Which playoff run is more impressive?(Hakeem/Duncan/Dirk)

[Anaximandro1]

I know stats don't tell the whole story,but this may be useful.

Hakeem's 1994 Playoff run

Offensive Side

PTS ORB AST
Hakeem 664 55 98
Rockets 2234 232 570
Hakeem's Share 29.7% 23.7% 17.2%

-Hakeem averaged 28.9 pts (51.9%),2.4 orb, 4.3 as
-Rockets averaged 97.1 pts (46.1%),10.1 orb,24.8 as




Defensive Side

DRB BLK
Hakeem 199 92
Rockets 720 143
Hakeem's Share 27.6% 64.3%

-Hakeem averaged 8.6 drb,4.0 blk
-Rockets averaged 31.3 drb,6.2 blk
-Rockets allowed 94.0 pts per game (42.2%)

Duncan's 2003 Playoff run

Offensive Side

PTS ORB AST
Duncan 593 96 127
Spurs 2275 291 497
Duncan's Share 26.1% 33.0% 25.5%

-Duncan averaged 24.7 pts (52.9%),4.0 orb,5.3 as
-Spurs averaged 94.8 pts (44.1%),12.1 orb,20.7 as


Defensive Side

DRB BLK
Duncan 273 79
Spurs 802 165
Duncan's Share 34.0% 47.9%

-Duncan averaged 11.4 drb,3.3 blk
-Spurs averaged 33.4 drb,6.9 blk
-Spurs allowed 89.3 pts per game (40.4%)

Dirk's 2011 Playoff run

Offensive Side

PTS ORB AST
Dirk 582 12 53
Mavs 2063 203 423
Dirk's Share 28.2% 5.9% 12.5%

-Dirk averaged 27.7 pts (48.5%),0.6 orb,2.5 as
-Mavs averaged 98.2 pts (46.1%),9.7 orb,20.1 as




Defensive Side

DRB BLK
Dirk 159 13
Mavs 603 86
Dirk's Share 26.4% 15.1%

-Dirk averaged 7.6 drb,0.6 blk
-Mavs averaged 28.7 drb,4.1 blk
-Mavs allowed 92.5 pts per game (44.7%)

PER


1994 Hakeem 27.7
2003 Duncan 28.4
2011 Dirk 25.2
Win Shares

1994 Hakeem 4.3
2003 Duncan 5.9
2011 Dirk 3.6

Who had the better performance,Hakeem,Duncan or Dirk? :confusedshrug:

[shaq's--lakers]

I don't care about the numbers....

Dirk sweept the 2 time Champions and the lakers had the Homecourt.

Dirk vs Durant + Westbrock

Dirk vs Lebron Wade And Miami had Homecourt .

Dirk's run is almost as impressive as Shaq's 01 demolition (15-1)

[Doctor Rivers]

I don't care about the numbers....

Dirk sweept the 2 time Champions and the lakers had the Homecourt.

Dirk vs Durant + Westbrock

Dirk vs Lebron Wade And Miami had Homecourt .

Dirk's run is almost as impressive as Shaq's and Kobe's 01 demolition (15-1)

fixed and i'd like to see you argue otherwise

[shaq's--lakers]

fixed and i'd like to see you argue otherwise

Playoff PER on title runs

1996 Bulls
Jordan---------26.7
Pippen---------19.4

1998 Bulls
Jordan---------28.1
Pippen---------19.5

2000 Lakers
Shaq-----------30.5
Kobe------------19.3

2001 Lakers
Shaq------------29.7
Kobe------------23.8

2002 Lakers
Shaq------------28.3
Kobe-------------20.5

Do you need anymore proof.....:facepalm

[KingBeasley08]

Duncan was a one-man army in 03

[amfirst]

Duncan's run is actually more impressive. He was unstoppable at one point.

Dirk actually has a more balance team and knock down shooters that just seem to never miss a beat.

[Kargo]

Duncan might have been more impressive individually but Dallas as a team has easily the most impressive run out of the three.

No Jordan retirement,Hakeem probably wins nothing.

Dallas beat 3 teams with 2 first or second All-NBA players(Kobe and Gasol;Durrant and Westbrook;Wade and Lebron) and 4 out of the 5 best scorers in the league(Kobe,Durrant,Wade,Lebron)

[SCdac]

2003, Duncan lead the playoffs in:

Minutes played
Points
Field Goals
Field Goal Attempts
Free Throws
Free Throw Attempts
Offensive Rebounds
Defensive Rebounds
Total Rebounds
Blocks
Blocks Per Game
Offensive Win Shares
Defensive Win Shares
Win Shares
Win Shares per 48 mins

2nd in Player Efficiency
2nd in Defensive Rating

[Doctor Rivers]

Playoff PER on title runs

2001 Lakers
Shaq------------29.7
Kobe------------23.8

Do you need anymore proof.....:facepalm

:facepalm

First off you specifically brought up 2001 so I don't really understand why you're posting PERs from other seasons.

:facepalm

Second -- the point of this thread was to highlight all-time individual efforts in comparison to their teammates. Once again, Shaq's 2001 playoff run isn't a great example at all. Kobe had plenty to do with the Lakers success leading up to the Finals. Only a blind irrational poster like yourself would think otherwise. Now, if you had actually thought it through, you would have cited 2000.

:facepalm

[TMacsOneGoodEye]

I'll take Dirk's simply because of the level of competition he faced.

Most people picked his team to lose in the first round against the Blazers, they didn't, then they SWEEP the 2-time defending champs and then finish off the new school OKC Thunder in 5, THEN a series EVERYONE picked them to lose against a Superteam with 2 of the 5 best players in the NBA and they win.

[Kellogs4toniee]

This is a pretty damn hard question. I started arguing for one, but then stopped mid-way because I would second guess myself. I want to say Dirk because of the competition he beat (defending champions, Durant + Westbrook, then the Big Three). But then I remember that a big reason for the Rockets and Spurs winning was there defense, and the anchors for there defenses were largely dependent on Hakeem and Duncan.

I'll still go with Dirk, just because they weren't really favorites for any of the series they won.

[SCdac]

Nobody outside of Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell has rebounded more missed shots in the playoffs than Tim Duncan did in 2003.

Duncan had 96 OFFENSIVE rebounds in the playoffs.

That's 96 extra possessions and opportunities.

To put that in perspective, Dirk had 50 offensive rebounds in 73 regular season games this season, and 12 offensive rebounds in 21 playoff games this season.

Duncan meant so much to his team, you have to understand it to get a firm grasp on his run. We're not talking about a player who didn't have his hand on every aspect of the team - from playmaking, to defending the paint, to scoring.

[Teanett]

this is really tough.

individually and from a "who is the best player" pov, i would go by the numbers.

but taking into account who the mavs beat, the meaning it has for basketball as a team sport and the culture of the game, all the comebacks and close games, them being the underdogs in almost every round and of course the payback/good vs evil/society transcending and public interest, almost nothing is more impressive than dirk's playoff run.

[kaiiu]

Dirks run> Hakeems run>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Duncans run

[ScolaFan]

Nobody outside of Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell has rebounded more missed shots in the playoffs than Tim Duncan did in 2003.

Duncan had 96 OFFENSIVE rebounds in the playoffs.

That's 96 extra possessions and opportunities.

To put that in perspective, Dirk had 50 offensive rebounds in 73 regular season games this season, and 12 offensive rebounds in 21 playoff games this season.

Duncan meant so much to his team, you have to understand it to get a firm grasp on his run. We're not talking about a player who didn't have his hand on every aspect of the team - from playmaking, to defending the paint, to scoring.

Yep gotta agree with this. :applause:

[BlackJoker23]

duncan and hakeem were the best players on the floor in every single one of the series. cant say the same about dirk. dirk also didnt have half the impact those two did defensively.

i'd go hakeem,duncan, dirk. hakeem and duncan are a toss up but duncan faced the nets in the finals so.................

[Smoke117]

Probably Hakeem Olajuwon. He was the best offensive and defensive player of the bunch and he had the worst supporting cast.

[millwad]

I'd say Hakeem, he was so freaking dominant. I know we talk about playoffs but the dude was DPOY and MVP when the playoffs began and he faced really tough opponents while his own team would be pure crap without him, but on the other side, so would Duncan's..

Dirk had the best teammates by far but at the same time he faced tough oppononents but still, without Dirk Dallas would still be good but without Hakeem and Duncan their teams would been one of the worst.

Between Hakeem and Duncan I gotta take Hakeem, I've seen both of those playoffs runs and Hakeem lead his team like no one else I've ever seen, he did it all.

[rmt]

PTS ORB ASST DRB BLK PER WS
Duncan 593 (26.1%) 96 (33%) 127 (25.5%) 273 (34%) 79 (47.9%) 28.4 5.9
Hakeem 664 (29.7%) 55 (23.7%) 98 (17.2%) 199 (27.6%) 92 (64.3%) 27.7 4.3
Dirk 582 (28.2%) 12 (5.9%) 53 (12.5%) 159 (26.4%) 13 (15.1%) 25.2 3.6

I'm surprised by the pts - thought Dirk would win that category but pts and blks (by a HUGE margin) go to Hakeem. ORB, ASST, DRB, (by significant margins), WS and PER go to Duncan. So going strictly by numbers, it would seem that Duncan's is the most impressive, Hakeem's and then Dirk's.

The numbers don't look too great for Dirk (in comparison). IMO, Dirk's clutch ness in the 4th quarter (and the resulting excitement) is blinding some fans.

[DCL]

2003, Duncan lead the playoffs in:

Minutes played
Points
Field Goals
Field Goal Attempts
Free Throws
Free Throw Attempts
Offensive Rebounds
Defensive Rebounds
Total Rebounds
Blocks
Blocks Per Game
Offensive Win Shares
Defensive Win Shares
Win Shares
Win Shares per 48 mins

2nd in Player Efficiency
2nd in Defensive Rating

that's disgusting total domination.

[millwad]

2003, Duncan lead the playoffs in:

Minutes played
Points
Field Goals
Field Goal Attempts
Free Throws
Free Throw Attempts
Offensive Rebounds
Defensive Rebounds
Total Rebounds
Blocks
Blocks Per Game
Offensive Win Shares
Defensive Win Shares
Win Shares
Win Shares per 48 mins

2nd in Player Efficiency
2nd in Defensive Rating

Minutes played - Obviously, he was the star player on the winning team.

Points - He was the leading scorer of the team that won and the other final opponent didn't have any all-star caliber scorers.

Field goal attempts - He made it to the finals and he was the best scorer on the court so not odd that he took most shots.

Field goals - If you take the most shots you're in most cases the one who makes most as well.

Free throws - He got fouled the most and he was the best scorer on his team and they won it all - played more games than other teams.

Rebounds - Obviously, he didn't face to many good rebounders and the teams that made it to the ECF and WCF had bad rebounders.

Blocks and blocks per game - He was the only true shotblocker in that years playoffs if you don't want to count Deke who was darn old.

[rodman91]

Mavs (Dirk).. He f.cked Phil Jackson's,Kobe's,Lebron's,Stern's best selling stories in one playoff.

If Lakers were champion...
Phil Jackson's epic ending for his career. Probably it will be all day and night at sport news..as a great goodbye. And he would continue all those stupid comments about other teams & stars. Dirk saved us all.

Kobe's second threepeat.Just like Jordan.He would have 6 rings.Just like Jordan.All that Jordan vs Kobe debate would rise again and it would take months probably on news. Dirk saved us all.

If Heat were champion...
Lebron's tweets...Lebron's and Wade's comments about haters..Lebron is better than Kobe..Lebron is better than Jordan..Lebron is the KING..his narcisstic comments, parties every day and night..for months.. Dirk once again saved us all.

Mavs championship story is most impressive one after first Rocky movie.

[Bigsmoke]

Dirk's because his standards was lower than those other guys. I had the Spurs to win the championship once Webber went down actually.

IMO... Hakeem in 1995 was more impressive than Hakeem in 1994

[get these NETS]

Duncan was a one-man army in 03
led his team in four stats that Finals


points rebounds assists and blocks
literally a one man army...AND the Nets had one of the alltime great defensive centers guarding him at times..Mutombo

[kentatm]

Nobody outside of Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell has rebounded more missed shots in the playoffs than Tim Duncan did in 2003.


hmm... is there something else in basketball you can rebound that I have been unaware of all these years?

