Dirk vs Kobe

[Alamо]

People are always comparing Kobe to greats like Duncan, Shaq, MJ, but I'm not even sure if given the choice, I would take him over Dirk. Like I have to think long and hard about it...


hmm.. who you got?

[stalkerforlife]

Got em.

[dhsilv]

People are always comparing Kobe to greats like Duncan, Shaq, MJ, but I'm not even sure if given the choice, I would take him over Dirk. Like I have to think long and hard about it...


hmm.. who you got?

Dirk is underrated defensively. Kobe is overrated defensively.

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2

Dirk 9 Kobe 31

Most advanced stats I would suspect will go Dirk's way. NM just checked Kobe still has a reasonable lead in VORP regular season. And virtually the same PER.

The playoff game for Kobe is too big though. I think Dirk is in the conversation with Kobe for who was better, but it's more of a passing statement unless he wins another 2 rings and/or plays for 5-6 more years I can't see it becoming a heated debate.

[Alamо]

Got em.

^

meltdown

[JebronLames]

Dirk. Swept Kobe, who had one of the most stacked teams of all time.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Honestly... I don't see a big gap between the two.

Prime for Prime in the playoffs as offensive anchors they are on the same tier for me.
Kobe is slightly more productive while Dirk is considerably more efficient, consistent and is a better team player.

Dirk also has better longevity.
For now I have them on the same tier All-Time wise.

In terms of who I would draft/build around I would take Dirk because he doesn't have such a difficult personality to work around.

[SouBeachTalents]

Dirk. Swept Kobe, who had one of the most stacked teams of all time.

So is Dirk better than LeBron too cause he beat him in the Finals?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Dirk. Higher PER, RAPM, WS.

[JebronLames]

So is Dirk better than LeBron too cause he beat him in the Finals?
No, he beat wade. Lebron was too nice back then. Let wade be the man, but wade couldn't get it done.

[dubeta]

So is Dirk better than LeBron too cause he beat him in the Finals?

Dirk had the better supporting cast, no shame in losing to Dirk

[ArbitraryWater]

I think people are finally catching up to the absurd narrative that is Kobe being on another level than Dirk.. there isn't much seperating the two.

[JT123]

So is Dirk better than LeBron too cause he beat him in the Finals?
Big difference between getting beat and getting swept in embarrassing fashion. :rolleyes:
Kobe's Lakers were to favorite to win it all that year and he played worse against the Mavs than Lebron did. Like MUCH worse

[TheMarkMadsen]

Dirk

11x all nba first team
2x all nba second team
2x all nba third team

9x all defensive first team
3x all defensive second team

2x scoring champion

3rd most playoff points of all time
3rd most regular season points of all time

2x FMVP

7 finals

5 rings

best player at his position for his era

better scorer, better defender, better play-maker.

45% FG in the playoffs


Kobe

4x all nba first team

5x all nba second team

3x all nba third team

0x all defense

0x scoring champion

17th alll time playoff points

arguably the 2nd best player at his position for his era

2 finals

1 FMVP

1 ring

46% FG in the playoffs




easily Dirk

[DMAVS41]

Depends on what conversation one is having...

If it's career/accolades like the above...easily Kobe.

If it's a more nuanced conversation about which player you'd rather draft and build a team around for 2 decades...I think it's an interesting conversation to have.

[Killbot]

Ghostface drillah

[ArbitraryWater]

Depends on what conversation one is having...

If it's career/accolades like the above...easily Kobe.

If it's a more nuanced conversation about which player you'd rather draft and build a team around for 2 decades...I think it's an interesting conversation to have.

sadly, one that cannot be had with Kobe fans for the most part.. not open to the thought.

[Jacks3]

These two guys primed/peaked at the exact same time and nobody thought Dirk was better. The overwhelming consensus in the basketball world was the Bryant was better. I mean, you have two guys whose primary impact comes from their offense, and yet one of them is far superior at perhaps the most important offensive skill: playmaking/passing. Bryant is also better defensively, and his playoff runs in 2001, 2008, 2009, and maybe even 2010 trump anything Dirk ever did.

[dhsilv]

Depends on what conversation one is having...

If it's career/accolades like the above...easily Kobe.

If it's a more nuanced conversation about which player you'd rather draft and build a team around for 2 decades...I think it's an interesting conversation to have.

So a couple statements as facts that are really open for discussion.

The 2 guard is not strong historically and even worse many if not most of the greats had short careers. Kobe is one of VERY few who's got a gap between him and everyone else. Even Hollinger when he created is winshare equivalent that we all rejected add a positional factor and downgraded anyone who was a 4 more than any other role. Basically a replacement level 4 was better than a replacement level 2 (be it bottom of the bucket or average starter really).

