Derrick Coleman as he was once lean and just got fat and never recovered, it even happened to Shaq during his Lakers tenure and he never recovered no matter how much shape he got in at first with that Heat trade

Z Randolph is not a better player just because he can hit a 3pt shot now in his career, if a guy improves at something it means very little like how maybe T Allen and Rondo can shoot a 3pt shot, regardless of the outcome they have more confidence in taking the shot, even though they are pretty much going to brick it though on occasion they knock the shot down

players do what they do because they are capable of doing that and getting confidence to do it more and more, Lebron confidence has been shaky from the FT line his entire career and pre nba, Lebron lost his 3pt shot and now has the re newed confidence back in it this year, he didn't improve at 3pt shooting because he was always capable of hitting the shot, its all about confidence and doing what you do

when you talking about players improving I think of the 12th man finally getting a few minutes on the court, the good to very good players are who they are

hope that makes you feel better since you are over ranking players improving, impressive is more like it to me

1) My reasoning explaining the 33 wins is to show that he did have an argument for the MVP -- which would prove that he did improve as a player. He was far from an MVP candidate in the Mavericks.

2) Next time you should stop trying to sound like you being older = you're omnipotent. You're just older. You will die sooner. Why are you bragging about it?

3) Blocked 20 shots per game.. That tells you all. Did players decline? Uhm, no. That never happens with athletes. So when he blocked 20 shots per game, I also blocked 30 shots per game against my little cousin who is 15.

4) Players today are better. You are probably the only one who denies this. Wilt was such a nostalgic old fool that he thought Barkley was a better scorer than Jordan because of FG%. You're the same thing. They played at a quicker pace because there was no developed system the way there is now. Most teams just ran court to court because they didn't know any better.

5) Dude, you literally have yet to find a logical explanation as to how a player improves. Saying "everyone has it in them" is hysterical. Players decline and improve all the time. Yes, it really is that simple. LeBron can easily shoot 40% this season and then drop to 32%. That's called DECLINING. I remember when LeBron began putting more emphasis on his FT shooting and it went up the the low 80's. He stopped practicing them and it slowly crept back into his averages %. And confidence has a lot to do with improving. AKA, why confidence matters in life. Jordan improved his three point shot later in his career because he began practicing it more. So did Magic. But according to you, that isn't improvement but just confidence.. give me a break.

6) Can we go back to the Oscar Robertson that you somehow failed to bring up again? Did the old peewee brain of yours forget that players voted for the MVP back then? I mean.. you're only 70, right? Old enough to be my grandpa.

I'll be the child. You'll be the senile guy who thinks going on an online forum calling people "children" is cool.

NYKalltheway
03-22-2017, 03:47 AM
The answer would be none. But between the two? It'd be Dirk.

A 7footer who could shoot threes back in the late 90s? Sign me up. Sign everyone up, it's the 90s...

Guards didn't dominate the game back then unless their name was Michael Jordan or Magic Johnson. Magic was extraordinary due to size and athleticism, Jordan was a #3 pick, so obviously not everyone, or not many, believed he'd be the greatest of all time back then. Everyone was talking about Garnett, Duncan and obviously Shaq was still around. Webber was still relevant and Elton Brand was considered one of the greatest prospects. Check the Draft Boards up to the mid 2000s. Everyone preferred the big guys. Heck, Milicic was drafted ahead of Wade, Melo and I don't know who else...

But even then, foreigners weren't superstar material. So Dirk going at #1 without any relevant experience would be considered a reach. And Kobe was too selfish back then to be considered an elite player. A raw super talent yeah, but the #1 pick usually is expected to have immediate impact.

Trust me, if it was between Kobe, Dirk and Olowakandi, it'd be Olowakandi with the #1 pick. That's how the NBA thought back in the day. Now the situation is changed, the game is different and that mentality doesn't get you anywhere. And 'mistakes' are easier because the SG/SF difference in quality is usually marginal whereas the bigs are either a hit or no. So picking the best big is sometimes easy, while picking the best SG/SF, unless they're obviously elite, is quite hard because there might be another one picked in the late picks of the 1st round with a higher ceiling or that's currently better but people don't feel he's NBA ready.

kyubi256
03-22-2017, 11:41 AM
Kobe was the superior player and drew more talent to support him. He's hard to play with but also incredibly gifted

FlashBolt
03-22-2017, 11:43 AM
Take a look at Shaq in his LAL prime days and then watch the double teams every chance they get. You think they double Shaq with Dirk at the free throw line? Shaq would be giggling and Dirk would be winning.

europagnpilgrim
03-22-2017, 01:30 PM
1) My reasoning explaining the 33 wins is to show that he did have an argument for the MVP -- which would prove that he did improve as a player. He was far from an MVP candidate in the Mavericks.