[Batz]

Nobody outside of Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell has rebounded more missed shots in the playoffs than Tim Duncan did in 2003..
****ing Einstein of basketball right here.

[Rose]

****ing Einstein of basketball right here.
:roll:

[DMAVS41]

As players?

1. Hakeem
2. Duncan
3. Dirk

Overall run considering circumstances?

1. Hakeem
2. Dirk
3. Duncan

[Jacks3]

Why is Dirk up there? His run isn't remotely close to the other two.

[tpols]

Why is Dirk up there? His run isn't remotely close to the other two.
It isn't at all.. he didnt impact the game nor carry near the weight those guys did..

In terms of historic clutch play.. probably the best ever. But clutch play isn't the whole game. There's a lot more to the basketball than late game scoring.

[DirkNowitzki41]

I don't care about the numbers....

Dirk sweept the 2 time Champions and the lakers had the Homecourt.

Dirk vs Durant + Westbrock

Dirk vs Lebron Wade And Miami had Homecourt .

Dirk's run is almost as impressive as Shaq's 01 demolition (15-1)

Damn right

[Jacks3]

Seriously. It's an insult to Hakeem/Duncan to include Dirk.

Those guys were posting monster numbers on offense and playing DPOY level defense on the other end.

Do people realize how extraordinarily that is?

Dirk pales in comparison.

[kentatm]

Mavs (Dirk).. He f.cked Phil Jackson's,Kobe's,Lebron's,Stern's best selling stories in one playoff.

If Lakers were champion...
Phil Jackson's epic ending for his career. Probably it will be all day and night at sport news..as a great goodbye. And he would continue all those stupid comments about other teams & stars. Dirk saved us all.

Kobe's second threepeat.Just like Jordan.He would have 6 rings.Just like Jordan.All that Jordan vs Kobe debate would rise again and it would take months probably on news. Dirk saved us all.

If Heat were champion...
Lebron's tweets...Lebron's and Wade's comments about haters..Lebron is better than Kobe..Lebron is better than Jordan..Lebron is the KING..his narcisstic comments, parties every day and night..for months.. Dirk once again saved us all.

Mavs championship story is most impressive one after first Rocky movie.

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/260391_1956137380678_1160010043_32002294_2412161_n .jpg

[crosso√er]

Dirk had one of the toughest runs to the championship.
Beating a hot Portland team; sweeping the two-time defending champions; beating a very good Thunder team and then overcoming the duo of James & Wade.

Simply incredible but I pick Duncan of 03'; I never seen a guy carry a team to a title the way Timmy did in 03 to be honest.

EVER.

[Smoke117]

As players?

1. Hakeem
2. Duncan
3. Dirk

Overall run considering circumstances?

1. Hakeem
2. Dirk
3. Duncan

This is just like the KG and Dirk debate all over...you completely dismissing Duncan's defense this time instead though during this playoff run. Only problem is Duncan was a stud offensively too in this instance. There is no way Dirk had a better run. Tim Duncan's two way super star effort trumps Dirks one way super star effort pretty handily.

[nbacardDOTnet]

1994
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/Rivalry/05%20The%20Dream%20VS%20Ewing/a7000319.jpg

1995 (WCF)
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/Hakeem%20Olajuwon/VS/David%20Robinson/5e4e3eb2-1.gif

[DMAVS41]

This is just like the KG and Dirk debate all over...you completely dismissing Duncan's defense this time instead though during this playoff run. Only problem is Duncan was a stud offensively too in this instance. There is no way Dirk had a better run. Tim Duncan's two way super star effort trumps Dirks one way super star effort pretty handily.

Which is why I rank Duncan over Dirk in terms of individual play.

As for the run though? I give the edge to Dirk for a lot of different reasons...some of them out of the control of the players.

That is what a playoff run is. It matters who you beat and how you beat them. It matters winning the title as a 20 to 1 underdog while nobody was surprised at all the Spurs won in 03.

It matters going 16-5 vs much better competition vs 16-8.

It matters that Dirk had the most clutch playoff run since MJ.

It matters that the Mavs beat a team in the finals without home court that so many people on this board deemed "competitively unfair".....

That is what a playoff run is to me. I can't explain it any clearer.

[Smoke117]

Which is why I rank Duncan over Dirk in terms of individual play.

As for the run though? I give the edge to Dirk for a lot of different reasons...some of them out of the control of the players.

That is what a playoff run is. It matters who you beat and how you beat them. It matters winning the title as a 20 to 1 underdog while nobody was surprised at all the Spurs won in 03.

It matters going 16-5 vs much better competition vs 16-8.

It matters that Dirk had the most clutch playoff run since MJ.

It matters that the Mavs beat a team in the finals without home court that so many people on this board deemed "competitively unfair".....

That is what a playoff run is to me. I can't explain it any clearer.

You are overrating the teams The Mavs beat and underrating the teams the Spurs beat. That 2003 lakers team was better then this 2011 team and your own Mavs team was better then the Thunder team this 2011 Mavs beat. And If that Blazers team was better then that Suns team it wasn't by much. You got the Heat over Nets handily enough, but I'm not sure one clear series makes the 2011 Mavs competition so much better.

[SCdac]

Duncan comes up big in the 4th

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/2003/playoffs/news/2003/06/13/duncan_sider_ap/


EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. (AP) -- Expectations for Tim Duncan are so high that when he averaged 21 points in Games 2, 3 and 4 of the NBA Finals, there were actually whispers that he wasn't doing enough for the San Antonio Spurs.

He left no room for doubt in Game 5.

Duncan had 29 points and 17 rebounds and was a steady presence during a tight stretch early in the fourth quarter as the Spurs beat the New Jersey Nets 93-83 Friday night to get within a victory of their second NBA championship.

Duncan made 10-of-18 shots and, most impressively, was 9-of-10 from the foul line. He also had four assists and four blocks, helping overcome his six turnovers.

"Tim was great tonight from the get-go," center David Robinson said. "That was one of the keys. When he gets started early, our confidence level is just higher. Guys just feel better and play better."

People are acting like Duncan was a ghost in the 4th quarter or what? it's not like he pales in comparison to Dirk

and Duncan makes his teammates play just as well if not better.

dude had 100+ assists in that playoff run

and Duncan was on the floor for nearly entire games.....

think about having the defense of prime Duncan on the floor for nearly entire games.

it's closer to Dirk Nowitzki and Tyson Chandler combined than it is just Duncan vs Dirk...

Finals Duncans minutes 2003:

Game 1: 44 min
Game 2: 43 min
Game 3: 45 min
Game 4: 39 min
Game 5: 46 min
Game 6: 46 min

Dirk Finals minutes 2011:

Game 1: 40 min
Game 2: 42 min
Game 3: 42 min
Game 4: 39 min
Game 5: 40 min
Game 6: 39 min

Don't take for granted what having Duncan control your team on both ends does..... when he's almost never on the bench.

He MADE teams look weak.

[Big#50]

Tim went crazy in 03. No playoff run will ever beat it. Dude averaged 24/17/5/5 in the finals. DUNCAN?Hakeem BTW. And I do not even like the guy.

[brownmamba00]

Hakeem


Duncan







Dirk

[brownmamba00]

1994

1995 (WCF)
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/Hakeem%20Olajuwon/VS/David%20Robinson/5e4e3eb2-1.gif
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[Big#50]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
Tim would have blocked that ***** shot. And I do not even like him.

[Stuckey]

tough call

Dirk faced some tough competition

but Hakeem and Duncan looked like gods out there

[DMAVS41]

You are overrating the teams The Mavs beat and underrating the teams the Spurs beat. That 2003 lakers team was better then this 2011 team and your own Mavs team was better then the Thunder team this 2011 Mavs beat. And If that Blazers team was better then that Suns team it wasn't by much. You got the Heat over Nets handily enough, but I'm not sure one clear series makes the 2011 Mavs competition so much better.

No, I'm not.

The Mavs without Dirk are not better than the Thunder this year. Its actually not even remotely close.

The Heat are probably 3 times as good as the Nets were.

Both Lakers teams were stacked and flawed.

The Blazers were better than the Suns.....


If you can't admit that this Mavs team played better competition then you should just stop posting because its just a pointless discussion. That should be conceded from the get go.

Just like I conceded that Duncan was a better overall player in 03.

Both are just facts.

[SCdac]

Tim Duncan's 37 points / 16 rebound game to close out the Lakers in 6 games.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVUGOb820wk

http://i935.photobucket.com/albums/ad191/Tjarks/sonea3l_300_080418.jpg

The Lakers, under Phil, at the time were 4-0 when facing elimination, and had won 13 straight playoff series since Phil's hiring

[DMAVS41]

Tim Duncan's 37 points / 16 rebound game to close out the Lakers in 6 games.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVUGOb820wk

http://i935.photobucket.com/albums/ad191/Tjarks/sonea3l_300_080418.jpg

The Lakers, under Phil, at the time were 4-0 when facing elimination, and had won 13 straight playoff series since Phil's hiring

And the Mavs beat a Lakers team that had gone to 3 straight Finals, 2 titles, and had gone 12-1 in their last 13 playoff series.

And not only did the Mavs beat them, they swept them without home court. A Phil Jackson led team had never been swept.

[SCdac]

And the Mavs beat a Lakers team that had gone to 3 straight Finals, 2 titles, and had gone 12-1 in their last 12 playoff series.

And not only did the Mavs beat them, they swept them without home court. A Phil Jackson led team had never been swept.

Good for the Mavs.

Dirk closed out the Lakers with 17 points / 7 rebounds... and the Mavs got 86 points from their bench...

Just like Duncan got help in plenty of playoff games. But in 2003 he was a beast on both ends, and the best playmaker on the team (the Spurs ran a play called "4 Down" on so many half court sets, getting the ball in the post to Duncan, letting him create).

I wasn't really "attacking" Dirk's run when posting Duncan's sick Game 6. Don't be so defensive. :facepalm

Duncan's 2003 run was legendary no matter how you, in particular, want to slice it...

[DMAVS41]

Good for the Mavs.

Dirk closed out the Lakers with 17 points / 7 rebounds... and the Mavs got 86 points from their bench...

Just like Duncan got help in plenty of playoff games. But in 2003 he was a beast on both ends, and the best playmaker on the team (the Spurs ran a play called "4 Down" on so many half court sets, getting the ball in the post to Duncan, letting him create).

I wasn't really "attacking" Dirk's run when posting Duncan's sick Game 6. Don't be so defensive. :facepalm

Duncan's 2003 run was legendary no matter how you, in particular, want to slice it...

I wasn't.

I was just pointing out what Dirk's team did as well. Its fair to look at both sides is it not?

Duncan's 03 run is absolutely legendary. In fact, Duncan's 4 titles all rank to me as some of the most impressive ever.

He never won a title with a teammate to make an all nba team. That is extremely rare.

Since 1980 (assuming there were 3 teams back then), I think that has only happened for Hakeem in 94, Jordan in 91, and Dirk in 11.

DUNCAN DID IT 4 FREAKING TIMES.

That is amazing.

[SCdac]

Tim Duncan's 34 points / 24 rebounds / 6 assists / 6 blocks to take the 2-1 lead against the Mavs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCXpLKZ8fJQ&feature=related

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2005/04/21/inside2-2005-04-21-dirk-duncan.jpg

Tim Duncan has a SICK block on Dirk at the 13:07 mark.... should check it out

[DMAVS41]

Tim Duncan's 34 points / 24 rebounds / 6 assists / 6 blocks to take the 2-1 lead against the Mavs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCXpLKZ8fJQ&feature=related

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2005/04/21/inside2-2005-04-21-dirk-duncan.jpg

Tim Duncan has a SICK block on Dirk at the 13:07 mark.... should check it out

Great game.

Didn't realize this was on youtube.

I win the "when did Dirk get injured" battle though. LOL at those clowns telling me he got hurt with a couple minutes to go. Dude got hurt at the 8 minute mark just like I remembered.

[SCdac]

Great game.

Didn't realize this was on youtube.

