The Second Banana: Dirk vs. Manu

[z0sa]

Tim and Dirk together? You can't even put that in the same sentence as Manu Ginobili. I love Manu, and he is tied for my 3rd favorite Spur, but I have to be realistic here. Tim and Dirk together would be akin to Tim and David type roles, neither player ever asserting true dominance over the other. Tim and Dirk are really team first guys and would fit great together, so chemistry would not be an issue.

While its not an altogether easy choice since I love Manu's capacity to win and win in big moments, as well as having a large and varied skillset, Dirk is pretty much a no brainer.

[DAF86]

It was ruined a long time ago by Manusexuals who can't seem to think beyond anything not relating to Manu.

Why can't you accept that there's people that actually thinks that Manu at his prime > Dirk at his prime.

If you make this poll among basketball fans that watch NBA and FIBA I'm pretty sure that Manu would win also (and I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't even be close). You have a missconception of Manu 'cause you have only saw him play on the NBA as a role player. But make no mistake about it, Manu could have easily been a "franchise player" on this league. For god sake if Joe fricking Johnson is "franchise player" for a second round playoff team, then Manu could have definitely been a franchise player.

[urunobili]

As a Player Dirk is better :tu

[Rodriguez]

As a Player Dirk is better :tu
Manu is better as a person?

[sonic21]

Why can't you accept that there's people that actually thinks that Manu at his prime > Dirk at his prime.

If you make this poll among basketball fans that watch NBA and FIBA I'm pretty sure that Manu would win also (and I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't even be close). You have a missconception of Manu 'cause you have only saw him play on the NBA as a role player. But make no mistake about it, Manu could have easily been a "franchise player" on this league. For god sake if Joe fricking Johnson is "franchise player" for a second round playoff team, then Manu could have definitely been a franchise player.

he has the talent, but he's is too inconsistent to be a franchise.

[DAF86]

he has the talent, but he's is too inconsistent to be a franchise.

Except on the NBA he has been a franchise player everywhere.

[Rodriguez]

Why can't you accept that there's people that actually thinks that Manu at his prime > Dirk at his prime.

If you make this poll among basketball fans that watch NBA and FIBA I'm pretty sure that Manu would win also (and I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't even be close). You have a missconception of Manu 'cause you have only saw him play on the NBA as a role player. But make no mistake about it, Manu could have easily been a "franchise player" on this league. For god sake if Joe fricking Johnson is "franchise player" for a second round playoff team, then Manu could have definitely been a franchise player.
If you also extend our discussion to D-League, NCAA, ABA... then there will flow millions of names that you may consider franchise players in their leagues, and overwhelmingly to beat both Manu and Dirk since neither guy is the No.1 dominant player in the NBA league though Dirk used to be the MVP of NBA.

[Rodriguez]

Except on the NBA he has been a franchise player everywhere.
Is it your admission that NBA is the No.1 best league in universe? given no alien has been found.

[dirk4mvp]

Except on the NBA he has been a franchise player everywhere.

He's been a 'franchise' player in the minor leagues. Congrats on that.

[BadOdor]

Without reading through this whole thread, I'll just say that anyone who chooses Manu over Dirk is out of his or her mind.

we've already established that it's simply all the argentine savage posters being over manu's nut sack.

lol no running water.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

He's been a 'franchise' player in the minor leagues. Congrats on that.

:lol

[DPG21920]

I would choose Dirk for sure, but Mav fans are seriously over estimating Dirk's "improvement" on defense. Dirk would be a great player even if he did not get back on defense at all.

He has gotten "better" on defense, but going from piss poor to anything will be an improvment. I watch a ton of Mav basketball, almost every single game. Dirk puts in decent effort for the most part, but seemingly only when on those plays when it "matters".

Manu is clearly a better defender and game changer on that end than Dirk. Dirk does do that swipe move with some effectiveness, but if someone is persistent, they can easily overcome Dirk on all areas of the floor, from every position.

Manu has his troubles with guys who are stronger and always put pressure on him by backing him down, but other than that he does a very good job. He comes up with timely steals, hustle blocks, weakside blocks and crafty doubles onto bigs. He has enough quickness and anticipation to stay infront of guys that are his size or smaller. Manu does not take plays off either.

Dirk has gotten better, but he is still below average, by quite a bit imo. He looks incredibly ackward as well both on the perimeter and inside. He is also quite bad at funneling within a system.

Dirk is such a sturdy player with so much range, that it makes him so efficient and deadly offensively. Manu is no offensive slouch and he gets easier baskets and I would rather the ball in his hands at the end of the game. I would rather Dirk get the last shot, but I would rather have the ball in Manu's hands.

But Dirk next to Tim would have been a disgustingly perfect compliment.

[benefactor]

Why can't you accept that there's people that actually thinks that Manu at his prime > Dirk at his prime.

If you make this poll among basketball fans that watch NBA and FIBA I'm pretty sure that Manu would win also (and I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't even be close). You have a missconception of Manu 'cause you have only saw him play on the NBA as a role player. But make no mistake about it, Manu could have easily been a "franchise player" on this league. For god sake if Joe fricking Johnson is "franchise player" for a second round playoff team, then Manu could have definitely been a franchise player.
I like how you decided to go a different direction here in order to find some sort of straw to grasp at within your weak, homer based arguments.

We are not talking about Manu vs. Dirk in their primes. We are discussing which in their prime would be a better compliment when paired with Tim Duncan. There is only one correct answer to this...and those with any sort of unbiased basketball knowledge know what it is.

[BadOdor]

So this forum is like LG after all....you start a MJ vs Kobe thread in there, kobe wins.

Homerism.

[dirk4mvp]

So basically, every known Spurs poster who usually provides good takes has been picking Dirk, while the only people picking Manu are posters from Argentina and Spurs homers. Got it.

[ElNono]

we've already established that it's simply all the argentine savage posters being over manu's nut sack.

lol no running water.

LOL Pink

[ElNono]

:blah

:jack

[Texas Chili Dog]

http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/ban-cha.gif

[dirk4mvp]

:jack

Resorting to this proves my point. Thanks.

[resistanze]

I'd pick Robert Horry over Dirk. He has 7 rings and plays defense and is clutch!!!!!!

[ElNono]

:blah

[Chieflion]

I voted for Dirk cause he was at least the MVP of the choke season while Manu choked against the choke.

[Frank Lucas]

:lmao DAF86 thinks Manu being a franchise player in the Euroleague means he could be a franchise player in the NBA.

[Frank Lucas]

DAF, how bout Argentina sticks to it's strength (harboring Nazis), and leaves basketball to the USA?

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

:lol

[Findog]

DAF, how bout Argentina sticks to it's strength (harboring Nazis), and leaves basketball to the USA?

They're also good at currency collapse.

[Frank Lucas]

They're also good at currency collapse.


Harboring Nazis is what they're particularly good at. I guess when some of the Nazis they harbored are worth more than their entire country, they had their reasons.

[Manu20]

I love Manu as much as the next guy but Dirk is clearly the better player.

[Findog]

Harboring Nazis is what they're particularly good at. I guess when some of the Nazis they harbored are worth more than their entire country, they had their reasons.

Don't forget kidnappings. Kidnappings are one of Argentina's biggest growth industries.

[dirk4mvp]

lol argentina

[Findog]

lol argentina

Don't cry for me Argentina

https://learninglatinamerica.wikispaces.com/file/view/eva-peron-6.jpg

[Phenomanul]

Nationality smack is weak... another form of racism...

[dirk4mvp]

Don't cry for me Argentina

https://learninglatinamerica.wikispaces.com/file/view/eva-peron-6.jpg

Barack Obama was not born in Argentina.

[ducks]

Barack Obama is was not born in Argentina.

he was not born in the usa either

[BadOdor]

Nationality smack is weak... another form of racism...

You should thank us for exposing these argentine savages, they don't give a shit about spurs or basketball in general, all they want is to fellate manu.

[dirk4mvp]

ducks has spoken.

[BadOdor]

he was not born in the usa either

its the truth, everyone knows he was born in africa.

[Findog]

he was not born in the usa either

ooh, a real live Birther. You people are nuts.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Nationality smack is weak... another form of racism...


If Argentina cared about racism they wouldn't harbor people responsible for the biggest example of persecution in human history.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

lol Argentina
lol Nazi lovers

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I wonder how much DAF86 will care about the Spurs once Manu retires.

[Typhoon]

The Spurs will be irrelevant when Manu/Duncan retire (TP will be exposed), so yeah, I'm sure nobody in the right mind will care.

The era of Duncan and Manu is going to end very soon, and Spurs basketball will be over... I already suffer enough with the other teams I support so I will watch basketball casually and root for the teams that have great teamwork with a pass first point guard.

And last am I a Spurs fan because of Manu?, fuck yeah. Like most of the people that watch Basketball, like a team because of an individual player.

p.s -- Manu :lobt2::lobt2::lobt2: >>>>>>>>>>>> Dirk :lol

[Admiral]

Dirk wins this one easily. Manu is obviously a good player, but Dirk is definitely in a tier or two above Manu. I think he would complement Tim just as well, too.

[MmP]

If Argentina cared about racism they wouldn't harbor people responsible for the biggest example of persecution in human history.
Those comments are just awful and should be deleted righ off. You cant generalize and put all the argentines on the same bag just cause some politician was pretty nasty and made evil deals with evil people. Those actions doesn't reflect people's mind at all. Here there are good and kind people too. Comments like that are pretty damn bad.

I bet you know all the argies.

[DAF86]

I wonder how much DAF86 will care about the Spurs once Manu retires.

I was a Spurs fan before Manu got to San Antonio.

[DAF86]

Wow, I've just read some of the last replys, pretty sad to read. That was not funny or hurtful or nothing, just sad, unnecesary and totally out of subject.

[Rogue]

Wow, I've just read some of the last replys, pretty sad to read. That was not funny or hurtful or nothing, just sad, unnecesary and totally out of subject.
No one suspect you as a racist, bro. At least you're not racist and not selective at all when you take photos of hooking women and their asses.

[resistanze]

The Spurs will be irrelevant when Manu/Duncan retire (TP will be exposed)

What a clown. I guess Manu is lucky he'll be retiring along with Duncan (or before, the way his body is holding up) since he won't get the chance to be exposed. And you openly admit to being a frontrunner? Wow. You're an insult to all Spurs fans that had to suffer through the Gervin and Robinson years.

[Findog]

I'd probably have to go with Dirk. But it isn't as clear-cut as some Dirk supporters are making it seem. Manu has won at every level. Dirk has won at no level.

Dirk is a franchise player, Manu is a second banana. Manu isn't capable of taking a team to an NBA Finals. And nobody cares about what Manu did in minor-league basketball. Dirk established himself as a good NBA player by the age of 21. Manu wasn't good enough to play in the NBA until he was 25. If Dirk wanted to pick up a bunch of Italian League Championship trophies, I'm sure he could've done so.

:lmao at Manu's Euro hardware.

[Findog]

Manu was arguably MVP of the 2005 finals...

Tony Parker was MVP of the 2007 Finals. Was he the Spurs best player in 2007? If Manu is your best player, you're scrapping for the 8th seed.



Dirk hasn't even won that though... and he doesn't have an olympic gold, either.

Who cares? Getting Germany to qualify for the Olympics with his "supporting cast" is as impressive as Manu winning Gold with a bunch of NBA caliber players.

[VivaPopovich]

Manu. It's best to have a good small-big combo not big-big combo

Outside shooting and dribble penetration frees up Timmy inside and vice versa, whereas with Dirk and Timmy you just have two big men so all you got to do is clog the paint

[Findog]

What does Tony Parker have to do with anything?

I said Manu couldn't make a Finals as a #1 guy. You then brought up his near Finals MVP award in 2005? So what does that have to do with anything? Tony Parker won Finals MVP in 2007, but nobody would say he was the Spurs best player that year.


The point is, you could make a case for Manu as finals MVP in 2005.

No, you can't make a case for Manu being the 05 Finals MVP. Duncan was. And Manu's play in the 05 Finals does not negate the fact that Dirk is a much better player, and can lead his team to the final round while Manu couldn't get out of the first round as a #1 guy.




Whereas you could make a case for Dirk as biggest choker in the league.

Dirk has two clutch plays for every clutch play Manu has made. And if Dirk is indeed a choker, then so is Manu:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TCdErEO7OCM/RnKYz5sfTSI/AAAAAAAAAHs/LASfGdzKRSc/s400/DirkManu.jpg




In fact, the best player in today's game(LeBron), says olympic gold is more important to him than an NBA championship.

And if you believe that, you're pretty naive. Like I said, Dirk leading a bunch of scrubs to qualify for the Olympics is just as impressive as Manu winning the Gold with a stacked Argentine squad. Just as Kobe leading a scrub Laker team to the playoffs in 06 and nearly toppling the Suns is as impressive as what he did this year when he won a title with a stacked team. I mean, Robert Horry has 7 rings, is clutch and played good defense, so obviously in his prime he was a much better player than Dirk. :rolleyes

[Findog]

Since you edited your argument, I'll respond to this as well... with: LOL. You have a lot of excuses. But you can't change facts. Manu has the hardware. Dirk doesn't. End of story.

Manu has a bunch of minor-league hardware. Dirk went to play with the big boys. Why should I care what Alex Rodriguez did in Double A?

[timtonymanurich]

Lucky for the Spurs that Pop and Buford run the team and not you. They'd trade Manu for Dirk in a heartbeat. ^^^^:lmao:nope:drunk

I answer this conundrum by stating NO FREAKING WAY would that trade ever get past the assistant coaches of Popovich let alone to the FO!!! This because of evidence of the MONSTROSITY of a choke in the 1st round in to GS AND to the Monster Choke in the Finals to the Heat. That "foul" Manu was called for on Dork by the way in the final seconds of OT in game 7 of the WCSF was pure crap. Hand is part of the ball!!

Manu has been a huge part of why SA has 3 out of their 4 rings and Dirk is the reason Dallas has NONE!!!

Next time you have another thought, let it go....

[Findog]

Opinion.


Every scout, every General Manager and every coach would say Dirk is a much better player than Manu and every owner would pick Dirk over Manu in a hypothetical draft.


It shows that he gets it done on the highest level.

It shows he does his job well as a #2 guy.


It's hard to be the best player when you're playing with the best player of all-time at his position.

There's about 30 guys in this league that are better players than Manu.





The vote was extremely close and Manu supporters would say Tim got it because of his body of work.

I'm the one with excuses? Duncan is the Spurs best player; Manu and TP are good players in their own right whose jobs are made easier by Duncan. Deal with it.