So given that, I think there's a really strong case for Kobe just due to the value he adds and where he adds it along with the length factor at his role/position.

This isn't a clear winning statement but it's a big part of why even though a part of me wants to go with Dirk here or at least entertain it as a really close call, I keep leaning towards Kobe's better, but it's not a crazy question.

[tpols]

There's not much separating Dirk from Duncan or Shaq either.. except that shaq and timmy had way better teams on average and won a bit more because of it. Its the same argument w/ kobe.

MJ is clearly on another level than any of them, but Duncan and shaq, KG, Dirk, Kobe are all similar level all time players. Shaq is the only one who could've been on MJ tier but his lack of leadership and cancerous attitude/work ethic + inability to close set him back out of top 5 all time.

[dhsilv]

These two guys primed/peaked at the exact same time and nobody thought Dirk was better. The overwhelming consensus in the basketball world was the Bryant was better. I mean, you have two guys whose primary impact comes from their offense, and yet one of them is far superior at perhaps the most important offensive skill: playmaking/passing. Bryant is also better defensively, and his playoff runs in 2001, 2008, 2009, and maybe even 2010 trump anything Dirk ever did.

Dirk's 06 run doesn't compare to 2001? He had a higher WS, VORP, and PER than any of Kobe's playoff runs. You can debate the path but that was a pretty solid group of teams he beat on this way to the finals.

Dirks' 2011 run wasn't bad either, but 06 he was a one man team by teams that made the finals standards.

[ArbitraryWater]

^ that position based argument is bad, also, how is 06 a 'one man team' but 11 not?


There's not much separating Dirk from Duncan or Shaq either.. except that shaq and timmy had way better teams on average and won a bit more because of it. Its the same argument w/ kobe.

MJ is clearly on another level than any of them, but Duncan and shaq, KG, Dirk, Kobe are all similar level all time players. Shaq is the only one who could've been on MJ tier but his lack of leadership and cancerous attitude/work ethic + inability to close set him back out of top 5 all time.

I agree, but I do think Shaq is seperating himself..

I would do Shaq >> Duncan > Kobe/Dirk

[Deuce Bigalow]

Dirk's 06 run doesn't compare to 2001? He had a higher WS, VORP, and PER than any of Kobe's playoff runs. You can debate the path but that was a pretty solid group of teams he beat on this way to the finals.

Dirks' 2011 run wasn't bad either, but 06 he was a one man team by teams that made the finals standards.
Shit forgot about that damn it's not even close!

[ArbitraryWater]

Dirk's 06 run doesn't compare to 2001? He had a higher WS, VORP, and PER than any of Kobe's playoff runs. You can debate the path but that was a pretty solid group of teams he beat on this way to the finals.

Dirks' 2011 run wasn't bad either, but 06 he was a one man team by teams that made the finals standards.

The 2006 Spurs are far better than any team out of the 2001 West.. honestly. 2006 Suns might be slightly better as well. The 2000 Blazers and 2002 Kings were hardcore, but in 2001? Not so much.

[DMAVS41]

So a couple statements as facts that are really open for discussion.

The 2 guard is not strong historically and even worse many if not most of the greats had short careers. Kobe is one of VERY few who's got a gap between him and everyone else. Even Hollinger when he created is winshare equivalent that we all rejected add a positional factor and downgraded anyone who was a 4 more than any other role. Basically a replacement level 4 was better than a replacement level 2 (be it bottom of the bucket or average starter really).

So given that, I think there's a really strong case for Kobe just due to the value he adds and where he adds it along with the length factor at his role/position.

This isn't a clear winning statement but it's a big part of why even though a part of me wants to go with Dirk here or at least entertain it as a really close call, I keep leaning towards Kobe's better, but it's not a crazy question.

I think that argument has some value...I would just worry about putting too much weight into like that because I don't think it's really any harder to build a championship level team for a guy like Dirk than it is for Kobe...precisely because of the value Dirk brings, at least offensively, without the ball in his hands.

So you'd have to run it both ways...Dirk allows you to have an elite ball dominant player on the perimeter in a way Kobe doesn't.

Conversely, you can build a better interior defense around Kobe because he's not taking up one of the big positions often necessary to have an elite defense. Yet Dirk did prove you could have a pretty darn good defense around him...even early in his career...without have any special level defenders as well. So it's a tough one for me here.

I think there are a lot of interesting arguments to be made and things that could go either way.

Ultimately, you probably have to give Kobe the benefit of the doubt because he's proven more and we've seen him with other star players and without star players...etc.

With Dirk...we got a brief glimpse in 02 and 03 before...but not enough to make a ton of claims off of.