I win the "when did Dirk get injured" battle though. LOL at those clowns telling me he got hurt with a couple minutes to go. Dude got hurt at the 8 minute mark just like I remembered.

Still it's the NBA, Duncan was near unstoppable that season/post season, and players go down in the NBA all the time... It's far from "outlandish" to assume the Spurs win with or without Dirk, considering the Mavs unreliable style of play and the Spurs had the best defense in the league - holding teams to 85 PPG. Spurs were damn good. They outscored the Mavs 34 to 9 in the fourth quarter of the Final game, which says alot not only about the Mavs but also about the Spurs considering they were down big earlier in the game. Don't underestimate how resilient the team was... and yes it's on youtube, credit to shaqattack on here.. wouldn't mind him posting more spurs games

[SCdac]

On one of Tim Duncan's worst shooting nights in the 2003 playoffs, he still managed to help the team with his defense, elite post vision, and relentless rebounding.... to close out the Phoenix Suns he put up:

15 points / 20 rebounds / 10 assists / 4 blocks

It was his 4th career triple double , and it came in a playoff game

3 of his assists came in the final five minutes of the game.

after the game, Duncan said...


"That's my job, to quarterback out there,''

This... coming from a 7 foot power forward!

Phoenix Suns coach Scott Williams said...


"He went out there and played a hard, clean ballgame. He's their all-everything.''

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=230501021

[DMAVS41]

Still it's the NBA, Duncan was near unstoppable that season/post season, and players go down in the NBA all the time... It's far from "outlandish" to assume the Spurs win with or without Dirk, considering the Mavs unreliable style of play and the Spurs had the best defense in the league - holding teams to 85 PPG. Spurs were damn good. They outscored the Mavs 34 to 9 in the fourth quarter of the Final game, which says alot not only about the Mavs but also about the Spurs considering they were down big earlier in the game. Don't underestimate how resilient the team was... and yes it's on youtube, credit to shaqattack on here.. wouldn't mind him posting more spurs games

I never said it was "outlandish" at all. In fact, the Spurs were favored with Dirk healthy. So don't turn this around like its me saying that the Mavs would have won or something. I never said that.

I just remember arguing with you and sin and others about when Dirk got hurt. Now we have the evidence. The 8 minute mark. Just like I said....and everyone else claimed he got hurt with 2 minutes to go. So sorry...that is not true.

That series ended when Dirk got hurt. The Mavs had no chance to beat the Spurs without Dirk. Doesn't mean they would have won, just means that they had no chance without him.

And that takes some of the luster off of the playoff run. Which is what we are debating.

That would be like Lebron going down in game 3 of the Finals. Everyone here (including me) would admit that it would take away a little from the overall playoff run.

[SCdac]

That series ended when Dirk got hurt. The Mavs had no chance to beat the Spurs without Dirk. Doesn't mean they would have won, just means that they had no chance without him.

And that takes some of the luster off of the playoff run. Which is what we are debating.

That would be like Lebron going down in game 3 of the Finals. Everyone here (including me) would admit that it would take away a little from the overall playoff run.

Can you prove that? ... is that not a completely subjective opinion?

Keep in mind this is a topic on which player had a better individual playoff run, not which team looked better or worse "according to expectations" or media glorification.

Lastly, of course Dirk going down cost the Mavericks severely, he was the best offensive player for a largely offensive-minded team. I can respect someone saying they're done without him, definitely. BUT, with or with out him, that team lived and died by three pointers (Mavs took the second most amount that season).

And no, I don't ever remember arguing with you about when Dirk did or didn't go down.. honestly... what is there to argue? it's already known.

[DMAVS41]

Can you prove that? ... is that not a completely subjective opinion?

Keep in mind this is a topic on which player had a better individual playoff run, not which team looked better or worse "according to expectations" or media glorification.

Lastly, of course Dirk going down cost the Mavericks severely, he was the best offensive player for a largely offensive-minded team. I can respect someone saying they're done without him, definitely. BUT, with or with out him, that team lived and died by three pointers (Mavs took the second most amount that season).

And no, I don't ever remember arguing with you about when Dirk did or didn't go down.. honestly... what is there to argue? it's already known.

We are talking about completely different things then. I think a playoff run absolutely has to do with expectations and competition and performance.

If its just...who played better? I've have repeatedly said literally a hundred times that 03 duncan was better.

Do you just ignore all of my posts when having a debate?

A playoff run to me encompasses much more than just individual play in a vacuum.

Why would Duncan or Hakeem be considered better than what Shaq or Jordan did if all the other stuff isn't factored in. As good as Duncan was in 03.....he wasn't as good as Shaq in 00 or 01....and certainly wasn't as good as Jordan in 92 or 93.

I apologize for the confusion. I've been talking about something completely different I guess.

[brain drain]

I'd say Duncan had a higher individual contribution to the 2003 title run, but the competition wasn't as good as this year's competition to the Mavs.

The Spurs had to go through one really tough team at full strenght (Lakers).

The other two top teams that year were Sac (59 wins) and the Mavs (60 wins).
Webber got injured against the Mavs, Dirk got injured against the Spurs.
It's as if this year, Duncan and Kobe or Durant had gone down.

That year, the Lakers only had the 6th best record in the west and were rather bad defensively, so basically, the Spurs went through the 8th seed (Phoenix), the 6th seed (Lakers) and the Mavs without Dirk.
And then they faced the Nets which were probably at the same level as Phoenix.

2011 Portland > Marbury's 2003 Suns
2011 Lakers >= 2003 Lakers
2011 OKC >>>> 2003 Mavs without Dirk
2011 Heat >>>>> 2003 Nets

[derman]

Tim Duncan's 34 points / 24 rebounds / 6 assists / 6 blocks to take the 2-1 lead against the Mavs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCXpLKZ8fJQ&feature=related

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/_photos/2005/04/21/inside2-2005-04-21-dirk-duncan.jpg

Tim Duncan has a SICK block on Dirk at the 13:07 mark.... should check it out

What about Parker's 19 points in the 3rd quarter which turned the game around? LOL at clowns claiming that Duncan had no help.
Dirk went down when the Mavs were still in it. Without dirk, obviously they had no chance.

Dirk's run is easily more impressive. The teams he faced are much better than the teams Duncan faced.

[SCdac]

We are talking about completely different things then. I think a playoff run absolutely has to do with expectations and competition and performance.

If its just...who played better? I've have repeatedly said literally a hundred times that 03 duncan was better.


Well, that's good to hear you understand which player played better...

to go along with what you think a playoff run is...

A) Duncan was expected to play well, the Spurs became a force in the regular season, he was the leading MVP candidate. He did exactly what he was expected to do.... not only that, he finally lead the team past one of the best dynasty's of NBA history that had knocked them out of the playoffs previously. That in itself is pretty sick. The other reason people are saying otherwise is because it didn't happen a few days ago.

B) Duncan and the Spurs went up against the best competition the NBA has to offer (just like the Mavs did) prior to the hand checking rule changes... and much of what Duncan/Spurs accomplished was at a slower pace, in low scoring games.... yet he was making only 2 less FT's per game than Dirk and had some clutch FT shooting games himself

Spurs went up against teams coached by possibly the GOAT coach Phil Jackson, Byron Scott, and all-time winning coach Don Nelson... and teams containing prime Shaq (the guy who's neck and neck with TD as the best player of the last decade), prime Kobe (maybe the next guy on the list), Dirk Nowitzki (for half a series), Steve Nash (AS, All-NBA, top 10 in APG and Offensive Win Shares), Amare Stoudemire (ROY), Stephon Marbury (AS and All-NBA, top 5 APG), Jason Kidd (AS and All-NBA, future HOF'er), Richard Jefferson, Michael Finley, Anfernee Hardaway, Dikembe Mutombo, etc)... Keep in mind, the teams SA beat, beat the other teams too....

C) Duncan performed exceedingly well, to the point where it seals the whole argument (for me). He upped his averages all across the board, carrying a team of ancient Robinson, 20 year old unpolished Parker, Stephen Jackson (never an AS or All-NBA his whole career), etc. Some of his games were one of a kind, on both end of the floor. I've already posted plenty of his performances and stats in this thread. He performed so much better, individually, when combining all aspects of the game that competition is hardly a tipping point, if even a significant factor (considering Dirk never had to guard any of Lebron or Wade the way Duncan did guard Shaq, Dirk, Amare, and Kenyon Martin at times). Duncan was that good. But that's just my opinion. Dirk couldn't ever effect a playoff run the way Duncan did, he would need more of an assist man next to him to pull that off and bigs who can block a ton of shots (no Malik Rose).

Replace Duncan with 2011 Dirk on the Spurs and I don't think they win a championship. On the other hand, I think prime Duncan could take the 2011 Mavs team to a championship and maybe more of Dirk's previous teams.

[DMAVS41]

Well, that's good to hear you understand which player played better...

to go along with what you think a playoff run is...

A) Duncan was expected to play well, the Spurs became a force in the regular season, he was the leading MVP candidate. He did exactly what he was expected to do.... not only that, he finally lead the team past one of the best dynasty's of NBA history that had knocked them out of the playoffs previously. That in itself is pretty sick. The other reason people are saying otherwise is because it didn't happen a few days ago.

B) Duncan and the Spurs went up against the best competition the NBA has to offer (just like the Mavs did) prior to the hand checking rule changes... and much of what Duncan/Spurs accomplished was at a slower pace, in low scoring games.... yet he was making only 2 less FT's per game than Dirk and had some clutch FT shooting games himself

Spurs went up against teams coached by possibly the GOAT coach Phil Jackson, Byron Scott, and all-time winning coach Don Nelson... and teams containing prime Shaq (the guy who's neck and neck with TD as the best player of the last decade), prime Kobe (maybe the next guy on the list), Dirk Nowitzki (for half a series), Steve Nash (AS, All-NBA, top 10 in APG and Offensive Win Shares), Amare Stoudemire (ROY), Stephon Marbury (AS and All-NBA, top 5 APG), Jason Kidd (AS and All-NBA, future HOF'er), Richard Jefferson, Michael Finley, Anfernee Hardaway, Dikembe Mutombo, etc)... Keep in mind, the teams SA beat, beat the other teams too....

C) Duncan performed exceedingly well, to the point where it seals the whole argument (for me). He upped his averages all across the board, carrying a team of ancient Robinson, 20 year old unpolished Parker, Stephen Jackson (never an AS or All-NBA his whole career), etc. Some of his games were one of a kind, on both end of the floor. I've already posted plenty of his performances and stats in this thread. He performed so much better, individually, when combining all aspects of the game that competition is hardly a tipping point, if even a significant factor. Duncan was that good. But that's just my opinion. Dirk couldn't ever effect a playoff run the way Duncan did, he would need more of an assist man next to him to pull that off.

Replace Duncan with 2011 Dirk on the Spurs and I don't think they win a championship. On the other hand, I think prime Duncan could take the 2011 Mavs team to a championship and maybe more of Dirk's previous teams.

I agree with some of this.

We just differ on what a playoff run is.

I have no idea what replacing each other would have done. I don't think Dirk would have won in 03, but at the same time....I don't think Duncan would have won this year.

We just have a different definition of playoff run and you seem unwilling to concede even the obvious:

Which is that Dirk faced better teams.

Agree to disagree.

[brain drain]

B) Duncan and the Spurs went up against the best competition the NBA has to offer

This is simply not true. There were 3 teams around 60 wins that year:
Spurs, Mavs (both 50) and Sac (59).

Webber got injured against the Mavs, Dirk got injured after 1.5 games against the Spurs (the first of which the Mavs had won in San Antonio).

So basically, the best two other teams were eliminated by injuries.

Duncan played against a 44-win team, a 50 win team, decimated Mavs and a 49 win team.

That has to be historically bad competition, having to play not a single full strength team with more than 50 wins in the playoffs, especially in the last 12 years in the otherwise ultra competetive west.

[DMAVS41]

This is simply not true. There were 3 teams around 60 wins that year:
Spurs, Mavs (both 50) and Sac (59).

Webber got injured against the Mavs, Dirk got injured after 1.5 games against the Spurs (the first of which the Mavs had won in San Antonio).

So basically, the best two other teams were eliminated by injuries.

Duncan played against a 44-win team, a 50 win team, decimated Mavs and a 49 win team.