2) Next time you should stop trying to sound like you being older = you're omnipotent. You're just older. You will die sooner. Why are you bragging about it?

3) Blocked 20 shots per game.. That tells you all. Did players decline? Uhm, no. That never happens with athletes. So when he blocked 20 shots per game, I also blocked 30 shots per game against my little cousin who is 15.

4) Players today are better. You are probably the only one who denies this. Wilt was such a nostalgic old fool that he thought Barkley was a better scorer than Jordan because of FG%. You're the same thing. They played at a quicker pace because there was no developed system the way there is now. Most teams just ran court to court because they didn't know any better.

5) Dude, you literally have yet to find a logical explanation as to how a player improves. Saying "everyone has it in them" is hysterical. Players decline and improve all the time. Yes, it really is that simple. LeBron can easily shoot 40% this season and then drop to 32%. That's called DECLINING. I remember when LeBron began putting more emphasis on his FT shooting and it went up the the low 80's. He stopped practicing them and it slowly crept back into his averages %. And confidence has a lot to do with improving. AKA, why confidence matters in life. Jordan improved his three point shot later in his career because he began practicing it more. So did Magic. But according to you, that isn't improvement but just confidence.. give me a break.

6) Can we go back to the Oscar Robertson that you somehow failed to bring up again? Did the old peewee brain of yours forget that players voted for the MVP back then? I mean.. you're only 70, right? Old enough to be my grandpa.

I'll be the child. You'll be the senile guy who thinks going on an online forum calling people "children" is cool.

1. Just because the Suns won more when Nash got there didn't mean he improved as a individual player, the whole entire Suns team improved, Nash was winning lots of games in a Mavs uniform as well so it meant he played on good teams from Mavs to Suns, Nash was the same floor general/sniper/over passer from Suns to Mavs and back to Suns and by the time the Lakers got him he was old and not the same

2. Its more just me joking around, but still respect your elders wherever you are in life,fact
and I will live forever because the soul never dies, but you probably will refute that as well

3. He was that damn dominant, he was blocking shots half that rate as a older player so that shouldn't be so shocking that he was doing close to 20bpg as a young spring chicken, Wilt had knee surgery( on both) and was aged so of course he had declined but when he was challenged by the media that he couldn't score big when he was with the Lakers he would drop a 50pt game just to remind others, you decline once you get older/injured, that's basic common nature, Wilt didn't improve really at all from Kansas to Lakers, he could do it all since HS

Wilt went to more Finals with the Lakers as a old aged player and do you think it was because he was a better player or the Lakers were more stacked than his other teams when he was younger? now imagine a young Wilt with the young Baylor and West and I am sure Wilt has more than 2 rings and Russell for sure wouldn't have 11, and Wilt wouldn't have needed to score 50ppg and you would have seen way more games where he would register 25 blocks and his assists numbers would have been even better

4. Its more athletes today but if players were better today then all the old records put up by inferior players(by your view) would be shattered by the better superior players of today, nobody is on Wilts level, go look at the record books for proof, and Wilt was trying to say since Barkley shot such a high pct and if he took as many shots as Jordan did then his ppg would be way higher, I recall Wilt saying Barkley was one of his favorite players but I never read or saw where he stated Barkley was better because he shot a higher fg pct, but if you have shoot me the video/article

they use to stall and over pass back in those days as well, its the reason why Wilt left Kansas because they would stall and triple/quad cover him on defense, they do the same now with slowing the pace down and people love how the Spurs overpass before they take a shot, the pace picked up when Wilt entered the league and he would ignite that fast pace by throwing the ball length of the court for a quick layup/jumper, but you probably think Love or Unseld was the first to do that just like you think Dirk is the first to shoot that 1leg jumper, Wilt was, they changed the rules to make it harder for him and changed the rules to make it easier for todays players and in Jordan era

