Rate KDs Game 1: 12 of 19 but 7 TOs, -20

[ArbitraryWater]

12 of 19, 14 rebs, but 7 TOs, just 1 assist.

Same problems for him, basically.

[DMAVS41]

He kept them in it in the first half for a long time. Thought he was very good on both ends early...then fell off later, but that is asking a lot for a player at his age.

However, as I have been arguing lately, he does kind of remove himself from the team a bit out there...it is hard to explain and clearly Durant is on the short list of best players ever, but I've always had this sense that he's just a little detached from the game. I don't know...it is hard to explain unless you've played a lot of ball...I could be overblowing it, probably am, but there is something there imo...

[ArbitraryWater]

He kept them in it in the first half for a long time. Thought he was very good on both ends early...then fell off later, but that is asking a lot for a player at his age.

However, as I have been arguing lately, he does kind of remove himself from the team a bit out there...it is hard to explain and clearly Durant is on the short list of best players ever, but I've always had this sense that he's just a little detached from the game. I don't know...it is hard to explain unless you've played a lot of ball...I could be overblowing it, probably am, but there is something there imo...


Yea, he just, does his own thing... hes very good at it, but its the same iso set over and over. Everyone else is a bit left out in his monotone plays.

Kerr said it to him in the 2018 WCF during a game.

[AlternativeAcc.]

He kept them in it in the first half for a long time. Thought he was very good on both ends early...then fell off later, but that is asking a lot for a player at his age.

However, as I have been arguing lately, he does kind of remove himself from the team a bit out there...it is hard to explain and clearly Durant is on the short list of best players ever, but I've always had this sense that he's just a little detached from the game. I don't know...it is hard to explain unless you've played a lot of ball...I could be overblowing it, probably am, but there is something there imo...

Sounds like Dirk in a nutshell. Didn't have impact outside of shooting in a ton of games due to skillet deficiency and lack of ball handling and athleticism.

Dirk is the most "detached" star I ever saw.

[ArbitraryWater]

Sounds like Dirk in a nutshell. Didn't have impact outside of shooting in a ton of games due to skillet deficiency and lack of ball handling and athleticism.

Dirk is the most "detached" star I ever saw.

so how does this type of player get to 50+ wins for 10 straight years in the west and an injury from 3 finals in those 10 years, when his best teammate for 8 of those 10 years was Jason Terry?

another basketball puzzle right here.. lol

[DMAVS41]

Sounds like Dirk in a nutshell. Didn't have impact outside of shooting in a ton of games due to skillet deficiency and lack of ball handling and athleticism.

Dirk is the most "detached" star I ever saw.

Cool...then please explain how he led his teams to 50 or more wins in 11 straight years and why he was able to make the finals twice and win a title with some of the worst championship level help in NBA history.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

Tell me more...that guy that was so detached sure got a lot out of his teammates.

You are complaining about Westbrook....what the **** would you say if Durant's second option was doing 17/3/4 on 54% TS while being a shit defender for 6 of his prime years in the playoffs before 2011 happened?

LOL

[Pipes2.0]

so how does this type of player get to 50+ wins for 10 straight years in the west and an injury from 3 finals in those 10 years, when his best teammate for 8 of those 10 years was Jason Terry?

another basketball puzzle right here.. lol

Because for the most part of his career, he has had a pretty good team constructed around him?
Lebron would've won plenty of championships if he replaced Nowitzki on the Mavericks from 2004 to 2016.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Cool...then please explain how he led his teams to 50 or more wins in 11 straight years and why he was able to make the finals twice and win a title with some of the worst championship level help in NBA history.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

Tell me more...that guy that was so detached sure got a lot out of his teammates.

You are complaining about Westbrook....what the **** would you say if Durant's second option was doing 17/3/4 on 54% TS while being a shit defender for 6 of his prime years in the playoffs before 2011 happened?

LOL

Because help is more than just name value stars.

Having help is more nuances than saying "westbrook is better than anyone dirk played with" which seems to be your MO. it's unintelligent basketball talk.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Because for the most part of his career, he has had a pretty good team constructed around him?
Lebron would've won plenty of championships if he replaced Nowitzki on the Mavericks from 2004 to 2012.

But Dirk didn't have a name as big as westbrick. That means he didn't have help.

[DMAVS41]

Because for the most part of his career, he has had a pretty good team constructed around him?
Lebron would've won plenty of championships if he replaced Nowitzki on the Mavericks from 2004 to 2012.