That has to be historically bad competition, having to play not a single full strength team with more than 50 wins in the playoffs, especially in the last 12 years in the otherwise ultra competetive west.

Yep.

There is no point having a debate if he's unwilling to acknowledge reality.

The 03 run would have been like the Mavs beating the Hornets, Lakers, Thunder (without Durant), and Magic in the finals. If he can't see the difference in what that would have been like compared to what actually happened I give up.

And again, the Mavs went 16-5 against that much better competition while the Spurs went 16-8 against that much worse competition. That matters when debating a playoff run.

[brain drain]

Here's a comparison:
- 2000 Lakers: played Sac (44 Wins), Phoenix (53), Portland (59), Pacers (56)
- 2001 Lakers: Portland (50 wins), Sac (55 wins), Spurs (58), Philly (56 wins)
- 2002 Lakers: Portland (49), Spurs (58), Kings (61), Nets (52)
- 2003 Spurs: Suns (44), Lakers (50), Mavs (60* - no Dirk), Nets (49)
- 2004 Detroit: Bucks (41), Nets (47), Pacers (61), Lakers (56)
- 2005 Spurs: Nuggets (49), Sonics (52), Suns(62), Pistons (54)
- 2006 Heat: Chicago (41), Nets (49), Pistons (64), Mavs (60)
- 2007 Spurs: Nuggets (45), Phoenix (61), Jazz (51), Cavs (50)
- 2008 Boston: Hawks (37), Cleveland (45), Detrtoit (59), Lakers (57)
- 2009 Lakers: Jazz (48), Rockets (53), Nuggets (54), Magic (59)
- 2010 Lakers: OKC (50), Jazz (53), Phoenix (54), Boston (50)
- 2011 Mavs: Portland (48), Lakers (57), OKC (55), Heat (58)

2004 West finalist Lakers: Rockets (45), Spurs (57), Timberwolves (58)
2006 West finalist Mavs: Grizzlies (49), Spurs (63), Phoenix (54)
2008 West finalist Lakers: Nuggets (50), Jazz(54), Spurs(56)

It's pretty obvious IMO, that the 2003 Spurs had the easiest path to the championship out of all teams in all these years, especially coming out of the West.

[Lucifer]

Playoff PER on title runs

2001 Lakers
Shaq------------29.7
Kobe------------23.8



Do you need anymore proof.....:facepalm


Going back to the Shaq's demolition in 01 comment while giving no credit to Kobe, so basically according to ISH having a per of 23.8 accounts for nothing :lol

[millwad]

I still think Hakeem's 94 run was more impress than Dirk's '11 and Duncan's 03 run but I almost think that Hakeem's 95' run was even more impressive than his previous run.

In first round in '95 the Rockets faced Utah Jazz who had 60 wins that year and they had the combo of prime Karl Malone and prime John Stockton and Hornacek. Rockets won with 3-2 in games.

In the second round they faced Phoenix Suns, they as well had a great regular season with 59 wins and they had team with players like Barkley, Johnson and Majerle. The rockets ended up winning with 4-3 in games.

In the WCF Rockets faced the Spurs, this series came to ruin alot of David Robinson's legacy. Robinson came into the playoffs being the MVP and no MVP has been that dominated like Robinson got by Hakeem.

San Antonio had 62 wins that season and beside MVP Robinson they had players like Sean Elliott, Vinny Del Negro, Avery Johnson, Dennis Rodman etc..

Here you have som stats, Hakeem vs Robinson in the WCF:


David Robinson in series: 23.8 points, 11.3 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.5 steals

Hakeem Olajuwon in series: 35.3 points, 12.5 rebounds, 5.0 assists 4.1 blocks, 1.3 steals

# Game 1: Olajuwon: 27 pts - Robinson 21 pts
# Game 2: Olajuwon: 41 pts - Robinson 32 pts
# Game 3: Olajuwon: 43 pts - Robinson 29 pts
# Game 4: Olajuwon: 20 pts - Robinson 20 pts
# Game 5: Olajuwon: 42 pts - Robinson 22 pts
# Game 6: Olajuwon: 39 pts - Robinson 19 pts

Not only did Hakeem outscore the MVP with almost 12 points, he outrebounded him, had almost twice as many assists a game and he had more blocks as well. It's amazing that Hakeem dropped more than 40 points in 3 of the 6 games and he almost had a 4th 40 point game in the last game when he ended up with 39 points. And it wasn't that Hakeem ballhogged and took bad shots, his FG % was higher than Robinson's as well.


In the finals the Rockets swept the same Orlando Magic that dominated Jordan and Pippen in the second round of the playoffs. Orlando Magic had a season with 57 wins and they had great players, Shaquille O'neal, Penny Hardaway, Horace Grant, Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson so they were damn solid. Still they stood no chance against the Rockets and they got swept.

Hakeem in the 1995 playoffs averaged 33 points, 10.3 rebounds, 4.5 assists, 3 blocks and 1 steal a game. Some could say he should have had grabbed more rebounds but Hakeem carried the load on offense and everyone knows how great his defense was..

Dirk is hard to compare but he had great teammates and I have know doubt in my mind that Hakeem would have abused Duncan the same way he did with Robinson.. Duncan didn't face any big men that he guarded that year, Robinson guarded Shaq most of the times and it wasn't like Duncan ran around the 3 points line chasing Dirk.. Hakeem faced both Shaq and MVP Robinson in that years playoffs and still dominated big time.

[brain drain]

I still think Hakeem's 94 run was more impress than Dirk's '11 and Duncan's 03 run but I almost think that Hakeem's 95' run was even more impressive than his previous run.

In first round in '95 the Rockets faced Utah Jazz who had 60 wins that year and they had the combo of prime Karl Malone and prime John Stockton and Hornacek. Rockets won with 3-2 in games.

In the second round they faced Phoenix Suns, they as well had a great regular season with 59 wins and they had team with players like Barkley, Johnson and Majerle. The rockets ended up winning with 4-3 in games.

In the WCF Rockets faced the Spurs, this series came to ruin alot of David Robinson's legacy. Robinson came into the playoffs being the MVP and no MVP has been that dominated like Robinson got by Hakeem.

San Antonio had 62 wins that season and beside MVP Robinson they had players like Sean Elliott, Vinny Del Negro, Avery Johnson, Dennis Rodman etc..

Here you have som stats, Hakeem vs Robinson in the WCF:


David Robinson in series: 23.8 points, 11.3 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.5 steals

Hakeem Olajuwon in series: 35.3 points, 12.5 rebounds, 5.0 assists 4.1 blocks, 1.3 steals

# Game 1: Olajuwon: 27 pts - Robinson 21 pts
# Game 2: Olajuwon: 41 pts - Robinson 32 pts
# Game 3: Olajuwon: 43 pts - Robinson 29 pts
# Game 4: Olajuwon: 20 pts - Robinson 20 pts
# Game 5: Olajuwon: 42 pts - Robinson 22 pts
# Game 6: Olajuwon: 39 pts - Robinson 19 pts

Not only did Hakeem outscore the MVP with almost 12 points, he outrebounded him, had almost twice as many assists a game and he had more blocks as well. It's amazing that Hakeem dropped more than 40 points in 3 of the 6 games and he almost had a 4th 40 point game in the last game when he ended up with 39 points. And it wasn't that Hakeem ballhogged and took bad shots, his FG % was higher than Robinson's as well.


In the finals the Rockets swept the same Orlando Magic that dominated Jordan and Pippen in the second round of the playoffs. Orlando Magic had a season with 57 wins and they had great players, Shaquille O'neal, Penny Hardaway, Horace Grant, Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson so they were damn solid. Still they stood no chance against the Rockets and they got swept.

Hakeem in the 1995 playoffs averaged 33 points, 10.3 rebounds, 4.5 assists, 3 blocks and 1 steal a game. Some could say he should have had grabbed more rebounds but Hakeem carried the load on offense and everyone knows how great his defense was..

Dirk is hard to compare but he had great teammates and I have know doubt in my mind that Hakeem would have abused Duncan the same way he did with Robinson.. Duncan didn't face any big men that he guarded that year, Robinson guarded Shaq most of the times and it wasn't like Duncan ran around the 3 points line chasing Dirk.. Hakeem faced both Shaq and MVP Robinson in that years playoffs and still dominated big time.

The 1995 Rockets run was amazing, and they went through VERY strong competition. However, at that point, Drexler was on the team, so it wasn't a one star team like 1994 anymore.

[DMAVS41]

Here's a comparison:
- 2000 Lakers: played Sac (44 Wins), Phoenix (53), Portland (59), Pacers (56)
- 2001 Lakers: Portland (50 wins), Sac (55 wins), Spurs (58), Philly (56 wins)
- 2002 Lakers: Portland (49), Spurs (58), Kings (61), Nets (52)
- 2003 Spurs: Suns (44), Lakers (50), Mavs (60* - no Dirk), Nets (49)
- 2004 Detroit: Bucks (41), Nets (47), Pacers (61), Lakers (56)
- 2005 Spurs: Nuggets (49), Sonics (52), Suns(62), Pistons (54)
- 2006 Heat: Chicago (41), Nets (49), Pistons (64), Mavs (60)
- 2007 Spurs: Nuggets (45), Phoenix (61), Jazz (51), Cavs (50)
- 2008 Boston: Hawks (37), Cleveland (45), Detrtoit (59), Lakers (57)
- 2009 Lakers: Jazz (48), Rockets (53), Nuggets (54), Magic (59)
- 2010 Lakers: OKC (50), Jazz (53), Phoenix (54), Boston (50)
- 2011 Mavs: Portland (48), Lakers (57), OKC (55), Heat (58)

2004 West finalist Lakers: Rockets (45), Spurs (57), Timberwolves (58)
2006 West finalist Mavs: Grizzlies (49), Spurs (63), Phoenix (54)
2008 West finalist Lakers: Nuggets (50), Jazz(54), Spurs(56)

It's pretty obvious IMO, that the 2003 Spurs had the easiest path to the championship out of all teams in all these years, especially coming out of the West.


Yep. They deserve a lot of credit for beating the Lakers, but the writing was actually on the wall with that team. They struggled all year to make it work with Kobe's desire to be more of "the man"....

The Spurs had home court in that series and won. Impressive, but not totally unexpected.

After that? They were huge favorites in the other three series.

Suns? No chance
Mavs without Dirk? No chance
Nets? No chance

Essentially they beat 1 team that actually had a chance to beat them. If each series was played 10 times, the Spurs would have won all 10 against the Suns, Mavs, and Nets.

Its one of the easiest paths, as you said, to the title of the last decade.

That matters.

And again. 16-5 vs 16-8.

[KingBeasley08]

I' say the Mavs had a better run in that case. Duncan's play was a better run tho

[DMAVS41]

I' say the Mavs had a better run in that case. Duncan's play was a better run tho

Yep.

And that is what makes the debate fun.

How do you weigh Duncan's superior play vs Dirk facing better teams?

How do you weigh going 16-5 vs 16-8?

How much does Dirk's legendary clutch play close the gap with Duncan's superior overall play?

Its definitely a debate when all things are taken into account.

[brain drain]

I' say the Mavs had a better run in that case. Duncan's play was a better run tho

Yes, but you have to take the level of competition into account.

This year, Dirk played against teams that have very good defenders against him in 3 of the 4 series.

During the 2003 Spurs run, the only good big Duncan went up against was Shaq. The opposing PFs were: rookie Amare, Horry, Raef Lafrentz, Kenyon Martin. Sure he excelled.

[SCdac]

This is simply not true. There were 3 teams around 60 wins that year:
Spurs, Mavs (both 50) and Sac (59).

Webber got injured against the Mavs, Dirk got injured after 1.5 games against the Spurs (the first of which the Mavs had won in San Antonio).

So basically, the best two other teams were eliminated by injuries.

Duncan played against a 44-win team, a 50 win team, decimated Mavs and a 49 win team.

That has to be historically bad competition, having to play not a single full strength team with more than 50 wins in the playoffs, especially in the last 12 years in the otherwise ultra competetive west.