You sure have a lot of opinions. I'm not seeing any evidence.

Dirk > Manu is true on its face and every coach, GM and scout would agree with me. If they swap places in 2003, the Spurs have 3 championships, if not more, while the Mavs would've been lucky to win a playoff series. I'm sorry you have a psychological need to not accept reality.





One series (and the biggest upset of all-time) > one play.

It's interesting to see a Spurs fan denigrate Dirk and his ability to come through in the clutch. Dirk played very well in the Finals; Wade was simply better. Wade is a better player than Dirk, so no shame in that. Nobody remembers Dirk's clutch runner over Shaq before Wade got bailed out by Salvatore, or the fact that Dirk put up 29/15 in Game 6. And if the Spurs get to whine and complain about Timmy not being 100% when the Spurs go fishing, why are Dallas fans not allowed to bring up the fact that Dirk was hurt against Golden State and still managed to put up 19/10 a game?






Not even close. And Oberto/Scola/Nocioni is a stacked team? ROFL. Who was on the US team that they beat again??? Can you name me their top players?


Those are all NBA players that had played years together on the NT developing chemistry and continuity...and they went up against NBA players under FIBA rules. If the Argentinian NT were granted admission to the NBA as the 31st franchise, they'd struggle adapting to NBA rules. Have you even seen Dirk's national team through the years? They couldn't hold the court at a 24 Hour Fitness.

[Findog]

^^^^:lmao:nope:drunk

I answer this conundrum by stating NO FREAKING WAY would that trade ever get past the assistant coaches of Popovich let alone to the FO!!! This because of evidence of the MONSTROSITY of a choke in the 1st round in to GS AND to the Monster Choke in the Finals to the Heat. That "foul" Manu was called for on Dork by the way in the final seconds of OT in game 7 of the WCSF was pure crap. Hand is part of the ball!!

Manu has been a huge part of why SA has 3 out of their 4 rings and Dirk is the reason Dallas has NONE!!!

Next time you have another thought, let it go....

Quoted Verbatim. No rebuttal necessary.

[Findog]

If we accept the premise that Manu is a better player than Dirk, then that means the Spurs have 3 of the top 4 players when the Spurs and Mavs meet. How the hell do the Mavs keep winning then? Either you have to prop up Josh and Terry as All Stars or accept the fact that your top players choke against Dallas.

[Findog]

Everyone scout and general manager in the league passed up on Manu in the draft as well. Some of them twice.

There's a reason Dirk went 9th overall as an 18 year old and the Mavs wanted him over here immediately instead of stashing him in Europe...whereas Manu needed 3 years of additional seasoning in Europe to hone his game.


I'd challenge you to find 30 players with a better resume.

Better resume? What is a resume? Joe Johnson is a better player than Manu. You swap him out for Manu beginning in 2003 and the Spurs still win 3 titles, just as the Hawks continue to be mediocre in the East. Not every player gets to be paired up alongside the greatest PF and pick up 3 rings in the process.



I'm hardly making excuses. I'm being objective. You should try it.

Yes, objectively leads one to the conclusion that Manu > Dirk.





Chris Kaman >>>> Scola, Oberto, Nocioni

:lmao. He's a lumbering stiff with Bill Walton feet. How much time did he spend practicing with the German NT before Olympic trials began?

[Findog]

If Manu > Dirk, then Manu, Tim and Tony choke constantly against the Mavs...either that or Josh Howard and Jason Terry deserve to be named to an All-NBA team.

[DAF86]

If we accept the premise that Manu is a better player than Dirk, then that means the Spurs have 3 of the top 4 players when the Spurs and Mavs meet. How the hell do the Mavs keep winning then? Either you have to prop up Josh and Terry as All Stars or accept the fact that your top players choke against Dallas.

I'm not saying that Manu > Dirk right now, I'm not even saying that Manu NBA career > Dirk NBA career (with the three rings and all). I'm saying Manu on his prime > Dirk on his prime, it's my opininon from seeing the best of both guys on their careers. And no, I don't consider Parker to be better than Manu or Dirk on their primes (even though we may just be starting to see the best of Tony), I do consider Tony and Dirk to be better than Manu right now.

And there's also this little thing about the matchups, how do you explain LA losing always against the Bobcats or SA against Milwuakee?

[Findog]

I'm saying Manu on his prime > Dirk on his prime, it's my opininon from seeing the best of both guys on their careers.

Agree to vehemently disagree. Manu's prime was, what, 2005-2007? Seems like that was when he was at his best. Dirk's prime I think was around the same time. There's just no way the Mavs can keep getting the better of the Spurs if San Antonio has TWO franchise players (Duncan for sure, Manu by your calculations) and keep getting beat by a team that doesn't have one (omitting Dirk by your calculations).




And there's also this little thing about the matchups, how do you explain LA losing always against the Bobcats or SA against Milwuakee?

It would take a playoff series to determine how much validity there is to the Bobcats and Bucks owning their respective teams.

[ohmwrecker]

Everyone has gotten way off track here. The original question is: Who would be a better "2nd banana" to Duncan, Manu or Dirk? You guys are arguing who the better player is or which one is a franchise player.

It's my opinion that Manu compliments Duncan's game better. If everyone admits that Duncan and Nowitzki are both franchise players and both are 7 ft post players with a similar skill set, it would seem like one of those player's game would suffer. Manu, on the other hand, has a vastly different skill set than Duncan and, therefore, compliments and inhances Duncan's game.

It's all pretty subjective anyway, but you guys should stay on topic if you're going to argue for 13 pages.

[weebo]

There's about 30 guys in this league that are better players than Manu.

...and 31 better than dirk :lol

[Findog]

Everyone has gotten way off track here. The original question is: Who would be a better "2nd banana" to Duncan, Manu or Dirk? You guys are arguing who the better player is or which one is a franchise player.

It's my opinion that Manu compliments Duncan's game better. If everyone admits that Duncan and Nowitzki are both franchise players and both are 7 ft post players with a similar skill set, it would seem like one of those player's game would suffer. Manu, on the other hand, has a vastly different skill set than Duncan and, therefore, compliments and inhances Duncan's game.

It's all pretty subjective anyway, but you guys should stay on topic if you're going to argue for 13 pages.

No, people understood perfectly what the question is. Dirk plays like a shooting guard more than a traditional big. You're basically saying two franchise guys can't coexist. Shaq and Kobe did long enough to win three titles together, and both Tim and Dirk don't have the egos and turf mentality that those two guys did. There's no way you can tell me the Spurs would've been better off with 1 franchise guy and 1 fringe All Star instead of two franchise guys. There's any number of serviceable players they could've found to play the 2 guard while slotting Dirk alongside Tim.

[Findog]

...and 31 better than dirk :lol

No, there's only 4 guys that are unquestionably better players than Dirk. There's quite a few more I would take if I were a GM because of contract/age, but I can only think of 4 that I would definitely take over Dirk if I needed to win a game tomorrow.

[weebo]

Kobe, Lebron, Dwade, DHoward, CP3...those are just five off the top of my head that are better than dirk and you say there's only 4 guys 'unquestionably' better than dirk...LOL get real!!

[benefactor]

e better player is or which one is a franchise player. Everyone has gotten way off track here. The original question is: Who would be a better "2nd banana" to Duncan, Manu or Dirk? You guys are arguing who th

It's my opinion that Manu compliments Duncan's game better. If everyone admits that Duncan and Nowitzki are both franchise players and both are 7 ft post players with a similar skill set, it would seem like one of those player's game would suffer. Manu, on the other hand, has a vastly different skill set than Duncan and, therefore, compliments and inhances Duncan's game.

It's all pretty subjective anyway, but you guys should stay on topic if you're going to argue for 13 pages.
Just saying things to make yourself sound like you know what you are talking about still makes you look foolish. You are embarrassing us. Stop please.

[Nathan Explosion]

^^^^:lmao:nope:drunk

I answer this conundrum by stating NO FREAKING WAY would that trade ever get past the assistant coaches of Popovich let alone to the FO!!! This because of evidence of the MONSTROSITY of a choke in the 1st round in to GS AND to the Monster Choke in the Finals to the Heat. That "foul" Manu was called for on Dork by the way in the final seconds of OT in game 7 of the WCSF was pure crap. Hand is part of the ball!!

Manu has been a huge part of why SA has 3 out of their 4 rings and Dirk is the reason Dallas has NONE!!!

Next time you have another thought, let it go....

There's no way that the trade gets past the assistant coaches, that is true. But that's only because the coaches would have free reign to accept the trade before Dallas finishes proposing it.

Manu lovers are making us objective Spurs fans look really bad right now. Us Spurs fans are far from Mavs lovers, let alone fans. But any objective fan of any NBA team can see that Dirk would make the Spurs nearly ubeatable. In fact, if you threw out the "prime stipulation" and put Dirk and Tim together, TODAY, they formed the best frontline in the league hands down.

Put the prime stipulation back in and you have the greatest PF to ever play the game paired with one of the best shooters the league has ever seen, who also happens to be 7 ft tall and can shoot over anyone and score from anywhere on the court.

As for people claiming the Spurs couldn't run pick and roll, the wouldn't need to. All they would have to do is put Dirk at the top of the key, use him as a screener for Parker, from which Parker can dish off or take advantage of the mismatch. You'd have Dirk being guarded by a guy almost a foot shorter than him and Parker guarded by a guy who couldn't keep Parker in front of him even if Parker tells him where he's going on the court and when.

Throw in that the help would have to come off a 3 point shooter or Tim in the block and the Spurs offense would be nearly unguardable.

[Findog]

Kobe, Lebron, Dwade, DHoward, CP3...those are just five off the top of my head that are better than dirk and you say there's only 4 guys 'unquestionably' better than dirk...LOL get real!!

Bron, Wade, Kobe and Duncan are unquestionably better. Paul and Howard are arguably better. Maybe Howard and Paul will pass Dirk this year, but based off last year you could make a case for Dirk or you could make a case for Paul or Howard being more valuable to their teams. At best Dirk is a top five player. At worst he is a top ten player. Manu is a top thirty player.

[ohmwrecker]

Just saying things to make yourself sound like you know what you are talking about still makes you look foolish. You are embarrassing us. Stop please.

What are you saying? Do you have a point or are you just being a dick?

I gave valid answer to a subjective question and even stated that it's my opinion . . . what the fuck is it to you?

[benefactor]

There's no way that the trade gets past the assistant coaches, that is true. But that's only because the coaches would have free reign to accept the trade before Dallas finishes proposing it.

Manu lovers are making us objective Spurs fans look really bad right now. Us Spurs fans are far from Mavs lovers, let alone fans. But any objective fan of any NBA team can see that Dirk would make the Spurs nearly ubeatable. In fact, if you threw out the "prime stipulation" and put Dirk and Tim together, TODAY, they formed the best frontline in the league hands down.

Put the prime stipulation back in and you have the greatest PF to ever play the game paired with one of the best shooters the league has ever seen, who also happens to be 7 ft tall and can shoot over anyone and score from anywhere on the court.

As for people claiming the Spurs couldn't run pick and roll, the wouldn't need to. All they would have to do is put Dirk at the top of the key, use him as a screener for Parker, from which Parker can dish off or take advantage of the mismatch. You'd have Dirk being guarded by a guy almost a foot shorter than him and Parker guarded by a guy who couldn't keep Parker in front of him even if Parker tells him where he's going on the court and when.

Throw in that the help would have to come off a 3 point shooter or Tim in the block and the Spurs offense would be nearly unguardable.
And logic wins in straight sets. As I said before, it's not rocket science.

[Kermit]

I'm not going to read this thread. Just a quick yes or no question...

Are people actually trying to argue that Manu is a better basketball player than Dirk?

[diego]

I didnt bother to read the whole thread, but to me this is easy:

bigs > guards, dirk shoots and rebounds better and bottom line those are the key production categories. dirk 1, manu 0

fit is important, 5 Lebrons will lose to a well constructed team of lesser players. unless you make other changes to accomodate these guys, both the mavs and the spurs would be worse in a straight up trade. so without those extra moves, i think manu fits with Tim better, just like kobe fit well with Shaq (ballhandling, setup game, inside out, etc). dirk 1, manu 1.

contract- for a 2nd banana you dont want to overpay, manu is a much better deal. dirk 1, manu 2

health- dirk's game lends itself to more minutes and therefore more production
dirk 2, manu 2.

intangible- agression and determination make big differences and IMO Manu is not as skilled a player as Dirk, but he is much more competitive. When Dirk is shooting fadeaways, manu is going hard to the cup, even if it means taking- or dishing- some pain. dirk 2, manu 3.

NOW, if the question were who is the better franchise player I go with Dirk. If the question is totally ignoring player salaries, I go with Dirk. and if the team can make other moves to round out the roster, I go with Dirk. but if I'm taking the 05 spurs and replacing manu with 07 dirk:

manu >>>>>>> brent barry
dirk >>>>> robert horry

manu makes more of a difference for that team (and I chose that team because i think it was the best of the duncan+manu title teams). thats how I understood the question and my answer. If its not clear enough, i still think Dirk is the more skilled, more valuable player.


and finally... for those that keep on using manu's game 7 foul in their argument. right after that Dirk fouled tim at the end of tha game and the refs swallowed their whistles. had they called it, we would be talking about what an idiot dirk is for fouling a tie game with milliseconds left on the clock.

[benefactor]

What are you saying? Do you have a point or are you just being a dick?

I gave valid answer to a subjective question and even stated that it's my opinion . . . what the fuck is it to you?
Your opinion sucks and is completely false. Duncan and Dirk's games together make them about 10 times as deadly as Duncan and Manu.

[Nathan Explosion]

I'm not one for hyperbole, but putting Tim and Dirk together would form one of the greatest duos to ever play the game. And that's not even up for debate.

[weebo]

You lost all credibility when you said you would wanted a known choke artist to get you a win if you needed one tomorrow.

[Nathan Explosion]

You lost all credibility when you said you would wanted a known choke artist to get you a win if you needed one tomorrow.

Umm, who?

[Findog]

You lost all credibility when you said you would wanted a known choke artist to get you a win if you needed one tomorrow.

Dirk's not a choker. You would think a Spurs fan that has watched Dirk rape his team time and time again would get that. Besides, if he is, he's got company:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TCdErEO7OCM/RnKYz5sfTSI/AAAAAAAAAHs/LASfGdzKRSc/s400/DirkManu.jpg

[ohmwrecker]

Your opinion sucks and is completely false. Duncan and Dirk's games together make them about 10 times as deadly as Duncan and Manu.

My opinion sucks because it's not the same as yours?