Is this supposed to be a knock? That Lebron, one of the 3 or so best players ever, would have won more?

I don't really care to debate it, but I'm honestly not sure he wins much...Lebron has never won with a Jason Terry type 2nd option...in fact, when Lebron had similar teams...he flamed out in the playoffs in both 09 and 10.

[DMAVS41]

Because help is more than just name value stars.

Having help is more nuances than saying "westbrook is better than anyone dirk played with" which seems to be your MO. it's unintelligent basketball talk.

Cool...then I'm assuming it would show up in 6 years of data when both Dirk and Durant were off the court.

Why were the Thunder so much better than the Mavs without the stars on the court if the Mavs supporting cast was much better?

[DMAVS41]

But Dirk didn't have a name as big as westbrick. That means he didn't have help.

Strawman. He had good to great help depending on the year. He just didn't have as good of help as KD did in the two periods we are comparing.

[Pipes2.0]

Because help is more than just name value stars.

Having help is more nuances than saying "westbrook is better than anyone dirk played with" which seems to be your MO. it's unintelligent basketball talk.

It's unbelievable how Nowitzki is so overrated over here. You beat Lebron once and suddenly you become one of the greatest players of all time, never mind choking multiple times in the playoffs and getting beat in the first round by the 8th seed.

[DMAVS41]

It's unbelievable how Nowitzki is so overrated over here. You beat Lebron once and suddenly you become one of the greatest players of all time, never mind choking multiple times in the playoffs and getting beat in the first round by the 8th seed.

Nonsense and ignorant take.

Dirk's playoff performances in his prime put him in a rare company in NBA history even before 2011.

But tell us more...it's actually the exact opposite of what you claim...it's amazing how under-rated Dirk got because of one terrible series...and he is punished for getting a nothing of note supporting cast / coach to 67 wins.

But I know actually thinking is tough for people on here.

[Pipes2.0]

You keep bringing up Jason Terry, but fail to mention that the rest of that team were solid veterans that has so much to prove like Tyson Chandler, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, etc.

[DMAVS41]

You keep bringing up Jason Terry, but fail to mention that the rest of that team were solid veterans that has so much to prove like Tyson Chandler, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, etc.

Yes...they were quite a good team. You are conflating me saying they weren't an elite championship supporting cast, which they weren't....with me saying they were bad.

Also, why were they better than the 12 Thunder supporting cast? All the data indicates they weren't.

Please explain.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Strawman. He had good to great help depending on the year. He just didn't have as good of help as KD did in the two periods we are comparing.

But KD only ever lost to juggernaut champions. Dirk was choking in the 1st round against 8 seed scrubs.

Durant never underachieved, Dirk did

And I obviously disagree about the help thing. But Durant beat better teams than Dirk ever did. You're just thinking the 2011 fluke holds more weight than it does in terms of comparing them as players.

[DMAVS41]

But KD only ever lost to juggernaut champions. Dirk was choking in the 1st round against 8 seed scrubs.

Durant never underachieved, Dirk did

And I obviously disagree about the help thing. But Durant beat better teams than Dirk ever did. You're just thinking the 2011 fluke holds more weight than it does in terms of comparing them as players.

I disagree. It is underachieving to never win a title with the kind of help KD had over that 6 year stretch.

Also disagree about 2011 being a fluke...I'd understand that logic if Dirk hadn't been putting up 26/10/3 in the playoffs on high efficiency for a decade prior while already leading a team to the finals and beating a Duncan led Spurs team at the peak of their powers in 06.

One could easily flip your narrative and say that Durant making the finals in 12 was the fluke. He only did it once.

One could also say you aren't giving enough weight to Dirk actually beating juggernaut champions / teams...not sure why losing to them is so impressive to you. But not surprised a Durant fan has that loser mentality.

[AlternativeAcc.]

I disagree. It is underachieving to never win a title with the kind of help KD had over that 6 year stretch.

Also disagree about 2011 being a fluke...I'd understand that logic if Dirk hadn't been putting up 26/10/3 in the playoffs on high efficiency in the playoffs for a decade prior while already leading a team to the finals and beating a Duncan led Spurs team at the peak of their powers in 06.

One could easily flip your narrative and say that Durant making the finals in 12 was the fluke. He only did it once.

It's not underachieving when you factor in the comp.