We are missing a lot of data for Dirk...it would have been really interesting to see him play with a Tyson Chandler level center and another all nba type player on the perimeter like Ray Allen in his prime.

I know what I think would happen, but we don't have the data like we have for Kobe.

The crazy thing...the two together? As long as you got them a good defensive center....they could have been the best pairing in NBA history imo. In large part because I don't think they would have ever feuded...Dirk just doesn't care about the kind of stuff Shaq did...and Dirk's work ethic is up there with Kobe. So I just see the two fitting together perfectly with a ton of mutual respect.

[ScalsFan21]

I'm a huge Kobe detractor but I have to admit, he's well above Dirk's level if we're talking careers and accolades. Individual player-wise it is highly arguable.

Dirk is probably underrated defensively, but he wasn't as good as Kobe at their defensive peaks. Dirk has had some of the least help ever in terms of Finals supporting casts, in both of his appearances particularly 2011. Kobe's had HOF help + Phil in each of his 7 trips.

If I'm starting a franchise... I'm not sure who I would take. They are on similar tiers, but the all-time nod has to go to Cryant since in a scenario this close, lifetime accolades have to play a factor somewhat. The top 11-25 range is already highly debatable, and if we take team success out of the picture it opens the door to rank guys like Garnett, Dirk and Malone just short of Duncan level. Which I don't think is fair.

[dhsilv]

I think that argument has some value...I would just worry about putting too much weight into like that because I don't think it's really any harder to build a championship level team for a guy like Dirk than it is for Kobe...precisely because of the value Dirk brings, at least offensively, without the ball in his hands.

So you'd have to run it both ways...Dirk allows you to have an elite ball dominant player on the perimeter in a way Kobe doesn't.

Conversely, you can build a better interior defense around Kobe because he's not taking up one of the big positions often necessary to have an elite defense. Yet Dirk did prove you could have a pretty darn good defense around him...even early in his career...without have any special level defenders as well. So it's a tough one for me here.

I think there are a lot of interesting arguments to be made and things that could go either way.

Ultimately, you probably have to give Kobe the benefit of the doubt because he's proven more and we've seen him with other star players and without star players...etc.

With Dirk...we got a brief glimpse in 02 and 03 before...but not enough to make a ton of claims off of.

We are missing a lot of data for Dirk...it would have been really interesting to see him play with a Tyson Chandler level center and another all nba type player on the perimeter like Ray Allen in his prime.

I know what I think would happen, but we don't have the data like we have for Kobe.

The crazy thing...the two together? As long as you got them a good defensive center....they could have been the best pairing in NBA history imo. In large part because I don't think they would have ever feuded...Dirk just doesn't care about the kind of stuff Shaq did...and Dirk's work ethic is up there with Kobe. So I just see the two fitting together perfectly with a ton of mutual respect.


My logic is that there were more good 4's than good 2's in the nba.

So and yeah I don't get this either but here's what I did.

years 2000-2010 (11 years)

minutes played >1000

and I don't get how Basketball reference does the positions but I used all the PF related possitions like C-PF or PF-SF, though I'm leaving out SG-PF and PF-SG because I'm just calling that one out as wrong! Also doubt it matters.

PER over 18

127 seasons meet that requirement.

Same rules on SG and I get 110.

So perhaps the gap isn't HUGE.

Moving to 20 PER

PF 73

SG 58

Now as I've said before there IS a bias in hollinger's mind here where he scales back PFs by PER so take this as you will.

Greater than 25

SG goes to 10

PF 15

I can work the data some other ways, though I just realized I "Upgraded" to office 2016 with the 32 bit version by mistake so my attempts at using power pivot and data modeling (I also suck at this stuff) are killing my ram. Hopefully I can fix that version issue tomorrow.
SG 58

[dhsilv]

I'm a huge Kobe detractor but I have to admit, he's well above Dirk's level if we're talking careers and accolades. Individual player-wise it is highly arguable.


Dirk is probably underrated defensively, but he wasn't as good as Kobe at their defensive peaks. Dirk has had some of the least help ever in terms of Finals supporting casts, in both of his appearances particularly 2011. Kobe's had HOF help + Phil in each of his 7 trips.

If I'm starting a franchise... I'm not sure who I would take. They are on similar tiers, but the all-time nod has to go to Cryant since in a scenario this close, lifetime accolades have to play a factor somewhat. The top 11-25 range is already highly debatable, and if we take team success out of the picture it opens the door to rank guys like Garnett, Dirk and Malone just short of Duncan level. Which I don't think is fair.

Memory is foggy sometimes but you think 2011 was worse than 2006 as far as teammates go for dirk?

