[QUOTE=R.I.P.]....and the fact that while Dirk had many very good teammates it
Printable View
[QUOTE=R.I.P.]....and the fact that while Dirk had many very good teammates it
[QUOTE=Fresh Kid]Kevin Durant is better but at tha same time I would choose prime dirk simply cuz he never had a westbrook type player:no:[/QUOTE]
Steve Nash?
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]While dirk played with talent, it was often the wrong talent or poor coaching or both
People forget about Avery... Does anyone think the Mavis blow the finals or lose to the warriors with pat Riley coaching us?
And the one year the team was stacked... At least offensively... Dirk got hurt in the wcf[/QUOTE]
Scott Brooks is even worse than Avery and Nelson. U cant blame the coach for Dirk underperforming in that Warriors series
[QUOTE=Bigsmoke]Steve Nash?
Scott Brooks is even worse than Avery and Nelson. U cant blame the coach for Dirk underperforming in that Warriors series[/QUOTE]
Mavs Nash wasn't as good as wb actually... And he was constantly hurt as well
Totally agree about Brooks being worse than Nellie,but Avery was as bad or worse
I'm not blaming Avery for how dirk played, but I do blame him mostly for the team losing. Nelson and Riley ran circles around him and was the biggest reason we lost those series IMO
My point was that coaching remains vastly under-rated here. And you are spot on with Brooks.
Durant. He is just so easy ot build around even if he isn't necessarily the better player.
It is pretty much a coin toss in terms of statistical output. Dirk has played longer so he obviously has the better resume right now, but Durant is an absolute scoring machine. One of the few guys in the NBA right now who I could legitimately see challenging Kareem or Malone for the top two spots in points (barring any injuries of course).
Both guys are almost impossible to guard one on one, though Dirk has the superior post game (being 7 feet doesn't hurt).
I'd go with Durant... but it's even. Both are great and not great at certain things.
Like Durant's all around game better, abilities to put the ball on the floor, has some good playoff experience at a young age, seems less soft to me despite living at the FT line, easier piece to build around position-wise and doesn't seem to be done growing as a player.
For Dirk, I prefer his three point shooting.. and him working out of the post (midrange) as I think he improved in that area greatly from 2007-now, but I'm not fond of his defensive skills and I felt he shied away from the paint/could be bodied too much in his prime and forced into jumpers.
It's close, but I love the way Dirk strokes that ball.
-Brook
[QUOTE=Chuckbrook]It's close, but I love the way Dirk strokes that ball.
-Brook[/QUOTE]
He strokes it so good.
That said, i'll take Durgawd.
I have Durant as a top tier scorer and has been the premier scorer in the league for three/four years now. Dirk was never either been premier or a top tier scorer. Both can be very clutch. Durant has more range and equal accuracy, better creative ability. Dirk has a better post game, better defensive reads and carried a bigger load. Durant is more versatile and a better defender.
Durant's length is about equal or greater than Dirk's. Durant is very quick.
Dirk's goes to his strength a little better and is more definite in what he wants to do with the ball.
Right now its very, very, very close but I take Durant because he can do more.
I do think its ironic that in a direct comparison of the two, Lebron's play affects the perception of both greatly. Had Lebron did his look-I-can-go-to-Mars-during-the-finals trick, a year later most of you would have Durant as an top 30 player already and this question is out of reach.
[QUOTE=Pointguard] Dirk was never either been premier or a top tier scorer.[/QUOTE]
Literally stopped reading.
ffs prime Dirk lead Dallas to the championship against Lebron, Wade and Bosh.
[QUOTE=Alan Ogg]Right, except for the '06-'07 when Dirk won MVP, oh and '04-'05 and '05-'06 when he came in 3rd in MVP voting. And '09-'12. The Finals MVP in '11 was okay too.[/QUOTE]
Derrick Rose wasn't the best, Allen Iverson wasn't the best, Steve Nash wasn't the best. Durant is the 2nd best in the NBA, even if he were to finish 5th in MVP voting.
[QUOTE=Pointguard]I do think its ironic that in a direct comparison of the two, Lebron's play affects the perception of both greatly. Had Lebron did his look-I-can-go-to-Mars-during-the-finals trick, a year later most of you would have Durant as an top 30 player already and this question is out of reach.[/QUOTE]
It is ironic. Durant dropped 31 ppg/.55 FG% on the Heat yet it wasn't much of a competitive series, while Dirk had a good Finals (26 ppg/.42 FG%) but it wasn't quite the WCF where he tore it up against the reallyyy young Thunder. Heat had gotten better in 2012, added Shane Battier who had his best series in the Finals against the Thunder, and they got even better in 2013. I def think under dog stories and going up against big names does play a big part in perception in weird ways... even if said player didn't personally guard or be guarded by the big names (ie. Dirk didn't have to guard Lebron, Durant, Kobe, etc) it still gives him a boost as if he did, because Dirk vs. Aldridge, Gasol, Bosh just doesn't sound as cool haha
[QUOTE=SCdac]It is ironic. Durant dropped 31 ppg/.55 FG% on the Heat yet it wasn't much of a competitive series, while Dirk had a good Finals (26 ppg/.42 FG%) but it wasn't quite the WCF where he tore it up against the reallyyy young Thunder. Heat had gotten better in 2012, added Shane Battier who had his best series in the Finals against the Thunder, and they got even better in 2013. I def think under dog stories and going up against big names does play a big part in perception in weird ways... even if said player didn't personally guard or be guarded by the big names (ie. Dirk didn't have to guard Lebron, Durant, Kobe, etc) it still gives him a boost as if he did, because Dirk vs. Aldridge, Gasol, Bosh just doesn't sound as cool haha[/QUOTE]
It's wierd.. watching both those series I got the impression Dirk played better despite having far inferior stats. Durant's scoring was too scattered and didnt spark any runs outside of the first game.. and his poor defense cancelled out his offense for the most part. While Dirk's points came in bunches at critical points in games to turn the tides.. and his defense wasnt really exposed because he didnt draw the toughest matchup.
[QUOTE=tpols]It's wierd.. watching both those series I got the impression Dirk played better despite having far inferior stats. Durant's scoring was too scattered and didnt spark any runs outside of the first game.. and his poor defense cancelled out his offense for the most part. While Dirk's points came in bunches at critical points in games to turn the tides.. and his defense wasnt really exposed because [B]he didnt draw the toughest matchup.[/B][/QUOTE]
I agree that Dirk's actual effect surpassed his statistical output, but it also speaks to his teammates and competition, and how they should be or are evaluated. I don't think Dirk drew the toughest match up in any series that year outside of maybe the Blazers w/ Aldridge, and even in that series Blazers were toast with BRoy broken down and playing like a shell of himself (he had 1 good game). Dirk had guys on his team to hound swingmen (Marion and Stevenson punked Lebron) and Chandler was great in the middle of the paint (lead Mavs in boards and blocks)... so it allowed Dirk to do what he does best (offensive stuff)... Credit to Cuban for building a great team relative to other teams that season, the best team to be exact.