5. I am giving you basic fundamental of understanding something so simple, Curry didn't decline shooting wise because his percentage is down this year from last, if so I bet they wont play off him from 3pt line because he still has the same potent shot, as with Klay, Lebron didn't improve as a better overall shooter from his 4yrs with the Heat until now, he was always what he was, percentages don't tell the story like you think it does

Lebron was a shaky free throw shooter coming into the league and 14yrs later still is, and I am sure he practiced on that every summer and during season practices but it is what it is, confidence has to do with knowing your capabilities and embracing that to the fullest and going out and maximizing that cause/effect, Jordan was always a iffy 3pt shooter but he always had a killer mid range game dating back to UNC, and what was his strength in the nba for majority of his career? the mid range/post up fadeaway, fact

Magic could hit a wide open 3 coming out of college but he was running showtime fastbreak dropping dimes so he stuck to what he did best and what he was accustomed to doing and didn't shoot a bunch of 3's, and him and Jordan were not known for 3's and its a reason why they didn't shoot a whole bunch because it wasn't the strength of their game and no one feared them when they took those shots, same with a D Rose who shoots 3's better pct than he did as a rookie but that doesn't mean he drastically improved because he is a shaky 3pt shooter til this day, basically 8 or 9 yrs into his career

6. who cares who voted for MVP back then because even if the media voted back then it would have went to Wilt or Russell and Oscar still would have avg a triple double and not winning the award because if any player this year would have avg 50ppg and 26rpg to go along with 15-18bpg they would win in a landslide, basically like Curry did last year

child please, you take words way too seriously, if I am a grandpa I would have to be the youngest looking grandpa in the entire world since people think I am 21, I get carded when I go buy alcohol, better handcuff your girl quick

europagnpilgrim
03-22-2017, 01:41 PM
Take a look at Shaq in his LAL prime days and then watch the double teams every chance they get. You think they double Shaq with Dirk at the free throw line? Shaq would be giggling and Dirk would be winning.

Now take a look back at a younger primed Shaq in Orlando and see why D Scott/N Anderson were getting all those wide open looks from Shaq getting doubled and Penny foaming at the mouth being 1 on 1

Shaq was the same player but he just got heavier and won 3 rings with the Lakers, still reached a Finals trip with Magic because he was that dominant

FlashBolt
03-22-2017, 06:35 PM
No one believes Orlando Shaq is the same player as Lakers Shaq. Just stop, man. Lakers Shaq pummels Hakeem and wins the Finals and probably destroys the Bulls as well. You need to stop this "he always had it in him. He just had to believe" sorta logic instead of just accepting that players can improve based on the scenario they're in.

GREATNESS ONE
03-22-2017, 10:29 PM
Lol a top 10 player all-time against a top 20 player all-time. I've enjoyed these arguments and watch the hate pour. Hilarious.

GREATNESS ONE
03-22-2017, 10:30 PM
No one believes Orlando Shaq is the same player as Lakers Shaq. Just stop, man. Lakers Shaq pummels Hakeem and wins the Finals and probably destroys the Bulls as well. You need to stop this "he always had it in him. He just had to believe" sorta logic instead of just accepting that players can improve based on the scenario they're in.

"Probably" destroys the Bulls just contradicts your entire argument. Saying Kobe was noting and anyone can fill that role against the Kings, Spurs and Wolves is hilarious. You probably watched at 13 years old.

europagnpilgrim
03-23-2017, 12:11 AM
No one believes Orlando Shaq is the same player as Lakers Shaq. Just stop, man. Lakers Shaq pummels Hakeem and wins the Finals and probably destroys the Bulls as well. You need to stop this "he always had it in him. He just had to believe" sorta logic instead of just accepting that players can improve based on the scenario they're in.