[DMAVS41]

My logic is that there were more good 4's than good 2's in the nba.

So and yeah I don't get this either but here's what I did.

years 2000-2010 (11 years)

minutes played >1000

and I don't get how Basketball reference does the positions but I used all the PF related possitions like C-PF or PF-SF, though I'm leaving out SG-PF and PF-SG because I'm just calling that one out as wrong! Also doubt it matters.

PER over 18

127 seasons meet that requirement.

Same rules on SG and I get 110.

So perhaps the gap isn't HUGE.

Moving to 20 PER

PF 73

SG 58

Now as I've said before there IS a bias in hollinger's mind here where he scales back PFs by PER so take this as you will.

Greater than 25

SG goes to 10

PF 15

I can work the data some other ways, though I just realized I "Upgraded" to office 2016 with the 32 bit version by mistake so my attempts at using power pivot and data modeling (I also suck at this stuff) are killing my ram. Hopefully I can fix that version issue tomorrow.
SG 58

Yea...I understood your point.

I think it's a point worth making...I just caution putting too much on that because how Kobe and Dirk performed throughout their careers already has that built into it.

You see my point?

We already know how they are going to perform night in night out against their counterparts. So it's kind of counting it twice if we put too much emphasis on it.

And if we are using it for team building...I don't think you need an elite sg next to Dirk. It wouldn't hurt, but a guard like Avery Bradley is honestly what you would want...and then maybe an all nba level pg or sf...that had the ability to be a decent playmaker.

[ScalsFan21]

Memory is foggy sometimes but you think 2011 was worse than 2006 as far as teammates go for dirk?

Hard to say for sure, but at the time... Josh Howard was a rising stud. Stack was still a very good role player. A better version of Terry. Harris was hitting his stride as a player. Not to mention Dirk himself was 5 years younger.

Looking back now I think it looks worse than it was, but the only thing I think the '11 Mavs really had over the '06 Mavs was better interior defense with Tyson.

Still a very mediocre finals supporting cast, particularly when you look at the quality teams they beat to get there (essentially stopped a potential Spurs 3-peat on their way there). Then Dirk goes and wins 67 the next year with the same crew. Sure they choked in the first round, but that's still a solid feat.

[DMAVS41]

Hard to say for sure, but at the time... Josh Howard was a rising stud. Stack was still a very good role player. A better version of Terry. Harris was hitting his stride as a player. Not to mention Dirk himself was 5 years younger.

Looking back now I think it looks worse than it was, but the only thing I think the '11 Mavs really had over the '06 Mavs was better interior defense with Tyson.

Still a very mediocre finals supporting cast, particularly when you look at the quality teams they beat to get there (essentially stopped a potential Spurs 3-peat on their way there). Then Dirk goes and wins 67 the next year with the same crew. Sure they choked in the first round, but that's still a solid feat.

The biggest difference between the teams was coaching....and honestly just the rules.

You give the 06 team Rick Carlisle...and they win it all...I'd bet my life.

I do think the 11 supporting cast was better, but the biggest difference was one team having an elite coach and the other having a very poor coach. That really matters when you are facing Pat Riley in the NBA finals.

[ScalsFan21]

The biggest difference between the teams was coaching....and honestly just the rules.

You give the 06 team Rick Carlisle...and they win it all...I'd bet my life.

I do think the 11 supporting cast was better, but the biggest difference was one team having an elite coach and the other having a very poor coach. That really matters when you are facing Pat Riley in the NBA finals.

Oh I agree. Hell with Avery they were within a quarter of a 3-0 lead up 13... my memory as to how responsible Dirk was for that blown lead is somewhat hazy, but he had them in that position which was incredible.

The refs were painful obviously but even getting that close against that Heat team looks even better now than it did at the time.

[DMAVS41]

Oh I agree. Hell with Avery they were within a quarter of a 3-0 lead up 13... my memory as to how responsible Dirk was for that blown lead is somewhat hazy, but he had them in that position which was incredible.

The refs were painful obviously but even getting that close against that Heat team looks even better now than it did at the time.

He was responsible for miss the ft that could have sent it to OT...still would have had to survive a Wade last shot though.

Other than that he played a decent qtr imo...

[dhsilv]

The biggest difference between the teams was coaching....and honestly just the rules.

You give the 06 team Rick Carlisle...and they win it all...I'd bet my life.

I do think the 11 supporting cast was better, but the biggest difference was one team having an elite coach and the other having a very poor coach. That really matters when you are facing Pat Riley in the NBA finals.

Jason kidd is always a nice addition, even when he was old. And Chandler needs more love for that year too!