In hindsight are you rolling with Westbrick or Wade, Bosh, Kawhi, Duncan, Klay, Dray, Spo/Pop/Kerr or Brooks/Donavan..

It's obvious they never underachieved. That's just stupid.

I'm saying him winning in 2011 was a fluke, in comparison to what Durant had to face to win it all. The 2011 Heat were clearly weaker and far more dysfunctional than the peak 2012 version. That's not debatable.

It was a great run by Dirk and he had amazing complementary players and more help from teammates AND competition than Durant ever did in OKC.

[DMAVS41]

It's not underachieving when you factor in the comp.

In hindsight are you rolling with Westbrick or Wade, Bosh, Kawhi, Duncan, Klay, Dray, Spo/Pop/Kerr or Brooks/Donavan..

It's obvious they never underachieved. That's just stupid.

I'm saying him winning in 2011 was a fluke, in comparison to what Durant had to face to win it all. The 2011 Heat were clearly weaker and far more dysfunctional than the peak 2012 version. That's not debatable.

It was a great run by Dirk and he had amazing complementary players and more help from teammates AND competition than Durant ever did in OKC.

I disagree...especially when you factor in Durant's help.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

What you say is simply false. The 12 Thunder supporting cast was clearly superior to the help Dirk had in both 06 and 11. Wasn't really close by multiple metrics.

It wasn't a fluke...it was one of the toughest roads a team has ever faced. Blazers/Lakers/Thunder/Heat....it is the exact opposite of a fluke...

I'll ask again...why were Durant's teams so much better without him than the Mavs were without Dirk?

There is absolutely nothing harder about beating the 12 Heat than going through what the Mavs did in 11. Nothing harder about beating the 14 Spurs or 16 Warriors than beating the 06 Spurs. You just under-rate Duran'ts help and over-rate the competition....all to explain away why the guy has made exactly 1 final in his entire career outside his time on the Warriors.

[AlternativeAcc.]

I disagree...especially when you factor in Durant's help.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-this-years-cavs-rank-among-lebrons-nba-finals-supporting-casts/

What you say is simply false. The 12 Thunder supporting cast was clearly superior to the help Dirk had in both 06 and 11. Wasn't really close by multiple metrics.

It wasn't a fluke...it was one of the toughest roads a team has ever faced. Blazers/Lakers/Thunder/Heat....it is the exact opposite of a fluke...

I'll ask again...why were Durant's teams so much better without him than the Mavs were without Dirk?

Even if durant had more help in 2012 it still doesn't matter because the 2012 Heat were far superior to the 2011 version.

You don't think lebron having his worst and most passive series ever is a fluke? It was in part due to the team defense of the Mavs in which Dirk gets almost zero credit for.

And I already answered your question in that other thread. Are they playoff stats? Do you think how a team performs when a star is off the court is more important than how they do when they are on it which is roughly 40 minutes per game in the playoffs?

[DMAVS41]

Even if durant had more help in 2012 it still doesn't matter because the 2012 Heat were far superior to the 2011 version.

You don't think lebron having his worst and most passive series ever is a fluke? It was in part due to the team defense of the Mavs in which Dirk gets almost zero credit for.

And I already answered your question in that other thread. Are they playoff stats? Do you think how a team performs when a star is off the court is more important than how they do when they are on it which is roughly 40 minutes per game in the playoffs?

Dirk played the most minutes in the finals by a large margin and absolutely should get credit for part of the role he played defensively. In addition to allowing the offense to generate enough good shots by having virtually everything run through him not only in that series by all playoffs. LOL at zero credit....

It is a large enough sample to indicate a basic level of help. If you are complaining about how they performed with Durant...I'd argue that you are making my point...Durant doesn't get as much out of his teammates as Dirk did.

Also, just think about how you talk about the 14 Spurs...and aging Dirk heavily relying on Monta Ellis took that team to game 7....but prime Durant with a clear cut better supporting cast...in your eyes, is asking the impossible to beat them?

Think about how ****ing stupid that take is when you are claiming Durant is the far superior player.

[k0kakw0rld]

But Dirk didn't have a name as big as westbrick. That means he didn't have help.

He had Steve Nash

[AlternativeAcc.]

Dirk played the most minutes in the finals by a large margin and absolutely should get credit for part of the role he played defensively. In addition to allowing the offense to generate enough good shots by having virtually everything run through him not only in that series by all playoffs. LOL at zero credit....