Who cares if no one believes it or not because you need your ego stroked to feel big and have others agree with you but not me, game film don't lie

a young primed Shaq still damn near put up 28-30ppg and like 12-14rpg and 6apg against Dream/Rockets so he more than held his own but just didn't win that series, now imagine had he won that series with those numbers then the perception would be oh the young primed Shaq put it on Dream, see how that works? and I think you are confusing usage rate with actual improvement, Russell didn't improve this year but with KD gone his scoring and rebound go up by default with being the true alpha and his assists are around the same, big deal whoopty doo

go watch Russell back in 2010 up to today and tell me what did he improve on that he wasn't capable of doing or already doing? from a on court perspective and not no dumb percentages or PER/TS or any other of that fake Einstein confusion

the clear best dominant players rarely improve, you must be talking about the 12th man turned 15mpg type players(flash in the pan), avg. developing players that hope to find a small niche and hose a team out of a big contract before reverting back to its old self of a player once that guaranteed contract is signed, like a DMo/Adams etc. type player

I would like you to give me clear cut examples of how a player improved so much and don't give me percentages give me the vision based on the eye test and how you watch the product on the court

Jeffy25
03-23-2017, 12:13 AM
"Probably" destroys the Bulls just contradicts your entire argument. Saying Kobe was noting and anyone can fill that role against the Kings, Spurs and Wolves is hilarious. You probably watched at 13 years old.

I agree with Bolt and I was 17 in 2000

If we placed every Finals team and had them play each team in history, we would likely have different winners.

Who you play has a lot to do with those that have won.

And these situations completely change the players. Completely.

Chronz
03-23-2017, 01:18 AM
Who cares if no one believes it or not because you need your ego stroked to feel big and have others agree with you but not me, game film don't lie

a young primed Shaq still damn near put up 28-30ppg and like 12-14rpg and 6apg against Dream/Rockets so he more than held his own but just didn't win that series, now imagine had he won that series with those numbers then the perception would be oh the young primed Shaq put it on Dream, see how that works? and I think you are confusing usage rate with actual improvement, Russell didn't improve this year but with KD gone his scoring and rebound go up by default with being the true alpha and his assists are around the same, big deal whoopty doo

go watch Russell back in 2010 up to today and tell me what did he improve on that he wasn't capable of doing or already doing? from a on court perspective and not no dumb percentages or PER/TS or any other of that fake Einstein confusion

the clear best dominant players rarely improve, you must be talking about the 12th man turned 15mpg type players(flash in the pan), avg. developing players that hope to find a small niche and hose a team out of a big contract before reverting back to its old self of a player once that guaranteed contract is signed, like a DMo/Adams etc. type player

I would like you to give me clear cut examples of how a player improved so much and don't give me percentages give me the vision based on the eye test and how you watch the product on the court
Thats the thing, your giving numbers that dont mean anything whereas the others at least try to quantify the value. I know what Shaq averaged that Finals, guess what? He was STILL far more productive as a Laker, therefore thats the better Shaq. Not only that but he was better defensively.

When players speak of the game slowing down, thats because their combined experience has allowed them to feel the game differently. It doesn't happen DAY1, some players need to tweak their game/approach over the years. It can lead to an improvement or decline, like when Kobe had his best season at age 23 but then declined over the following years thereafter until reaching his absolute apex when he was scoring 35 on high efficiency. Aside from other variables, the fact that Kobe chose to play at a different playing weight led to a transition period but it did change his game. Kobe at 220 was different than Kobe at 205 the next few years. Just like 300lb Shaq
was smaller and less productive than Beast Shaq in LA at 340.

europagnpilgrim
03-23-2017, 06:32 PM
Thats the thing, your giving numbers that dont mean anything whereas the others at least try to quantify the value. I know what Shaq averaged that Finals, guess what? He was STILL far more productive as a Laker, therefore thats the better Shaq. Not only that but he was better defensively.

When players speak of the game slowing down, thats because their combined experience has allowed them to feel the game differently. It doesn't happen DAY1, some players need to tweak their game/approach over the years. It can lead to an improvement or decline, like when Kobe had his best season at age 23 but then declined over the following years thereafter until reaching his absolute apex when he was scoring 35 on high efficiency. Aside from other variables, the fact that Kobe chose to play at a different playing weight led to a transition period but it did change his game. Kobe at 220 was different than Kobe at 205 the next few years. Just like 300lb Shaq
was smaller and less productive than Beast Shaq in LA at 340.