I'm not saying Manu is a better player than Nowitzki, I am just saying having two post players that just naturally demand a lot of offensive touches are better served complimented by players who can create, penetrate and pass. Nowitzki has better long range shooting than Duncan, but Duncan is undeniably the superior defensive player. Whatever offensive deficiencies Duncan has, Manu makes up for. That's why I think they compliment each other.

What's so difficult to understand?

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Duncan and Nowitzki are both franchise players and both are 7 ft post players with a similar skill set.

...and 31 better than dirk :lol
Nope.

[Findog]

Umm, who?

The guy who can't beat the Spurs or come through in the clutch EVER to save his life :rolleyes


http://nachodonut.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/dirk_nowitzki1.jpg

If I wanted to, I could spend lots of time on youtube pulling videos of game-winners and clutch plays from Dirk. It just boggles the mind that Spurs fans would take that tack. It would be like me trashing Chris Paul, Dwyane Wade, Baron Davis, Steve Nash or any of the other guys that have owned Dallas in the playoffs.

[ohmwrecker]

Nope.

Yep. I didn't say exactly the same, I said "similar". Dirk plays the post or the 3 pt line. His mid range game comes from screens and pick and rolls, just like Duncan. There are some subtle differences in shot preferences (Dirk likes that turn around fader, while Duncan either backs down his defender for that hook shot or isolates for that baseline glass shot), but other than the 3 point shot, Duncan and Nowitzki take their shots from the same spots on the floor.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Yep. I didn't say exactly the same, I said "similar". Dirk plays the post or the 3 pt line. His mid range game comes from screens and pick and rolls, just like Duncan. There are some subtle differences in shot preferences (Dirk likes that turn around fader, while Duncan either backs down his defender for that hook shot or isolates for that baseline glass shot), but other than the 3 point shot, Duncan and Nowitzki take their shots from the same spots on the floor.


Except that Duncan plays more close to the rim than he does the midrange, while Dirk plays more midrange and 3PT than close to the rim. Dirk is like a shooting guard in a power forward's body. They would play incredibly well with each other.

[Findog]

Yep. I didn't say exactly the same, I said "similar". Dirk plays the post or the 3 pt line. His mid range game comes from screens and pick and rolls, just like Duncan. There are some subtle differences in shot preferences (Dirk likes that turn around fader, while Duncan either backs down his defender for that hook shot or isolates for that baseline glass shot), but other than the 3 point shot, Duncan and Nowitzki take their shots from the same spots on the floor.

Who would you rather have, a Twin Towers of Hakeem and David Robinson, with some scrub to play shooting guard, or David Robinson, some spare at PF and Dale Ellis at SG?

[dirk4mvp]

What's funny is spur fans who are usually quick to say Dirk's lacking in his inside game are now all of a sudden saying he wouldn't fit with Duncan because there would be too much clogging in the paint :lmao

Reaching much?

[dirk4mvp]

Duncan and Nowitzki are both franchise players and both are 7 ft post players with a similar skill set,

Since when?

[benefactor]

My opinion sucks because it's not the same as yours?

No...it sucks because you are being dishonest.


I'm not saying Manu is a better player than Nowitzki, I am just saying having two post players that just naturally demand a lot of offensive touches are better served complimented by players who can create, penetrate and pass.

That would be all well and good if Dirk were a post player. Dirk is a perimeter player. We have a guy that is one of the best penetrating guards in the league, so there is your creator. Nathan Explosion wrote an excellent post on it....go back a few responses and read it.


Nowitzki has better long range shooting than Duncan, but Duncan is undeniably the superior defensive player. Whatever offensive deficiencies Duncan has, Manu makes up for. That's why I think they compliment each other.

Again...you are just saying stuff to say stuff and aren't making any real point that suggests Manu is a better fit than Dirk next to Duncan. Sure Manu and Duncan compliment each other...but Dirk and Duncan compliment each other better and this is not really refutable without being a homer.


What's so difficult to understand?

You are.

[benefactor]

What's funny is spur fans who are usually quick to say Dirk's lacking in his inside game are now all of a sudden saying he wouldn't fit with Duncan because there would be too much clogging in the paint :lmao

Reaching much?
I think that the combination of Mavs hate and Manu love has them blinded. It's really sad because they just wind up looking ignorant.

[Findog]

I think that the combination of Mavs hate and Manu love has them blinded. It's really sad because they just wind up looking ignorant.

Dirk's a classy guy, is team-oriented, has no ego and plays the game the right way. In other words, he's very Spur-like. I think it's proxy hate for Mark Cuban.

[dirk4mvp]

I think that the combination of Mavs hate and Manu love has them blinded. It's really sad because they just wind up looking ignorant.

I knew there was that 'church of manu' thing people here like to call themselves members of, but I didn't think they'd go to hell and back trying to defend an argument that just isn't true.

[Kermit]

Dirk's a classy guy, is team-oriented, has no ego and plays the game the right way. In other words, he's very Spur-like. I think it's proxy hate for Mark Cuban.

I believe the only "bad" thing you can say about Dirk is that he has horrible taste in women.

[resistanze]

LMAO @ people thinking a Manu-led team could make it to the finals. Not even when the East was weak.

[ohmwrecker]

No...it sucks because you are being dishonest.

That would be all well and good if Dirk were a post player. Dirk is a perimeter player. We have a guy that is one of the best penetrating guards in the league, so there is your creator. Nathan Explosion wrote an excellent post on it....go back a few responses and read it.

Again...you are just saying stuff to say stuff and aren't making any real point that suggests Manu is a better fit than Dirk next to Duncan. Sure Manu and Duncan compliment each other...but Dirk and Duncan compliment each other better and this is not really refutable without being a homer.

You are.

I think you are reading a little too much into what I am saying. I'm not being dishonest. I am being completely honest. You can say Nowitzki is a better compliment to Duncan (and he may be), but you don't know. No one knows because they don't play together. It's all just conjecture and opinion. None more or less valid than the next.

I'm actually giving Nowitzki more credit than you by saying he has a post game instead of just saying he is only a perimeter player. Tony Parker isn't part of the equation in this dopey little fantasy scenario you guys are geeking over. Remember the original question?

I don't know what you mean by "saying stuff just to say stuff". What are you, thirteen? You are argumentative just to be argumentative. You are extremely immature and you are just trying to pick a fight.

[bigfan]

As much as I like Manu and appreciate his efforts, Id take Dirk over Manu.

[Sdayi135]

Dirk's not a choker. You would think a Spurs fan that has watched Dirk rape his team time and time again would get that. Besides, if he is, he's got company:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TCdErEO7OCM/RnKYz5sfTSI/AAAAAAAAAHs/LASfGdzKRSc/s400/DirkManu.jpg

Explain his performance in the 2006 Finals after game 2.

Explain his shooting performance in the three losses at GS in '07

Explain his performance in 2008 vs. NO when he got slapped around (in many ways) by an average Xavier character called "David West"

[Sdayi135]

He's a fringe All Star. Dirk is a franchise player.



And this franchise player won you how many chanionships?

[dirk4mvp]

Explain his performance in 2008 vs. NO when he got slapped around (in many ways) by an average Xavier character called "David West"

You might want to check that again. Dude averaged 27/12/4 that series.

[Findog]

Explain his performance in the 2006 Finals after game 2.

29 points and 15 rebounds in the penultimate Game 6. A tough clutch runner over Shaq at the end of Game 5 before Wade got bailed out by Salvatore.


Explain his shooting performance in the three losses at GS in '07

Well, if Spurs fans get to complain about Timmy not being 100% and hobbled when the Spurs go fishing, why are Dallas fans not allowed to reference the fact that Dirk was hurt and still put up 19/10 a game against the Warriors?


Explain his performance in 2008 vs. NO when he got slapped around (in many ways) by an average Xavier character called "David West"

Explain his performance? You mean when he got tapped on the cheek and decided not to retaliate and risk a suspension? And that same David West that was "guarding" Dirk when he "held" him to 27/14/4 on 47% shooting? Yeah, you're right, Dirk got slapped around "in many ways" alright by David West. Bottom line is that the 08 Hornets were much better than the 08 Mavs. Just like Timmy is a better player than Dirk, but the 09 Mavs were much better than the 09 Spurs. You're saying 27/14/4 on 47% shooting is something that has to be "explained" and made excuses for? Your arguments are shit and you're a fucking idiot.

[Findog]

And this franchise player won you how many chanionships?

One Finals Appearance. That's 1 more Finals Appearance as a #1 guy than Manu has. LeBron James, Dwight Howard and Chris Paul don't have rings, so I guess they're not franchise players either. :lol

[benefactor]

I think you are reading a little too much into what I am saying. I'm not being dishonest. I am being completely honest. You can say Nowitzki is a better compliment to Duncan (and he may be), but you don't know. No one knows because they don't play together. It's all just conjecture and opinion. None more or less valid than the next.

There is this thing call an educated guess. Basketball front offices use them all the time when building a team. You choose to got back to the "no one knows because they don't play together" argument because you have no facts to stand on that support Manu being a better compliment to Duncan than Dirk would be. If you were a GM building a championship team and you had Dirk and Manu to choose from to place around Duncan you would be foolish not to pick Dirk. If you think this is wrong then please supply something with a little more meat to support your position.


I'm actually giving Nowitzki more credit than you by saying he has a post game instead of just saying he is only a perimeter player. Tony Parker isn't part of the equation in this dopey little fantasy scenario you guys are geeking over. Remember the original question?

Ok...but his game is mostly perimeter based and he is most effective from there, so it is a pretty far reach to suggest that Dirk would somehow hinder what Duncan does in the post.


I don't know what you mean by "saying stuff just to say stuff". What are you, thirteen? You are argumentative just to be argumentative. You are extremely immature and you are just trying to pick a fight.
You said this:


Nowitzki has better long range shooting than Duncan, but Duncan is undeniably the superior defensive player. Whatever offensive deficiencies Duncan has, Manu makes up for. That's why I think they compliment each other.

What the hell do those two statements have to do with each other? Your statements make no sense in regards to the topic at hand. You said nothing in support of Manu over Dirk and you made no argument that suggests Dirk would be a bad fit with Duncan. If anything all you did was compare Dirk to Duncan and Manu to Duncan...which has nothing to do with this thread. Again, you are just saying stuff and none of it has anything to do with anything.

[benefactor]

Man...this is starting to look like 90210 getting owned in the NFL forum. It's just getting silly now.

[ohmwrecker]

Alright...let's settle this. If you had to pick a PRIME version of either as a compliment to Tim Duncan which would you pick? I'd like to see some valid arguments too.

Alright. Why would you start this thread with this question and then proceed to argue with someone who disagrees with you. Was that the purpose of this thread? If I had known that, I wouldn't have said anything.

Do you not understand your own question? The question, as I understand it, is who would make for a better compliment to Duncan. Not, who is a better player or who is a franchise player or whatever other inane arguments have predominated this thread. I answered based on the known fact that Ginobili is a great compliment to Duncan. Whether or not Nowitzki would be better or not is only debatable and not based on anything else.

[ohmwrecker]

Man...this is starting to look like 90210 getting owned in the NFL forum. It's just getting silly now.


I have no fucking clue what this means. Maybe you should spend a little time away from the internet.

[ohmwrecker]

There is this thing call an educated guess. Basketball front offices use them all the time when building a team. You choose to got back to the "no one knows because they don't play together" argument because you have no facts to stand on that support Manu being a better compliment to Duncan than Dirk would be. If you were a GM building a championship team and you had Dirk and Manu to choose from to place around Duncan you would be foolish not to pick Dirk. If you think this is wrong then please supply something with a little more meat to support your position.

Ok...but his game is mostly perimeter based and he is most effective from there, so it is a pretty far reach to suggest that Dirk would somehow hinder what Duncan does in the post.

You said this:

What the hell do those two statements have to do with each other? Your statements make no sense in regards to the topic at hand. You said nothing in support of Manu over Dirk and you made no argument that suggests Dirk would be a bad fit with Duncan. If anything all you did was compare Dirk to Duncan and Manu to Duncan...which has nothing to do with this thread. Again, you are just saying stuff and none of it has anything to do with anything.

Jesus. You are dense. I didn't state any facts to support Nowitzki being a better compliment to Duncan because there are none. Do I need to explain to you what facts are? My comments are based on the fact that Ginobili already is a great support player to Duncan. I'm not dealing with unknowns.

[Rogue]

I believe the only "bad" thing you can say about Dirk is that he has horrible taste in women.
Barack Obama has a terrible taste in women too, just take a look at his wife, SOS and Supreme court judge then you can easily get the same conclusion. None of these 3 women can ever make a dick erected even when they are naked.

[benefactor]

Jesus. You are dense. I didn't state any facts to support Nowitzki being a better compliment to Duncan because there are none. Do I need to explain to you what facts are? My comments are based on the fact that Ginobili already is a great support player to Duncan. I'm not dealing with unknowns.
So why are you posting in this thread then? If you are not here to take the dynamics of each players games and make and educated guess as to which one would be the better fit then you are just wasting time. If you haven't figured that out by now, then I am not the dense one.

[benefactor]

Alright. Why would you start this thread with this question and then proceed to argue with someone who disagrees with you. Was that the purpose of this thread? If I had known that, I wouldn't have said anything.

Do you not understand your own question? The question, as I understand it, is who would make for a better compliment to Duncan. Not, who is a better player or who is a franchise player or whatever other inane arguments have predominated this thread. I answered based on the known fact that Ginobili is a great compliment to Duncan. Whether or not Nowitzki would be better or not is only debatable and not based on anything else.
Notice that in the statement after my question I asked for valid arguments...which you have offered none.

[Rodriguez]

Leaving alone the topic of this discussion, Dirk is apparently the better one as an individual and Dirk's MVP trophy also WEIGHS more than Manu's rings do. However, what you have been debating on is who WOULD HAVE been a better second banana, obviously Manu easily won this title over Dirk who was born to be a leader.

[VivaPopovich]

i'd like to see Dirk play SF for a change

if he successfully played as SF to Duncan's PF then i'd choose Dirk

but not if Dirk was PF and Duncan was C

Dirk at C? Please

[Findog]

Positional designations are becoming obselete. There is no PF or C anymore- you have two bigs, one of whom is hopefully at least a 7-footer. Then you have two wings, not a SG or SF. Finally you have your PG.

[ohmwrecker]

Notice that in the statement after my question I asked for valid arguments...which you have offered none.

I think I did, but if you need them stated more clearly then I can do this:

These are the skills where I believe Ginobili excels over Nowitzki: ball handling, driving to the basket, passing, creating his own offense and offense for teammates. I also believe Ginobili is a better defender, at his position, than Nowitzki.

