-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=97 bulls]But do you realize how difficult it is to get a team that commited to playing defense? And most of the teams and coaches you named have or had some pretty good defenders on them. [/QUOTE]
Considering those coaches I listed led very solid offenses wherever they went, no. I don't think it's particularly hard to get players committed assuming they're not a bunch of malcontents or if there's just horrible chemistry in the locker-room.
None of these teams had particularly great defensive talent and they were still very solid defensively:
2007 Bulls with Skiles (#1 ranked defense)
2010 Bulls with Spoelstra (#6 ranked defense)
2010 Bucks with Skiles(#2 ranked defense, they were #15 the year before he got there)
2007 Cavs (4th ranked defense)
2009 Bobcats (7th ranked defense, #20 before Brown year before Brown arrived)
2010 Bobcats (#1 ranked defense)
Etc, etc
The fact is, coaches and effort can make a HUGE impact on a team's defense even if they don't have much talent, because defense is all about effort, execution, discipline, schemes, focus. Those are things you can teach.
Offense is much more difficult to create. You need the inherent talent for that.
[QUOTE]And there have been players that were more defensive oriented that have done much better than the players you named with even less talent. Scottie Pippen in 95, Jason Kidd in 04 and 05 I believe it was. Those teams didn't have big time scorers.but they did far better than the players you mentioned[/QUOTE]
This is such a sweeping, broad statement. I mean, Kidd in NJ played in perhaps the worst conference ever, and it's not like he had supporting casts anywhere near as bad as the guys I listed. You have to look at the context.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=GoldNugg21]I think it's pretty evident that on an individual level, you take the offensive player. Just look at a top 50 NBA player list, and tell me how many of those guys were known for their defense. Russell obviously, but he had the luxury of being surrounded by excellent offensive players throughout his career, and was exceptional on that end himself.
[/QUOTE]
That's not particularly true. The players around Russell were not that good offensively especially after Cousy retired and the Celtics generally were the worst offensive team in the league for much of the 60's.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=Jacks3]Considering those coaches I listed led very solid offenses wherever they went, no. I don't think it's particularly hard to get players committed assuming they're not a bunch of malcontents or if there's just horrible chemistry in the locker-room.
None of these teams had particularly great defensive talent and they were still very solid defensively:
2007 Bulls with Skiles (#1 ranked defense)
2010 Bulls with Spoelstra (#6 ranked defense)
2010 Bucks with Skiles(#2 ranked defense, they were #15 the year before he got there)
2007 Cavs (4th ranked defense)
2009 Bobcats (7th ranked defense, #20 before Brown year before Brown arrived)
2010 Bobcats (#1 ranked defense)
Etc, etc
The fact is, coaches and effort can make a HUGE impact on a team's defense even if they don't have much talent, because defense is all about effort, execution, discipline, schemes, focus. Those are things you can teach.
Offense is much more difficult to create. You need the inherent talent for that.
This is such a sweeping, broad statement. I mean, Kidd in NJ played in perhaps the worst conference ever, and it's not like he had supporting casts anywhere near as bad as the guys I listed. You have to look at the context.[/QUOTE]
The Bulls in 07 had a team full of good defensive players. Deng, Hinrich, Wallace, Nocioni, P.J. Brown, Tyrus Thomas, Thabo Sefalosha all were very good defensive players.
The 09 Cavs had James, Hughes, Big Z, Varejo, and Eric Snow
The bobcats had Jackson,, Wallace, Mohamed, Chandler, Felton, Tyrus Thomas.
All had very good records. And minus the cavs (lebron james) none of the teams you mentioned had big time scorers.
And what was so broad about the players I listed? You gave a list of playerrs you feel support your view, I gave you a list of players that support my view.
You say kidd shouldn't count because he played in a conference that was weak at the time. But so did mcgrady. There really isn't much of a difference.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
It depends on defensive player's offensive impact.
If we are talking about something like Carmelo Anthony vs. Dennis Rodman/Ben Wallace, without a doubt it's Carmelo.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]but that is the point. even with Howard's far superior defense/rebounding...its still debatable on who the better player is right now.
so you are talking about the best defender in the league who happens to play center (easily the highest impact defensive position) and a very good offensive player that gives you 23/14/2 a night on near 60% from the field
and its debatable as to which player is better. i think that answers the question.[/QUOTE]
Lol that's not debatable. Id be willing to bet that if every GM had to pick between howard and nowitzki, howard would win in a landslide. Dirk is a flavor of the month. He has always been considered one of the best players in the league, but its been only this year that he's broke top 5. And that's due largely to the mavs winning this years championship. While howard has really been no lower than top 5 since he's been in the league.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Ok, scrap the centers. Let's just look at wing players. And under similar circumstances. Kobe, nash, and tmac didn't do any better than kidd, pippen and payton. The main reason thhe lakers won was because no team could match up with them down low.[/QUOTE]
well, agree to disagree. kobe was simply just a better player than pippen. i think nash was better than payton. and i'd take a healthy t-mac over kidd.
but really, that is shifting the argument a little because all of those defensive guys you mentioned were also excellent offensive players as well.
i do think kidd was better than nash overall, but nash is tough because he is arguably one of the worst defensive players in the history of the league. And Kidd is also a great overall offensive player to go along with his defense/rebounding.