It is a large enough sample to indicate a basic level of help. If you are complaining about how they performed with Durant...I'd argue that you are making my point...Durant doesn't get as much out of his teammates as Dirk did.

Also, just think about how you talk about the 14 Spurs...and aging Dirk heavily relying on Monta Ellis took that team to game 7....but prime Durant with a clear cut better supporting cast...in your eyes, is asking the impossible to beat them?

Think about how ****ing stupid that take is when you are claiming Durant is the far superior player.

So you made my point. Dirk played huge minutes. Durant played huge minutes. Whatever regular season net differential stats have little value in actually describing overall help and it completely ignores competition. It's silly. And I haven't dug deep on those numbers.. I'm sure if i did I would you shut you up about it.

Ok... so Dirk took them to 7 and Lebron only took them to 5. Dirk > Lebron right?

You're just cherry picking random bullshit and hoping it sticks.

[k0kakw0rld]

So you made my point. Dirk played huge minutes. Durant played huge minutes. Whatever regular season net differential stats have little value in actually describing overall help and it completely ignores competition. It's silly. And I haven't dug deep on those numbers.. I'm sure if i did I would you shut you up about it.

Ok... so Dirk took them to 7 and Lebron only took them to 5. Dirk > Lebron right?

You're just cherry picking random bullshit and hoping it sticks.

Stop responding to idiocy. A forum full of Dillon Brooks. That's exactly what they want you to do.

[DMAVS41]

So you made my point. Dirk played huge minutes. Durant played huge minutes. Whatever regular season net differential stats have little value in actually describing overall help and it completely ignores competition. It's silly. And I haven't dug deep on those numbers.. I'm sure if i did I would you shut you up about it.

Ok... so Dirk took them to 7 and Lebron only took them to 5. Dirk > Lebron right?

You're just cherry picking random bullshit and hoping it sticks.

No, I don't think that at all. I think a sample size over 6 years is indicative of real things. Stars that have half decade runs of having their teams outscore opponents when they are on the bench is really rare....it is Durant and Duncan...I'd have to think who else has had that. Not many...

Is it perfect? Of course not, but Durant had both...he had a real 2nd guy and a team capable without him on court.

No, I'm not arguing that at all...I'm talking about how stupid your opinion is. You just got done saying how it is asking too much for Durant to beat the 14 Spurs...and I'd simply want to know why if he's so much better than a player like Dirk.

You bring up Lebron, but his help in the 14 finals was not great....nobody on his team played even close to the level Russ did in the 14 Spurs series.

You see...that is your problem....you just say "Westbrick"....

But in 2014 against the Spurs...he was really good....27/6/7 (54% TS)

Wade in the finals did 15/4/3 (50% TS)

But, "Westbrick"!!!!!

[AlternativeAcc.]

He had Steve Nash

True. Had more help in 03 than Durant ever did in OKC and he was at a similar age as OKC KD.

But Dmavs likes to cherry pick to create a narrative nobody actually believes or takes serious.

[DMAVS41]

True. Had more help in 03 than Durant ever did in OKC and he was at a similar age as OKC KD.

But Dmavs likes to cherry pick to create a narrative nobody actually believes or takes serious.

Nonsense. I've written about how good the 03 Mavs were many times. I still think it was the best Mavs team actually and absolutely was a title worthy supporting cast.

You probably don't even know, but Dirk got hurt in the conference finals....not sure if they would have beaten Duncan as he was on a mission and Dirk hadn't peaked yet, but they had a real shot.

There is no bullshit narrative...you just don't like reality. Reality is that KD, even not counting the Warriors, played with a lot of quality help in his career and if he was a tier better than the likes of Dirk/KG/Barkley...etc....you'd expect better results.

And losing to good teams doesn't somehow make him better. I still don't even understand the point you are making. Beating those really good teams is what matters.

[AlternativeAcc.]

No, I don't think that at all. I think a sample size over 6 years is indicative of real things. Stars that have half decade runs of having their teams outscore opponents when they are on the bench is really rare....it is Durant and Duncan...I'd have to think who else has had that. Not many...

Is it perfect? Of course not, but Durant had both...he had a real 2nd guy and a team capable without him on court.

No, I'm not arguing that at all...I'm talking about how stupid your opinion is. You just got done saying how it is asking too much for Durant to beat the 14 Spurs...and I'd simply want to know why if he's so much better than a player like Dirk.

You bring up Lebron, but his help in the 14 finals was not great....nobody on his team played even close to the level Russ did in the 14 Spurs series.