No one is arguing that Ginobili is a better all around player, obviously, but I am saying that he is a better player in a supporting role. No one has ever seen Nowitzki in a supporting role because he has been "the man" in Dallas from day one. You could make the argument for Steve Nash early in Dirk's career, but it has been pretty clear (as with Duncan) that Dirk was to be the franchise player.

I don't know how much clearer I can be. If that's not good enough, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

[Nathan Explosion]

Dirk appears to have the personality similar to Duncan's in that he doesn't have to be the focus of attention and is willing to take a secondary role if it means winning.

Dirk is a far superior player to Gino. Add in the mentality and I have no doubt that Dirk would excel alongside Duncan. In fact, I am 99% sure that the Spurs would have more titles now than they presently do if Dirk has played alongside Duncan since 2003.

[ElNono]

Notice that in the statement after my question I asked for valid arguments...which you have offered none.

You still didn't answer my question... what were your expectations when you created this thread? Were you expecting everyone to jump on Dirk's jock?
There has been valid arguments why somebody would pick Manu in his prime over Dirk in his prime. That you don't like them or agree with them doesn't mean they're any less valid.

[lotr1trekkie]

How about if we had Dirk for 10 years and the Mavs ended up with Tim?

[benefactor]

You still didn't answer my question... what were your expectations when you created this thread? Were you expecting everyone to jump on Dirk's jock?
There has been valid arguments why somebody would pick Manu in his prime over Dirk in his prime. That you don't like them or agree with them doesn't mean they're any less valid.
I expected to expose our super homer DAF86...which has happened repeatedly. To my surprise there were actually others who agreed with him. The plain reality of it is without being a homer, there is not real valid argument that suggests one would take Manu over Dirk to pair with Duncan. Saying you would take Manu suggests that you hate the Mavericks so bad that you are blind to the player Dirk is and you overrate Manu in your own mind because of this. This was just proven a couple of posts ago when ohmwrecker suggested that Dirk would struggle in a supporting role. He is just lying to himself. Nothing in Dirks game suggests he is not a team player and would struggle in a supporting role.

[benefactor]

TBQH...if I would have known that Spur fan would have come to this thread and made himself look this stupid then I probably wouldn't have started it. Shame on me for once again underestimating SpursTalk.

[dbestpro]

If it was as simple as putting the best players on the floor then anybody could be a GM and Iverson would not still be looking for a job. The question was in regard to econd banana or who would compliment Duncan more. Facts are facts and we know that Duncan has one with Manu. Manu does a lot of dirty work that Dirk would not do. Of course Dirk is a PF and Manu is a SG so to try and compare does do justice.

Also, would Dirk be able to get his flop foul shots on a team with Duncan. Manu doesn't get them. And would Dirk melt down if he had to take some of the shots Manu has had to take.

In the end the Lakers with Malone and Payton has taught us that you can't just slap great players together to make a great team. We know that Manu compliments Timmy as a team mate and they have the rings to prove it. Anything else is just fools gold. Ask the Lakers team that lost to Detroit.

[angelbelow]

This is ridiculously hard. Dirk would probably be the better choice. His style would create too much of a mismatch especially with Duncan there.

[werewolf]

Wow! Even on a Spurs board, I wouldn't have thought that it would be this close. Must be a lot of hatred for the Mavs.

This would be like me saying I wouldn't take Kobe over Josh Howard. :(

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

With the logic Manufan is using in this thread, Robert Horry is better than both Manu and Dirk since he has 7 rings.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Positional designations are becoming obselete. There is no PF or C anymore- you have two bigs, one of whom is hopefully at least a 7-footer. Then you have two wings, not a SG or SF. Finally you have your PG.


I agree here. Maybe there used to be two guards, two forwards and a center, but now it's more like two big men, two wings, and a point.

[Nathan Explosion]

If it was as simple as putting the best players on the floor then anybody could be a GM and Iverson would not still be looking for a job. The question was in regard to econd banana or who would compliment Duncan more. Facts are facts and we know that Duncan has one with Manu. Manu does a lot of dirty work that Dirk would not do. Of course Dirk is a PF and Manu is a SG so to try and compare does do justice.

Also, would Dirk be able to get his flop foul shots on a team with Duncan. Manu doesn't get them. And would Dirk melt down if he had to take some of the shots Manu has had to take.

In the end the Lakers with Malone and Payton has taught us that you can't just slap great players together to make a great team. We know that Manu compliments Timmy as a team mate and they have the rings to prove it. Anything else is just fools gold. Ask the Lakers team that lost to Detroit.

That Lakers team lost to Detroit because Kobe shot something like 31% from the field and tried to take over as the leader while Shaq was dominating the series shooting 63%. It's really that simple.

There is NOTHING to suggest that Dirk and Duncan don't have the personalities to work together. That 2004 Lakers team had Shaq and Kobe battling for alpha dog status. I doubt that would happen with Duncan and Dirk. From what I've seen, I think Dirk would understand that Duncan was the man, but Duncan would allow Dirk to flourish if the situation called for it.

To suggest anything else is to underestimate Dirk and shows a major lack of understanding of the game of basketball.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Mavs fans will disagree here, but from I've seen from Dirk at times it looks like he would rather be playing 2nd fiddle, like being able to play off another player would be a sense of relief. I don't think he'd have any problems adjusting to a 2nd fiddle role.

[mikekim]

IMHO, I think this poll (and its results) is a bit of an embarrassment to the intelligence and objectivity of this board -- even accounting for the fact that this is "SPURStalk" and most people here are Spurs fans. Manu is my favorite player...there aren't many players I admire more. But c'mon guys...

I guess this "prime" thing is an issue too...are we saying we'd have both in their primes for all eternity? If not, Dirk's prime is pretty significantly longer, don't you think? So...many more seasons of the Tim/Dirk duo as opposed to the Tim/Manu duo.

You just don't pass on a 7-footer who can shoot, handle, and (more recently) rebound like Dirk. Not to mention other factors (which I know isn't really part of the OP's question).

Like...

Having two 7-footers who, in tandem, can basically do almost anything a basketball player can do on the court -- and at an extremely high level -- will almost certainly draw a (relatively) comparable Manu-like swingman to our team. Going further, if we assume we're getting Dirk for the same price as Manu, we'll be able to afford this high-quality swingman. Like Stephen Jackson. Not to mention, we'll still have Tony Parker! (And we'll also add the right pieces around this core, especially if Holt opens the pocketbook like he did this past summer.)

Looked at in that light...it's almost a no-brainer.

BUT, even if you take all that out and go purely on the question of who is better for the team in their respective primes...a 70/30 split for Dirk would be about what I'd expect. (That's also the split that's going on in my head.)

But 50/50??

[ElNono]

I expected to expose our super homer DAF86...which has happened repeatedly. To my surprise there were actually others who agreed with him. The plain reality of it is without being a homer, there is not real valid argument that suggests one would take Manu over Dirk to pair with Duncan. Saying you would take Manu suggests that you hate the Mavericks so bad that you are blind to the player Dirk is and you overrate Manu in your own mind because of this. This was just proven a couple of posts ago when ohmwrecker suggested that Dirk would struggle in a supporting role. He is just lying to himself. Nothing in Dirks game suggests he is not a team player and would struggle in a supporting role.

I don't think it's as clear cut as you think it was. And honestly, I can see why.
Now, I don't subscribe to the notion that Dirk couldn't play second fiddle. I actually think that's exactly what's going to take for him to get to a championship, much like Gasol. He struggles in a leadership role because he's not a leader. It's not a knock on Dirk. Many other great players are not either.

[ElNono]

TBQH...if I would have known that Spur fan would have come to this thread and made himself look this stupid then I probably wouldn't have started it. Shame on me for once again underestimating SpursTalk.

So if they don't agree with you, they look stupid. :rolleyes

Considering your intent, this thread has Epic Fail written all over it.

[dirk4mvp]

:jack

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

^In defense to Spurfan, I'm sure there are just as many Laker homers that are way worse at Lakersground.net or some site like that.

[sonic21]

i really thought lakers fans were the biggest homers but now i'm not sure.

[sonic21]

^In defense to Spurfan, I'm sure there are just as many Laker homers that are way worse at Lakersground.net or some site like that.

true, i'm just surprised. i know there are tony and manu homers (including myself) here but this thread is :wow

[benefactor]

So if they don't agree with you, they look stupid. :rolleyes

Considering your intent, this thread has Epic Fail written all over it.
Not really...seeings how there are quite a few respected posters who seem to agree with me...and the only ones who disagree are either Argentinean or just plain ridiculous in their reasoning. The only failures here are the ones who refuse to choose their brain over their heart.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

If you were to interview the 30 NBA GM's (so no DAF86 the Euroleague GMs don't matter) about whether they want Manu or Dirk, I'd be surprised of less than 28 of the said Dirk.

[dirk4mvp]

There wouldn't be any question 30 of them would pick Dirk.

[ElNono]

Not really...seeings how there are quite a few respected posters who seem to agree with me...and the only ones who disagree are either Argentinean or just plain ridiculous in their reasoning. The only failures here are the ones who refuse to choose their brain over their heart.

I see. So the validity of one's opinion is solely based on e-rep... gotcha.

[benefactor]

I see. So the validity of one's opinion is solely based on e-rep... gotcha.
lol...keep digging Manufan, your hole is only getting bigger.

[ElNono]

lol...keep digging Manufan, your hole is only getting bigger.

Says who, you? Look at your thread and poll. A failure just like you.

[benefactor]

Says who, you? Look at your thread and poll. A failure just like you.

i really thought lakers fans were the biggest homers but now i'm not sure.
lol

[ElNono]

lol

Being a homer is wrong?
LOL indeed...

[benefactor]

Being a homer is wrong?
LOL indeed...
Hey...whatever makes your hair blow back man. Just don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

[ElNono]

Hey...whatever makes your hair blow back man. Just don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

I see. Maybe I should make more completely subjective fail threads like this one to get some e-rep... LOL

[Phenomanul]

When someone mentions Manu's "prime" the 2005 post season flashes through my mind...

Frankly, no one played better than Manu that post-season... not Dirk, not Kobe, not Wade, not LeBron, not Carmelo... Manu was an unstoppable force.

Someone mentioned Dirk's prime as being longer and more consistent... I wholeheartedly agree; and that's what this whole hypothetical exercise boils down to... perception of impact. Manu's impact from his "otherworldly" level in 2005 (and to an extent in 2008) was cut short by injuries. While Dirk has yet to step-down from his elite level.

If people were truly honest with themselves they would have to concede that the 2005 version of Manu could have produced 5-6 championship seasons paired with a healthy Duncan and Parker... unfortunately, Manu sustained career defining injuries... Having said that, I have no doubts that Duncan paired with Dirk could have accomplished the same result... ultimately, the common denominator in those hypothetical scenarios is a healthy Duncan.

This is where the argument becomes subjective. IMO no version of Dirk was better than 2005-playoff-Manu. That is why Mav-fan is upset... they know this statement is valid, but can't get themselves to accept it. This is also why Mav-fan arguments have been centered around premises that really can't be argued against...

"Dirk has been the go-to guy on his team and led his team to the Finals"
"Dirk was drafted immediately... not considered a project like Ginobili"
"Dirk is not injury prone"
"Dirk has un unstoppable release"
"Dirk was an NBA MVP"
"Dirk has produced at an elite clip his entire career"
"Dirk's national team, teammates are 'scrubs'; which is why he doesn't have any international accolades"
"Dirk is not soft, the league simply rigged the 2006 Finals in D-whistle's favor"
"Really, Dirk isn't soft, the league just wanted to teach Mark Cuban a lesson and paired us up against the only team that gave us fits... Nellie's Warriors"
"Statistically, Dirk is the better player"

While most of those statements are certifiably true... they eliminate the single most important facet of the hypothetical question:

One can't suggest we compare the two players at their primes and then toss in all the factors which play against that very premise; it isn't a logical constraint.

Both players are game changers for sure... but, Manu's versatility at his peak level was greater than Dirk's at the top of his... If the Spurs would have had that version of Manu the entire time from 2002 to 2009, David Stern would likely have sent asassins to San Antonio or stepped down as commish altogether...

[benefactor]

I see. Maybe I should make more completely subjective fail threads like this one to get some e-rep... LOL
No need...you are getting plenty of e-rep right now as completely biased fan that can't think beyond his own nationality. But hey, if that's what you want to be then more power to you. You and DAF86 can get married and live happily ever after. :married:

[Alonzo Harris]

When someone mentions Manu's "prime" the 2005 post season flashes through my mind...

Frankly, no one played better than Manu that post-season... not Dirk, not Kobe, not Wade, not LeBron, not Carmelo... Manu was an unstoppable force.

Someone mentioned Dirk's prime as being longer and more consistent... I wholeheartedly agree; and that's what this whole hypothetical exercise boils down to... perception of impact. Manu's impact from his "otherworldly" level in 2005 (and to an extent in 2008) was cut short by injuries. While Dirk has yet to step-down from his elite level.

If people were truly honest with themselves they would have to concede that the 2005 version of Manu could have produced 5-6 championship seasons paired with a healthy Duncan and Parker... unfortunately, Manu sustained career defining injuries... Having said that, I have no doubts that Duncan paired with Dirk could have accomplished the same result... ultimately, the common denominator in those hypothetical scenarios is a healthy Duncan.

This is where the argument becomes subjective. IMO no version of Dirk was better than 2005-playoff-Manu. That is why Mav-fan is upset... they know this statement is valid, but can't get themselves to accept it. This is also why Mav-fan arguments have been centered around premises that really can't be argued against...

"Dirk has been the go-to guy on his team and led his team to the Finals"
"Dirk was drafted immediately... not considered a project like Ginobili"
"Dirk is not injury prone"
"Dirk has un unstoppable release"
"Dirk was an NBA MVP"
"Dirk has produced at an elite clip his entire career"
"Dirk's national team, teammates are 'scrubs'; which is why he doesn't have any international accolades"
"Dirk is not soft, the league simply rigged the 2006 Finals in D-whistle's favor"
"Really, Dirk isn't soft, the league just wanted to teach Mark Cuban a lesson and paired us up against the only team that gave us fits... Nellie's Warriors"
"Statistically, Dirk is the better player"

While most of those statements are certifiably true... they eliminate the single most important facet of the hypothetical question:

One can't suggest we compare the two players at their primes and then toss in all the factors which play against that very premise; it isn't a logical constraint.

Both players are game changers for sure... but, Manu's versatility at his peak level was greater than Dirk's at the top of his... If the Spurs would have had that version of Manu the entire time from 2002 to 2009, David Stern would likely have sent asassins to San Antonio or stepped down as commish altogether...