[Smoke117]

I find both players overrated...and Dirk for the simple fact that there are some people (dmavs) that actually think he was greater than Kevin Garnett. I'm sorry, but to me that is just laughable and absurd.

[DMAVS41]

Jason kidd is always a nice addition, even when he was old. And Chandler needs more love for that year too!

Of course...hence why I like the 11 team better.

But lets not forget the Mavs beat the Spurs at the near peak of their powers in 06 on the road.

The Spurs lost 1 series in three years...and it was that series.

That team with a great coach is just different.

[DMAVS41]

I find both players overrated...and Dirk for the simple fact that there are some people (dmavs) that actually think he was greater than Kevin Garnett. I'm sorry, but to mee that is just laughable and absurd.

The only thing laughable and absurd there is that you think it's laughable and absurd to take Dirk.

I have absolutely no issue with someone taking KG over Dirk, but to act like it's not even debatable is actually, well, absurd.

[dhsilv]

Of course...hence why I like the 11 team better.

But lets not forget the Mavs beat the Spurs at the near peak of their powers in 06 on the road.

The Spurs lost 1 series in three years...and it was that series.

That team with a great coach is just different.

oh yeah, that spurs team even if duncan had issues regular season, he was epic in the playoffs. Still one of the most frustrating series I ever watched, the spurs should have could have but didn't get it done. I still feel that spurs were just better setup to not let wade get those kinds of calls without even MORE fan complaints.

Either way that series along with the spurs clippers last year, the lakers kings of the early 00's and blazer's lakers of the early 00's are some of the best series I've ever seen.

[JellyBean]

I am picking Kobe. I am picking Kobe at 18, 19, 20 years of age, and the Kobe that is 37 and building a house with bricks over Dirk.

[Smoke117]

The only thing laughable and absurd there is that you think it's laughable and absurd to take Dirk.

I have absolutely no issue with someone taking KG over Dirk, but to act like it's not even debatable is actually, well, absurd.

You can legitimately make a case for Kevin Garnett being the best defensive player during his entire era in the league with his consistency. Dirk's offense isn't that much better than his to make a case when they are light and day in this regard. His defense compared to Dirks (who I actually think is underrated defensively) is so much better that it makes the fact that Dirk is better offensively moot.

[DMAVS41]

You can legitimately make a case for Kevin Garnett being the best defensive player during his entire era in the league with his consistency. Dirk's offense isn't that much better than his to make a case when they are light and day in this regard. His defense compared to Dirks (who I actually think is underrated defensively) is so much better that it makes the fact that Dirk is better offensively moot.

I don't disagree about KG perhaps being the best defensive player of the era. He was unreal good on defense. One of the best ever.

Disagree about their offensive impact being close though.

But I'm not gonna debate this again here...I do it like 4 times a year and don't have the patience now.

I love KG...I have no issue with someone taking him over Dirk.

[ScalsFan21]

You can legitimately make a case for Kevin Garnett being the best defensive player during his entire era in the league with his consistency. Dirk's offense isn't that much better than his to make a case when they are light and day in this regard. His defense compared to Dirks (who I actually think is underrated defensively) is so much better that it makes the fact that Dirk is better offensively moot.

I think Duncan's consistency from the beginning of his career on that end of the court (which maybe can be attributed to having Pop his whole career) edges out KG's in terms of this era's defensive anchors at least in terms of superstars, but peak KG was the better defensive anchor.

Dirk probably has been the more consistent overall player than KG in terms of total years spent as the "finished version" of himself, but peak for peak I'd take Garnett. Probably career for career too, since KG was always a 2-way god.

[Smoke117]

I don't disagree about KG perhaps being the best defensive player of the era. He was unreal good on defense. One of the best ever.

Disagree about their offensive impact being close though.

But I'm not gonna debate this again here...I do it like 4 times a year and don't have the patience now.

I love KG...I have no issue with someone taking him over Dirk.

Just remember...offense is not just scoring...KG is by far the best passing and playmaking PF ever.

[dhsilv]

I don't disagree about KG perhaps being the best defensive player of the era. He was unreal good on defense. One of the best ever.

Disagree about their offensive impact being close though.

But I'm not gonna debate this again here...I do it like 4 times a year and don't have the patience now.

I love KG...I have no issue with someone taking him over Dirk.

Reasonable people will more than like on average go with KG, but to claim it's not closer is crazy as Dmav said!

The more we get into data and study what makes teams win the more KG seems to stand out. That said he didn't really bring it in the playoffs which like Malone is what is going to hold KG back.

As for my view, and this one is out there and I'm not sure I can fully back it up, BUT here it is.

KG is the better basketball player.

I can win more games with Dirk.