You see...that is your problem....you just say "Westbrick"....

But in 2014 against the Spurs...he was really good....27/6/7 (54% TS)

Wade in the finals did 15/4/3 (50% TS)

But, "Westbrick"!!!!!

I honestly don't know what stats you're taking about. Are they playoff stats?


You're the one who keeps reverting to the westbrook thing. I don't care about his stats in any series. He's a negative player and the worst commentary star... ever. Stop citing his stats. I don't care. I would take Terry, Nash, Finley, over him in a fukking heart beat especially if you surround them with other high IQ role players which Dirk had.

Westbrick is like Cousins to me. I don't want them regardless of what the raw stats say. All the greatest teams ever had a 20ppg sidekick and elite role players. Its the historical record. Stop pretending westbrick is help.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Nonsense. I've written about how good the 03 Mavs were many times. I still think it was the best Mavs team actually and absolutely was a title worthy supporting cast.

You probably don't even know, but Dirk got hurt in the conference finals....not sure if they would have beaten Duncan as he was on a mission and Dirk hadn't peaked yet, but they had a real shot.

There is no bullshit narrative...you just don't like reality. Reality is that KD, even not counting the Warriors, played with a lot of quality help in his career and if he was a tier better than the likes of Dirk/KG/Barkley...etc....you'd expect better results.

And losing to good teams doesn't somehow make him better. I still don't even understand the point you are making. Beating those really good teams is what matters.

KD never had championship expectations help when you factor in his comp. It's that simple brother.

He just didn't have the comp luck on his side like 2015 curry, 2011 dirk, 2019 Kawhi.

Also he beat better teams than Dirk beat and lost to better ones than Dirk lost to. Do you get that?

[DMAVS41]

I honestly don't know what stats you're taking about. Are they playoff stats?


You're the one who keeps reverting to the westbrook thing. I don't care about his stats in any series. He's a negative player and the worst commentary star... ever. Stop citing his stats. I don't care. I would take Terry, Nash, Finley, over him in a fukking heart beat especially if you surround them with other high IQ role players which Dirk had.

Westbrick is like Cousins to me. I don't want them regardless of what the raw stats say. All the greatest teams ever had a 20ppg sidekick and elite role players. Its the historical record. Stop pretending westbrick is help.

You honestly expect to be taken seriously arguing that Russ from 11 through 16 was a negative player?

They aren't "stats"...it's simply recording how a team performs with a star and without a star over a given period.

For example...

From 06 through 11...the Mavs were +7.9 points per 100 possessions with Dirk...and -2.5 points per 100 without him on the court

From 11 through 16...the Thunder were +8.4 points per 100 possessions with Durant...and +2.9 points per 100 without him on the court

A 5.4 points per 100 difference in terms off court performance by the teams...over a 6 year period is indicative of a baseline level of help difference.

And it isn't cherrypicking...if we expand it...it actually is better for Dirk

From 01 through 11...the Mavs were +8.3 with Dirk and -3.6 without him

[DMAVS41]

KD never had championship expectations help when you factor in his comp. It's that simple brother.

He just didn't have the comp luck on his side like 2015 curry, 2011 dirk, 2019 Kawhi.

Also he beat better teams than Dirk beat and lost to better ones than Dirk lost to. Do you get that?

If he never had championship expectations in your mind...you simply don't actually think he's as good as you claim. Also, if Durant never did...than certainly Dirk never did.

Arguing that Dirk had competition luck in 2011 is one of the most insane things I've ever heard on here.

Again, disagree, I don't think Durant beat a team better than the 06 Spurs....don't think he beat a team better than the 11 Heat either to be honest.

[AlternativeAcc.]

You honestly expect to be taken seriously arguing that Russ from 11 through 16 was a negative player?

They aren't "stats"...it's simply recording how a team performs with a star and without a star over a given period.

For example...

From 06 through 11...the Mavs were +7.9 points per 100 possessions with Dirk...and -2.5 points per 100 without him on the court

From 11 through 16...the Thunder were +8.4 points per 100 possessions with Durant...and +2.9 points per 100 without him on the court

A 5.4 points per 100 difference in terms off court performance by the teams...over a 6 year period is indicative of a baseline level of help difference.