But again, nobody would laugh you out of the room if you said Nash was a better player than both kidd and payton....and that defies your logic of defense being more important individually. Because if that was the case, two elite defenders like Kidd and Payton that also are very good to great offensively should be significantly better than one of the most inept defenders ever.
Not the case though. Its debatable.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol that's not debatable. Id be willing to bet that if every GM had to pick between howard and nowitzki, howard would win in a landslide. Dirk is a flavor of the month. He has always been considered one of the best players in the league, but its been only this year that he's broke top 5. And that's due largely to the mavs winning this years championship. While howard has really been no lower than top 5 since he's been in the league.[/QUOTE]
uh no. simply no.
why do you keep holding onto these bs perceptions? who cares what people thought. they were clearly wrong. i think dirk has been better than howard pretty much every year they've been in the league.
and if owners/gm's had to pick howard or dirk for last year....i bet almost all of them would pick Dirk.
remember when howard made the finals in 09 and his team had chances to win those two games that went to OT? remember when Howard couldn't make a free throw or carry the team offensively late? yep...that is what we are talking about.
don't give me his bs about how dirk vs howard is not debatable. that is straight up nonsense and you know it.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]well, agree to disagree. kobe was simply just a better player than pippen. i think nash was better than payton. and i'd take a healthy t-mac over kidd.
but really, that is shifting the argument a little because all of those defensive guys you mentioned were also excellent offensive players as well.
i do think kidd was better than nash overall, but nash is tough because he is arguably one of the worst defensive players in the history of the league. And Kidd is also a great overall offensive player to go along with his defense/rebounding.
But again, nobody would laugh you out of the room if you said Nash was a better player than both kidd and payton....and that defies your logic of defense being more important individually. Because if that was the case, two elite defenders like Kidd and Payton that also are very good to great offensively should be significantly better than one of the most inept defenders ever.
Not the case though. Its debatable.[/QUOTE]
But the players you mentioned aren't one dimensional either. Even nash who can make plays for himself as well as others. There is no one player that you can build a team around just based on them putting the ball in the basket and they are good at anything else. Those players become 6th men. Ben Gordon, Andrew Toney, Vinnie Johnson, Jason Terry. And their polar opposites would be guys like bobby jones, bruce bowen, michael cooper. Guys like the ones I listed first, are great for putting the ball in the basket. But not much else.
And again, when you say who's better. Your ranking them based on accomplishments. Not talent. Then, to compund your folly, you take those accomplishments and translate it to one on one play I.E. this play has an mvp and this player doesn't so the latter isn't as good. It just doesn't work like that. I mean, sure you can say that when ranking players. But you can confuse ranking players with whose more talented.
You know why the nba/players will never hold 1v1 competitions during the all-star game? Because some nobody 12th man will end up beating kobe bryant and lebron james and it'll throw everyone ranking system out of whack.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=97 bulls]But the players you mentioned aren't one dimensional either. Even nash who can make plays for himself as well as others. There is no one player that you can build a team around just based on them putting the ball in the basket and they are good at anything else. Those players become 6th men. Ben Gordon, Andrew Toney, Vinnie Johnson, Jason Terry. And their polar opposites would be guys like bobby jones, bruce bowen, michael cooper. Guys like the ones I listed first, are great for putting the ball in the basket. But not much else.
And again, when you say who's better. Your ranking them based on accomplishments. Not talent. Then, to compund your folly, you take those accomplishments and translate it to one on one play I.E. this play has an mvp and this player doesn't so the latter isn't as good. It just doesn't work like that. I mean, sure you can say that when ranking players. But you can confuse ranking players with whose more talented.