"IMO" and then you try to pass it off as fact? gtfo. And I thought these argentina pieces of shit were homers. Does manu's dick taste good to you?

[Phenomanul]

"IMO" and then you try to pass it off as fact? gtfo. And I thought these argentina pieces of shit were homers. Does manu's dick taste good to you?

Ok then...

Which version of Dirk performed better than 2005 playoff Manu? Free-throw choking, 2006 Finals Dirk or 67-win, MVP-season, 1st round upset, 2007 Dirk???

:wakeup

[Alonzo Harris]

All of them. Manu isn't nearly the player Dirk is.

[Alonzo Harris]

Says who, you? Look at your thread and poll. A failure just like you.
You know who's winning the poll right?

[weebo]

Not really...seeings how there are quite a few respected posters who seem to agree with me...and the only ones who disagree are either Argentinean or just plain ridiculous in their reasoning. The only failures here are the ones who refuse to choose their brain over their heart.



whatever you say know it all:rolleyes

[Phenomanul]

All of them. Manu isn't nearly the player Dirk is.

And where has that taken him??.. Like I said, this exercise is entirely subjective...

Manu is a winner at every level... that cannot be debated.

[ElNono]

No need...you are getting plenty of e-rep right now as completely biased fan that can't think beyond his own nationality. But hey, if that's what you want to be then more power to you. You and DAF86 can get married and live happily ever after. :married:

I'm already married to an american lady from San Antonio who is every bit as much of a Spurs and Manu fan as I am.

Maybe you should stick to managing the Dirk fanboy club instead of repeatedly failing to try to make a point.
I mean, you really showed that DAF guy... :rolleyes

[Alonzo Harris]

And where has that taken him??.. Like I said, this exercise is entirely subjective...

Manu is a winner at every level... that cannot be debated.


Manu has been on stacked teams at every level... that cannot be debated.

[weebo]

Manu has been on stacked teams at every level... that cannot be debated.

Could it be that Manu's ability to make teammates better have anything to do with having 'stacked' teams? If my memories serves me correct, dirk has been part of some 'stacked' teams as well and has yet to win anything worth regarding.

[ElNono]

You know who's winning the poll right?

He wanted an undisputable landslide, not a < 10% margin. Because to him his point is undisputable. He wanted to call out another poster and it fired back. So he resorts to the usual shit butthurt losers do: If you don't agree with me you are stupid.

Anybody with half a brain knows that the entire proposition is entirely subjective, completely open to interpretation, and impossible to verify. He thought the 'mob' would support him and validate his point. He failed miserably at that.

[ElNono]

Manu has been on stacked teams at every level... that cannot be debated.

I don't agree, but it's besides the proposition of the OP.
We are being asked who would make a better second banana to TD, Manu in his prime or Dirk in his prime. The answer is entirely subjective and has absolutely nothing to do with his teammates. I mean, under this proposition their teammates would be the same.

[Phenomanul]

Manu has been on stacked teams at every level... that cannot be debated.

Which is why this argumentative see-saw is an exercise in futility...

Strictly by the constraints given in the opening thread...

Manu in his prime (2005 playoff version), was more dominant, versatile, efficient and productive, than any version of Dirk at his prime. Manu orchestrated key playoff victories and actually WON... the name of the game is to win... and that's what Manu does; WIN*....


*Disclaimer (when not hurt)... then again, being hurt negates the argument that one is in their prime...

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

Dirk.

[mikekim]

Okay, let's flip the coin (if it hasn't already been done)

Put 2005 Manu on the Mavs from 2002 - 2009 and, although I would like it to be otherwise, he wouldn't have as much success as Dirk has (as far as non-nba championship winning teams go...'cos a Manu-led Mavs would be just as ringless)

You know why? 'Cos there are plenty of 2 guards/swingmen who can either compete/better Manu (Kobe, Wade, Lebron, early 2000's T-Mac) or keep up at a reasonable level (SJax et al.)

There aren't even a handful of 7 footers who are mobile enough to guard Dirk on the perimeter. And as has been the case for many seasons, it's very hard to find a swingman who is able to stop Dirk either.

Now...put that Dirk in the same role that 2002-2009 Manu had on the Spurs?

I still don't get how we have 16 pages of heated debate going on here.

[sabar]

Dirk, no contest. He is simply more talented and has a freakish combination of size and shooting ability. There are so few players that can guard him even decently. He is also in much better health.

The whole argument is pretty dumb though as Dirk and Manu make nowhere near the same salary which makes the whole thing moot.

[greensborohill]

Mavs fans will disagree here, but from I've seen from Dirk at times it looks like he would rather be playing 2nd fiddle, like being able to play off another player would be a sense of relief. I don't think he'd have any problems adjusting to a 2nd fiddle role.

No. I think he would like a legit #2 option. But he knows he's the man in Dallas and he. Would he accept being 2nd fiddle? Yes, if one of the 4 or 5 players that are better than him would be on his team he would do so b/c he is a winner and wants to win.

But you don't work as hard as he does and thrive for as long as he has and want to be #2. He's a legit #1 and wants to be.

[benefactor]

He wanted an undisputable landslide, not a < 10% margin. Because to him his point is undisputable. He wanted to call out another poster and it fired back. So he resorts to the usual shit butthurt losers do: If you don't agree with me you are stupid.

Anybody with half a brain knows that the entire proposition is entirely subjective, completely open to interpretation, and impossible to verify. He thought the 'mob' would support him and validate his point. He failed miserably at that.
Ahh...the final straw in the hay field. The "it's subject to interpretation and it can't be verified" argument. I love this argument because it can be used at any time when debating a hypothetical situation and it usually signals an admission of defeat. You say that anyone with half a brain can see this, but from where I am standing it looks like the people on this site with a brain argued for Dirk.

And I am far from butthurt...It's more marveling at homerism and hate, which many besides me have done. It was an underestimation on my part and I admit that. I didn't realize that the CoM had such a large "mob" of wacky fundamentalists among them. But as I said before, if you want to be a blind homer then go right ahead. Laker fan does it all the time and gets away with it.

[Chieflion]

Seeing that Dirk is winning this poll but not by much, shows just how homer some of the Spurs fans are.

[Phenomanul]

Okay, let's flip the coin (if it hasn't already been done)

Put 2005 Manu on the Mavs from 2002 - 2009 and, although I would like it to be otherwise, he wouldn't have as much success as Dirk has (as far as non-nba championship winning teams go...'cos a Manu-led Mavs would be just as ringless)

You know why? 'Cos there are plenty of 2 guards/swingmen who can either compete/better Manu (Kobe, Wade, Lebron, early 2000's T-Mac) or keep up at a reasonable level (SJax et al.)

There aren't even a handful of 7 footers who are mobile enough to guard Dirk on the perimeter. And as has been the case for many seasons, it's very hard to find a swingman who is able to stop Dirk either.

Now...put that Dirk in the same role that 2002-2009 Manu had on the Spurs?

I still don't get how we have 16 pages of heated debate going on here.


How do you know for sure??? No one, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE! could stop that version of Manu...

He got to the rim at will...
Was highly efficient... scoring 30+ points on less than 12 shots...
Averaging 5+ assists...
Getting every crucial rebound...
And when he didn't score, the opposing team tried to whack him on his noggin', no matter... Ginobili got to the line and calmly sank his free-throws...
He was a playmaker who commanded double teams and made the opposing strategy pay.

It's not a coincidence R.C. Buford recently called Ginobili a "Championship moment player".... that's pretty high praise for a guy who's supposedly coattailing his way to championships...

[ElNono]

Ahh...the final straw in the hay field. The "it's subject to interpretation and it can't be verified" argument. I love this argument because it can be used at any time when debating a hypothetical situation and it usually signals an admission of defeat. You say that anyone with half a brain can see this, but from where I am standing it looks like the people on this site with a brain argued for Dirk.

You can't claim your proposition is hypothetical then dismiss opinion that is "subject to interpretation and can't be verified" as invalid.
Mere logic doesn't work that way. Or you're just plain dumb, which would go a long ways towards explaining how this thread came to be in the first place.


And I am far from butthurt...It's more marveling at homerism and hate, which many besides me have done. It was an underestimation on my part and I admit that. I didn't realize that the CoM had such a large "mob" of wacky fundamentalists among them. But as I said before, if you want to be a blind homer then go right ahead. Laker fan does it all the time and gets away with it.

Or your Dirk bias detector is quite skewed.
You came here thinking this poll was a home run, and when it blows in your face you tag your failure to the CoM, homers, haters, etc. Talk about strawmans and loser arguments.
Should you had made a somewhat similar proposition asking who is better between Duncan and Manu, which is a completely clear cut proposition, unlike this one, there would be no CoM, homers or haters to blame.
But you didn't make this thread because you had any doubts, you made this thread because you wanted to call somebody out and it blew right in your face. Now deal with it.

[DAF86]

lol this thing is still up here.

OK this will be the last thing I'd say about this subject. I'll honestly take Manu at his prime over Dirk at his prime but I can definitely understand why others would take Nowitzki over Ginobili, the "Manu can't even be compared to Dirk" comments are what bothers me, if you think that Manu can't be compared with Dirk then you're either underrating Gino or overrating Nowitzki.
Dirk isn't Tim Duncan or Shaq and Manu isn't a role player, the fact that most of you have only seen Manu on that role is what I think makes you bealive that. But like I said before: Ginobili could easily be the leader of a pretty decent team on the NBA. I'm pretty sure that the ones that think that Manu isn't on the same level with Dirk also think that Joe Johnson is a better basketball player than Ginobili.

[Rogue]

Only when along with someone equally as great as Jordan can Dirk be considered a second banana, and we all know how countable such players are in NBA history. While it would occupy hundreds of pages to list the names alongside whom Manu can be an assistant.

[sonic21]

Or your Dirk bias detector is quite skewed.
You came here thinking this poll was a home run, and when it blows in your face you tag your failure to the CoM, homers, haters, etc. Talk about strawmans and loser arguments.


The poll is in the spurs section. If you make the same thread in the nba section or any other nba forums, Dirk will win easily.

[ElNono]

The poll is in the spurs section. If you make the same thread in the nba section or any other nba forums, Dirk will win easily.

Probably. But it only goes to show how naive/dumb the OP is. You post this fail thread and then act 'surprised' there are Spurs homers here?
I mean, really?

[mikekim]

How do you know for sure??? No one, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE! could stop that version of Manu...

He got to the rim at will...
Was highly efficient... scoring 30+ points on less than 12 shots...
Averaging 5+ assists...
Getting every crucial rebound...
And when he didn't score, the opposing team tried to whack him on his noggin', no matter... Ginobili got to the line and calmly sank his free-throws...
He was a playmaker who commanded double teams and made the opposing strategy pay.

It's not a coincidence R.C. Buford recently called Ginobili a "Championship moment player".... that's pretty high praise for a guy who's supposedly coattailing his way to championships...

Okay last post for me too (only my 3rd but I'm already tired of this).

Yes, Manu was awesome in those playoffs. He hit shots, made clutch plays on both sides, imposed his will, whatever.

But who won the Finals MVP? Tim Duncan. And no matter how much Manu-lovers whined about it, at the end of the day, who is the reason for an overwhelming number of opportunities for anyone on the Spurs (including Manu and Tony)? Tim Duncan.

We are indeed talking about the "Second Banana" here, right? The guy who plays off of and supports the "First Banana."

I think what most of the people who agree with me are saying is that, seeing as how a player like Manu thrived in this "Second Banana" role to Duncan, why wouldn't Dirk be just as good, if not better, in a role that he has never been fortunate enough to have in his career? ('Cos he was busy being relatively highly successful being the First Option.)

All I'm saying is that from my point of view, it is pretty clear-cut that if Prime Dirk had/has an opportunity to play in that role on the Spurs, he'd make a bigger impact than Manu (but not by some blizzard avalanche landslide either). That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

(And how the fuck do you know anything for sure? Why even have discussions about anything that didn't "actually take place" and is "proven" and "real" if we can't know anything "for sure"? Why the hell did we invent the lightbulb? Candles and torches were pretty damn good for years and years. They're a SURE, PROVEN thing. Why bother with lightbulbs? They're UNKNOWN...fuck...shit...can't possibly be better than a SURE thing.)

[benefactor]

You can't claim your proposition is hypothetical then dismiss opinion that is "subject to interpretation and can't be verified" as invalid.
Mere logic doesn't work that way. Or you're just plain dumb, which would go a long ways towards explaining how this thread came to be in the first place.

It is invalid because it is a cop out. The point of the thread is to take both players game's and plug them in to Duncan's game and see which one would yield the best results. Saying stuff like, "Manu has had good results and we don't know what would happen with Dirk" is foolishness. I am not going to waste keystrokes repeating the arguments for Dirk again because it has been done repeatedly throughout this thread and every single time he is obviously superior compared to Manu when paired with Duncan.


Or your Dirk bias detector is quite skewed.

lol...this statement. I am biased towards Dirk?

Anyone that says they would take Manu over Dirk is being a homer...and I hate the Mavs and Dirk.


You came here thinking this poll was a home run, and when it blows in your face you tag your failure to the CoM, homers, haters, etc. Talk about strawmans and loser arguments.
Should you had made a somewhat similar proposition asking who is better between Duncan and Manu, which is a completely clear cut proposition, unlike this one, there would be no CoM, homers or haters to blame.
But you didn't make this thread because you had any doubts, you made this thread because you wanted to call somebody out and it blew right in your face. Now deal with it.
Your right...I do contribute it's failure to homers, hater, CoM, etc. Again, I underestimated the critical thinking ability of Manu fan/Spur fan. I never intended to embarrass my fellow fans, but it happened and I feel bad for it. I will be sure to scrap that idea I had for the "Second Banana: Jordan vs. Manu" thread I was planning on starting. I'd hate to cause anymore unnecessary damage.

[Findog]

If it was as simple as putting the best players on the floor then anybody could be a GM and Iverson would not still be looking for a job.

Iverson can't get a job because he thinks it's still 2001 and he wants the $$ and the PT to reflect that.






In the end the Lakers with Malone and Payton has taught us that you can't just slap great players together to make a great team.

Those guys were role players at the end of their careers. Dirk is a franchise player. You guys just keep failing at this. :lmao

[benefactor]

Sadly...this thread is full of win for Mavs fan. :depressed

[Findog]

Sadly...this thread is full of win for Mavs fan. :depressed

Nothing new when it comes to all things Mavs/Spurs. :stirpot:

[benefactor]

Nothing new when it comes to all things Mavs/Spurs. :stirpot:
:ihit......:)

[DPG21920]

I will say this. Although Dirk is the better player, that does not always mean he would win in every scenario. That is just too myopic. Intangibles, defense and other things can make someone a better fit.