[dhsilv]

Just remember...offense is not just scoring...KG is by far the best passing and playmaking PF ever.

I'm going to ignore the playmaking term because I'll need you to define it but PASSING??????????

Really? Can you add more detail there?

[DMAVS41]

Just remember...offense is not just scoring...KG is by far the best passing and playmaking PF ever.

I know what offense is...and Dirk was a better offensive force than you realize.

Again, I love KG...you can have this debate with someone else if you like.

[Young X]

People need to stop acting like these 2 weren't comparable in their primes or that nobody thought Dirk was better. And Garnett too. Both of these guys were finishing ahead of Kobe in MVP voting in some his best seasons and were playing at a similar level in almost any way you wanna look at it.

[dhsilv]

People need to stop acting like these 2 weren't comparable in their primes or that nobody thought Dirk was better. And Garnett too. Both of these guys were finishing ahead of Kobe in MVP voting in some his best seasons and were playing at a similar level in almost any way you wanna look at it.

But sports center man...who was the headline? I mean they post all most people know about the game in 2 minute clips that don't show anything related to who did anything! But boy oh boy do they discuss "clutch."

[DMAVS41]

Reasonable people will more than like on average go with KG, but to claim it's not closer is crazy as Dmav said!

The more we get into data and study what makes teams win the more KG seems to stand out. That said he didn't really bring it in the playoffs which like Malone is what is going to hold KG back.

As for my view, and this one is out there and I'm not sure I can fully back it up, BUT here it is.

KG is the better basketball player.

I can win more games with Dirk.


The bold is something interesting I've been think about lately. I'm not sure you can win more with Dirk than KG, but just in general I think what you are saying makes some sense.

Like, in theory, a player like Chris Paul (not hating on Paul...he's the best pg since Magic until Curry came along imo) should be better than Curry when we break them down they way most do (although I have a huge issue with how people break down players like offense vs offense and defense vs defense...it tends to overvalue a certain type of player...but that is another story)

I think Curry is essentially the pg version of Dirk...not arguing they are just as good...etc., but people now have come to realize the importance of range shooting and what it does to defenses...how being doubled off the ball and on pick and rolls/pops can cause huge problems for defenses.

They are very similar in the way you kind of just have to pick your poison with them because they are so deadly without the ball in their hands.

So, yes, I totally understand what you are getting at and I think really what that statement means ultimately is that we have to stop thinking in such simplistic terms about impact or value when comparing certain players.

Even though Curry's box score stats are amazing...you'd never grasp his impact off of those alone....while some players you do grasp most of their impact...sometimes it's inflated...off box score stats alone.

[Young X]

I'm going to ignore the playmaking term because I'll need you to define it but PASSING??????????

Really? Can you add more detail there?6 dimes a game twice as a 7 footer.

[ArbitraryWater]

Reasonable people will more than like on average go with KG, but to claim it's not closer is crazy as Dmav said!

The more we get into data and study what makes teams win the more KG seems to stand out. That said he didn't really bring it in the playoffs which like Malone is what is going to hold KG back.

As for my view, and this one is out there and I'm not sure I can fully back it up, BUT here it is.

KG is the better basketball player.

I can win more games with Dirk.

which makes Dirk a better basketball player, essentially.. the very fact he's more valuable.

[ArbitraryWater]

Smoke would fit greatly in with RealGM, those guys have a hard on for KG and underrate Kobe in the year for year rankings massively.

[Smoke117]

Smoke would fit greatly in with RealGM, those guys have a hard on for KG and underrate Kobe in the year for year rankings massively.

Yeah but I like to drink and express my rage...they already banned me years ago. My personal downfalls are why i'm stuck with these dimwits on insidehoops. Nobody is perfect, eh?

I find ish character building.

[masonanddixon]

Kobe is better than Dirk and Dirk is better than Lebron

[stalkerforlife]

Kobe is better than Dirk and Dirk is better than Lebron

Best poster on ISH.

Such a high basketball IQ.

[fiddy]

Kobe by a mile

[dhsilv]

[/B]

The bold is something interesting I've been think about lately. I'm not sure you can win more with Dirk than KG, but just in general I think what you are saying makes some sense.

Like, in theory, a player like Chris Paul (not hating on Paul...he's the best pg since Magic until Curry came along imo) should be better than Curry when we break them down they way most do (although I have a huge issue with how people break down players like offense vs offense and defense vs defense...it tends to overvalue a certain type of player...but that is another story)

I think Curry is essentially the pg version of Dirk...not arguing they are just as good...etc., but people now have come to realize the importance of range shooting and what it does to defenses...how being doubled off the ball and on pick and rolls/pops can cause huge problems for defenses.