You know why the nba/players will never hold 1v1 competitions during the all-star game? Because some nobody 12th man will end up beating kobe bryant and lebron james and it'll throw everyone ranking system out of whack.[/QUOTE]
i'm not ranking them by accomplishments. i just disagree with you. i think kobe is simply a better player than pippen. you don't. that is ultimately the perfect breakdown of this discussion.
you think that pippen's all around play and better defense trumps kobe's ability to dominate games with his scoring and late game play. we've had this talk before. i could not disagree more. the example last time was you saying that pippen was a better basketball player than magic. another great example of this. i just disagree. i think what magic brought was simply more beneficial to winning than what pippen did.
i don't think nash is better than payton because of accomplishments. i think so because i think nash is a better player and i'd pick him first to play pg on my team. same with kobe over pippen.....kidd vs tmac is a little closer for me, but i'd take tmac at his best over kidd at his probably...but its close. hard to say.
i'm not discounting defense and all around play, i just think these elite offensive players that we are talking about have more value.
and i'd add that its why that is reaching here...you use popular opinion constantly....and then turn around and claim that pippen was a better player than both magic and kobe. LOL...i find it very difficult to have this debate with someone that watched all three of them play and would take pippen first. doesn't mean i'm right or anything....i just feel like we are watching two different games if you honestly believe that.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]uh no. simply no.
why do you keep holding onto these bs perceptions? who cares what people thought. they were clearly wrong. i think dirk has been better than howard pretty much every year they've been in the league.
and if owners/gm's had to pick howard or dirk for last year....i bet almost all of them would pick Dirk.
remember when howard made the finals in 09 and his team had chances to win those two games that went to OT? remember when Howard couldn't make a free throw or carry the team offensively late? yep...that is what we are talking about.
don't give me his bs about how dirk vs howard is not debatable. that is straight up nonsense and you know it.[/QUOTE]
Well Ft shooting is defintely a weakness of Howard. But please don't bring up howards short commings and leave out nowitzkis. Your so big on having players that are clutch, what happened to the dirk led mavs in 06? Or vs golden state? Why didn't he shoot those teams to victory? Just to refresh, in the 06 finals, a series that the mavs had homecourt and were favored to win. What happend in game 5? When with the series tied 2-2, terry scored 35, josh howard had 25 and dirk had 20 on 42% shooting. The mavs lost by 1 pt. Or how bout game 6? The mavs lost by 3. Where was that clutch shooting then?
Or what about the following year when the dirk led 67 win mavs got their ass handed to them by the 8th seeded warriors. And even if you feel the warriors were better than an 8th seed, they sure as hell weren't 67 win/ 1st seed better, which the mavs were.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=SCdac]But what exactly does being offensively elite guarantee you? George Gervin, Kevin Durant, Gilbert Arenas, Carmelo, McGrady, etc, what have they earned to make you say have that kind of prime-time scorer goes hand in hand with a championship?... Players like Jordan, Duncan, Kareem, etc, were all great defensive players on top of being great offensive players.... Obviously it's a team game, it's shortsighted to pin accomplishments (or lack thereof) solely on one player. But some of these players give a team a "head start" so to speak, by being (or becoming) great defensive players. If I'm a GM, I'm looking for that head start, which is why I, and most people, fully understood Greg Oden being picked over Durant at the time. Yes, every winning team is going to need an elite offensive player, but with out a defensive presence of some kind to compensate, it's useless because defense in the playoffs is all-important. Every team has to be balanced, so at some point in this discussion we're just splitting hairs, but I lean towards defense more than offense... when talking championships... not necessarily "Hall of Fame", which is slightly different IMO, more of a "life time achievement" award kind of thing.[/QUOTE]
you can also say with defensive players. what has mutombo, mourning, howard done? Or if jordan, hakeem,duncan, were never great offensive players, do you think they have won. Why cant chandler win 50+ wins in charlotte while dirk can win 50+ every season. You need both but when it comes to skills, it is easier to play defense thats why they can be gotten in the 2nd round. which makes offensive players harder to acquire, so ill go with offense..
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21]what about Ben Wallace vs Dirk Nowitzki?[/QUOTE]
Dirk Nowitzki is a great dribbler? Ben Wallace can guard 4 out of 5 positions?
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Well Ft shooting is defintely a weakness of Howard. But please don't bring up howards short commings and leave out nowitzkis. Your so big on having players that are clutch, what happened to the dirk led mavs in 06? Or vs golden state? Why didn't he shoot those teams to victory? Just to refresh, in the 06 finals, a series that the mavs had homecourt and were favored to win. What happend in game 5? When with the series tied 2-2, terry scored 35, josh howard had 25 and dirk had 20 on 42% shooting. The mavs lost by 1 pt. Or how bout game 6? The mavs lost by 3. Where was that clutch shooting then?
Or what about the following year when the dirk led 67 win mavs got their ass handed to them by the 8th seeded warriors. And even if you feel the warriors were better than an 8th seed, they sure as hell weren't 67 win/ 1st seed better, which the mavs were.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle.[/QUOTE]
its clear you didn't watch game 5....lol. Dirk was amazing down the stretch and actually made a potential game winning shot over Shaq with 9 seconds left in OT.