For example, Vince Carter is a better player than Manu, but I would not take him over Manu in this situation. I would take Dirk in this scenario, but it is not just because he is a better player overall. This is a "second option" poll, not a "who is the better player poll".

[spursfan09]

:lol

I accidently voted for Manu.

I think Dirk and Timmy would be awesome together. Dirk gets an even bigger edge for actually being healthy. Who knows what we'll get from Manu this year.

[benefactor]

I will say this. Although Dirk is the better player, that does not always mean he would win in every scenario. That is just too myopic. Intangibles, defense and other things can make someone a better fit.

For example, Vince Carter is a better player than Manu, but I would not take him over Manu in this situation. I would take Dirk in this scenario, but it is not just because he is a better player overall. This is a "second option" poll, not a "who is the better player poll".
Exactly. Some people are under the allusion that this is a straight up Dirk vs. Manu poll...and that is simply not the case. If you take that angle it is much closer. But if one weighs the benefits of playing next to Duncan, then it becomes decidedly favorable towards Dirk.

[ElNono]

It is invalid because it is a cop out. The point of the thread is to take both players game's and plug them in to Duncan's game and see which one would yield the best results. Saying stuff like, "Manu has had good results and we don't know what would happen with Dirk" is foolishness. I am not going to waste keystrokes repeating the arguments for Dirk again because it has been done repeatedly throughout this thread and every single time he is obviously superior compared to Manu when paired with Duncan.

We all know what Manu can do as a second banana. You can only speculate what Dirk can do. What you're attempting to do is transplant Dirk as the number 1 option and plug him next to Duncan. But then, we would be comparing oranges to apples. Because we don't know how effective Dirk would be in a reduced role with only 8 to 10 shots a game, instead of 20 to 25, not to mention that defensively he would be only an improvement over Bonner, and even that is debatable. So you absolutely can't claim to know how that would work or demonstrate it in a verifiable manner. The cop out is to dismiss everyone else's opinion because you simply say so.


lol...this statement. I am biased towards Dirk?

Considering the reasoning that made you create this thread, looking at the results, and your reaction to it, I think there's little doubt about it.


Your right...I do contribute it's failure to homers, hater, CoM, etc. Again, I underestimated the critical thinking ability of Manu fan/Spur fan. I never intended to embarrass my fellow fans, but it happened and I feel bad for it. I will be sure to scrap that idea I had for the "Second Banana: Jordan vs. Manu" thread I was planning on starting. I'd hate to cause anymore unnecessary damage.

IOW, you need to think before you post another failure of a thread like this one. Couldn't agree more.

[Blackjack]

I don't have time to get into this as much as I'd like to at the moment but considering the OP, I'm having a hard time understanding some of these arguments I've seen.(Haven't read all, but I'll come back and do so later)

As for the question of the OP, who'd be the better second banana to Tim, in their prime, I'd probably go with Manu.

That's not to say Manu is the consistently more dominant player but Dirk plays the 4 and doesn't have the varied overall game to fill the gaps, so to speak, to compliment the numero uno instead of run the offense through at the same position.

Could Dirk and Tim co-exist? Absolutely. But I'd rather have a dominant backcourt player to compliment Tim instead of a dominant scorer at the 4, who if you don't utilize correctly by running the majority of your offense through, which you wouldn't if he was playing the second banana to Tim, you wouldn't fully reap the benefits of Dirk's game.

Dirk is absolutely the more dominant player night-in and night-out, but that wasn't the question.

If Dirk isn't your first option, which he should be probably 90% of the time, he shouldn't be reduced to simply a one-trick pony floating around the perimeter shooting jumpers and waiting for a kickout.

There's a pecking order on every successful team, both in terms of talent and role, and it takes a certain skillset and mentality to play a supporting role.

Dirk has the mentality and unselfishness to do it, like Manu, but he doesn't bring a conducive skillset and position to compliment Duncan.

Duncan at his best was a 4 and didn't have to burden himself banging solely against the 5's defensively, so playing him at 5 and Dirk at the 4 takes away from both of there respective talents.

I'll just finish with this, you're coming down the stretch of a game and you need a stop or a bucket with Duncan on the floor.

Who would compliment Tim on the offensive-end better with the defense sagging when they needed someone to break down the defense, make a play, or shot off of a kickout? And who would would be more likely to come up with a turnover, make a steal or game-changing defensive play, and where would that play or opportunity most likely come about, position wise, with Duncan manning the 4?

If Dirk's going to play second banana, it'd have to be for not only one hell of a player but someone whose position and skillset would allow him to thrive as a dominant scorer without taking away from his own game or effectiveness.

I don't think Duncan is that guy.

[leo_d]

Manu in his prime was a top ten player with a top 30 contract, wich gives you the oportunity to have a third all star in your team. Dirk in his prime is a top 5 player with a top 5 contract. You put that next to Duncan`s contract and you will not have Tony Parker as your point guard.

So what i am saying is that in his prime Manu was the perfect combination of talent/$$$ to have a champioship team, not only a devastating dúo.

[dirk4mvp]

Manu in his prime was a top ten player

:lmao


:lmao


:lmao

[leo_d]

:lmao


:lmao


:lmao

i guess that by beeing fishing to soon you didn`t get the oportunity to see the 2005 playoffs.

[dirk4mvp]

top 10 player


:lmao

:lmao

:lmao

[leo_d]

:fishing

[DAF86]

top 10 player


:lmao

:lmao

:lmao

How many other guys did you see putting 20/25 + points per game regularly while only taking 8/12 shots per game on crucial playoffs' games like Manu did during his prime? if that's not top ten material it comes pretty fucking close.

[dirk4mvp]

Manu's never been any where near close to a top 10 player.

[DPG21920]

He has never been a top 10 player consistently, but in certain flashes, he has been close. Manu's problem is that it can not be sustained over 82 games.

[Findog]

He has never been a top 10 player consistently, but in certain flashes, he has been close. Manu's problem is that it can not be sustained over 82 games.

Bingo. There are times when he looks as good as Kobe, and other times when he's fucking worthless.

[leo_d]

He has never been a top 10 player consistently, but in certain flashes, he has been close. Manu's problem is that it can not be sustained over 82 games.

The Spurs only needed him to sustained for 16

[DPG21920]

Ya, that is always the knock on Manu, but who cares? He shows up when the Spurs need him and plays his role nicely.

[leo_d]

It doesn`t make sense to separate the economic aspect of having Duncan and Dirk in the same team. If those two players were all that is needed to have a champioship team ¿why owners dont`t sacrifice talent in other positions to make this true?

Someone said that 28 of 30 gm will pick Dirk over Manu, and i say when you put $$ in the question none of them would do it.

[DAF86]

He has never been a top 10 player consistently, but in certain flashes, he has been close. Manu's problem is that it can not be sustained over 82 games.


Bingo. There are times when he looks as good as Kobe, and other times when he's fucking worthless.

That's 'cause he isn't the top dog on his team and plays along side two other great players that can take over a basketball game. When he's in a great night he will have those 40 points games where he is just unstopable, when he is in a good night he has those "20/25 points in 10 FG attemps" games, in an average day he will have 16/18 pts but when he is in a bad shooting game he will only score 10 or less points 'cause he doesn't need to force the deal because he knows that he has two other great players that can pick up the scoring slack, he will still do other things though, like trying even harder on defense, going more for the boards or focusing on his play-making ability, etc. he always leaves an imprint on the court.

If he were the number one option on his team he could put up more lazy shots to pump up his scoring stat (like most number one guys on the league do) and instead of ending a game with ten points in 7 FG attemps, he will end it with 20 points on 20 FG attemps and nobody would say that he can't sustain a certain level over a 82 games season.

[benefactor]

Bingo. There are times when he looks as good as Kobe, and other times when he's fucking worthless.

Liar! Manu is better than Kobe all the time!

[DPG21920]

That's 'cause he isn't the top dog on his team and plays along side two other great players that can take over a basketball game. When he's in a great night he will have those 40 points games where he is just unstopable, when he is in a good night he has those "20/25 points in 10 FG attemps" games, in an average day he will have 16/18 pts but when he is in a bad shooting game he will only score 10 or less points 'cause he doesn't need to force the deal because he knows that he has two other great players that can pick up the scoring slack, he will still do other things though, like trying even harder on defense, going more for the boards or focusing on his play-making ability, etc. he always leaves an imprint on the court.

If he were the number one option on his team he could put up more lazy shots to pump up his scoring stat (like most number one guys on the league do) and instead of ending a game with ten points in 7 FG attemps, he will end it with 20 points on 20 FG attemps and nobody would say that he can't sustain a certain level over a 82 games season.

While what you say "could" happen, it is not likely. He more than likely cannot be a first option over 82 games. It is not the Spurs system or who he plays with that dictates this like you suggest. It is his style of play.

Great players do not disappear like Manu and have long stretches of poor games. Not to mention he cannot play more than 30 minutes a game. If Manu was as good as Kobe, he would not be a third option.

[DAF86]

While what you say "could" happen, it is not likely. He more than likely cannot be a first option over 82 games. It is not the Spurs system or who he plays with that dictates this like you suggest. It is his style of play.

Great players do not disappear like Manu and have long stretches of poor games. Not to mention he cannot play more than 30 minutes a game. If Manu was as good as Kobe, he would not be a third option.

I've seen Manu play as a number one option and he paces himslef a lot more. IMO he could easily be a number one option on a NBA team.

And who the fuck said Manu is as good as Kobe???

[DPG21920]

Are people not saying Manu is a top 10 player? What NBA team have you seen Manu as the number one option for?

[DPG21920]

Many people can be a number one option; hell RJ was a number one option for the Bucks. Will the team have a legit shot at winning? No. Does that make him a top 10 player? No.

If Manu was a top 10 player, he would under no circumstances be a 3rd option.

[sonic21]

manu is too inconsistent to be a franchise player. Also he's only been to 1 ASG because of that.

[weebo]

When its all said and done, Manu will be remembered and honored for both his play in the NBA and internationally. On the other hand, dirk will be remembered as just a another good player that couldn't get it done.

[DPG21920]

I will say this. Although Dirk is the better player, that does not always mean he would win in every scenario. That is just too myopic. Intangibles, defense and other things can make someone a better fit.

For example, Vince Carter is a better player than Manu, but I would not take him over Manu in this situation. I would take Dirk in this scenario, but it is not just because he is a better player overall. This is a "second option" poll, not a "who is the better player poll".


I don't have time to get into this as much as I'd like to at the moment but considering the OP, I'm having a hard time understanding some of these arguments I've seen.(Haven't read all, but I'll come back and do so later)

As for the question of the OP, who'd be the better second banana to Tim, in their prime, I'd probably go with Manu.

That's not to say Manu is the consistently more dominant player but Dirk plays the 4 and doesn't have the varied overall game to fill the gaps, so to speak, to compliment the numero uno instead of run the offense through at the same position.

Could Dirk and Tim co-exist? Absolutely. But I'd rather have a dominant backcourt player to compliment Tim instead of a dominant scorer at the 4, who if you don't utilize correctly by running the majority of your offense through, which you wouldn't if he was playing the second banana to Tim, you wouldn't fully reap the benefits of Dirk's game.

Dirk is absolutely the more dominant player night-in and night-out, but that wasn't the question.

If Dirk isn't your first option, which he should be probably 90% of the time, he shouldn't be reduced to simply a one-trick pony floating around the perimeter shooting jumpers and waiting for a kickout.

There's a pecking order on every successful team, both in terms of talent and role, and it takes a certain skillset and mentality to play a supporting role.

Dirk has the mentality and unselfishness to do it, like Manu, but he doesn't bring a conducive skillset and position to compliment Duncan.

Duncan at his best was a 4 and didn't have to burden himself banging solely against the 5's defensively, so playing him at 5 and Dirk at the 4 takes away from both of there respective talents.

I'll just finish with this, you're coming down the stretch of a game and you need a stop or a bucket with Duncan on the floor.

Who would compliment Tim on the offensive-end better with the defense sagging when they needed someone to break down the defense, make a play, or shot off of a kickout? And who would would be more likely to come up with a turnover, make a steal or game-changing defensive play, and where would that play or opportunity most likely come about, position wise, with Duncan manning the 4?

If Dirk's going to play second banana, it'd have to be for not only one hell of a player but someone whose position and skillset would allow him to thrive as a dominant scorer without taking away from his own game or effectiveness.

I don't think Duncan is that guy.

For the sake of this poll, from these standpoints, I can see an argument for Manu for sure.

But to go off on the other side of the debate and argue that Manu is a franchise player or better than Dirk is a bit too much imo.

[weebo]

manu is too inconsistent to be a franchise player. Also he's only been to 1 ASG because of that.

The franchise tag gets kicked around too often when it comes to NBA players. In reality, there is only two franchise players in the NBA and that would be Lebron and Kobe (shaq and TD in their primes).

Also, its hard making the ASG when you're coming off the bench...sacrificing personal accomplishments for the good of the team.:rolleyes

[DAF86]

Many people can be a number one option; hell RJ was a number one option for the Bucks. Will the team have a legit shot at winning? No. Does that make him a top 10 player? No.

If Manu was a top 10 player, he would under no circumstances be a 3rd option.

Joe Johnson is the number one option of a second round playoff team. Do you think Joe Johnson is better than Manu at his prime?

And when IMO Manu was arguably among the top ten/fifteen players on the league (2005) he was clearly the 2nd best player on the Spurs.

[sonic21]

The franchise tag gets kicked around too often when it comes to NBA players. In reality, there is only two franchise players in the NBA and that would be Lebron and Kobe (shaq and TD in their primes).


so i guess you don't know what a franchise player is.


Also, its hard making the ASG when you're coming off the bench...sacrificing personal accomplishments for the good of the team.:rolleyes

At times Manu plays like a franchise player. So the "coming of the bench" argument doesn't change the fact that he's inconsistent and has played in only one ASG.

p.s. I do think Manu is better than a lot of allstars

[DAF86]

manu is too inconsistent to be a franchise player. Also he's only been to 1 ASG because of that.

No he has been to 1 ASG first and foremost 'cause he was robbed in '07/'08 but even more important 'cause he plays in a great team that doesn't need him to average 20 pts per game and 'cause he accepts coming off the bench for the benefit of the team.

It's a shame that this has to be explained even to Spurs fans.