And it isn't cherrypicking...if we expand it...it actually is better for Dirk

From 01 through 11...the Mavs were +8.3 with Dirk and -3.6 without him

Oh, so not the playoffs, ignores competition and team context. (Mavs were built to have one star on the court and struggled a bit when he was off)

It really doesn't mean much. They used to stagger west rook and Durants minutes at times. Obviously Dirks help was a bit more inconsistent over the years but better in peak years.

Again the difference isn't noteworthy at all to me really. It's a broad sample taken from regular season games. The 2011 Mavs had the best bench in the NBA, and the Thunder never came close. I dont need any regular season numbers to know that.

[AlternativeAcc.]

If he never had championship expectations in your mind...you simply don't actually think he's as good as you claim. Also, if Durant never did...than certainly Dirk never did.

Arguing that Dirk had competition luck in 2011 is one of the most insane things I've ever heard on here.

Again, disagree, I don't think Durant beat a team better than the 06 Spurs....don't think he beat a team better than the 11 Heat either to be honest.

Completion luck meaning they didn't have to beat a team as good as the 2012 Heat, 2014 Spurs. 2016 Warriors. It's really not hard to understand.

Durant beat the 2012 and 2016 Spurs which are better than ANY teams dirk ever beat, but didn't have the luck to only have to face one of those teams in a given run or none at all like dirk in 2011. Does the truth upset you?

[DMAVS41]

Oh, so not the playoffs, ignores competition and team context. (Mavs were built to have one star on the court and struggled a bit when he was off)

It really doesn't mean much. They used to stagger west rook and Durants minutes at times. Obviously Dirks help was a bit more inconsistent over the years but better in peak years.

Again the difference isn't noteworthy at all to me really. It's a broad sample taken from regular season games. The 2011 Mavs had the best bench in the NBA, and the Thunder never came close. I dont need any regular season numbers to know that.

Never did I say it is everything. However, it is something...and directly flies in the face of your "Russ is a negative player" and Durant's supporting casts weren't good. Which is why I brought it up.

The 11 Mavs did not have the best bench in the league. Again, facts have to matter...

In the regular season...the Mavs were -5.4 points per 100 without Dirk....in the playoffs (which shouldn't even be used because of small samples and different lineup constructions....but you seem hell bent on saying false things)...the Mavs were -6.6 points per 100 without Dirk.

There is absolutely nothing to support your claim that the Mavs without Dirk had the best bench in the league.

[DMAVS41]

Completion luck meaning they didn't have to beat a team as good as the 2012 Heat, 2014 Spurs. 2016 Warriors. It's really not hard to understand.

Durant beat the 2012 and 2016 Spurs which are better than ANY teams dirk ever beat, but didn't have the luck to only have to face one of those teams in a given run or none at all like dirk in 2011. Does the truth upset you?

What?

I would not take either the 12 Spurs or the 16 Spurs over the 06 Spurs with peak/prime Duncan at the height of their powers...they lost one series in 3 years...and it was to the Mavs. I also don't think either of those teams are better than the 11 Heat. Hell, I'm not even sure either of those teams are for sure better than the 11 Lakers....

And when you factor in the help Dirk had...beating the 06 Spurs is the most impressive series win in my opinion out of the ones you listed. You'll claim beating Lebron/Wade/Bosh was a fluke...so I won't even go down that road.

And even that having to beat teams is false. Dirk had to beat the 02 Kings, the 03 Spurs, 06 Spurs, the 06 Heat, the 11 Lakers, and the 11 Heat...when you factor in what Dirk was working with most of those years...it's absolutely similar in terms of teams he had to beat. The only difference is that Dirk actually beat enough of them a couple times to make the finals more than once unlike Durant.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Never did I say it is everything. However, it is something...and directly flies in the face of your "Russ is a negative player" and Durant's supporting casts weren't good. Which is why I brought it up.

The 11 Mavs did not have the best bench in the league. Again, facts have to matter...

In the regular season...the Mavs were -5.4 points per 100 without Dirk....in the playoffs (which shouldn't even be used because of small samples and different lineup constructions....but you seem hell bent on saying false things)...the Mavs were -6.6 points per 100 without Dirk.

There is absolutely nothing to support your claim that the Mavs without Dirk had the best bench in the league.

You keep saying without Dirk as if they didn't have bench guys playing with Dirk and altering the numbers.

This is why the numbers are fukking stupid. When your superstar is playing 40+ minutes and playing with the bench guys making a big difference it makes for nonsense meaningless numbers.