Dirk was absolutely clutch.
And you are confusing things. I'm not saying Dirk is way better than Howard. I'm saying its absolutely debatable as to who the better player was last year and the years before. I lean towards Dirk....but have no issue with somebody taking Howard.
Doesn't that throw your entire premise away though? If defense is more important, then Howard should be easily better than Dirk as Howard is by far the best defender in the league. And he's very good offensively as well.
And sorry...it is debatable. So clearly something Dirk does has very high value. And that would be his ability to carry a team scoring wise and take over late in games.
Please don't try to give me a history lesson on Dirk. That isn't what this is about...but regardless, you dont' even know what actually went down in game 5 of that series. Get a clue.
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]and if owners/gm's had to pick howard or dirk for last year....[B]i bet almost all of them would pick Dirk.[/B][/QUOTE]
that's probably not true.
Everybody knows Dirk is a super star and one of the best scorers in the league, but all things being equal (as in, the teams they play for), Dwight probably has more "value", and this is something GM's thought going into the 10-11 season... and I don't think it's all about being younger, either.
I'm not saying "put Howard on the Mavs and they'd do better", I'm saying, your idea of what you think others value is... off.
This is from the 2010-2011 NBA GM survey:
Who will win the 2010-11 MVP?
1. Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City 66.7%
2. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers 25.9%
Also receiving votes:
[B]Dwight Howard, Orlando[/B]; LeBron James, Miami
- Last year: LeBron James 69.0%
If you were starting a franchise today and could sign any player in the NBA, who would it be?
1. Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City 55.6%
2. LeBron James, Miami 25.9%
3. Kobe Bryant, Lakers; [B]Dwight Howard, Magic 7.4%[/B]
5. Dwyane Wade, Miami 3.7%
- Last year: LeBron James 78.6%
Which player forces opposing coaches to make the most adjustments [in the here and now]?
1. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers 35.7%
2. LeBron James, Miami 28.6%
[B]3. Dwight Howard, Orlando 17.9%[/B]
4. Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City 10.7%
Also receiving votes:
Chris Paul, New Orleans; Dwyane Wade, Miami
- Last year: LeBron James 39.3%
2010-2011 end of the season MVP voting:
1. Derrick Rose
[B]2. Dwight Howard (DPOY, All-NBA 1st team, All-NBA Defense 1st team)[/B]
3. Lebron James
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Kevin Durant
6. Dirk Nowitzki (All-NBA 2nd team)
-
Re: Defense vs. Offense
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]i'm not ranking them by accomplishments. i just disagree with you. i think kobe is simply a better player than pippen. you don't. that is ultimately the perfect breakdown of this discussion.
you think that pippen's all around play and better defense trumps kobe's ability to dominate games with his scoring and late game play. we've had this talk before. i could not disagree more. the example last time was you saying that pippen was a better basketball player than magic. another great example of this. i just disagree. i think what magic brought was simply more beneficial to winning than what pippen did.
i don't think nash is better than payton because of accomplishments. i think so because i think nash is a better player and i'd pick him first to play pg on my team. same with kobe over pippen.....kidd vs tmac is a little closer for me, but i'd take tmac at his best over kidd at his probably...but its close. hard to say.
i'm not discounting defense and all around play, i just think these elite offensive players that we are talking about have more value.
and i'd add that its why that is reaching here...you use popular opinion constantly....and then turn around and claim that pippen was a better player than both magic and kobe. LOL...i find it very difficult to have this debate with someone that watched all three of them play and would take pippen first. doesn't mean i'm right or anything....i just feel like we are watching two different games if you honestly believe that.[/QUOTE]
You asked me a question and I answered it. If you would've asked me who is the consensus best between whoever, then id answer accordingly.
Like I've said before, how can you say whose better? The kobe, magics, jordans.... they had the best talent in the league around them. I just don't see how anyone of that caliber and that talent couldn't win with similar talent. I just don't see how or why if you don't replace a raw kenyon martin and a young richard jefferson with let's say prime shawn kemp and prime gerald wallace along with an upgrade at center, the nets don't win at least one championship.
Even with pippen. Just upgrading that 94 team wiith mitch richmond in my opinion gets them over the top. They lost iin 7 to the knicks who lost in 7 to the eventual champion rockets.
The payton led soncis lost to arguably the greatest team ever.
On the other end of the spectrum. Kobe was able to shoot low 40% as well as dirk and they get all this pub? THEY HAD THE BEST TEAM. That's all I've ever tried to say. They won not because they themselves were really any better than other players, they just had the best team. I'm still waiting for kobe to will a team to a championship.