[Findog]

It doesn`t make sense to separate the economic aspect of having Duncan and Dirk in the same team. If those two players were all that is needed to have a champioship team ¿why owners dont`t sacrifice talent in other positions to make this true?

Someone said that 28 of 30 gm will pick Dirk over Manu, and i say when you put $$ in the question none of them would do it.

Bullfuckingshit. The Spurs couldn't afford two max players and then get a serviceable journeyman to play SG for much less money?

[Findog]

The franchise tag gets kicked around too often when it comes to NBA players. In reality, there is only two franchise players in the NBA and that would be Lebron and Kobe (shaq and TD in their primes).

How can LeBron be a franchise player? He doesn't have a ring. That's Spurfan logic for you in this thread. Also, are Chris Paul and Dwight Howard not franchise players?

My definition of a franchise player is somebody who is capable of being the best player on a title team. In the case of Dirk, he took his team within inches of a title. That makes him a franchise player, at least in his prime it did. He's still a top 10 player, so while it's no longer likely that he will win a title as a #1 guy, it's still a remote possibility.

[Rogue]

It doesn`t make sense to separate the economic aspect of having Duncan and Dirk in the same team. If those two players were all that is needed to have a champioship team ¿why owners dont`t sacrifice talent in other positions to make this true?

Someone said that 28 of 30 gm will pick Dirk over Manu, and i say when you put $$ in the question none of them would do it.
¿cuan Vd haceres la "¿" ? jajajajajaja :lmao

[sonic21]

Bullfuckingshit. The Spurs couldn't afford two max players and then get a serviceable journeyman to play SG for much less money?

no they can't, they can afford 20M for duncan, 14 for RJ, 12 for Tony, 10 for manu, but no way they can have two max contract + tony's + another SG's contract.

That's not possible.

[DPG21920]

Joe Johnson is the number one option of a second round playoff team. Do you think Joe Johnson is better than Manu at his prime?

And when IMO Manu was arguably among the top ten/fifteen players on the league (2005) he was clearly the 2nd best player on the Spurs.

You are proving my point. Yes, when Manu plays his absolute best, he is a top 10 player. But he does not do it often enough for him to be considered a top 10 player or a number one option.

That is not comparing apples to apples. You have to look at how Manu plays overall. Not just the "best" moments.

Other players are just as good as Manu's best moments, but they carry teams on a night in, night out basis.

Manu had a great playoff run in 2005, but he was not a top 10 or 15 player in the league for the entire year. He has flashes of brilliance and he plays a vital role on a championship team. But he is no number one option imo.

[DPG21920]

No he has been to 1 ASG first and foremost 'cause he was robbed in '07/'08 but even more important 'cause he plays in a great team that doesn't need him to average 20 pts per game and 'cause he accepts coming off the bench for the benefit of the team.

It's a shame that this has to be explained even to Spurs fans.

That is not the point. If he was a top 10 player, he would not be 2nd or 3rd option. He is great for his role and he plays starters minutes and ends the game in crunch time, so the "bench" argument is a weak one.

Is it great that he has no ego and does not have to "start" the game? Yes. It makes things easy and allows the Spurs to be more effective. But he plays the same amount of minutes and plays when it matters.

Just like how the offense is designed around TP now. If Manu was the best option, it would be foolish not to use him in such a manner. Tim and TP would have no problem if Kobe or Lebron were on the team and they would be the first option.

Manu cannot be that.

[Findog]

no they can't, they can afford 20M for duncan, 14 for RJ, 12 for Tony, 10 for manu, but no way they can have two max contract + tony's + another SG's contract.

That's not possible.

If you had a "Big Three" of Dirk, Duncan and TP, you'd get some journeyman Quentin Ross type to start at the 2. Somebody who would come really cheap.

If the Spurs ever had the opportunity to pair Dirk and Duncan together, they would've constructed the rest of the roster accordingly.

[sonic21]

If you had a "Big Three" of Dirk, Duncan and TP, you'd get some journeyman Quentin Ross type to start at the 2. Somebody who would come really cheap.

If the Spurs ever had the opportunity to pair Dirk and Duncan together, they would've constructed the rest of the roster accordingly.

I was being sarcastic Fin. Of course with Dirk, Duncan and Tony, a SG worth 2 to 4M is enough.

maybe my previous post sucks and i've failed my sarcasm attempt. :wakeup

[DAF86]

You are proving my point. Yes, when Manu plays his absolute best, he is a top 10 player. But he does not do it often enough for him to be considered a top 10 player or a number one option.

That is not comparing apples to apples. You have to look at how Manu plays overall. Not just the "best" moments.

Other players are just as good as Manu's best moments, but they carry teams on a night in, night out basis.

Manu had a great playoff run in 2005, but he was not a top 10 or 15 player in the league for the entire year. He has flashes of brilliance and he plays a vital role on a championship team. But he is no number one option imo.

How am I proving your point? I didn't say Manu on his best nights, I said Manu at his prime (which IMO was from 2000/2001 'till 2005/2006) could easily be a number one option on a good NBA team, and I think that with the comparission with Joe Johnson I proved my point. And I also think that I refuted the "inconsistent" card with this thought:


If he were the number one option on his team he could put up more lazy shots to pump up his scoring stat (like most number one guys on the league do) and instead of ending a game with ten points in 7 FG attemps, he will end it with 20 points on 20 FG attemps and nobody would say that he can't sustain a certain level over a 82 games season.

Manu has been a number one guy on all of his teams except the Spurs and all those teams won championships. Granted, FIBA isn't at the same level as the NBA but if a guy is inconsistent it doesn't matter at which level he plays he will still be inconsistent, and an inconsistent "franchise player" can't lead his team to a championship, at least not as regularly as Manu has lead his teams to championships.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

if you think that Manu can't be compared with Dirk then you're either underrating Gino or overrating Nowitzki..


Or you're just a standard NBA fan and don't give two shits about the B-list basketball leagues you seem to be in love with.

[Rodriguez]

thre anillos, puta.

[benefactor]

That's not to say Manu is the consistently more dominant player but Dirk plays the 4 and doesn't have the varied overall game to fill the gaps, so to speak, to compliment the numero uno instead of run the offense through at the same position.

Could Dirk and Tim co-exist? Absolutely. But I'd rather have a dominant backcourt player to compliment Tim instead of a dominant scorer at the 4, who if you don't utilize correctly by running the majority of your offense through, which you wouldn't if he was playing the second banana to Tim, you wouldn't fully reap the benefits of Dirk's game.

How could you not fully reap the benefits of Dirk's game? 90% of Dirks game is perimeter oriented and Duncan during his prime was most effective on the block. As it was said earlier, Dirk is really not a 4...he is more like a SG in a 7 foot body. If anything, you enhance the abilities of Dirk and Duncan.


If Dirk isn't your first option, which he should be probably 90% of the time, he shouldn't be reduced to simply a one-trick pony floating around the perimeter shooting jumpers and waiting for a kickout.

Duncan and Dirk gives you variable first options and you could run plays for either at any give time. Both players will command a double team in order to be rendered ineffective. For example, you could run Dirk on a iso on the wing and if a double came, he only has to swing the ball to the open shooter who can either take the shot or pass inside to Duncan who will be one on one with his man. It would work in reverse with an iso on Duncan also. Let's not forget that Dirk will probably be covered by a front line player who is slower than him that he could easily take to the rim.


There's a pecking order on every successful team, both in terms of talent and role, and it takes a certain skillset and mentality to play a supporting role.

Dirk has the mentality and unselfishness to do it, like Manu, but he doesn't bring a conducive skillset and position to compliment Duncan.

I don't see how this is true. Duncan and Dirk's game match up perfectly.


Duncan at his best was a 4 and didn't have to burden himself banging solely against the 5's defensively, so playing him at 5 and Dirk at the 4 takes away from both of there respective talents.

I don't get your argument here. Duncan in his prime was best on the block. His shooting keeps defenders honest but his footwork around the rim is what makes him great. Dirk is great at dragging defenders away from the rim and shooting over them. Furthermore, Dirk would lessen some of that burden because he would lighten Duncan's offensive load.


I'll just finish with this, you're coming down the stretch of a game and you need a stop or a bucket with Duncan on the floor.

Who would compliment Tim on the offensive-end better with the defense sagging when they needed someone to break down the defense, make a play, or shot off of a kickout? And who would would be more likely to come up with a turnover, make a steal or game-changing defensive play, and where would that play or opportunity most likely come about, position wise, with Duncan manning the 4?

Good points...but I would counter with who would be better over a full season. Manu in his prime is still at a high risk for injury. He plays balls out every night and there have been more than one postseason where we have either seen him ineffective or sitting in a suit. Dirk is not going to take the kind of abuse that Manu would take and has far less of a chance of injury. He could play more minutes and he could be used with small ball lineups that would be completely and totally dominant. Plus there is always the good Manu/bad Manu scenario. Even in his prime, Manu could go for 40 and then disappear for several games. Manu has intangibles, but if you are going to grind out a whole season Dirk is the better choice. A Dirk and Duncan front line gives you a much better chance with matchups and adjustments on the fly during a 7 game series, as you can go with a quicker or more traditional lineup....and use a 7 footer in either one.

[Rodriguez]

How am I proving your point? I didn't say Manu on his best nights, I said Manu at his prime (which IMO was from 2000/2001 'till 2005/2006) could easily be a number one option on a good NBA team, and I think that with the comparission with Joe Johnson I proved my point. And I also think that I refuted the "inconsistent" card with this thought:



Manu has been a number one guy on all of his teams except the Spurs and all those teams won championships. Granted, FIBA isn't at the same level as the NBA but if a guy is inconsistent it doesn't matter at which level he plays he will still be inconsistent, and an inconsistent "franchise player" can't lead his team to a championship, at least not as regularly as Manu has lead his teams to championships.
Manu es un bueno jugador, pero Dirk es determinado mejor.

[dbestpro]

Okay lets look at in a historical view. Who would you rather have Bernard King or Joe Dumars playing with Thomas. Most will say Dumars because he was critical to winning for Detroit and was an excellent compliment to Thomas. Many will not even remember Bernard King even though his stats are better than Dirk's.

If Dirk does not win the ring then future generations will say the same thing. Its not about the stats or the indivdual play. Its about the rings. Thats one thing a Mav fan will never know and unfortunately it seems too many Spurs fans seem to forget.

[ElNono]

How could you not fully reap the benefits of Dirk's game? 90% of Dirks game is perimeter oriented and Duncan during his prime was most effective on the block. As it was said earlier, Dirk is really not a 4...he is more like a SG in a 7 foot body. If anything, you enhance the abilities of Dirk and Duncan.

I believe his point is that if you're running your offense through Duncan, then you're making Dirk a spot up shooter. A heck of a spot up shooter? Sure. But a one trick pony nonetheless. You want a SG that can both shoot and penetrate and create for others. There's only one ball and a set amount of possessions in a game.


Duncan and Dirk gives you variable first options and you could run plays for either at any give time. Both players will command a double team in order to be rendered ineffective. For example, you could run Dirk on a iso on the wing and if a double came, he only has to swing the ball to the open shooter who can either take the shot or pass inside to Duncan who will be one on one with his man. It would work in reverse with an iso on Duncan also. Let's not forget that Dirk will probably be covered by a front line player who is slower than him that he could easily take to the rim.

So you don't want Dirk to be a second banana, but a part-time first banana. Which actually goes against your proposition for this thread, something I pointed out in a previous post.
As far as who covers who, it's all relative. A guy like SJax has defended him pretty well. It's arguable that Jack is any faster than Dirk, and he's definitely smaller. I'm not going to claim he's not a tough cover, but it's not like he can't be stopped. Nellie obviously knows pretty well what bothers him.
Manu commanded a double team after the first two games in the 2005 finals too. I still remember Larry Brown basically saying that Manu got the biggest compliment he could give him: putting a double team on him.
I don't care if Dirk commands a double team for 82 games. What matters is what you do in the playoffs.


Good points...but I would counter with who would be better over a full season. Manu in his prime is still at a high risk for injury. He plays balls out every night and there have been more than one postseason where we have either seen him ineffective or sitting in a suit. Dirk is not going to take the kind of abuse that Manu would take and has far less of a chance of injury. He could play more minutes and he could be used with small ball lineups that would be completely and totally dominant. Plus there is always the good Manu/bad Manu scenario. Even in his prime, Manu could go for 40 and then disappear for several games. Manu has intangibles, but if you are going to grind out a whole season Dirk is the better choice. A Dirk and Duncan front line gives you a much better chance with matchups and adjustments on the fly during a 7 game series, as you can go with a quicker or more traditional lineup....and use a 7 footer in either one.

Who cares about a full season? I don't care if we win 55 or 72 as long as we make the playoffs.
What really matters is what you bring to the real season. Sure, Manu has had his injuries the past few seasons, but in his prime he did not miss a single playoff game. And his style of play that you're so scared about is exactly what makes him the winner he is. There's never a doubt wether he left everything out there. His energy is contagious. He's a determined guy that hates to lose, and he'll compete his ass off. He'll never call out a teammate (much like Tim) and take it upon himself when the team loses.
Which is exactly what I think is lacking on Dirk. Not all of it, but I don't think he nearly has the same of drive at all.

It's really no knock on Dirk. There's plenty of players that have the talent, but don't have that drive to win, that extra gear to take it up one more notch. So they come up short. They'll still be remembered as great players, and nobody will take that away from them.

[Findog]

Okay lets look at in a historical view. Who would you rather have Bernard King or Joe Dumars playing with Thomas. Most will say Dumars because he was critical to winning for Detroit and was an excellent compliment to Thomas. Many will not even remember Bernard King even though his stats are better than Dirk's.


Who gives a fuck what casual fans think? Dirk will be remembered better than Manu.

And btw, to answer your question: Before his injury, King. After his injury, Dumars.



If Dirk does not win the ring then future generations will say the same thing. Its not about the stats or the indivdual play. Its about the rings.


Robert Horry has 7 rings; Dirk has 0. Ergo, Robert Horry > Dirk.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

^

Horry > Jordan

[benefactor]

Sorry ElHomo...I'm done responding to homers in this thread.

[Findog]

^

Horry > Jordan

Horry > Bill Russell

[ElNono]

Sorry ElHomo...I'm done responding to homers in this thread.

Now you're quitting on your own thread. Keep it up champ. :tu

[ElNono]

Horry > Bill Russell

You forgot: Kerr > Shaq/Dunca/Kobe

[DAF86]

That is not the point. If he was a top 10 player, he would not be 2nd or 3rd option. He is great for his role and he plays starters minutes and ends the game in crunch time, so the "bench" argument is a weak one.