"historically bad competition" and prime Shaq and Kobe in the same sentence makes no sense...... agree to disagree on that. :roll:

Not a single team with "more than 50 wins", is that like a weird way of saying they didn't go up against a single 50-win team? .... because.... they did.... and the Nets beat a 50-win team (that won a championship the next season) to get to the Finals.

This is like saying, the Mavs this season didn't have to go up against the 61 win Spurs or Bulls.... so therefore their run is "invalid".... Do you realize how many variables there are in these situations and how silly it is to claim a competition so drastically inferior? And what makes you guys think the Mavs are going up against teams at absolute "full strength"?

The Mavs didn't have to go up against a Blazers team with Brandon Roy we all know - the best player on that team averaging 30+ MPG, and went up against them without a healthy Greg Oden, so that series "doesn't count". Both the Thunder and the Heat had crucial players who weren't full strength and fully recovered from serious injuries, in Kendrick Perkins, Mike Miller, and Udonis Haslem... so we should consider those teams at about 80% not 100%. And the Heat just threw their roster together on the fly, and they had problems all season, so we shouldn't consider them serious threats either... The Lakers finished with the same record as the Mavs so you can't really consider them above Dallas...... and so on.... and so on.

The New Jersey Nets were coming off a previous Finals appearance and were holding teams to 90 PPG that season (would be top-3 this season), playing more cohesive defense than the Heat... in a tougher era for defense.... Less star talent than the Heat, that's for sure, maybe not a "better" team, but still the best team in the Eastern conference lead by a future HOF'er... (Keep in mind, it's not like Duncan hasn't beaten Lebron team in dramatic fashion either - that's not beyond him)

Considering how stacked the Mavs were in having two starting centers on the roster (one of them the best defensive player on the team), and former All-Stars, a veteran-lead squad, and a MUCH better point guard.... even considering the "better competition" ..... it's STILL not more impressive than Duncan's amazing playoff run with his rag-tag group.

If anything..... y'all are underrating what Duncan did in the playoffs (not necessarily the team).... but this is ISH afterall.... where flashy offense overrules everything and the dirty work goes unseen and unrecognized.

[KingBeasley08]

Yes, but you have to take the level of competition into account.

This year, Dirk played against teams that have very good defenders against him in 3 of the 4 series.

During the 2003 Spurs run, the only good big Duncan went up against was Shaq. The opposing PFs were: rookie Amare, Horry, Raef Lafrentz, Kenyon Martin. Sure he excelled.
Didn't he go against Mutombo?

[BlackJoker23]

Tim would have blocked that ***** shot. And I do not even like him.
you dont like tim? thats why youre his biggest d-rider on this board right? with the name big#50. lmao phuck outta here.

hakeem would have duncan on skates.

[brain drain]

"historically bad competition" and prime Shaq and Kobe in the same sentence makes no sense...... agree to disagree on that. :roll:

Not a single team with "more than 50 wins", is that like a weird way of saying they didn't go up against a single 50-win team? .... because.... they did.... and the Nets beat a 50-win team (that won a championship the next season) to get to the Finals.

This is like saying, the Mavs this season didn't have to go up against the 61 win Spurs or Bulls.... so therefore their run is "invalid".... Do you realize how many variables there are in these situations and how silly it is to claim a competition so drastically inferior? And what makes you guys think the Mavs are going up against teams at absolute "full strength"?

The Mavs didn't have to go up against a Blazers team with Brandon Roy we all know - the best player on that team averaging 30+ MPG, and went up against them without a healthy Greg Oden, so that series "doesn't count". Both the Thunder and the Heat had crucial players who weren't full strength and fully recovered from serious injuries, in Kendrick Perkins, Mike Miller, and Udonis Haslem... so we should consider those teams at about 80% not 100%. And the Heat just threw their roster together on the fly, and they had problems all season, so we shouldn't consider them serious threats either... The Lakers finished with the same record as the Mavs so you can't really consider them above Dallas...... and so on.... and so on.

The New Jersey Nets were coming off a previous Finals appearance and were holding teams to 90 PPG that season (would be top-3 this season), playing more cohesive defense than the Heat... in a tougher era for defense.... Less star talent than the Heat, that's for sure, maybe not a "better" team, but still the best team in the Eastern conference lead by a future HOF'er... (Keep in mind, it's not like Duncan hasn't beaten Lebron team in dramatic fashion either - that's not beyond him)

Considering how stacked the Mavs were in having two starting centers on the roster (one of them the best defensive player on the team), and former All-Stars, a veteran-lead squad, and a MUCH better point guard.... even considering the "better competition" ..... it's STILL not more impressive than Duncan's amazing playoff run with his rag-tag group.

If anything..... y'all are underrating what Duncan did in the playoffs (not necessarily the team).... but this is ISH afterall.... where flashy offense overrules everything and the dirty work goes unseen and unrecognized.
Yes, the Spurs' overall competition WAS historically bad in that year.

The Lakers didn't bring it that year (which was the reason why they felt they had to go out and reload the next year). They were still a good team, but miles away from how good they had been three years before.

The Mavs without Dirk were probably the equivalent of a 40-45 win team in the west.

The only reason why the nets had two finals appearances in a row was because the East was historically bad at that point. It's not a testament to their strenght, it's a testament to the weakness of the competition in the east in these years. The fact that the best thing the east had to offer was a 50 wins while the west had 3 59/60 win teams team should tell you something.

[brain drain]

Didn't he go against Mutombo?
Mutombo played 115 minutes in the whole playoffs. Go figure.

[DMAVS41]

"historically bad competition" and prime Shaq and Kobe in the same sentence makes no sense...... agree to disagree on that. :roll:

Not a single team with "more than 50 wins", is that like a weird way of saying they didn't go up against a single 50-win team? .... because.... they did.... and the Nets beat a 50-win team (that won a championship the next season) to get to the Finals.

This is like saying, the Mavs this season didn't have to go up against the 61 win Spurs or Bulls.... so therefore their run is "invalid".... Do you realize how many variables there are in these situations and how silly it is to claim a competition so drastically inferior? And what makes you guys think the Mavs are going up against teams at absolute "full strength"?

The Mavs didn't have to go up against a Blazers team with Brandon Roy we all know - the best player on that team averaging 30+ MPG, and went up against them without a healthy Greg Oden, so that series "doesn't count". Both the Thunder and the Heat had crucial players who weren't full strength and fully recovered from serious injuries, in Kendrick Perkins, Mike Miller, and Udonis Haslem... so we should consider those teams at about 80% not 100%. And the Heat just threw their roster together on the fly, and they had problems all season, so we shouldn't consider them serious threats either... The Lakers finished with the same record as the Mavs so you can't really consider them above Dallas...... and so on.... and so on.

The New Jersey Nets were coming off a previous Finals appearance and were holding teams to 90 PPG that season (would be top-3 this season), playing more cohesive defense than the Heat... in a tougher era for defense.... Less star talent than the Heat, that's for sure, maybe not a "better" team, but still the best team in the Eastern conference lead by a future HOF'er... (Keep in mind, it's not like Duncan hasn't beaten Lebron team in dramatic fashion either - that's not beyond him)

Considering how stacked the Mavs were in having two starting centers on the roster (one of them the best defensive player on the team), and former All-Stars, a veteran-lead squad, and a MUCH better point guard.... even considering the "better competition" ..... it's STILL not more impressive than Duncan's amazing playoff run with his rag-tag group.

If anything..... y'all are underrating what Duncan did in the playoffs (not necessarily the team).... but this is ISH afterall.... where flashy offense overrules everything and the dirty work goes unseen and unrecognized.

Nobody is saying it 100% over rules anything....or at least I'm not.

I'm saying your unwillingness to concede that the Spurs played much weaker competition is just proof that you won't have a legit conversation.

Its a huge difference.

And if you can't recognize that then its a pointless conversation.

And just for the record.....Chandler and Haywood were not better in the playoffs than Robinson and Rose.

I'll use your argument about the slowed down era against you.

Doesn't that make the numbers of the Mavs supporting cast elevated? Can't have it both ways.

Lets compare these "all star centers".....to the spurs:

Haywood and Chandler combined for a whopping 11 points and 13 rebounds and 0 assists per game.

Robinson and Rose combined for 16 points and 13 rebounds and 2 assists per game.

Shouldn't the numbers of the Mavs two players be better because the pace was faster and the defensive rules....etc? Please explain. Now i'm confused again.

If it was harder to score and the Spurs played at a slower pace, shouldn't the numbers be better across the board if the Mavs had better players as you claim?????

[brain drain]

Considering how stacked the Mavs were in having two starting centers on the roster (one of them the best defensive player on the team), and former All-Stars, a veteran-lead squad, and a MUCH better point guard.... even considering the "better competition" ..... it's STILL not more impressive than Duncan's amazing playoff run with his rag-tag group.

Those "two starting centers" were averaging 8pts / 9 rb (Chandler) and 3 pts/ 4 rb (Haywood) per game.

And former all stars are just that - former all stars. I could just as well say that Duncan played with "future all stars".

The facts are:
- Duncan played with slightly worse players, had slightly better PER and clearly more win shares
- but he did so against clearly inferior competition.

[DMAVS41]

Mutombo played 115 minutes in the whole playoffs. Go figure.

Yes.

And what is funny is that the two games that Mutombo played legit minutes in 3 games in the finals.

The Nets won 2 of those games.

He played 10 or less minutes three times and never played more than 21 minutes in any game.

Not like he was a huge factor.

[KingBeasley08]

Mavs had a better run but Duncan was better individually than Dirk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nejQMtkyLgY:bowdown:

and then sh1tting on a prime shaq, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR6AgYWdoBQ&feature=related

just unreal.

[SCdac]

Yes, the Spurs' overall competition WAS historically bad in that year.

The Lakers didn't bring it that year (which was the reason why they felt they had to go out and reload the next year). They were still a good team, but miles away from how good they had been three years before.

The Mavs without Dirk were probably the equivalent of a 40-45 win team in the west.

The only reason why the nets had two finals appearances in a row was because the East was historically bad at that point. It's not a testament to their strenght, it's a testament to the weakness of the competition in the east in these years. The fact that the best thing the east had to offer was a 50 wins while the west had 3 59/60 win teams team should tell you something.

The Lakers didn't bring it that year? I see....

And the Lakers this year? how well did they do? they floundered in the regular season too... and Pau Gasol was arguably one of the worst players in the playoffs - definitely no prime Shaq.

I agree that Dirk might have faced tougher competition... but if anything his cast deserves that much more credit as well... Considering the amount of help and how much less of a responsibility he had on the defensive end and even creating the plays.....

It's quite easy to tell who had the more impressive run IMO. Dirk came nowhere close to having triple-double kind of overall impact on his team. Came no where close to having the defensive impact.

Tyson Chandler was big for not only the defense but offense too... for instance he had more offensive rebounds than Shaq in 06, Duncan in 07, and Garnett in 08. That's extra possesions that Duncan was the one getting in his respective run. Dirk never guarded Lebron, Wade, Kobe, or Durant so it's not like he was impressive in that aspect (averaged less than a single block and steal a game)... Tim Duncan had to guard prime Shaq at times, as well as Dirk, young Amare, and he shut Kenyon Martin down about as well as any defender could...

and he also was the best playmaker on the team unlike Dirk. Was just too all over the place. Got to respect it.

[DMAVS41]

The Lakers didn't bring it that year? I see....

And the Lakers this year? how well did they do? they floundered in the regular season too... and Pau Gasol was arguably one of the worst players in the playoffs - definitely no prime Shaq.

I agree that Dirk might have faced tougher competition... but if anything his cast deserves that much more credit as well... Considering the amount of help and how much less of a responsibility he had on the defensive end and even creating the plays.....

It's quite easy to tell who had the more impressive run IMO. Dirk came nowhere close to having triple-double kind of overall impact on his team. Came no where close to having the defensive impact.

Tyson Chandler was big for not only the defense but offense too... for instance he had more offensive rebounds than Shaq in 06, Duncan in 07, and Garnett in 08. That's extra possesions that Duncan was the one getting in his respective run. Dirk never guarded Lebron, Wade, Kobe, or Durant so it's not like he was impressive in that aspect (averaged less than a single block and steal a game)... Tim Duncan had to guard prime Shaq at times, as well as Dirk, young Amare, and he shut Kenyon Martin down about as well as any defender could...

and he also was the best playmaker on the team unlike Dirk. Was just too all over the place. Got to respect it.