[DMAVS41]

You keep saying without Dirk as if they didn't have bench guys playing with Dirk and altering the numbers.

This is why the numbers are fukking stupid. When your superstar is playing 40+ minutes and playing with the bench guys making a big difference it makes for nonsense meaningless numbers.

I gave you the numbers in both the regular season and playoffs....and if the guys were so ****ing good...they wouldn't get their asses handed to them every single ****ing time Dirk wasn't on the court.

That doesn't mean they were bad...and of course they stepped up and played great when it mattered...but nothing, virtually nothing, supports your assertions about that team. It was definitely a below average supporting cast for a title winning team.

And that is why I gave you the regular season numbers and record. Dirk was playing like 33 minutes a game in 11 iirc...and you have a huge sample. Your point about the playoffs is right in terms of the sample and minutes...but you are the one that is arguing it doesn't matter in the regular season.

Do you even know the point you are trying to make?

You realize you can't just say Russ is negative or the Thunder supporting cast sucked...well, you can...but you'd need to present something other than your biased opinion if you want to be taken seriously.

[AlternativeAcc.]

I gave you the numbers in both the regular season and playoffs....and if the guys were so ****ing good...they wouldn't get their asses handed to them every single ****ing time Dirk wasn't on the court.

That doesn't mean they were bad...and of course they stepped up and played great when it mattered...but nothing, virtually nothing, supports your assertions about that team. It was definitely a below average supporting cast for a title winning team.

No, a team built around a star who creates offense will struggle when he's off, especially in limited doses vs. Other teams who may still be playing their star or "stars". It's a dumb as **** way to look at things.

That 2011 bench had several guys come in and contribute in a monstrous way on both ends... mostly playing with Dirk because Dirk played big minutes. It's not hard to grasp buddy. His help was insane especially defensively in the finals in which he gets zero credit for. Fluke.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Goodnight Dmavs

Keep swinging for the fences. Nobody will ever believe Dirk being better than Durant but keep trying.

[DMAVS41]

No, a team built around a star who creates offense will struggle when he's off, especially in limited doses vs. Other teams who may still be playing their star or "stars". It's a dumb as **** way to look at things.

That 2011 bench had several guys come in and contribute in a monstrous way on both ends... mostly playing with Dirk because Dirk played big minutes. It's not hard to grasp buddy. His help was insane especially defensively in the finals in which he gets zero credit for. Fluke.

I actually agree to some extent...now just apply that same logic to Durant. A star that scores...doesn't really create offense at the level of Dirk...but lets go with what you say...a team built around a star is going to struggle when he's off. Cool...great thing for Durant is that his team struggled less because it was built so well. Durant also had a 2nd star to carry that burden as well.

Durant also had bench guys come through and play very well...including his all-nba teammate that was putting up first option numbers...oh, but he doesn't count...I forgot.

Not hard to grasp...Russ was great and Durant had quality help...just couldn't get it done...but tell me more about how Durant beating the 14 Spurs was impossible, but Dirk beating the 06 Spurs was nothing of note.

[DMAVS41]

Goodnight Dmavs

Keep swinging for the fences. Nobody will ever believe Dirk being better than Durant but keep trying.

If you think I'm arguing to convince the masses, you are even dumber than I thought.

Better luck tomorrow...you can tell me more about how Durant is way better, but never had the same championship expectations Dirk had....and how losing series to good teams is the difference.

[plowking]

Is Durant the only player in history that keeps getting this "he is the best in the world but..." narrative.

Best in the world... but he was injured.
Best in the world... but wasn't completely healthy.
Best in the world... but his team didn't rise with him.
Best in the world... but they caught him at a bad time.
Best in the world... but stuck on a toxic team.

Dude is a nicely skilled player who can score from anywhere. He plays lazy and doesn't do as much everywhere else.

[Manny98]

Typical empty stats performance from the snake, nice scoring but no real impact on the game because he's not really good at anything else

[ArbitraryWater]

True. Had more help in 03 than Durant ever did in OKC and he was at a similar age as OKC KD.

But Dmavs likes to cherry pick to create a narrative nobody actually believes or takes serious.

Sure, but then again Dirk also probably would have won the title that year barring injury.


So its not an argument against him.



Anyway, dmavs, Pipes is a troll and an alt, no need to respond to him.

[ArbitraryWater]

Its funny, Dirk never had championship rosters in his life outside of 2003. Never.


Players throughout NBA history did not win championships with Dirk‘s type of rosters.