Is it great that he has no ego and does not have to "start" the game? Yes. It makes things easy and allows the Spurs to be more effective. But he plays the same amount of minutes and plays when it matters.

Just like how the offense is designed around TP now. If Manu was the best option, it would be foolish not to use him in such a manner. Tim and TP would have no problem if Kobe or Lebron were on the team and they would be the first option.

Manu cannot be that.

First: he doesn't play the same minutes when he starts than when he doesn't, he plays less, look for the numbers.

And second: what does the other thing you say has to do with what I'm saying? I'm talking about Manu at his prime, Manu right now isn't on his prime.

[weebo]

How can LeBron be a franchise player? He doesn't have a ring. That's Spurfan logic for you in this thread. Also, are Chris Paul and Dwight Howard not franchise players?

My definition of a franchise player is somebody who is capable of being the best player on a title team. In the case of Dirk, he took his team within inches of a title. That makes him a franchise player, at least in his prime it did. He's still a top 10 player, so while it's no longer likely that he will win a title as a #1 guy, it's still a remote possibility.

A franchise player should transcend beyond the court. Kobe and Lebron bring more to their respective franchises besides jump shooting (something that dirk does well). The problem I have with dirk is he is a one trick pony. He does one thing well and that's scoring. I know you're just bs'ing yourself if you think he is much more than an offensive player. Many have regarded him mediocre at best in all other facets of the game.

Manu, although not a scoring machine such as dirk, has a greater skill set that compliments Duncan as a second option. And those that believe that pairing Duncan and dirk would automatically guarantee the Spurs multiple titles are deluded. Don't just look at stat sheets look at the game. Dirk is a jump shooting big that requires plenty of touches to be effective. He is a volume shooter that dribbles to the paint for that fade away ten footer. That alone would have an impact on how Duncan plays. Duncan's primary role would have to change from being a facilitator on offense to being a re bounder only. That would hurt the rest of the team because dirk is a piss poor facilitator on offense. On defense, dirk wouldn't be an upgrade from any of the other 4/5 stiffs we've had out there since the Drob days. Manu's D as a SG is still greater than that of dirks as a PF.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Horry > Bill Russell


But Bill Russell has more rings!!! That's all anyone will remember!!! I can't remember Reggie Miller since he has no rings.

[peskypesky]

ok ok ok we all love Manu, but let's not be ridiculous. Any GM in the NBA, if offered Dirk for Manu, would take the trade in less than a second.

[Findog]

But Bill Russell has more rings!!! That's all anyone will remember!!! I can't remember Reggie Miller since he has no rings.

Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone, John Stockton, all of those guys are mere footnotes in basketball history.

[weebo]

But Bill Russell has more rings!!! That's all anyone will remember!!! I can't remember Reggie Miller since he has no rings.

I only remember Reggie Miller because he's always getting restraining orders for trying to bang married chics.

[weebo]

Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone, John Stockton, all of those guys are mere footnotes in basketball history.

There's room on that list for one more.

[peskypesky]

There's room on that list for one more.

:lmao

[Findog]

A franchise player should transcend beyond the court.

???? Who brought sports marketing into this?


Kobe and Lebron bring more to their respective franchises besides jump shooting (something that dirk does well). The problem I have with dirk is he is a one trick pony. He does one thing well and that's scoring. I know you're just bs'ing yourself if you think he is much more than an offensive player. Many have regarded him mediocre at best in all other facets of the game.

Dirk is a Top Ten player. A Spurs fan of all people should know this. A One Trick Pony doesn't come within inches of a title. At this point I don't think it's likely the Mavs will win a championship with him as the #1 guy, but it's still a possibility. If Manu is your top guy, maybe you'll grab the eighth seed.


Manu, although not a scoring machine such as dirk, has a greater skill set that compliments Duncan as a second option.

No, he doesn't. He's a fringe All Star. He did his job well as the #2 guy for San Antonio, but Dirk's impact on a game is far greater.


And those that believe that pairing Duncan and dirk would automatically guarantee the Spurs multiple titles are deluded.

The Spurs won multiple titles with Manu playing second fiddle. Since Dirk is a much better player, has no ego and would defer to Duncan, it doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to know that he and Duncan together would win at least 2, if not more.


Don't just look at stat sheets look at the game.

I think that has been the contention of every single person making the pro-Dirk argument in this thread.


Dirk is a jump shooting big that requires plenty of touches to be effective. He is a volume shooter that dribbles to the paint for that fade away ten footer.

He's not a volume shooter. Allen Iverson is a volume shooter. Kobe Bryant at his most undisciplined is a volume shooter. Dirk is near the top in offensive efficiency and doesn't commit turnovers. And he would take less touches and defer to Duncan if that's what was best for the team.


That alone would have an impact on how Duncan plays. Duncan's primary role would have to change from being a facilitator on offense to being a re bounder only.

:lmao So Duncan would no longer be able to score 20 a game bc of Dirk? He would become Ben Fucking Wallace???? You're killing me with this. :lmao


That would hurt the rest of the team because dirk is a piss poor facilitator on offense.

Oh man, this is comedy gold. :lmao Did you watch that first-round series between our two teams this year? Did you notice JJ Barea and Brandon Bass dropping Hot Carls on the Spurs?


On defense, dirk wouldn't be an upgrade from any of the other 4/5 stiffs we've had out there since the Drob days.

Exactly, which is why you guys haven't won a title since Robinson retired in 2003. :rolleyes

[Findog]

There's room on that list for one more.

George Gervin? David Robinson? Manu Ginobili? Tony Parker? None of those guys won a title as #1 guy. Dirk came closer than all of them.

[DPG21920]

First: he doesn't play the same minutes when he starts than when he doesn't, he plays less, look for the numbers.

And second: what does the other thing you say has to do with what I'm saying? I'm talking about Manu at his prime, Manu right now isn't on his prime.

It is within a few minutes, and the only reason it might dip is because he cannot play long minutes because of health concerns. Not because of selflessness.

Manu in his prime was still wildly inconsistent from night to night. Every time he would score 20, he would have 3 games where he was 2-9 with 4 turn overs. Manu in his prime would never be a number one option. If he was that good (top 10 in his prime), he would not have been a secondary option. He at least would have been equal.

You are confusing moments of brilliance with sustainable talent. You are making excuses saying anytime he plays poorly he does other things and that it is because he does not have to score because of who he plays with. That is true, but not for the reasons you are pointing out.

When he plays bad or has to make hustle plays to make up for his poor game, it is because that is the player he is. He is able to do things because the game is easier for him with Tim and TP. He would not have the same success by himself with lesser talent.

[Findog]

It is within a few minutes, and the only reason it might dip is because he cannot play long minutes because of health concerns. Not because of selflessness.

Manu in his prime was still wildly inconsistent from night to night. Every time he would score 20, he would have 3 games where he was 2-9 with 4 turn overs. Manu in his prime would never be a number one option. If he was that good (top 10 in his prime), he would not have been a secondary option. He at least would have been equal.

You are confusing moments of brilliance with sustainable talent. You are making excuses saying anytime he plays poorly he does other things and that it is because he does not have to score because of who he plays with. That is true, but not for the reasons you are pointing out.

When he plays bad or has to make hustle plays to make up for his poor game, it is because that is the player he is. He is able to do things because the game is easier for him with Tim and TP. He would not have the same success by himself with lesser talent.

Gawd, this post is full of so much common sense.

[benefactor]

It is within a few minutes, and the only reason it might dip is because he cannot play long minutes because of health concerns. Not because of selflessness.

Manu in his prime was still wildly inconsistent from night to night. Every time he would score 20, he would have 3 games where he was 2-9 with 4 turn overs. Manu in his prime would never be a number one option. If he was that good (top 10 in his prime), he would not have been a secondary option. He at least would have been equal.

You are confusing moments of brilliance with sustainable talent. You are making excuses saying anytime he plays poorly he does other things and that it is because he does not have to score because of who he plays with. That is true, but not for the reasons you are pointing out.

When he plays bad or has to make hustle plays to make up for his poor game, it is because that is the player he is. He is able to do things because the game is easier for him with Tim and TP. He would not have the same success by himself with lesser talent.

Gawd, this post is full of so much common sense.

Sadly...this thread is full of win for Mavs fan. :depressed

[DAF86]

It is within a few minutes, and the only reason it might dip is because he cannot play long minutes because of health concerns. Not because of selflessness.

Those few minutes are the difference between averaging 16 pts or 18/20, besides beign a bench player gives you a reputation that may go against your chances of getting to the all-star game (which was the thing I was arguing)


Manu in his prime was still wildly inconsistent from night to night. Every time he would score 20, he would have 3 games where he was 2-9 with 4 turn overs. Manu in his prime would never be a number one option. If he was that good (top 10 in his prime), he would not have been a secondary option. He at least would have been equal.

How many times do I have to repeat the same thing? most "franchise players" shoot their way to a decent scoring night. A lot of top dogs on the league start a game 2 for 9 from the field but they keep shooting 'till they get their 20+ points so then nobody says they're "inconsistent". If Manu were a number one option he could do the same. And Manu on his prime wasn't equal to Duncan simply 'cause Tim is one of the greatest ever, still he was pretty damn close as the finals MVP votes show.


You are confusing moments of brilliance with sustainable talent. You are making excuses saying anytime he plays poorly he does other things and that it is because he does not have to score because of who he plays with. That is true, but not for the reasons you are pointing out.


When he plays bad or has to make hustle plays to make up for his poor game, it is because that is the player he is. He is able to do things because the game is easier for him with Tim and TP. He would not have the same success by himself with lesser talent.

When he beat Duncan and company in the olympics
was 'cause the game is easier for him with Oberto and Nocioni?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

When he beat Duncan and company in the olympics
was 'cause the game is easier for him with Oberto and Nocioni?


No, it's cause they were playing Eurofag rules which he's got more experience with than Duncan.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

:lmao DAF86's main argument being stuff Manu has done outside the NBA.

[dirk4mvp]

Manu fans have gone overboard in this thread.

[Findog]

Manu fans have gone overboard in this thread.

Manu fan has owned himself in this thread. It's like they're one of the crazy Arrested Development characters and Dirk fan is Jason Bateman.

[DPG21920]

I don't think it is as bad as benefactor is making it out to be with regards to his question. If you look at it from the view point of who can play the 2nd option with Duncan better, you can make some arguments for Manu (ball handling abilities, diversified game, ...).

The problems are coming from the other arguments about Manu being a top option. On a certain team, Manu as the number one option would be able to score 20+ a night more than likely. But his team would not be successful like a Kobe team and such.

[Findog]

I don't think it is as bad as benefactor is making it out to be with regards to his question. If you look at it from the view point of who can play the 2nd option with Duncan better, you can make some arguments for Manu (ball handling abilities, diversified game, ...).

The problems are coming from the other arguments about Manu being a top option.

I understand the question perfectly. I see it as Duncan playing the Shaq role and Dirk playing the Kobe role. Bowen and Finley at the other wing positions would be fine, with TP to bring the ball up.

[DAF86]

The problems are coming from the other arguments about Manu being a top option. On a certain team, Manu as the number one option would be able to score 20+ a night more than likely. But his team would not be successful like a Kobe team and such.

That's exactly what I'm saying, I'm not saying a team with Manu as their main guy would be a championship team but if a team lead by Joe Johnson can get to the second round of the playoffs, then a team lead by Ginobili could definitely do at least that.

[DAF86]

I understand the question perfectly. I see it as Duncan playing the Shaq role and Dirk playing the Kobe role. Bowen and Finley at the other wing positions would be fine, with TP to bring the ball up.

That's the difference, you think Dirk is in the same level with Kobe while I don't.

[DPG21920]

I understand the question perfectly. I see it as Duncan playing the Shaq role and Dirk playing the Kobe role. Bowen and Finley at the other wing positions would be fine, with TP to bring the ball up.

I am not saying you don't understand it, I am saying it is not as big of an outrage to make arguments for Manu over Dirk in this role.

Like I said, VC is a better player than Manu, but I would not take him over Manu in a similar poll.

I am looking at from this angle:

If you have Dirk replacing Bonner (from a talent standpoint and because of position) and that means Manu would be gone (in this scenario) but you replace Manu with someone of equal talent of Bonner (who was replaced by Dirk). The rest of the team is the same.

Or you keep Bonner and you have Manu on the Spurs. There could be arguments made for Manu because of depth, ball handling in the clutch and other factors.

I personally would choose Dirk, but I don't think it is outlandish to make a case for Manu as a secondary player in this type of scenario.

[Findog]

That's the difference, you think Dirk is in the same level with Kobe while I don't.

I said he would play the Kobe role, I didn't say he was as good as Kobe. Dirk is 85% the player Kobe is anyways, and 85% Kobe >>> Manu.

[DPG21920]

That's the difference, you think Dirk is in the same level with Kobe while I don't.

Dirk is not on the same level as Kobe, but he is ahead of Manu.

Kobe can win a title with no one else on the team as good as him. He will still need good players, but he can be the clear cut best.

Dirk needs a player that is just as good or slightly better to win imo. He cannot be the clear cut best player.

Manu would need players like a Tim or Kobe to win. He could not be the number one option under any circumstances.

[DPG21920]

That's exactly what I'm saying, I'm not saying a team with Manu as their main guy would be a championship team but if a team lead by Joe Johnson can get to the second round of the playoffs, then a team lead by Ginobili could definitely do at least that.

But Manu is not as good as Joe Johnson. Manu might average 20+, but his team would not be as good as Joes if you give them equal talent imo. Joe would be a guy who scores 20 almost every night and then he can go off for more.

Manu is a guy who would score 8,9,10 points on plenty of nights and then throw in some 20 point games and some 30+ point games every now and then. Manu could not play the minutes to be a number one option.

[Findog]

I am looking at from this angle:

If you have Dirk replacing Bonner (from a talent standpoint and because of position) and that means Manu would be gone (in this scenario) but you replace Manu with someone of equal talent of Bonner (who was replaced by Dirk). The rest of the team is the same.



I am looking at it from that angle too, and the way I see it, you have Dirk taking Manu's role as a perimeter player on offense, and Bonner's role on defense. There are a few things Manu does better than Dirk, but the Spurs would get more efficient and consistent production from Dirk than Manu. On defense, Duncan would be patrolling the paint, not Dirk. Dirk would simply be asked to step in and duplicate what Nazr, Rasho, Fabs and Bonner have done up to this point. His D is decidedly average and mediocre, but in this scenario, playing in the Spurs system, it wouldn't be much of an issue.

So I think it is kind of outlandish. It's hard to take a stand in this thread without shitting on either guy's game, but it's hard for me to ponder taking Manu.