My numbers don't have to mean anything because its just examples which are accurate if you know anything about the game of basketball, what I am speaking about is solid enough to stand on its own, it needs no crutch or validation, if you shot 34pct from 3pt land and the next year you shot 38pct that is not a big deal to say oh man Chronz has really improved his shot, its probably because you got better looks than last year, its a reason why Curry 3pt pct dropped a tad this year because he has KD there to take some of those looks away but you know damn well Curry is still a rainmaker and you wouldn't play off him any less because his pct took a small dip, if you cant see that then maybe you need to take on another sport to dissect

Shaq won titles with Lakers, Shaq reg. season high with Orlando was like 29ppg in 4yrs and his high with Lakers was like 30ppg(29.7) in 8yrs but I am pretty sure you know that but still think its false and say the numbers don't mean anything but Shaq put up those numbers, not me




Kobe put up 35ppg because his usage rate went way up after Shaq left and he had Smush and the gang then when he gets more help with Gasol along with Odom and sometime healthy Bynum his scoring went down and it wasn't because he declined nor was it because he improved that he put up 35ppg, he just had more chances to shoot and showcase it

if you are comparing just postseason/Finals then its really not a comparison since we all know Shaq went to 1 Finals in 4yrs with Magic and 4 out of 8yrs with LA but the way Shaq played was the same with more weight to bully ball the opposition in LA but he still played bully ball with Magic with more finesse/speed/quickness, did Shaq do more of a turn around hook baseline in LA than he did in Magic? sure he did but that didn't make him an improved player, improving is Shaq going from a 55pct ft shooter to a consistent 80pct(Karl Malone like), talk to me if that happened

the reason why Shaq Finals numbers in LA dwarfed his Magic appearance is because no Center from the East could put pressure on him like the Dream offensively, Mutombo/Smits/McCollough-whoever else could not challenge him like the Dream and Shaq still put up 28ppg, so he should have scored 6-10 more points against that weak lineup of Centers to go against, doesn't mean Shaq was an improved player because he was a beast day1, hell he was a beast at LSU, he didn't shatter rim/rip off the backboard when he entered the league he did it pre NBA as well

a more slimmer in shape Shaq was better defensively than a 340lb version, if you think that then so be it because you can feel the sky is rainbow colored at any moment its your free will

Kobe bulked up because he learned from his puppet master Jordan so he did it at a younger age and didn't wait until he got old, he lost some quickness with that added weight but he still played like a carbon copy of his boy hood idol (rather he was 205 or 220lbs) Jordan, especially the second 3peat version of Jordan, copied his moves on down to his interviews, walk etc.

when the players say the game has slowed down its because they have hit a comfort/confidence zone of what they do on the court(and the 82game schedule) and always did on the court from day1, the best players decline after age/injury while the rest try to improve to make you guys feel like they do to have something to talk about

no young dominant player day1 is going to tweak their game to see if it helps them or declines them, its a reason why the coach has to let that player be themselves while adding that to the team concept for success, after the w-l results(4-7 yrs in) then a player can slightly alter the approach similar to how Jordan did when Phil/triangle came into play, he wasn't the ultra gunner(still got his shots though) he was his first few yrs but him scaling back and the other contending teams falling off helped that outcome tremendously for the team to succeed as they did

what did Bird improve on from college that he wasn't really already doing once he got to Boston? what did B Russell do when he won back to back titles in college then went to the league? what did Shaq do differently from LSU to Orlando? what did Chris Jackson/Abdul Rauf do different from LSU to Denver that he wasn't already capable of? go watch some game film/highlights and get back to me with your phantom reason with the eye test, no percentages or numbers at all

https://youtu.be/Y0grIbJ5O-8 - Orlando version Shaq

Gibby23
03-23-2017, 06:44 PM
I agree with Bolt and I was 17 in 2000

If we placed every Finals team and had them play each team in history, we would likely have different winners.

Who you play has a lot to do with those that have won.

And these situations completely change the players. Completely.

True. Just like if Webber didn't get hurt in that 1st or 2nd round series against Dallas, the Mavs probably don't make it out of that round. They didn't win that series because of Dirk, it was more Webber hurting his knee and Nick Van Excel having some big games.

Bruno
03-23-2017, 07:30 PM
this thread is what happens when smart people have too much time to contemplate the obvious.

how yall doin?

5ass
03-23-2017, 08:37 PM
this thread is what happens when smart people have too much time to contemplate the obvious.

how yall doin?

Gd, U?

LAKERMANIA
03-23-2017, 09:48 PM
Kobe is the better all around player IMO, so I gotta go with Kobe.