Where is this "much more help"

You claim Haywood and Chandler were so great....yet Rose and Robinson put up better numbers in a tougher era with a slowed down pace.

Those are your words not mine. So I'm confused again. How are Haywood and Chandler better when they put up worse numbers in a faster pace and easier defensive era??????

[brain drain]

The Lakers didn't bring it that year? I see....

And the Lakers this year? how well did they do? they floundered in the regular season too... and Pau Gasol was arguably one of the worst players in the playoffs - definitely no prime Shaq.

I agree that Dirk might have faced tougher competition... but if anything his cast deserves that much more credit as well... Considering the amount of help and how much less of a responsibility he had on the defensive end and even creating the plays.....

It's quite easy to tell who had the more impressive run IMO. Dirk came nowhere close to having triple-double kind of overall impact on his team. Came no where close to having the defensive impact.

Tyson Chandler was big for not only the defense but offense too... for instance he had more offensive rebounds than Shaq in 06, Duncan in 07, and Garnett in 08. That's extra possesions that Duncan was the one getting in his respective run. Dirk never guarded Lebron, Wade, Kobe, or Durant so it's not like he was impressive in that aspect (averaged less than a single block and steal a game)... Tim Duncan had to guard prime Shaq at times, as well as Dirk, young Amare, and he shut Kenyon Martin down about as well as any defender could...

and he also was the best playmaker on the team unlike Dirk. Was just too all over the place. Got to respect it.

First of all, the big difference is that while the 2011 Lakers were clearly not the toughest competition the Mavs faced, the 2003 Lakers were the Spurs toughest opponent.

Also, the 2011 Lakers are constructed differently from the 2003 Lakers. The 2003 Lakers were basically a paper thin two man team, while the 2011 Lakers are more of a very deep committee approach with 5 clearly above average players. And if you call the 2011 Lakers "floundering in the regular season" (to the tune of 57 wins), what do you call the reg season of the 2003 Lakers, when they only won 50?

Before the series, all the experts still picked the Lakers. Guess why? Because they were seen as a very good team.

Here's a nice contrast, an expert prediction for the 2003 Lakers / Spurs series, picking the Spurs because the Lakers were paper thin behind Shaq and Kobe:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2003/story?id=1550081

Here's another article from before the 2003 playoffs which predicted the Lakers demise that year

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2003/story?id=1540667

[tpols]

The Mavericks this year did play better competition than the Spurs did in 2003. Their most notable opponents were the Lakers and the Heat, while the Spurs really only had to beat a hard opponent in the 03 Lakers.. But why is Dirk getting all of the credit for his team beating the Heat and Lakers like he carried them through those series or something? Dirk shot 41% against the Heat.:oldlol:

Are we really comparing 26/10 on 41% shooting to Duncan's 25/15 on 50+% shooting with vastly improved defense? I dont get it. Dirk, despite playing a harder Finals opponent, was much, much worse than Duncan.. it's just a fact. Dirk should not even be in this conversation.

[the_wise_one]

Mavs (Dirk).. He f.cked Phil Jackson's,Kobe's,Lebron's,Stern's best selling stories in one playoff.

If Lakers were champion...
Phil Jackson's epic ending for his career. Probably it will be all day and night at sport news..as a great goodbye. And he would continue all those stupid comments about other teams & stars. Dirk saved us all.

Kobe's second threepeat.Just like Jordan.He would have 6 rings.Just like Jordan.All that Jordan vs Kobe debate would rise again and it would take months probably on news. Dirk saved us all.

If Heat were champion...
Lebron's tweets...Lebron's and Wade's comments about haters..Lebron is better than Kobe..Lebron is better than Jordan..Lebron is the KING..his narcisstic comments, parties every day and night..for months.. Dirk once again saved us all.

Mavs championship story is most impressive one after first Rocky movie.

This.
Praise and Respect to our savior Dirk.

[brain drain]

and he also was the best playmaker on the team unlike Dirk. Was just too all over the place. Got to respect it.

This is an aspect that gets pointed out by people who see nothing but assists.
Dirk's probably the greatest floor stretcher of all time. A lot of the things that the Mavs do won't work without Dirk.
Of course "spacing created for teammates" is not a statistic in the box score. But it's the main reason that Dirk's teams are performing so well. There's hardly any player that influences the opposing D (and correspondingly the possibilities of the own offense) as much as Dirk.

And in addition to that, Dirk's passing WAS excellent in these playoffs.

[SCdac]

Nobody is saying it 100% over rules anything....or at least I'm not.

I'm saying your unwillingness to concede that the Spurs played much weaker competition is just proof that you have a legit conversation.

Its a huge difference.

And if you can't recognize that then its a pointless conversation.

And just for the record.....Chandler and Haywood were not better in the playoffs than Robinson and Rose.

I'll use your argument about the slowed down era against you.

Doesn't that make the numbers of the Mavs supporting cast elevated? Can't have it both ways.

Lets compare these "all star centers".....to the spurs:

Haywood and Chandler combined for a whopping 11 points and 13 rebounds and 0 assists per game.

Robinson and Rose combined for 16 points and 13 rebounds and 2 assists per game.

Shouldn't the numbers of the Mavs two players be better because the pace was faster and the defensive rules....etc? Please explain. Now i'm confused again.

If it was harder to score and the Spurs played at a slower pace, shouldn't the numbers be better across the board if the Mavs had better players as you claim?????

First off, the Mavs play faster, but they don't play that much faster. It's wort noting though.

Tyson Chandler is arguably in his prime right now, and he is noticeably more limber than David Robinson was in his final year of basketball and is able to see more floor time than Robinson.

Chandler - 32.4 MPG - 28 years old
Robinson - 23 MPG - 37 years old

Finals:

Chandler - 37.1 MPG - playing this much helps the Mavs on both ends
Robinson - 26.8 MPG

Look at the offensive rebounds and how much Dirk didn't have to worry about that area of rebounding at all.

Chandler lead the team in the category and brought down a historic amount of extra possessions.

duncan - 96 o rebounds
chandler - 79 o rebounds
rose - 49 o rebounds
robinson - 45 o rebounds
haywood - 34 o rebounds
dirk - 12 o rebounds

Haywood - 18 bocks in 18 games, is a legit 7 footer
Rose - 11 blocks in 24 games, is 6'7 at best

I'd say Robinson was a better defender (per minute) than Chandler for the minutes role player minutes he played, but a younger Chandler and Haywood combined was better than aged Robinson and Malik combined, IMO.

It's Duncan which makes the Spurs defense better (than the Mavs).

Chandler and Haywood combined for a bout 7% of the Mavs block percentage, and both lead the Mavs in rebounding % .... Duncan lead the Spurs in both those categories.... Chandler and Haywood combined for 955 minutes played, whereas Robinson/Malik played less

[DMAVS41]

The Mavericks this year did play better competition than the Spurs did in 2003. Their most notable opponents were the Lakers and the Heat, while the Spurs really only had to beat a hard opponent in the 03 Lakers.. But why is Dirk getting all of the credit for his team beating the Heat and Lakers like he carried them through those series or something? Dirk shot 41% against the Heat.:oldlol:

Are we really comparing 26/10 on 41% shooting to Duncan's 25/15 on 50+% shooting with vastly improved defense? I dont get it. Dirk, despite playing a harder Finals opponent, was much, much worse than Duncan.. it's just a fact. Dirk should not even be in this conversation.

A playoff run is not just about only the finals. Especially when in those same finals Dirk was as clutch as it gets.

Oh, and Duncan's opponent in the Finals was known for letting big men trash them. You should know this better than anyone if you are actually a Nets fan as you say.

And Dirk shot 42%...not that it matters, but at least round properly if you are going to post.

Tpols posting a wrong stat? Shocking.....

[tpols]

Tyson Chandler is arguably in his prime right now, and he is noticeably more limber than David Robinson was in his final year of basketball and is able to see more floor time than Robinson.

Chandler - 32.4 MPG - 28 years old
Robinson - 23 MPG - 37 years old

Hilarious.. Lets use DMAVs argument here.

Tyson Chandler is obviously a positive impact, so that extra 9 minutes of play really leaves a much bigger impact on the game.
:roll:

[DMAVS41]

First off, the Mavs play faster, but they don't play that much faster. It's wort noting though.

Tyson Chandler is arguably in his prime right now, and he is noticeably more limber than David Robinson was in his final year of basketball and is able to see more floor time than Robinson.

Chandler - 32.4 MPG - 28 years old
Robinson - 23 MPG - 37 years old

Finals:

Chandler - 37.1 MPG - playing this much helps the Mavs on both ends
Robinson - 26.8 MPG

Look at the offensive rebounds and how much Dirk didn't have to worry about that area of rebounding at all.

Chandler lead the team in the category and brought down a historic amount of extra possessions.

duncan - 96 o rebounds
chandler - 79 o rebounds
rose - 49 o rebounds
robinson - 45 o rebounds
haywood - 34 o rebounds
dirk - 12 o rebounds

Haywood - 18 bocks in 18 games, is a legit 7 footer
Rose - 11 blocks in 24 games, is 6'7 at best

I'd say Robinson was a better defender (per minute) than Chandler for the minutes role player minutes he played, but a younger Chandler and Haywood combined was better than aged Robinson and Malik combined, IMO.

It's Duncan which makes the Spurs defense better (than the Mavs).

Chandler and Haywood combined for a bout 7% of the Mavs block percentage, and both lead the Mavs in rebounding % .... Duncan lead the Spurs in both those categories.... Chandler and Haywood combined for 955 minutes played, whereas Robinson/Malik played less

Great breakdown.

You know what is better?

16/13/2 for Robinson/Rose in 46.7 minutes per game

11/13/0 for Chandler/Haywood in 47.7 minutes per game

Those were the numbers. You can twist them however you want.

[SCdac]

This is an aspect that gets pointed out by people who see nothing but assists.
Dirk's probably the greatest floor stretcher of all time. A lot of the things that the Mavs do won't work without Dirk.
Of course "spacing created for teammates" is not a statistic in the box score. But it's the main reason that Dirk's teams are performing so well. There's hardly any player that influences the opposing D (and correspondingly the possibilities of the own offense) as much as Dirk.

And in addition to that, Dirk's passing WAS excellent in these playoffs.

Go watch Duncan in the 2003 playoffs. He was routinely getting double and triple teamed and was just as much creating for others (if not more than Dirk)... and he was making teams pay at the most timely times.... His assists weren't just gifts and inflated stats, 10 assists aren't just luck or coming out of nowhere... He was getting the ball in the low post on almost every possession, literally... and the offensive was centered around him just as much as Dirk and the Mavs.

He considered himself like a quarterback... that's saying alot.

[DMAVS41]

Hilarious.. Lets use DMAVs argument here.

Tyson Chandler is obviously a positive impact, so that extra 9 minutes of play really leaves a much bigger impact on the game.
:roll:

So was Rose....and he played 8 more minutes than Haywood...and played every single game I might add.

The comparison was not Chandler vs Robinson....never was.

It was Chandler/Haywood vs Robinson/Rose

And its very clear that they are similar when taking into account the better defense Chandler/Haywood provided.

I was simply showing him how inconsistent he was. Check the above post for the actual production.

[tpols]

And Dirk shot 42%...not that it matters, but at least round properly if you are going to post.

Dirk did not shoot 42% from the field.He shot under that.:oldlol:

And once again.. you cant refute anything I said about comparing Dirk and Duncan.. What a joke of an excuse that the nets let big men normally trash them. Duncan was trashing EVERYONE that year. His impact is way higher than Dirk's. You already admitted he was 10-15% better in terms of individual impact.. which even then is an underestimate. Probably around 20-25% mostly because of their vast difference in impact on the defensive end while not being that far off offensively. It's not close to the same level of dominance.

[brain drain]

Hilarious.. Lets use DMAVs argument here.

Tyson Chandler is obviously a positive impact, so that extra 9 minutes of play really leaves a much bigger impact on the game.
:roll:
The fact is that Haywood was actually the better defender of the two against the heat in the first games. But then Haywood went down, so Chandler had to play as many minutes as possible.
Was it essential that Chandler could play as many minutes as he did? Yes, of course.
Was this the best scenario for the Mavs? Of cours not. Chandler had to be very carful not to pick up too many fouls and couldn't challenge opposing players as much.