They are very similar in the way you kind of just have to pick your poison with them because they are so deadly without the ball in their hands.

So, yes, I totally understand what you are getting at and I think really what that statement means ultimately is that we have to stop thinking in such simplistic terms about impact or value when comparing certain players.

Even though Curry's box score stats are amazing...you'd never grasp his impact off of those alone....while some players you do grasp most of their impact...sometimes it's inflated...off box score stats alone.

I think it is even more complex than that. Or perhaps more simple.

One of the concepts I was taught working with some guy's who'd started a lot of companies (many failed a few made them a lot of money), is that a lot of them would just look at a person they're working with and ask "can I make money with him/her". It was a way of cutting through things like "yeah but he's SOOO smart" or "he's really fun to be around" and get to the goal. Can I put this person into the role I have and get a return.

Both of these guys make any team better, so yeah I can make money off either of them. I however think I'll have an easier time making money with Dirk. He fits more combinations of teams and adds more value faster. Getting optimal value out of KG requires you have a spot that lets him focus on defense and stand back offensively. But I can't turn him into just a catch and shoot guy, he's not a post up guy, and he needs touches because he's important. So getting that right mix with him imo would be harder.

So yes it is things like how Dirk bends defenses off the ball. It's how having a big who can shoot causes even more defensive match up problems, moves a shot blocker from the rim to the top of the key, removes a rebounder as well. It's having a guy at the end of a shot clock or game clock who can hit a "clutch" shot because he can almost always generate an average look no matter how tightly defended he is. But it is also about the flexibility in team building you'd get with dirk.

That said I think with the best possible team around both guys, I'll take KG. Once you find that right mix, KG just can do more just a bit better.

[nathanjizzle]

Kobe and its not even fair.

7 first round knock outs vs 5 championships.

[DMAVS41]

I think it is even more complex than that. Or perhaps more simple.

One of the concepts I was taught working with some guy's who'd started a lot of companies (many failed a few made them a lot of money), is that a lot of them would just look at a person they're working with and ask "can I make money with him/her". It was a way of cutting through things like "yeah but he's SOOO smart" or "he's really fun to be around" and get to the goal. Can I put this person into the role I have and get a return.

Both of these guys make any team better, so yeah I can make money off either of them. I however think I'll have an easier time making money with Dirk. He fits more combinations of teams and adds more value faster. Getting optimal value out of KG requires you have a spot that lets him focus on defense and stand back offensively. But I can't turn him into just a catch and shoot guy, he's not a post up guy, and he needs touches because he's important. So getting that right mix with him imo would be harder.

So yes it is things like how Dirk bends defenses off the ball. It's how having a big who can shoot causes even more defensive match up problems, moves a shot blocker from the rim to the top of the key, removes a rebounder as well. It's having a guy at the end of a shot clock or game clock who can hit a "clutch" shot because he can almost always generate an average look no matter how tightly defended he is. But it is also about the flexibility in team building you'd get with dirk.

That said I think with the best possible team around both guys, I'll take KG. Once you find that right mix, KG just can do more just a bit better.


I'm not sure about the bold. It certainly may be the case, but I don't think it's clear there.

Only thing I can say for certain, after watching them both play going on 20 years now, is that they are in the same range as players. Outside of that...there just isn't anything definitive for me that I can look at to really sway me from leaning towards Dirk here for a variety of reasons.

[feyki]

Shaq vs Karl

[JohnnySic]

Kobe easily.

[ArbitraryWater]

Shaq vs Karl

Thats one hell of a lobsided comparison.. Duncan vs Karl would be more appropriate.

Putting Duncan on Shaq's level is pretty insulting, tbh.

[Milbuck]

Thats one hell of a lobsided comparison.. Duncan vs Karl would be more appropriate.

Putting Duncan on Shaq's level is pretty insulting, tbh.
It's really not. He's not as good as Shaq but peak-wise he's not considerably worse than anyone in history.

[feyki]

Thats one hell of a lobsided comparison.. Duncan vs Karl would be more appropriate.

Putting Duncan on Shaq's level is pretty insulting, tbh.

No , that is fair comparison as Kobe-Dirk . Duncan is another level player to Shaq . He is same class as Magic .

[ArbitraryWater]

No , that is fair comparison as Kobe-Dirk . Duncan is another level player to Shaq . He is same class as Magic .

Blatantly insane :oldlol:

Last time we talked about this I shredded that piece of shit argument and you came back with a quote from an ISH poster gino something about their h2h stats :facepalm

Duncan is the least dominant out of the top 10 players, sorry.

[dhsilv]

[/B]

I'm not sure about the bold. It certainly may be the case, but I don't think it's clear there.