But apparently Dirk‘s rosters were super good…

When your entire argument is „give KD credit for even making it there with that roster“, you know you‘ve lost it if the other guy is Dirk. Cause he was the master of that.


Dirk had solid rosters, with a bunch of role players, and those rosters are nice but NEVER enough to win for ANYONE. Not even LeBron.

And yet here you people are, dumbing it down with shit like „well Dirk had really good rosters!“ not championship level though. Not even close. Thats why no one else throughout history won with that kind of help.

Durant objectively had championship rosters his whole career. And he‘s made it out drawing 1 more ring than Dirk. By joining a team that already won a chanpionship without him….

[DMAVS41]

Its funny, Dirk never had championship rosters in his life outside of 2003. Never.


Players throughout NBA history did not win championships with Dirk‘s type of rosters.

But apparently Dirk‘s rosters were super good…

When your entire argument is „give KD credit for even making it there with that roster“, you know you‘ve lost it if the other guy is Dirk. Cause he was the master of that.


Dirk had solid rosters, with a bunch of role players, and those rosters are nice but NEVER enough to win for ANYONE. Not even LeBron.

And yet here you people are, dumbing it down with shit like „well Dirk had really good rosters!“ not championship level though. Not even close. Thats why no one else throughout history won with that kind of help.

Durant objectively had championship rosters his whole career. And he‘s made it out drawing 1 more ring than Dirk. By joining a team that already won a chanpionship without him….


End of the day...Durant vs Dirk in terms of non Warriors years is absolutely close in terms of impact...and the edge is with Dirk in terms of team success.

My take is simple: Durant is over-rated just a little by his fans...but is still of course one of the best players ever. I just question how much of a true offensive generator he is like Curry is and to a lesser extent Dirk was.

The Durant side take: Dirk was a choker. He got lucky in 2011 to face weak competition (the most absurd argument ever). Russ was a negative player in his prime (sorry, this argument is even more absurd). Jason Terry was better than Russ (my bad, this is the dumbest argument ever). Durant beat much better teams. Really? Which team did Durant beat that was better than the 06 Spurs or 11 Heat? But the Warriors series! Westbrick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even if someone disagrees with me...and most will....they know those arguments for Durant are terrible. Everyone knows Durant from 11 through 16 had really good help...better than Dirk had after 03...and Durant simply did not have the kind of team results you'd expect from a player much better than Dirk.

And, again...the numbers don't even back it up.

For Dirk's prime in the playoffs he was a 26/11/3 (59% TS) (25 PER) (119 ortg) (107 drtg)

For Durant's non-Warriors prime in playoffs he was a 29/8/4 (58% TS) (24 PER) (114 ortg) (106 drtg)

Even if you include the Warriors and go from 11 through 19 for him...

Durant was 29/8/4 (60% TS) (24.8 PER) (116 ortg) (106 drtg)

There is just not a difference here. Durant shot a few more times a game...that's about it. I'd get it if Durant was taking teams to the finals left and right like Lebron or Magic...and having clear cut better team success...but shit...even if you include the Warriors in which Durant played (meaning not 19 as his team won round 2 and then the conference finals without him...didn't drop a game lol)...but even including 17 and 18.

During those stretches...Durant made 3 finals and won two titles...and Dirk made 2 finals and won a title.

And they talk about luck? How about the luck of having Chris Paul get hurt in 18 when Durant was about to lose to the Rockets. That's about as lucky as you can get. That was the difference between no finals and no championship. If you remember...that was back when Durant fans were saying that Klay/Steph/Dray weren't very good anymore and Durant was having to carry them. Still makes me laugh...they just weren't that good...but won at a 65 plus win pace without Durant and easily made the finals without Durant the very next year....then won a title the first year Klay came back off of two devastating injuries. That is the Durant fan logic...Steph/Klay/Dray weren't that good and Durant had to carry them...holy shit.

That is the best part...even if you include the Warriors...the resumes are still very similar both in terms of the numbers and results.

[ImKobe]

KD played well enough individually but they don't have the 3PT shooting nor the depth to match up with them.

[tpols]

Durant is great but he's a lazy off ball player. He prefers to have the ball in his hand and iso. If he played more like Reggie or curry and was in constant off ball motion it would scramble the defense more, make them work harder, and unlock the teams true ceiling.

That's why the warriors are so well known for their 2nd half avalanches. They get you tired, then start throwing haymakers.