[tpols]

So was Rose....and he played 8 more minutes than Haywood...and played every single game I might add.

The comparison was not Chandler vs Robinson....never was.

It was Chandler/Haywood vs Robinson/Rose

And its very clear that they are similar when taking into account the better defense Chandler/Haywood provided.

I was simply showing him how inconsistent he was. Check the above post for the actual production.
Of course you want to add Haywood's stats in their because he is not a good center. You're skewing the comparison.:oldlol:

Chandler is EASILY the best single big man out of those guys, and thats all that matters. And a big reason for that is the fact that the league doesn't have a plethora of good big men like it did back then. Chandler right now is a top 2 or 3 defensive center and he gives you a solid 10/10 on 60% shooting, which is extremely good production. He's a top 5-10 center in this league. Was an old robinson as good compared to his competition? Nope.

[DMAVS41]

Dirk did not shoot 42% from the field.He shot under that.:oldlol:

And once again.. you cant refute anything I said about comparing Dirk and Duncan.. What a joke of an excuse that the nets let big men normally trash them. Duncan was trashing EVERYONE that year. His impact is way higher than Dirk's. You already admitted he was 10-15% better in terms of individual impact.. which even then is an underestimate. Probably around 20-25% mostly because of their vast difference in impact on the defensive end while not being that far off offensively. It's not close to the same level of dominance.

I'm not claiming Dirk was better individually overall. Never once did I say that.

We are comparing playoff runs....its different. You know this. You know have chosen to flip flop around for some reason to just argue something you know is not true.

25% better is way too strong.

We've been over it all.

I just showed you that Rose/Robinson out produced Chandler/Haywood.

Do you really want to continue to get owned? Or let me guess.....those numbers aren't fair for some reason.....LOL

[DMAVS41]

Of course you want to add Haywood's stats in their because he is not a good center. You're skewing the comparison.:oldlol:

Chandler is EASILY the best single big man out of those guys, and thats all that matters. And a big reason for that is the fact that the league doesn't have a plethora of good big men like it did back then. Chandler right now is a top 2 or 3 defensive center and he gives you a solid 10/10 on 60% shooting, which is extremely good production. He's a top 5-10 center in this league. Was an old robinson as good compared to his competition? Nope.

We never disputed that?

Pay attention to the conversation moron. The other poster claimed the Mavs had a huge advantage with "two starting centers"

I merely showed him how flawed a statement that was. End of story.

[DMAVS41]

Of course you want to add Haywood's stats in their because he is not a good center. You're skewing the comparison.:oldlol:

Chandler is EASILY the best single big man out of those guys, and thats all that matters. And a big reason for that is the fact that the league doesn't have a plethora of good big men like it did back then. Chandler right now is a top 2 or 3 defensive center and he gives you a solid 10/10 on 60% shooting, which is extremely good production. He's a top 5-10 center in this league. Was an old robinson as good compared to his competition? Nope.

Again. stop making shit up.

Chandler gave the mavs 8 points and 9 rebounds. Is that 10/10? No...stop posting lies.

And you wonder why I have a problem with you? Do you ever post accurate information?

[brain drain]

Dirk did not shoot 42% from the field.He shot under that.:oldlol:

And once again.. you cant refute anything I said about comparing Dirk and Duncan.. What a joke of an excuse that the nets let big men normally trash them. Duncan was trashing EVERYONE that year. His impact is way higher than Dirk's. You already admitted he was 10-15% better in terms of individual impact.. which even then is an underestimate. Probably around 20-25% mostly because of their vast difference in impact on the defensive end while not being that far off offensively. It's not close to the same level of dominance.
Again, you have to consider the circumstances.

Dirk got sick during the series and played through it as well as he could. At the same time, Haslem is one of the better defenders against Dirk and the defense was pretty much geared on stopping Dirk. So, he didn't have his best performance in the finals, but in the fourth quarters, when it mattered, he was able to deliver.

It's remarkable that in spite of that relatively bad finals performance, Dirk still had a playoff PER that was not that far away from Duncan's in 2003.
The mind boggles thinking about what type statistics Dirk might've had, had he been healthy and had he faced a subpar team like the 2003 Nets in the finals.

[tpols]

I'm not claiming Dirk was better individually overall. Never once did I say that.

We are comparing playoff runs....
If Dirk wasn't individually as good as Duncan throughout their respective playoff runs.. then how the fvck can his playoff run, from an individual standpoint, be considered on the same level? It makes no sense. You ADMITTED Dirk didn't play basketball as well as Duncan did.. so what makes their runs equal? You're still crediting the TEAM'S overachieving to Dirk.. A bunch of veteran players who no longer are big names in this league rose to the occasion and outplayed their opponents. That's it. This was as big a team effort as I have ever seen[especially in their two biggest series against LA and MIA].

So until you explain to me how Dirk's run was better individually you're just bullshitting. Dirk's supporting cast outplayed the other team's supporting cast in both of their most unexpected-to-win series.. and he actually had a legit second option step up in both of those series. So there's no excuses.

[Odinn]

The topic asks for individual performances.

Duncan's run >>> Dirk's run

Anyone who claim Dirk's run was better than Duncan's run, please explain this to me;
Duncan's 2003 run (42,5mpg); off rating 116 - def rating 92, difference 24
Dirk's 2011 run (39,2mpg); off rating 115 - def rating 105, difference 10

Can you say Dirk had the Duncan's defensive impact during 2011 playoffs?

PS: About teams; 2011 Mavs except Dirk > 2003 Spurs except Duncan. But we're talking about individual runs and Dirk wasn't a monster both ends.

[tpols]

Again. stop making shit up.

Chandler gave the mavs 8 points and 9 rebounds. Is that 10/10? No...stop posting lies.

He averaged 10.1/9.4 on 65% shooting for the year[reg. season].

You're pulling out stats from different areas that I did and posting them to say I 'lied,' when it fact you are lieing about me making them up. Oh the irony.:oldlol:

[brain drain]

If Dirk wasn't individually as good as Duncan throughout their respective playoff runs.. then how the fvck can his playoff run, from an individual standpoint, be considered on the same level? It makes no sense. You ADMITTED Dirk didn't play basketball as well as Duncan did.. so what makes their runs equal? You're still crediting the TEAM'S overachieving to Dirk.. A bunch of veteran players who no longer are big names in this league rose to the occasion and outplayed their opponents. That's it. This was as big a team effort as I have ever seen[especially in their two biggest series against LA and MIA].

So until you explain to me how Dirk's run was better individually you're just bullshitting. Dirk's supporting cast outplayed the other team's supporting cast in both of their most unexpected-to-win series.. and he actually had a legit second option step up in both of those series. So there's no excuses.


Dirk didn't have the same stat production, but Duncan had a much softer playoff schedule.
Had Dirk played against 4 44-50 win teams, his stats probably would've looked better too.

[tpols]

It's remarkable that in spite of that relatively bad finals performance, Dirk still had a playoff PER that was not that far away from Duncan's in 2003.

PER is an offensive measure.. it doesn't account for defense. So the fact that Duncan still had a higher PER WITHOUT accounting for his massive edge in defense makes the comparison even more lopsided.

[brain drain]

The topic asks for individual performances.

Duncan's run >>> Dirk's run

Anyone who claim Dirk's run was better than Duncan's run, please explain this to me;
Duncan's 2003 run (42,5mpg); off rating 116 - def rating 92, difference 24
Dirk's 2011 run (39,2mpg); off rating 115 - def rating 105, difference 10

Can you say Dirk had the Duncan's defensive impact during 2011 playoffs?

PS: About teams; 2011 Mavs except Dirk > 2003 Spurs except Duncan. But we're talking about individual runs and Dirk wasn't a monster both ends.

Duncans's stats might've looked quite a bit more pedestrian had the level of competition been higher.
A GOAT soft schedule lends itself to GOATish stat production.

[brain drain]

PER is an offensive measure.. it doesn't account for defense. So the fact that Duncan still had a higher PER WITHOUT accounting for his massive edge in defense makes the comparison even more lopsided.
Yes, but both (offensive and defensive) stats would not look as good against better competition. They're both inflated.

[rmt]

I agree with some of this.

We just differ on what a playoff run is.

I have no idea what replacing each other would have done. I don't think Dirk would have won in 03, but at the same time....I don't think Duncan would have won this year.

We just have a different definition of playoff run and you seem unwilling to concede even the obvious:

Which is that Dirk faced better teams.

Agree to disagree.

I strongly disagree with this statement. I think '03 Duncan on '11 Mavs (replacing Dirk) would have won. There would have been little scoring in the paint for the Heat - not quite TD/Robinson style (circa '99) but still great with TD/Chandler. And who on the Heat would stop TD in the post? Bosh? Haslem? Anthony? I think MAVS would be even better against MIA with TD because MAVS would be great in the paint which is the weakness of MIA (big men).

Some of the posters are under-rating the rest of the Mavs team - whether they over-achieved, they did perform very well from top to bottom - Terry, Marion, Chandler, Kidd, Barea. Even Peja (against LA) performed better than expected.

I'll give the Mavs the better competition but TD's #2, #3, #4 lacked experience regardless of whether they would be future all-stars or not. For the pressure-packed playoffs, give me seasoned, experienced, former all-star veterans. Look at the past champions (DAL, LA, BOS, DET, SA, MIA). Very rarely is it a young or inexperienced team that wins.

[DMAVS41]

If Dirk wasn't individually as good as Duncan throughout their respective playoff runs.. then how the fvck can his playoff run, from an individual standpoint, be considered on the same level? It makes no sense. You ADMITTED Dirk didn't play basketball as well as Duncan did.. so what makes their runs equal? You're still crediting the TEAM'S overachieving to Dirk.. A bunch of veteran players who no longer are big names in this league rose to the occasion and outplayed their opponents. That's it. This was as big a team effort as I have ever seen[especially in their two biggest series against LA and MIA].

So until you explain to me how Dirk's run was better individually you're just bullshitting. Dirk's supporting cast outplayed the other team's supporting cast in both of their most unexpected-to-win series.. and he actually had a legit second option step up in both of those series. So there's no excuses.

Easy.

The Mavs faced better competition and won more easily.

16-5 vs 16-8.

Dirk also had the most clutch playoff run since MJ. Doing things in the 4th qtrs that we have seen only a handful of times in NBA history.

A playoff run has much more to do with just player vs player in a vacuum.

Dirk might have averaged even better numbers playing the scrub teams Duncan did. I have no idea.

I do know that Dirk faced much better teams and had great numbers himself. Lets not just sweep 28/8/3 on 61% TS under the rug. You combine those numbers with Dirk's legendary clutch play...then add in the better competition and the 16-5 record and you have yourself a legit debate.

[SCdac]

Again, you have to consider the circumstances.

Dirk got sick during the series and played through it as well as he could. At the same time, Haslem is one of the better defenders against Dirk and the defense was pretty much geared on stopping Dirk. So, he didn't have his best performance in the finals, but in the fourth quarters, when it mattered, he was able to deliver.

It's remarkable that in spite of that relatively bad finals performance, Dirk still had a playoff PER that was not that far away from Duncan's in 2003.
The mind boggles thinking about what type statistics Dirk might've had, had he been healthy and had he faced a subpar team like the 2003 Nets in the finals.

Could the Mavs get past a prime Shaq and Kobe Bryant though?

They didn't face a big man like Shaq who could drop close to 30 on you every night in this 2011 run. Nothing even close. Pau Gasol sucked big time even before meeting Dallas, Bosh didn't even crack 19 PPG with the Heat, and Aldridge is career sub-50% shooting big man.

Duncan defended prime Shaq in parts of those games, even blocking some of his shots, and I can't see Dirk consistently doing that at any point in his career.

I can't see Dirk making a Dirk/Malik Rose tandem work the way it did.

Dirk, with a different team w/ different make up, lost to a 52 win Heat team with a 33 year old Shaq. And in that 2003 season the Mavs were 1-3 against the Lakers.

Duncan's defensive impact is brushed off too lightly in this thread. It was integral to the Spurs success. You can't quite say that about Dirk and Dallas.