Only thing I can say for certain, after watching them both play going on 20 years now, is that they are in the same range as players. Outside of that...there just isn't anything definitive for me that I can look at to really sway me from leaning towards Dirk here for a variety of reasons.

With an attitude like that, we'd have little to discuss on a message board about basketball :)

[Shih508]

Imagine Dirk plays with Shaq and Gasol+Odom while Phil is coaching. Easily 5 rings and Dirk would never miss playoff even he had little help in his prime

Kobe such an overrated borderline top 20 of all time at best

[DMAVS41]

With an attitude like that, we'd have little to discuss on a message board about basketball :)

Maybe we'd have less, but the quality of the conversations worth having would be a lot better.

This whole..."it's KG and it's not close" or it's "Dirk and it's not close" that I see from both sides ruins any meaningful conversation one might have.

[TheImmortal]

Weird thread.. Kobe >>>> Dirk, there's no shame in that. Dirk is a top 20 All-Time player though.

[Akrazotile]

Depends on what conversation one is having...

If it's career/accolades like the above...easily Kobe.

If it's a more nuanced conversation about which player you'd rather draft and build a team around for 2 decades...I think it's an interesting conversation to have.


In other words, you're saying: Intelligent people would rather have Dirk.

I agree.

[DMAVS41]

In other words, you're saying: Intelligent people would rather have Dirk.

I agree.

Not at all...I just don't think it's as simple as counting up rings and accolades.

I said earlier that I think Kobe probably deserves the edge because we know more about how he would play and accomplish in certain situations...and with Dirk it's more conjecture.

[Akrazotile]

Not at all...I just don't think it's as simple as counting up rings and accolades.

I said earlier that I think Kobe probably deserves the edge because we know more about how he would play and accomplish in certain situations...and with Dirk it's more conjecture.


Like flaming out in the first round or worse for 3 years in a row then demanding a trade?

Or being the most cancerous player ever in history by the age of 36?

[DMAVS41]

Like flaming out in the first round or worse for 3 years in a row then demanding a trade?

Or being the most cancerous player ever in history by the age of 36?

Both negative and positive of course.

However, we just don't know how Dirk would respond to certain pressure playing in LA...going for 3 peats...playing deep in the summers...etc.

I know what I think would happen, but we have to actually give Kobe credit for doing stuff as well.

Look...I've said I'd take Dirk, but I'm not going to join in a conversation that says smart people would take Dirk and stupid people would take Kobe.

I just think it's potentially an interesting conversation to have...

[dhsilv]

Maybe we'd have less, but the quality of the conversations worth having would be a lot better.

This whole..."it's KG and it's not close" or it's "Dirk and it's not close" that I see from both sides ruins any meaningful conversation one might have.

Yeah but nothing wrong with picking a side and making a reasonable argument even if it's based on hypothetical because the reality is we can't really tell who'd be better on a team with xyz.

KG and Ray Allen from day one of their careers as a duo vs lets say Dirk and Jason Kidd.

I think that's a somewhat fair pairing...it's actually the more I think the first one to pop in my head but it would be hard to top. Kidd might be slightly more well thought of, but I don't think the gap is huge and I think both guys complement each other.

So which duo wins more assuming they're on simi competent franchises?

[SwayDizzle]

not even close

[HOoopCityJones]

62 in 3 quarters

[DMAVS41]

Yeah but nothing wrong with picking a side and making a reasonable argument even if it's based on hypothetical because the reality is we can't really tell who'd be better on a team with xyz.

KG and Ray Allen from day one of their careers as a duo vs lets say Dirk and Jason Kidd.

I think that's a somewhat fair pairing...it's actually the more I think the first one to pop in my head but it would be hard to top. Kidd might be slightly more well thought of, but I don't think the gap is huge and I think both guys complement each other.

So which duo wins more assuming they're on simi competent franchises?

Of course.

I pick Dirk over KG...I've made that clear, but I'm not going to argue a ton with someone making reasonable arguments in favor of KG like you seem to because I agree with many of them.

I'd rather have Kidd/Dirk....you are going to have a better offense around them and Dirk has proven capable enough to build good enough defenses around him without an elite perimeter defender like Kidd on his team. With Kidd...they could have a chance to be elite on both ends. I'd envision something like a top 3 offense and top 8 defense...if built properly...

And in the playoffs...I'll roll with Dirk being able to cause more problems offensively and his team being good enough defensively to make it work

[feyki]

62 in 3 quarters

First round and finals .

[Levity]

you put either one of those players in their prime in todays NBA, and they just shit on the league. both players with incredible midrange games, surrounded by shooters. :rockon:

[TheBigVeto]

Dirk is better than Kobe.