[DMAVS41]

I strongly disagree with this statement. I think '03 Duncan on '11 Mavs (replacing Dirk) would have won. There would have been little scoring in the paint for the Heat - not quite TD/Robinson style (circa '99) but still great with TD/Chandler. And who on the Heat would stop TD in the post? Bosh? Haslem? Anthony? I think MAVS would be even better against MIA with TD because MAVS would be great in the paint which is the weakness of MIA (big men).

Some of the posters are under-rating the rest of the Mavs team - whether they over-achieved, they did perform very well from top to bottom - Terry, Marion, Chandler, Kidd, Barea. Even Peja (against LA) performed better than expected.

I'll give the Mavs the better competition but TD's #2, #3, #4 lacked experience regardless of whether they would be future all-stars or not. For the pressure-packed playoffs, give me seasoned, experienced, former all-star veterans. Look at the past champions (DAL, LA, BOS, DET, SA, MIA). Very rarely is it a young or inexperienced team that wins.

Which is why I said we'll never know. I could take the same stance in 03. If Dirk was on the Spurs they would have won easily against every team other than the Lakers.

So if Dirk gets by the Lakers they win for sure. Not even a question.

Duncan would have struggled more with the Lakers this year than the Heat. Bynum/Gasol would be a tougher match up for him than they were for Dirk.

Maybe they get by. I have no idea.

[brain drain]

I'll give the Mavs the better competition but TD's #2, #3, #4 lacked experience regardless of whether they would be future all-stars or not. For the pressure-packed playoffs, give me seasoned, experienced, former all-star veterans. Look at the past champions (DAL, LA, BOS, DET, SA, MIA). Very rarely is it a young or inexperienced team that wins.

At that time, #2 was still DRob, who was a veteran, then Manu, who was already 25 and definitely wasn't your typical NBA rookie as far as experience in pressure situations is concerned, having won the Euroleague and having been Euroleag final four MVP before entering the NBA.

[Odinn]

Yes, but both (offensive and defensive) stats would not look as good against better competition. They're both inflated.
I prefer EFF rating, because IMO PER is more subjecitve than EFF. (PER based on offense mostly)

2003 Playoffs Duncan's EFF rating 34.92. Since 1980, this is the third highest rating. (1st Kareem with 37.07 in 1980 playoffs, 2nd Jordan with 35,15 in 1991 playoffs)

2011 Playoffs Dirk's EFF rating 26.24.

If you make an adjustment; eff per min;
2003 Duncan 0.821
2011 Dirk 0.677

Not close.

[tpols]

Easy.

The Mavs faced better competition and won more easily.

16-5 vs 16-8.

Dirk also had the most clutch playoff run since MJ. Doing things in the 4th qtrs that we have seen only a handful of times in NBA history.

The competition is already accounted for.. and in the Mavs most competitive series, Dirk actually had his worst series and was very mediocre. Despite competition, and even if you gave Dirk's numbers a little boost, he still doesn't measure up to Duncan.

LOL at having 3 less team losses having anything to do with Dirk individually.. that's a TEAM accomplishment.

And the 'clutchness' is already accounted for in their individual impacts.. which you admitted Duncan's trumped Dirk's.

So from an individual standpoint, you have offered nothing to show how Dirk was better than Duncan.

[brain drain]

Could the Mavs get past a prime Shaq and Kobe Bryant though?

They didn't face a big man like Shaq who could drop close to 30 on you every night in this 2011 run. Nothing even close. Pau Gasol sucked big time even before meeting Dallas, Bosh didn't even crack 19 PPG with the Heat, and Aldridge is career sub-50% shooting big man.

Well they didn't meet Shaq, but they met the team with the NBA's best front court and swept them and they met a top heavy team with 2 of the NBA's best three players who could easily drop 30 every game plus Chris Bosh who used to be called a superstart or borderline superstar.

They won against both teams convincingly.

So while we'll never know how well they'd done against the 2003 Lakers, we know that they were able to win against completely differently built super teams, each of which had won clearly more games than LA had in 2003.

In addition to that, they beat another team with two high scoring superstars in Oklahoma and a tough Portland team.

I think there are way more question marks if the 2003 spurs could've succeeded this year (my bet is most definitely not) than there are question marks if the current Mavs could've succeeded in 2003.

[KingBeasley08]

yea, the mavs had a tougher schedule. but dirk played worse as a result of it.

:roll: at the people that say a PRIME DUNCAN wouldnt take a crap on gasol, alridge, and bosh :lol

[brain drain]

I prefer EFF rating, because IMO PER is more subjecitve than EFF. (PER based on offense mostly)

What? Your preference of EFF is subjective.

Besides that, I already said that Duncan's stat production was better than Dirks.

But it is inflated in so far, as he played with a relatively weak supporting cast against inferior competition, resulting in a stat fest for Duncan.

[DMAVS41]

The competition is already accounted for.. and in the Mavs most competitive series, Dirk actually had his worst series and was very mediocre. Despite competition, and even if you gave Dirk's numbers a little boost, he still doesn't measure up to Duncan.

LOL at having 3 less team losses having anything to do with Dirk individually.. that's a TEAM accomplishment.

And the 'clutchness' is already accounted for in their individual impacts.. which you admitted Duncan's trumped Dirk's.

So from an individual standpoint, you have offered nothing to show how Dirk was better than Duncan.

Its not about individual.

Why are you so ****ing dense?

Here is a question for you.

Better playoff run:

Duncan in 03 or Shaq in 00?

Duncan in 03 or MJ in 92?

Care to tell me how Duncan was individually better than those two guys? He wasn't.

Then why is Duncan's run held in such high regard? Because of of all the things I've mentioned.

Please answer the two questions.

[KingBeasley08]

Its not about individual.

Why are you so ****ing dense?

Here is a question for you.

Better playoff run:

Duncan in 03 or Shaq in 00?

Duncan in 03 or MJ in 92?

Care to tell me how Duncan was individually better than those two guys? He wasn't.

Then why is Duncan's run held in such high regard? Because of of all the things I've mentioned.

Please answer the two questions.
Its a freaking combination of it all. It's who did the most with the least

[DMAVS41]

Its a freaking combination of it all. It's who did the most with the least

Exactly.

So if Duncan's in 03 can be held in higher regard than Jordan in 92...then its a legit debate.

For those that don't know:

Jordan in 92:

35 points 6 boards 6 assists on 50/39/86 57% TS 27.2 PER

Jordan went through much tougher competition including the Knicks, Cavs, and Blazers......

[KingBeasley08]

Exactly.

So if Duncan's in 03 can be held in higher regard than Jordan in 92...then its a legit debate.

For those that don't know:

Jordan in 92:

35 points 6 boards 6 assists on 50/39/86 57% TS 27.2 PER

Jordan went through much tougher competition including the Knicks, Cavs, and Blazers......
Jordan had a better playoff for run.... I thought this was about who did the most with the least :confusedshrug:

[Odinn]

2011 Mavs > 2003 Spurs
2011 Mavs except Dirk >> 2003 Spurs except Timmy
2011 Nowitzki < 2003 Duncan

Done.

[KingBeasley08]

2011 Mavs > 2003 Spurs
2011 Mavs except Dirk >> 2003 Spurs except Timmy
2011 Nowitzki < 2003 Duncan

Done.
thread.

[DMAVS41]

Jordan had a better playoff for run.... I thought this was about who did the most with the least :confusedshrug:

That is my question as well.

It seems people are changing the argument....I'm asking.

What point is there in debating when its pretty much just a fact that individually Duncan was better overall. I have said from the beginning that duncan was around 10% better in my opinion.

But hell, Jordan was easily 10% better than Duncan in 92....


So i don't understand the logic at all now. :confusedshrug:

[rmt]

At that time, #2 was still DRob, who was a veteran, then Manu, who was already 25 and definitely wasn't your typical NBA rookie as far as experience in pressure situations is concerned, having won the Euroleague and having been Euroleag final four MVP before entering the NBA.

DRob was not #2. '03 Playoffs:

Parker 14.7 pts. 33.9 mins
SJax 12.8 pts. 33.8 mins.
Manu 9.4 pts 27.5 mins
Rose 9.3 pts. 23.3 mins.
DRob 7.8 pts. 23.4 mins.
Bowen 6.9 pts. 31.3 mins.

DRob was a 37 year old with a bad back and #5 in both points (7.8)and minutes. Manu averaged 9.4 pts and was crazy out-of-control.

[millwad]

Tim Duncan faced the worst competition between himself, Hakeem and Dirk.

He did barely face any competition at his own position, in first round he faced rookie Amare Stoudemire and he was only 20 years old at that time. And off the bench he had to face the mighty Jake Voskuhl and Bo Outlaw.

In the second round he faced the Lakers but he was neither guarded or did guard on O'neal, Robinson did. To manage to beat the Lakers was a great accomplishment though but he was mostly guarded by Horry and the bench guys. And to be honest Lakers didn't have any other than Bryant and O'Neal.

In the WCF they faced good competitione in Dallas and they were 1-1 in games but Dirk went down in game 3 which resulted in a season ending injury. Dirk's injury made Walt Williams a starter and they even managed winning game 5 without Dirk but it all ended after game 6.

In the finals he faced the Nets and was guarded and guarded Kenyon Martin. He was a nice player but he wasn't no star player.

So the big men Duncan faced was Horry, O'neal, Walt Williams (Dirk for 2 games), Kenyon Martin and Aaron Williams, Jason Collins.


Hakeem in 94 faced following big men: Karl Malone, Tom Chamber (old version), Felton Spencer, Charles Barkley, A.C Green, Pig Miller, Cliff Robinson, BUck Williams, Harvey Grant, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley and Anthony Mason.

And in 95 he basically faced the same players minus Ewing, Oakley and Mason but instead of them he faced David Robinson, Shaq and Horace Grant.

Dirk in 2011 faced following big men: LaMarcus Aldridge, Camby, Bynum, Gasol, Odom, Ibaka, Perkins, Joel Anthony and Bosh.

The reason why I mentionend the centers and the PF's is because off help defense when it comes to big guys. It's easily seen that Duncan face the worst players and he also faced the worst teams as well. He was amazing in the playoffs but in all honesty, he had the worst competition.

[KingBeasley08]

Tim Duncan faced the worst competition between himself, Hakeem and Dirk.

He did barely face any competition at his own position, in first round he faced rookie Amare Stoudemire and he was only 20 years old at that time. And off the bench he had to face the mighty Jake Voskuhl and Bo Outlaw.

In the second round he faced the Lakers but he was neither guarded or did guard on O'neal, Robinson did. To manage to beat the Lakers was a great accomplishment though but he was mostly guarded by Horry and the bench guys. And to be honest Lakers didn't have any other than Bryant and O'Neal.

In the WCF they faced good competitione in Dallas and they were 1-1 in games but Dirk went down in game 3 which resulted in a season ending injury. Dirk's injury made Walt Williams a starter and they even managed winning game 5 without Dirk but it all ended after game 6.

In the finals he faced the Nets and was guarded and guarded Kenyon Martin. He was a nice player but he wasn't no star player.

So the big men Duncan faced was Horry, O'neal, Walt Williams (Dirk for 2 games), Kenyon Martin and Aaron Williams, Jason Collins.


Hakeem in 94 faced following big men: Karl Malone, Tom Chamber (old version), Felton Spencer, Charles Barkley, A.C Green, Pig Miller, Cliff Robinson, BUck Williams, Harvey Grant, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley and Anthony Mason.

And in 95 he basically faced the same players minus Ewing, Oakley and Mason but instead of them he faced David Robinson, Shaq and Horace Grant.

Dirk in 2011 faced following big men: LaMarcus Aldridge, Camby, Bynum, Gasol, Odom, Ibaka, Perkins, Joel Anthony and Bosh.

The reason why I mentionend the centers and the PF's is because off help defense when it comes to big guys. It's easily seen that Duncan face the worst players and he also faced the worst teams as well. He was amazing in the playoffs but in all honesty, he had the worst competition.
if we're mentioning all the PF and center than the Big Diesel was met by Duncan

[bence23]

Hakeem was the illest ***** ive ever seen those 2 years:eek: